• Archives

  • Topics

  • Meta

  • The Boogeyman - Working Vacation
  • Coming Home
  • Via Serica

Quote of the Day

The government that is big enough to give you what you want, is big enough to take anything they can from you. – Newbius 

 

We’re not at the “Jews in the Attic” or “People in Boxcars” point, not yet anyway.  But our political parties are starting to act more like Marius and Sulla than they are Washington and Lincoln.  How far is it from sending police to raid a business because the owner supports a political opponent to raiding a political meeting to get rid of political opposition?

Very Strange Bedfellows

Rupert Boneham, who has competed in the reality TV show “Survivor” several times, has filed papers indicating that he may run for governor in Indiana as a Libertarian.  His website says that he’s not satisfied with the candidates that have already declared their intentions to run, and he wants to serve his community.

I wish Mr. Boneham luck.  I’ve heard some interviews with him and he seems to be a hard-working, caring man who does indeed care about his community.  Being just south of the state line with Hoosierland, we see a lot of their political commercials.  I can’t wait to see what his campaign comes up with.

The posts from Tam, Frank W. James, Roberta X, and other Indiana bloggers may be interesting if this develops into a full blown campaign.  Of course, having seen pictures of Mr. Boneham, I don’t think he’ll need a wookie suit.  Usel no longer needs the weerding module.

Stump Speech # 1

Good evening.  It’s great to be attending the (NRA/SAF/CALGUNS/ETC) meeting here in ___________.  I’m here to discuss Candidate X and (his/her) position on guns.

First, let me introduce myself.  I am Daddy J. Bear.  I grew up around guns, and as an adult came to realize that gun rights for the American citizen are civil rights, no less than the right to publish a newspaper or have a lawyer represent you in court.  I am a member of the NRA and the SAF, and have blogged a bit about guns and gun rights at my blog.  I am a proud gun owner, target shooter, and attempted hunter.

Candidate X and I share much the same beliefs about guns and gun rights.  Basically, it’s none of the government’s business whether or not a citizen owns guns, which guns they own, or whether or not they carry a gun in a lawful manner.  Unless you break a law, you should be left alone.  Gun rights are important in America for a number of reasons, but the ones that come to mind immediately are these:

  • Self defense – I do not want to the United States become a country that has a policeman on every street corner, but that’s what it would take for law enforcement to provide the same amount of defense to people and property as an armed populace provides.
  • National Defense – A nation of riflemen is a nation that can defend itself.  If a young man or woman is brought up in the shooting sports, they have a leg up on someone who has to be convinced that a gun will not reach up and bite them and then taught how to shoot.  
  • Keeping the Government Honest – As much as I enjoy target shooting and hunting, that’s not why the Founding Fathers put the Second Amendment into the Bill of Rights.  They knew that a government that controlled the weapons of its people could easily control the people themselves.  So they put in language that limited the government to regulating, not outlawing, firearms and the manner in which the civilian population can obtain and use them.  A government that has nothing to fear from its citizens becomes a tyranny very quickly.

Recognizing these and the myriad other reasons that we value the civilian ownership and use of firearms in our country, Candidate X and I, when we are elected, plan to do the following to protect and re-establish gun rights:

  • Within the first 100 days of the administration, we will introduce legislation to amend or repeal the National Firearms Act of 1934, the Gun Control Act of 1968, and the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986.  In NFA 34, we will remove language that deals with suppressors, short barreled rifles, and short barreled shotguns.  A suppressor is nothing more than a muffler for a gun, and there are specific reasons a gun owner may wish to own a short barreled rifle or shotgun.  In GCA ’68, we will remove the prohibition against interstate commerce in pistols, and relax provisions pertaining to the purchase of firearms through the mail.  We went almost 200 years in this country where you could legally ship a gun from one state to another without having to go through an FFL, and we see no reason to stop that now.  As for FOPA ’86, we will remove the provision that prevents the transfer of a newly manufactured automatic weapon to private citizens.  If you want to burn up your ammunition with a gun that is equipped with a happy switch that is newer than Return of the Jedi, have at it.
  • In addition, we will introduce legislation supporting national reciprocity of concealed carry licenses.  If you can get a driver’s license in Maine and have it recognized in Oregon, then your main CCW license should be just as good in Oregon.  Of course we will leave it up to each of the several states to come up with their own laws as to how and where a gun may be carried by citizens within their borders.  Whether or not a state requires a CCW license in order to carry a gun is up to the states, but we will encourage this at the federal level.  
  • We will also direct the civil rights division of the Department of Justice to work through the courts to assist citizens whose gun rights have been infringed upon by states whose gun laws are so restrictive that they restrict gun ownership, carry, and use.  Things that will bring the weight of the federal courts and the Attorney General down on a state include may issue CCW laws or a lack of CCW at all, gun registration and gun ownership licensing, lists of allowable guns, or onerous fees and requirements for a citizen to get a CCW license.  
  • We will direct the director of the Civilian Marksmanship Program to expand that organizations efforts to promote gun safety training and marksmanship programs in our nations high schools and universities.  We ask that the NRA and other gun rights groups put their weight behind these efforts in order to promote this effort.
  • Candidate X and I will never sign international treaties that infringe on the 2nd Amendment or any other Constitutional guarantee of rights, and we will pull out of any such treaties that have already been signed but not ratified by the Senate.  If a treaty that the Senate has ratified infringes on any civil right of our citizens, we will work with Congress to have that ratification revoked.
  • We will work with the CMP and our foreign allies to repatriate as many of the weapons that we have loaned or sold to the world over the last 100 years.  These weapons of war can be brought back and resold to our citizens at a profit to the CMP and used to train the next generation of citizens to be responsible gun owners.  We built these guns, we paid for them, and now we should bring them home so that they can be used once again to make America stronger.

Candidate X and I truly believe that a nation of people who own and use their guns is a nation that respects itself and will stand on its own without government interference.  We also believe that with every right in the Constitution comes a responsibility to use it responsibly.  You have the right to print a newspaper, but you do not have the right to libel someone or to plagiarize their work.  As gun owners and shooters, our 2nd Amendment rights are tempered by our responsibility to police ourselves, lest those who want to take them away become emboldened to try again.  The NFA and GCA were passed because of a public perception that the common ownership and use of firearms of certain types was causing problems in our society.  If the most onerous parts of these and other gun control laws are stripped away, we must, as responsible gun owners, prevent those who would abuse gun rights from becoming a big enough problem that anti-rights groups can take our rights away again.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have one final request for you:  Get involved.  Whether or not you support Candidate X, become as involved as you can in this election and the political process.  Vote, and encourage those around you, including those who disagree with you, to go to the polls in November.  Take your children with you to the polls so that they learn how easy it is to vote and can see how important it is to make your voice heard through the ballot box.  On other political matters, learn about the issues that Congress and the President are dealing with, and make sure they know how you feel about them.  Write to your legislators, both here in _____ and in Washington.  Go to their offices and tell them in person what you think they should do.  Attend rallies and demonstrations so that they know it’s not just a few people trying to talk to them, but rather a vast multitude of voters.

My fellow citizens of the United States of America, we are fortunate in that a lot of the restrictions to our gun rights are being won back, even when opposed by the government.  The National Rifle Association, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the myriad other pro-rights groups in our country are doing wonderful things through the state legislatures and the courts.  Now, it’s time to send a president who understands and supports gun rights to Washington.  I hope that throughout the campaign, the election, and the administration of Candidate X, you will support us as we try to continue the trend of restoring and protecting gun rights to the people of the United States.

Thank you for your time.   God bless you, and may He continue to bless America.

I’ll Do It

According to Politico, the discussions about who will be the vice-presidential running mate for whoever gets the Republican nomination next year are already starting up.  Marco Rubio of Florida seems to be the favorite so far.  He’s Hispanic, conservative, and from Florida, one of the king maker swing states, so he’s very desirable for the second spot on the GOP ticket.

