Posts Tagged ‘big government’

Three Cheers for Idaho; Why not Wyoming?

March 23, 2014

BOISE, March 21, 2014 – On Thursday, Idaho Governor Butch Otter (R) signed a bill, which would effectively nullify future federal gun laws, by prohibiting state enforcement of any future federal act relating to personal firearms, a firearm accessories or ammunition.

S1332 passed the house by a vote of 68-0 and the senate by a vote of 34-0. Alaska and Kansas have also passed similar laws.

Erich Pratt, Director of Communications for Gun Owners of America, cheered the governor’s action. “By signing this nullification bill into law, Idaho has joined an elite class of states that are telling the feds to ‘get lost’ ��especially when it comes to unconstitutional gun control infringements”

Introduced by the State Affairs Committee, the Idaho Federal Firearm, Magazine and Register Ban Enforcement Act, will:

“protect Idaho law enforcement officers from being directed, through federal executive orders, agency orders, statutes, laws, rules, or regulations enacted or promulgated on or after the effective date of this act, to violate their oath of office and Idaho citizens’ rights under Section 11, Article I, of the Constitution of the State of Idaho.”

The legislation continued:

any official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision thereof who knowingly and willfully orders an official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision of the state to enforce any executive order, agency order, law, rule or regulation of the United States government as provided in subsection (2) of this section upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition shall, on a first violation, be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) which shall be paid into the general fund of the state…

S1332 also includes an emergency provision meaning it takes effect immediately upon signature.

Tenth Amendment Center national communications director Mike Maharrey considered the legislation a good start. “This is an important first step for Idaho,” he said. “Getting this law passed will ensure that any new plans or executive orders that might be coming our way will not be enforced in Idaho. Then, once this method is established and shown to be effective, legislators can circle back and start doing the same for federal gun control already on the books. SB1332 is an important building block for protecting the 2nd Amendment in Idaho.”

Passage into law represents a giant step forward in protecting the right to keep and bear arms in Idaho. As the law now stands, state and local law enforcement will not cooperate with all future federal firearm laws.

The bill rests on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine. Simply put, the federal government cannot force states to help implement or enforce and federal act or program The anti-commandeering doctrine rests primarily on four Supreme Court cases dating back to 1842. Printz v. United States serves as the cornerstone.

Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin said that the new Idaho law has opened Pandora’s box even wider.

“People are beginning to realize that this practice is completely constitutional and legal. In the near future, you will see a wave of states passing even broader legislation to fight the federal government on everything ranging from more traditionally liberal issues like hemp and marijuana, to more conservative issues like Obamacare.” Boldin continued, “Nullification isn’t a left vs. right issue. It destroys the fallacy of the left right paradigm and is the remedy for all unconstitutional laws.”
By: Michael Lotfi - Mar 22, 2014

The answer to my question? Well, we had a similar law being considered here. However our “leaders” succumbed to the pressures that are opposed to freedom and liberty. The election looms friends. Let us all remember who had the courage to stand and be counted as among those that support our most deeply held values. As well as remembering those that did not.

Some things that were missed; The Bill of Rights

December 16, 2013

The obamanites and other Tory’s would simply crap their pants if all would have passed!





Amendments Offered in
Congress by James Madison
June 8, 1789

First. That there be prefixed to the Constitution a declaration, that all power is originally vested in, and consequently derived from, the people.

That Government is instituted and ought to be exercised for the benefit of the people; which consists in the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right of acquiring and using property, and generally of pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.

That the people have an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform or change their Government, whenever it be found adverse or inadequate to the purposes of its institution.

Secondly. That in article 1st, section 2, clause 3, these words be struck out, to wit: “The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each State shall have at least one Representative, and until such enumeration shall be made;” and that in place thereof be inserted these words, to wit: “After the first actual enumeration, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number amounts to ——, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that the number shall never be less than ——, nor more than ——, but each State shall, after the first enumeration, have at least two Representatives; and prior thereto.”

Thirdly. That in article 1st, section 6, clause 1, there be added to the end of the first sentence, these words, to wit: “But no law varying the compensation last ascertained shall operate before the next ensuing election of Representatives.”