I’ve decided to indicate my interest in the job.  Here’s what I can bring to the ticket:

  • I’m from the upper Mid-west, but I’ve lived all over this great land of ours, so I can speak to and appeal to lots of crowds.
  • I’ve actually held down a non-governmental paying job in my lifetime.  That alone give me a big leg up.
  • I’m ex-military, and I’m not afraid to go all Gunnery Sergeant Hartman on a wayward general or admiral.  
  • I’m socially moderate, meaning I don’t care who sleeps with whom or how they find their personal high as long as they don’t bother the neighbors.
  • I’m fiscally conservative, meaning that I truly believe that every penny that flows out of Washington should be tax money, not borrowed money, and that we should only spend on things that are absolutely necessary.
  • I’m not afraid to be a hatchet man with anyone.  Seriously, I would love to make Wolf Blitzer cry like a little girl on national TV.  It’s a life goal of mine.
  • I know how to keep my zipper zipped, so you won’t have to worry about me embarrassing you with a sex scandal.
  • I’m a heck of a nice guy, unless you make me angry.  Don’t make me angry.  You wouldn’t like me when I’m angry.
  • I’ve never held elective office, so there’ll be no embarrassing record for your opponents to grab onto.  Hey, it worked for Obama.
  • I’m a true American mutt.  I can campaign at Oktoberfests, Norsk Huskefests, Saint Patrick Day Parades, and anywhere else they need someone to tap a keg or pour the whiskey.
  • I know when to shut up, which is a great improvement over the current guy in the VP’s office.
  • I don’t want to be president, so you won’t have to worry about me undermining you so I can run against you in four years.  Not to say that I’m not ready to take over as president and get the job done.  It’s just that I don’t sit in my living room at night fantasizing about all the neat things I could do while sitting in the big chair in the Oval office.

Yes, I won’t agree with everything my running mate may do or say, and I won’t be shy about it.  But if elected, when given a priority by the president, I’ll get it done, with or without the use of high explosives, but preferably with high explosives.  I’ve been used as a training aide by Army interrogators, so I know a thing or two about locking a recalcitrant White House staffer in a room and getting him to agree to support something without leaving a mark.  I’d make a great guy for you to point to and say “Hey, you can work with me on this, or I can unleash the Bear.  It’s your choice.”.

I even have some good ideas for fellow bloggers who could round out the cabinet and get fresh ideas for our country.  Getting a few non-career politicians into the Departments of Defense, Interior, Justice, and Treasure Treasury would go a long way towards making things make sense again.

So what do you all think?  Would I make a good second half to a presidential ticket?

Another Remake Movie I’ll Miss

According to Big Hollywood, during a recent interview the director of the recent Planet of the Apes remake used the movie’s protagonist, a chimpanzee that has gained the ability to speak English, to evoke the image of Che Guavera.  For those of you who were educated in the American school system, Che Guavera was the Cuban Communists’ analog to Felix Dzerzhinski and Lavrenti Beria.

Wait a minute… hmmm……

Let’s try to explain that a bit.  Guavera stood up the Cuban Communist secret police, massacred peasants who didn’t bend their knees to the hammer and sickle, and tried to export his genocidal ideology to the rest of Latin America and Africa.  He was eventually killed while running like a scalded dog from government troops in Bolivia.

No, that’s probably assuming too much.  Hmmmmm.

OK, let’s try this:  Contrary to what that really neat economics and history professor told you, Guavera was a cowardly butcher who preferred to kill off those who disagreed with him rather than either modify his own beliefs when they were proven wrong or convince his opponents of the rightness of his position through argument and example.  He made it even worse by putting together his own unique blend of sadists and muscle to break heads and bust caps on anyone who dared to show a little thoughtfulness before acquiescing to his demands.  He then tried to ‘convince’ the downtrodden populations of the rest of the Third World that giving up self-direction and personal freedom was better than cyclically electing the best and brightest to try to bring their lives out of the crapper.  Yeah, the guy on that really neat OD green t-shirt was a putz.  We’d all have been better off if his mother had drowned him at birth.

Did y’all get that?  Good.

For those of you who understood what I meant before reading past the first paragraph, thanks for hanging with me while I brought the others up to speed. Now back to my rant.

I have had it up to here with ‘entertainment’ being used to shove revisionist history of Fascism, Communism, terrorists, and athlete’s foot down my throat.  Nazi’s are always evil, as are communists, people who blow up pizza restaurants for fun and profit, and the guy who invented talking toy robots with no volume control or off button.  Their image cannot be rehabilitated and those who try to do it are either uneducated, intellectually dishonest, or a little of both.

Here are some plot elements of which I have no interest in and will waste neither my time nor my money on:

  • Soldiers of any nation treated as doops, idiots, or victims who didn’t know better and were betrayed by The Man
  • Soldiers that are nothing but sadists who are given a license to prey upon the poor people they come across in their conquests
  • Members of any species, race, religion, or political leaning shown as being uniformly evil or virtuous
  • Evil corporations who subvert government to maximize profit, preferably by causing harm to ordinary folk
  • Plucky single mothers who are able to make a great life for themselves and their children while afflicted by the presence of the ubiquitous evil penis owners, all while still able to keep their active social life going
  • Humans and their evil technology which does nothing but despoil otherwise pristine, virginal Nature
  • Communist revolutionaries or their symbolic surrogates who do nothing but fight against the plight of the common man while creating a new, better world.

I have known many people from Latin America whose lives were adversely effected by the Communist ideology exported from Cuba by Che Guavera and his ilk, so this kind of stuff trips a trigger with me. Che Guavera, Stalin, Beria, Pol Pot, and the rest of that crowd of mass murderers deserve nothing but our scorn.  The ‘intellectuals’ who lionize them deserve no better.  I gave up on such ‘entertainment’ long ago, and I don’t see anything that will entice me back into the theater coming along anytime soon.

Head meet desk

Dear Mrs. Bachmann,

Yesterday, you put your foot so deep into your mouth that you almost turned inside out. This wasn’t the first time that you tried to appear folksy and ended up looking like an idiot.  Next time you feel a need to connect with a crowd on a personal level, please don’t.

I like some of your politics, and I’m willing to listen to your ideas on the economy, the government, and foreign policy.  I truly don’t care if you’re a woman of the people, and I believe that those who come out to hear you don’t either. 

Quit giving those who want to not only tear you down but also bring other conservatives down with you somewhere to latch on and pull.  Get your message across, answer questions honestly when asked, and shut the heck up.

By the way, when are you coming to Kentucky? 

Where have I heard this before?

The president is urging his Democrat brethren to consider reform of entitlement programs, including Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.*  I fully expect him to be pillaried and publicly shunned for his efforts.  Nothing buys votes among the elderly and ‘poor’ than free money and doctor visits.

But where have I heard a call to reform these programs before?  Oh yeah, it was here.

It’s kind of nice when you can say something in the spring, and by the time the leaves start to turn the politicians are starting to say something that’s quite similar.  Although apparently Leon Panetta and the President haven’t heard my assertion that economic reform shouldn’t be done on the backs of our veterans. 

*President Obama seems to be borrowing a page from Clinton’s playbook:  Say something that your opponent has been saying, then claim it was your idea if it works.

Sounds good to me

Zercool has a good post up about how a chief of police was asked to find other employment after trying to get an ordinance passed to restrict open carry and visibly transporting guns in vehicles.  There aren’t any details, and a quick google search has so much noise about police chiefs resigning or being fired that I can’t find any corroborating evidence.

Even if the story isn’t exactly as Z’s source relates it, all I can say is that this sounds like a good start.

Law enforcement’s job is to enforce the laws, not to come up with new crimes and ways to infringe on our rights.

Whether it’s a police department going after a journalist that gives them bad press, or follows a civil rights activist around in order to find an excuse to ticket or arrest them, or a hoplophobe “only one” with a badge that wants to make it harder for someone to carry, transport, and use their guns, they need to be reminded exactly what their role is and shown the door if they don’t change their ways.

As gun rights are exercised more and more in this country, more gun owners are going to become part of the political process, and some of us are going to end up on city councils, statehouses, Congress, and God willing, the White House.  Hopefully as their political leaders become more friendly towards citizens exercising their rights, law enforcement will either become more respectful of our rights or get another job.   To quote Lawdog, Burger King is hiring.

Dear Warren

While I appreciate your candor in your recent newspaper article, in which you opined that the rich in our nation should pay more in taxes, please keep it to yourself.