Fourthly. That in article 1st, section 9, between clauses 3 and 4, be inserted these clauses, to wit: The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed.

The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.

The people shall not be restrained from peaceably assembling and consulting for their common good; nor from applying to the Legislature by petitions, or remonstrances, for redress of their grievances.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

No soldiers shall in time of peace be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner; nor at any time, but in a manner warranted by law.

No person shall be subject, except in cases of impeachment, to more than one punishment or one trial for the same offence; nor shall be compelled to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor be obliged to relinquish his property, where it may be necessary for public use, without a just compensation.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

The rights of the people to be secured in their persons, their houses, their papers, and their other property, from all unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated by warrants issued without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, or not particularly describing the places to be searched, or the persons or things to be seized.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, to be informed of the cause and nature of the accusation, to be confronted with his accusers, and the witnesses against him; to have a compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.

The exceptions here or elsewhere in the Constitution, made in favor of particular rights, shall not be so construed as to diminish the just importance of other rights retained by the people, or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the Constitution; but either as actual limitations of such powers, or as inserted merely for greater caution.

Fifthly. That in article 1st, section 10, between clauses 1 and 2, be inserted this clause, to wit:

No State shall violate the equal rights of conscience, or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases.

Sixthly. That, in article 3d, section 2, be annexed to the end of clause 2d, these words, to wit:

But no appeal to such court shall be allowed where the value in controversy shall not amount to —— dollars: nor shall any fact triable by jury, according to the course of common law, be otherwise re-examinable than may consist with the principles of common law.

Seventhly. That in article 3d, section 2, the third clause be struck out, and in its place be inserted the clauses following, to wit:

The trial of all crimes (except in cases of impeachments, and cases arising in the land or naval forces, or the militia when on actual service, in time of war or public danger) shall be by an impartial jury of freeholders of the vicinage, with the requisite of unanimity for conviction, of the right of challenge, and other accustomed requisites; and in all crimes punishable with loss of life or member, presentment or indictment by a grand jury shall be an essential preliminary, provided that in cases of crimes committed within any county which may be in possession of an enemy, or in which a general insurrection may prevail, the trial may by law be authorized in some other county of the same State, as near as may be to the seat of the offence.

In cases of crimes committed not within any county, the trial may by law be in such county as the laws shall have prescribed. In suits at common law, between man and man, the trial by jury, as one of the best securities to the rights of the people, ought to remain inviolate.

Eighthly. That immediately after article 6th, be inserted, as article 7th, the clauses following, to wit:

The powers delegated by this Constitution are appropriated to the departments to which they are respectively distributed: so that the Legislative Department shall never exercise the powers vested in the Executive or Judicial, nor the Executive exercise the powers vested in the Legislative or Judicial, nor the Judicial exercise the powers vested in the Legislative or Executive Departments.

The powers not delegated by this Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively.

Ninthly. That article 7th be numbered as article 8th.


SOURCE




 

We are from the government, we are here to help: Sleeze bags and out of control Prosecutors

September 22, 2013

Control freaks by any other name. Read on…

Most of us remember the quote by Ronald Reagan“I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.”

Imagine this brand of “help” appearing at your doorstep…Please read on.

Your elementary school aged child misses several days of school. First because of the flu, then when you thought things were getting better, pneumonia symptoms set in.

What started out as a “cold” lingered as an illness that is so unpredictable that even when your child was given the green-light  to go back to school, the nurse sends them home for more rest.

You do what any parent will do, make sure your child gets plenty of chicken soup, take that awful tasting cough medicine, and go to the school to pick up any make-up lessons.

Now let’s fast forward. Later in the same year you find out your spouse has to “go under the knife”. As any loving spouse would do, you plan to go through the ordeal with them. And at the same time your “little one” is now distraught as one of their parents is suffering with chronic illness.

By the end of the year your child misses ONLY twenty days of school, while maintaining satisfactory performance as per the official report card.

So far this is a true story happening in the Wheatland WY School District.

You remember the little boy whose family was put on “criminal probation” along with a — NO GUNS ORDER — placed on the household?

Well as anyone would do, this family appealed this order and retained an attorney.

And Wheatland prosecutor Eric Jones (who ran as a Republican) is now retaliating.

By making this a special case. As a matter a fact, it’s so special, that everything will be under a — gag order — claiming that keeping it all behind closed doors is to protect the minor child.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned, is that sleazy prosecutors like Eric Jones love to keep their dirty deeds deeply under cover. His actions are proof he doesn’t give one iota about the children.

To Eric Jones it’s all about power!

Eric Jones is guilty of doing what many prosecutors in America do best –WIN CASES…and if it means making a Wyoming family go bankrupt, it’s just part of the “game” he plays as a prosecutor.

As of now the avenues of diplomacy have been exhausted. You see, every single member of the School Board and the County Commissioners (even Sandy Contour who ran as a “pro-freedom” candidate”) tell me, “there is nothing they can do.

And it’s all a bald faced lie! Under WY-Statute the “elected officials” can force Eric Jones to step down.

Of course, as usual the job of holding “other politicians accountable”, in this case the prosecuting attorney, is something that no one wants do.

By now you probably know how things really work…When a politician is asking for your vote, even for school board, they are certain to speak in a manner to win the popularity contest.

Then once this same politician is safely in office, by their “actions”, they become part of the slimy “business as usual” club. (Commissioner Sandy Contour, in case you are reading this email, YOU should be paying close attention since many people are watching)

Here is the call to immediate action!!!

The good news is, if Governor Mead hears from enough people like you he could put a stop to this merciless harassment of a Wyoming family.

Even though we know Mead has been on the wrong side on gun issues, surely Mead will stand up in defense against this egregious abuse of power that has been directed against this innocent family.

I pray that Mead would realize that bankrupting this family will only leave long term scars.

This matter is urgent, it cannot wait, it’s not something that can be put-off.

Please contact Governor Mead and ask him to stop this attack that started as a criminal no guns order, and has now turned into a retaliatory act by a out of control prosecutor Eric Jones.

Mead’s office (307) 777-7434
Other contact info here 


The following is an example:

Dear Governor Matt Mead,
I am contacting you on behalf of the Cain family in the Wheatland School district.
Life brings its own hurdles, things like Illness and even surgery can certainly send a family for a loop. But adding salt to the wounds by punishing a family for circumstances out of their control isn’t what the “spirit” of the law is for.
Platte County Prosecutor Eric Jones is retaliating against a Wyoming Family that complied with all prior recommendation by the local school officials, all during  time of documented hardship.
Eric Jones is falsely using low PAWS testing scores, since the entire school numbers have taken a nose dive. Also be aware that the school principal that filed the initial action against this family, was later forced to resign for her own poor performance.
On a side note, similarly when a law enforcement officer is found to be a bad apple, it brings the citations written by that officer under strict scrutiny, sometimes even overturning prior guilty rulings. so should this case be treated.
I pray that you help this family by taking this issue out of the hands of Eric Jones and the heavy handed judge, so this family can go back normal. Twenty days of school absence for a little boy dealing with illness, and on top of that, his father undergoing surgery isn’t who I want my government prosecuting. Let’s save all that for real criminals.
Please help Brandon Cain’s family from being wrongful prosecuted by ruthless prosecutor Eric Jones.
__________________________________________
If after you contact Governor Mead, you would like to also contact Prosecutor Eric Jones, here is his contact info.

Platte County Attorney Office
Eric Jones
307) 322-2045
jones@plattecountywyoming.com

If you’re on Facebook – be sure to go to WyGO’s page and like us. We’ll be publicizing this atrocity on social media as well.

 

  

To Liberty,

Anthony Bouchard
   Executive Director
Wyoming Gun Owners

 

P.S. Prosecutor Eric Jones is going to show a Wheatland family just who the boss is unless you get involved.

Since this family decided that a probation order treating them like felons — including a NO GUNS ORDER — went too far. Since they decided to fight, Eric Jones is now on a mission to get even.