You see, while I’m not super-rich by any measure, I am working my butt off to bring my household’s income to the level that President Obama says ‘rich’ starts at, $250,000 a year.  I’ve got a long way to go before that happens, but hard work will pay off over time.

As it stands now, I’m giving a lot of money to the government in both taxes I pay directly and money I give to businesses when they pass on their tax bills to me in the price of their goods and services.  I pay income tax, property tax, energy tax, sales tax, as well as taxes on many of the services that I purchase in order to maintain the level of comfortable living that I want.

I don’t think I need to pay more taxes, and while you may envision only the rates for the highest earners going up, the slippery slope theory of tax law leads me to believe that when that particular snowball gets going, my tax rates will go up and my upward mobility will slow or stop.

Mr. Buffett, if you feel you should be giving more of your income to the government, please feel free to do so.  In the mean time, please allow the rest of us to do the same if we so choose, or to do something meaningful with our money, either through investing, spending, or saving.  In other words, do something that makes you feel good and leave the rest of us alone.

Sincerely,

Daddy J. Bear

You all stay classy, now

President Obama flew down to Dover Air Force Base on Tuesday to observe the bodies of our fallen troops from Afghanistan.  Due to the wishes of the families, the Pentagon told the press, as well as photographers from the Pentagon, to stay away.  Even when asked if pictures that did not include caskets could be fallen, the Pentagon asked them to not attend.

Imagine their surprise when the White House released a picture of President Obama at the ceremony.  Now in his defense, the remains of our troops aren’t in the picture.  What you see is the president and other people standing in the shadows at the doorway of what I assume is a hangar.  The president is attempting to give a hand salute, presumably in honor of the dead.

Now, I’m not criticizing the President for going to Dover.  He’s the Commander in Chief of our armed forces, and if he felt it was right and fitting that he personally observe the return of these remains and pay respect to them, good for him.  I’ll even give him a pass on his salute.  He’s never been to basic training, boot camp, or an ROTC class, so unless he’s smart and asks the Gunnery Sergeant in charge of the White House detail to teach him, he’s figuring it out on his own.  If he’s trying to show respect in a way that fits with the object of that respect, good for him.*

My problems start with the existence of the photo in question.  I personally don’t have a problem with the press taking tasteful pictures of coffins with flags draped over them as long as the family of the servicemember approves.  A war without reminders of the cost quickly becomes nothing more than something mentioned between the sports and weather on the evening news.

But in this case, the families said no.  The Pentagon tried very hard to comply with those wishes.  They even banished their own photographers from what is a historic event.  But apparently the White House either didn’t get the memo or didn’t think that the restrictions for the press and Pentagon applied to their photographer.  This either shows a disconnect between our military and our civilian leadership when it comes to this almost holy duty we owe to the fallen, or it shows that the White House feels its needs and wants are above what others feel is right.  You make the call.

My next problem is the release of the photo.  If the White House decided to override the Pentagon and have a photographer there to record the ceremony for history, then an argument can be made that the photograph itself is OK.  But to release the photograph on the White House website and distribute it to the press is beyond the pale for me. There is only one excuse for doing this, and that’s to promote the President.  He needs to show he’s the Commander in Chief to convince pro-defense Democrats he’s worth going to the polls, and a picture is worth a thousand words.

A statement from the Press Secretary saying that the President travelled to Dover to observe the ceremony would have been enough, but the White House released a picture that should never have been taken.  This was a brazen political move, and the President should be ashamed.  If he knew about it, he needs to come out and admit how thoughtless he was.  If he didn’t know, he needs to publically fire the twit behind it.  If the press and Pentagon weren’t welcome to take and release pictures, then the White House shouldn’t have been able to do so.

The families of these brave servicemembers are grieving the loss of their child, their husband, their father, their brother.  They asked that pictures not be taken, and the government is obligated by its own policy and by simple decency to comply.  Breaking faith with these families for a calculated political purpose is despicable.

*Personally, my teeth itch a bit when I see someone who’s never served trying to mimic a hand salute.  Usually they don’t know how to do it properly and they don’t understand the meaning of what they’re doing.  I’ve seen presidents who preferred to just put their hands over their hearts to return a salute or to pay respect, and I think that looks and feels better.  Just my opinion.