Please call Governor Mead’s office ASAP!

“There is no consensus and the meeting is over,”

July 31, 2012

No surprise, the worst abusers of human rights couldn’t come to a consensus on the best method of destroying resistance to their oppression.

The pro-gun community breathed a collective sigh of relief after United Nations negotiators failed to produce a treaty regulating global arms trade on Friday.
“There is no consensus and the meeting is over,” said a spokesman for the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, which sponsored the month-long conference on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).
However, while the demise of the ATT is a positive outcome for U.S. gun owners, it would be a mistake to believe that it spells the end of the effort to regulate small arms worldwide.
In fact, to global gun ban supporters like Amnesty International and Oxfam America, the ATT was a success whether or not a treaty was produced.
Sure, they would rather have had the treaty pass, and they complained loudly when it was scuttled.  But the fact remains that the ATT represented the most serious discussion of global gun control in history and it ensures that small arms (read: your gun collection) will be part of future negotiations.
And there will be another anti-gun treaty in the near future.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called the unraveling of the ATT merely a “setback,” and insiders at the UN say they expect a vote at the next session of the General Assembly later this year to restart treaty talks.
The Obama administration continues to back a treaty and has already signaled its support for an additional round of negotiations after the next presidential election.
“While we sought to conclude the month’s negotiations with a treaty, more time is a reasonable request for such a complex and critical issue,” a State Department spokesman said.
The ATT was a convenient catch-all mechanism for the many streams of arms control measures that have been flowing from UN headquarters for years.  Just because the ATT was blocked does not mean that all the streams will stop flowing.
Despite what happened — or didn’t happen — this year with the ATT, the drive to ratify a treaty regulating small arms is alive and well.
GOA Members Play Big Role in Stopping Anti-gun Treaty
While the ATT sought to regulate trade on conventional weapons such as battle tanks and battleships, it was the small arms provisions that stirred the most opposition in the U.S.
Earlier this year, GOA began working with Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS) in an effort to get Senators on the record opposing the treaty.
The Moran letter warned that in requiring nations to take “appropriate measures” in furtherance of the goals of the ATT, the vaguely worded treaty “will be used to push the U.S. in the direction of measures that would infringe on both Second Amendment freedoms and the U.S.’s sovereignty more broadly.”
The fact Sen. Moran and millions of gun owners in America rallied fifty other Senators to go on the record against the treaty was a huge obstacle for the Obama administration.  It put the anti-gun side well short of the 67 votes needed in the Senate to ratify a treaty, and would have left the President “owning” an unpopular, anti-gun treaty in an election year.
Backdoor Gun Control Attempt
The President knows that he cannot get his anti-Second Amendment agenda passed through the full Congress, so he simply attempts to bypass that body whenever possible through Executive Orders, presidential directives, and international treaties.
GOA has helped to lay the groundwork to stop the UN small arms treaty.  Since it first came up more than ten years ago, we have led the charge to make gun owners aware of its dangerous implications.
For now, thanks to the efforts of so many politically active supporters, we have bought some time before the next arms treaty.  And that day will come.  The gun grabbers know they’re running a marathon, not a sprint.  They are patient and will work out a more narrowly crafted treaty that still slices away at our liberty.
But GOA, the no-compromise gun lobby, will not budge when it comes to protecting the Second Amendment from enemies at home or abroad.
Action: Contact your Senators and thank those who signed on to the Moran letter, and express disappointment in those who would sacrifice your liberty and U.S. sovereignty to the UN.  When you click here, the appropriate message will be sent to your Senators depending on their position.

Ultra-liberal senators Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY)? More like big government commies…

July 31, 2012
Anti-gun Lautenberg trying to
put amendment on Cybersecurity Bill
Washington is, to say the least, not a town known for its high moral standards.
 
But there is, perhaps, no one with more expertise in milking shameless advantage out of national tragedy than ultra-liberal senators Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY).
 
So it can hardly be a surprise that, this week, these anti-gun Senators intend to offer an amendment to the cybersecurity bill which would prohibit the manufacture of magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds.
 
They appear oblivious to the fact that their “gun ban” mentality created a deadly situation in Aurora, Colorado, where there was a room with a number of trained military marksmen — and none of them were allowed to have a gun.
 
Any one of those individuals could have made a big difference.  Heck, does anyone doubt there would have been a different outcome if George Zimmerman had been in the theater?
 
Incidentally, lest anyone think that banning magazines is the be-all-and-end-all for Lautenberg, he has already announced that he intends to follow up his magazine ban with legislation to monitor and limit your purchases of ammunition.
 
Explains the clueless Lautenberg:  “No sportsman needs 100 rounds to shoot a duck ….”
 
So this Einstein believes you don’t need 100 rounds of ammunition?  Who decided that our Bill of Rights should be a “Bill of Needs”? 
 
It’s time to nip this nasty piece of work in the bud and ensure that his efforts to exploit innocent victims for political gain do not go any further.
ACTIONClick here to contact your Senators.  Demand that they vote against the Lautenberg-Schumer magazine-ban amendment to the cybersecurity bill.

Fools one and all.

 

Deadline Nears On BATFE Shotgun Ban Comments:

April 23, 2011

As we reported on and since Jan. 28, May 1 is the deadline for public comments concerning a shotgun importation ban that has been proposed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. A working group within the BATFE has recommended that any shotgun (semi-automatic, pump-action or any other) that has any one of 10 specific features should be banned from importation, on the grounds that such shotguns are not “generally recognized as particularly suitable for a readily adaptable to sporting purposes.”

SOURCE

The Second Amendment isn’t about hunting or sporting…

Dead Border Patrol Agent Scandle gets even worse

April 22, 2011

Two updates have developed in the continually-breaking story of scandal and corruption at the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives revolving around the U.S. guns-to-Mexico scheme that deliberately placed American firearms in the hands of drug cartels.

The Department of Justice has refused, yet again, to provide Senator Charles Grassley with the documents he has demanded concerning the illegal plot. Grassley took to the Senate floor last week to blast the Obama Administration and Eric Holder for their stonewalling on the issue and their continued failure to provide to Congress the materials necessary for an investigation.

Regarding that refusal, National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea has filed a legal appeal challenging the DOJ-ATF.

A slideshow of the appeal can be found here.

Meanwhile, a second development indicates the origins of the Project Gunwalker scandal (also known as Operation Fast and Furious, and Project Gunrunner). Mike Vanderboegh has discovered documentation that gives the reader a look at the mindset, the motives, and the foundation of what led to the illegal operation.

The Government Accountability Office produced a report in 2009 that highlighted the problem with gun trafficking to Mexico and the lack of a coherent policy to address it. From there, things got out of control when addressing the problem became a central focus of The Department of Homeland Security, the ATF, and its umbrella bureau, the Department of Justice.

Vanderboegh explains:

Let me tell you what this was, and where it came from, based on a conversation I had with a long-time, well-informed veteran of American government intelligence operations the other day.

“Do you think,” he asked me, “that this happened accidentally in a vacuum?” Meaning that one day “Gunwalker Bill” Newell, Phoenix SAC, just got a wild hair and decided to invent his own foreign policy. “Things like this happen because of meetings. People sit in meetings and they decide what they want to happen. And then they take decisions, make policy and implement that policy to achieve those ends.” He added, “That’s why State is so nervous. They signed off on this. In a meeting.”

Gunrunner, I pointed out to him, predated the Obama administration. “Yes, but ‘walking guns’ didn’t.” I told him it seemed to me that given the dates on the documents that the meetings crafting this policy must have taken place sometime in mid-2009. “And who took power in January, 2009?” he replied.

He continued, summing up this way. The gun issue was known to be radioactive. Every time the Democrats embraced it they got killed at the polls the next election cycle. What was needed, in Rahm Emanuel’s parlance, was a good crisis to exploit, something to change the paradigm. The gun confiscationists had always danced in the blood (my term, not his) of every mass shooting and gotten nowhere, to their chagrin and frustration. What was needed was a game changer. Something that fit the meme of “we’ve got to tighten up on American gunowners, gun stores and gun shows because they are feeding the slaughter.” Mexico was perfect. The ATF controlled the reporting of the statistics, the headlines were lurid and if the rest of us gunnies knew that you don’t get automatic weapons, hand grenades and RPGs from gun shows and gun stores, most of the American people were too ignorant of the issue to care about the distinction. But the fact was, as the IG report and other sources concluded, the amount of weapons from those legitimate American sources did not meet the allegation. More importantly the statistics didn’t meet the policy need. So, how to “fix” that? Project Gunwalker. If there weren’t enough semi-auto “assault rifles” in Mexico, the ATF could fix that. And the murders would follow, justifying the policy change of cracking down on “assault rifles,” gun shows and the like.

“So,” I said, “you’re saying that this was a deliberate attempt by policymakers at the highest levels of the Obama administration to subvert the Second Amendment and further diminish the free exercise of firearm rights of honest citizens?”

“You got it. Sucks, huh?” He laughed bitterly.

In short, DOJ, ATF, and DHS needed an issue that would allow them to make a strong case to the American public that U.S. guns laws must be tightened significantly in order to address the problem of gun trafficking to Mexico. And they found that issue in Project Gunwalker. If the agencies mentioned above could somehow prove statistically that drug cartel firearms were coming primarily from the U.S., then they could insist on more gun control.

Things only went downhill from there.

Vanderboegh continues,

In the process of updating and expanding a previous timeline of the Gunwalker scandal, the question hit me once more, where did this come from? Something changed when the Obama administration took over, something that involved a lot of inter-agency coordination. And then it hit me, one other thing my spook friend told me that I hadn‘t reported, that up until now I‘d totally forgot. “Don’t worry about ‘following the money’ on this one,” he said, “follow the power — follow the paper, because paper is how power is transmitted in the federal government.” So I went and I looked and I found this, the real Rosetta Stone of this scandal, hiding in plain sight. Read it and I think you‘ll agree that whatever happened at ground level in the Gunwalker Scandal, it had its roots in this Obama change of policy.

One more thing. I think you, like me, will find confirmation of what I said earlier this month about EPIC – El Paso Intelligence Center: What did EPIC know about Project Gunwalker and when did they know it? Likely answer: Everything and early. The strong and extensive inter-agency coordination described in the document below makes it certain that EPIC, ICE, CBP, DHS and other agencies HAD to be cognizant at some command level of what was happening with the Gunwalker fiasco.

Documentation concerning these assertions can be found here and here.

Within the latter report, issued by the federal government, we find tale-tell statements such as these:

Enhance programs at EPIC targeting illegal weapons smuggling/trafficking. ATF’s Project Gunrunner utilizes the EPIC Gun Desk as the focal point for the collection, analysis, and dissemination of investigative leads derived from Federal, State, local, and international law enforcement agencies.

And these:

Rapidly share weapons seizure information among U.S. law enforcement agencies. Law enforcement organizations have a variety of intelligence collection capabilities and programs which are either directly or indirectly related to information on illicit weapons smuggling/trafficking. Such resources must be utilized in a coordinated and cohesive manner. The ICE Border Violence Intelligence Cell and ATF Gun Desk located at EPIC each utilize separate systems to collect and maintain information relating

to weapons seizures, such as TECS, ATF’s OnLine Lead, the National Tracing Center, Violent Crime Analysis Branch, and the U.S. Bomb Data Center. The Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice will address options for establishing methods to rapidly share information derived from Federal, State, and local and Government of Mexico illicit weapons seizures.

By putting 2 and 2 together it is not difficult to see the game plan. Implement Operation Gunrunner, i.e., send U.S. guns to Mexico, and then rabidly share weapons seizure information among U.S. law enforcement agencies, information that would, of course, show that U.S. guns are arming the Mexican drug cartels.

Much more about this is provided at Vanderboegh’s site.  Read it all.

SOURCE
This was re-posted, in full using a long standing agreement. Please visit the source website for more articles.
So much for the ninety percent myth, as well as any sort of trust in the higher levels of this epic failure administration…

S. 436..? Yet another abomination from the usual suspects…

April 18, 2011

Gads… Go on the road for a few months. Alright, more than a few, and what are the treasonous types up too?

You guessed it; No good! At least if you are any sort of decent American. Read on…

This is an effort to embody Barack Obama’s Arizona newspaper article into legislation — and to milk political advantage from the tragedy in Tucson. It would:

  • withhold federal crime-fighting funds from states which fail to provide a sufficient number of names to the FBI’s Instantcheck system (with penalties possible for states that fall as little as 10% short of providing all names [sec. 101];
  • require federal agencies to turn over the names of all prohibited persons (which would presumably include the names of all persons admitting to having smoked as little as one marijuana cigarette) [sec. 102];
  • redefine “adjudicated as a mental defective” (18 U.S.C. 922(g)(4)) to impose a gun ban in any case in which a “lawful authority” (including, presumably, a school or a Medicare-funded doctor) prescribes counseling or medication in response to “subnormal intelligence, mental illness, or incompetency” [sec. 103];
  • require colleges to set up a procedure for investigating students who are acting strange and “reporting” them [sec. 103]; -allow a person to be put on the FBI’s drug abuser list if, among other things, he admitted to “possessing a controlled substance unlawfully within the last five years” (thereby, humorously, removing current law’s theoretical gun ban for large numbers of unadmitted pot smokers) [sec.104];
  • ban all private person-to-person sales of firearms, requiring that all sales go through federal firearms licensees or the police, who would conduct a background check [Title II].

See All Firearms Legislation In The 112th Congress

This is yet another abomination being thrust upon the people of the United (apparently not so.) States of America.

Back a few, yes only a few years ago, a fellow called TexasFred started talking about a thing. It was called, or more properly became called, the Taxed Enough Already movement. The TEA PARTY. The idea being local control, and accountability of the various politicians. That is still the overriding mission of real TEA PARTY people. Keep it local, keep it hot, and hold those that we elect to their words and promises. All these “National” TEA Party types are forgetting the mission. The mission folks, is local needs, desires, and accountability. We, the local people, have a duty as well as responsibility to see that our wants, needs, and desires are supported by those that we elect as our leaders.

Then the cards fall as they were dealt. Yes. That was a Libertarian view. However, the TEA Party is not Libertarian in a philosophical sense. It is made up of a vast selection of peoples. It crosses racial and ethnic boundaries, political, and regional facets. It does include peoples of many stripes; As it were. We are called AMERICAN’S. For a reason… We are all different, and we combine the strengths of our backgrounds while never forgetting our weaknesses. From there, we go on. Never have we been perfect. Yet I would submit; We AMERICANS have established the finest of nations that this world has yet to see. Anyone that thinks different is more than welcome to post about a better place.

We; Americans, need to guard our liberty and freedom. Every day, every minute, from those that would steal our birthright. That being Liberty and Freedom. Think about it people!

Last; Please say a prayer for those folks plying Elk Mountain and Bordeaux Road. Truck drivers die every hour because states (corruption) refuse to close roads, driver managers preach safety yet send their charges into the gates of hell. All so that you can have your broccoli…

May God bless each and everyone; Keep your powder dry.


California: Stuck on stupid!

November 24, 2010

Thank God that I got out of there in 1978. It was bad enough back then…

“In the future, historians may likely mark the 2010 midterm elections as the end of the California era and the beginning of the Texas one. In one stunning stroke, amid a national conservative tide, California voters essentially ratified a political and regulatory regime that has left much of the state unemployed and many others looking for the exits. … This state of crisis is likely to become the norm for the Golden State. In contrast to other hard-hit states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Nevada, which all opted for pro-business, fiscally responsible candidates, California voters decisively handed virtually total power to a motley coalition of Democratic-machine politicians, public employee unions, green activists and rent-seeking special interests. In the new year, the once and again Gov. Jerry Brown, who has some conservative fiscal instincts, will be hard-pressed to convince Democratic legislators who get much of their funding from public-sector unions to trim spending. Perhaps more troubling, Brown’s own extremism on climate change policy — backed by rent-seeking Silicon Valley investors with big bets on renewable fuels — virtually assures a further tightening of a regulatory regime that will slow an economic recovery in every industry from manufacturing and agriculture to home-building.” –columnist Joel Kotkin

And then these words of wisdom;

“In 1920, when the top tax rate was 73 percent, for people making over $100,000 a year, the federal government collected just over $700 million in income taxes — and 30 percent of that was paid by people making over $100,000. After a series of tax cuts brought the top rate down to 24 percent, the federal government collected more than a billion dollars in income tax revenue — and people making over $100,000 a year now paid 65 percent of the taxes. How could that be? The answer is simple: People behave differently when tax rates are high as compared to when they are low. With low tax rates, they take their money out of tax shelters and put it to work in the economy, benefitting themselves, the economy and government, which collects more money in taxes because incomes rise. High tax rates, which very few people are actually paying, because of tax shelters, do not bring in as much revenue as lower tax rates that people are paying. It was much the same story after tax cuts during the Kennedy administration, the Reagan administration and the Bush Administration. The New York Times reported in 2006: ‘An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year.’ Expectations are in the eyes of the beholder — and in the rhetoric of the demagogues. If class warfare is more important to some politicians than collecting more revenue when there is a deficit, then let the voters know that. And spare us so-called ‘deficit reduction commissions.’” –columnist Thomas Sowell

SOURCE

Political Correctness, and getting laid; Talk about Big Brother / Sister!

October 27, 2010

What follows, is well? Beyond stupid in my not so humble opinion…

I am a Conservative Libertarian, hence the name of this blog. What follows, is either some really funny tounge in cheek. Or some serious Big Government Mysandry / Misogyny intrusion on personal liberty…

Seeking Promiscuous Heathen Female Roommate


Dear Fair Housing Center of West Michigan,

I am writing to express my concern over a recent civil rights complaint that has been filed against a woman who posted an advertisement at her church last July. Apparently, you were upset that she was seeking a Christian roommate. I came to that conclusion after reading the following in the complaint you recently filed against her: “(The ad) expresses an illegal preference for a Christian roommate, thus excluding people of other faiths.”

As someone who is preparing to move to Grand Rapids, I am concerned about your complaint. I’m not concerned about the Christian woman. I’m concerned about myself. Let me explain.

Because of recent financial hardships I have had to take a job in Michigan and, for the same reasons, I am going to have to seek a roommate. I want to live with a woman. Not just any woman but, preferably, a really sexually promiscuous one. In order to increase the chances that she’ll be promiscuous I am specifically demanding that she be a practitioner of Heathenism, just like me.

But now I have read a Fox News story that quotes your Executive Director Nancy Haynes as saying “It’s a violation to make, print or publish a discriminatory statement. There are no exemptions to that.” Director Haynes statement is incorrect because there is, in fact, an exemption for gender when there is a shared living space. I plan to take advantage of that by discriminating on the basis of gender. I’ll seek women only and, of course, demand that the woman I choose shares a bedroom with me throughout the duration of our relationship.

I am concerned that Director Haynes has said that, depending on the outcome of the case, the Christian woman could face several hundreds of dollars in fines and fair housing training to prevent it from happening again. I don’t want to face the same prospect.

Harold Core, director of public affairs with the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, recently told the Grand Rapids Press that the Fair Housing Act prevents people from publishing an advertisement stating their preference of religion with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling. And he made no distinction between an owner-placed ad and one placed by a prospective occupant.

Joel Oster, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) is representing the Christian woman free of charge. He says this case is simply “outrageous.” So I plan to call the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to see if they will defend my right to live with a promiscuous heathen woman. I know they would not represent me if I were seeking a Christian roommate. Thank Government Almighty they aren’t morally consistent!

Okay folks, I couldn’t remove the “sign up” Button… Here is the source


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 168 other followers

%d bloggers like this: