January 10, 2011
Here, In Reality
A lot of memes are dying a bitter death as more information comes out about Jared Loughner's rampage at Gabrielle Giffords' townhall. Despite dishonest attempts by a corrupt media and their left wing allies to blame conservatives and the Tea Party movement for the shootings, the truth has emerged.
Loughner—according to those who knew him in high school and college—was very liberal when he was younger, but began displaying behavior that became increasingly erratic, and his obsession with Giffords began before the Tea Party ever existed. Another meme is also suffering its downfall in the wake of the massacre in Tuscon. For years, left-wing gun control advocates have claimed that concealed carry laws allowing the general population to carry arms would result in carry permit holders gunning down each other and the public at large in the panic of a violent episode. Well, a concealed carry permit holder was at the scene of Saturday's attack. He helped subdue the shooter. So much for another leftist meme. Long-time CY reader Bill Smith noted via email:The vast majority of those citizens that choose to go armed do so to be a benefit to society, not just themselves. Mr. Zamudio isn't atypical. He's simply one of us.
According to the above piece, it seems that there WAS a private, armed citizen on scene with a pistol who, in the midst of the chaos, managed to keep his head, assess the immediate situation, and not draw his weapon. That is, he did NOT become a "cowboy" even though he was -- as some idiot saw fit to point out elsewhere about this shooting -- within some sort of significant distance from the OK Corral -- and start blazing away with his weapon. He did not even draw his weapon. He, did, however, start running TOWARD the shooting. He became intimately involved in the struggle, and saw what he thought was the shooter holding the gun. Instead of using his own weapon to shoot the shooter, he used his considerable size, and strength to "[force] the muzzle to the ground." He was then made aware by others -- and was sufficiently in control of his own faculties to immediately understand -- that this was NOT the shooter. At about the same time, the innocent man dropped the gun, and our armed citizen decided to stand on it, and try to get to the police on his cell phone. "Zamudio [ -- our armed citizen -- ] said he never pulled his gun out. He saw that the slide on the shooter's gun appeared to be empty and decided the shooter was not in a position to fire." "I don't know about being called a hero," he said. "I feel like everybody should think that's what you are supposed to do in a situation like this - go and help," Zamudio said. My question is, does our armed citizen, Mr. Zamudio, fit the picture so often painted of armed citizens by the Brady Campaign? Or, don't many of us recognize him from thousands of shooting ranges, gun clubs, matches, hunting camps, and classes around the country, who just enjoy their sport legally and responsibly, and pass along its values to younger shooters coming up, because that's how we were taught when we learned to shoot when we were kids. For the present purposes you may want to read these rules starting with # 4, but it seems that our armed citizen had all four of these rules present clearly, and simultaneously in his head from the moment he strapped on his weapon that morning on his way to his Mom's art show: RULE 1: ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED The only exception to this occurs when one has a weapon in his hands and he has personally unloaded it for checking. As soon as he puts it down, Rule 1 applies again. RULE 2: NEVER LET THE MUZZLE COVER ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT PREPARED TO DESTROY You may not wish to destroy it, but you must be clear in your mind that you are quite ready to if you let that muzzle cover the target. To allow a firearm to point at another human being is a deadly threat, and should always be treated as such. RULE 3: KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER TIL YOUR SIGHTS ARE ON THE TARGET This we call the Golden Rule because its violation is responsible for about 80 percent of the firearms disasters we read about. RULE 4: BE SURE OF YOUR TARGET You never shoot at anything until you have positively identified it. You never fire at a shadow, or a sound, or a suspected presence. You shoot only when you know absolutely what you are shooting at and what is beyond it.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:23 PM | Comments (0) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Text of the So-Called "Assault Weapons Ban" That Liberal Journalists Can't Seem to Find or Understand
Consider this a public service (HTML) (PDF).
There is of course more to the bill, and this section of the bill, but this is the language that is relevant to the MSM's erroneous claims that the Glock 19 and the magazines used by Loughner would have been illegal if this ban were still in place. Clearly, Glock handguns were never banned in any capacity, and higher-than-standard capacity magazines such as used in Loughner's atrocity were legal to own, buy, sell and possess during the lifetime of the ban. It was only illegal to manufacture new magazines after the law went into effect.
TITLE XI--FIREARMS Subtitle A--Assault Weapons SEC. 110101. SHORT TITLE. This subtitle may be cited as the `Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act'. SEC. 110102. RESTRICTION ON MANUFACTURE, TRANSFER, AND POSSESSION OF CERTAIN SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS. (a) RESTRICTION- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: `(v)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon. `(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection. `(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to-- `(A) any of the firearms, or replicas or duplicates of the firearms, specified in Appendix A to this section, as such firearms were manufactured on October 1, 1993; `(B) any firearm that-- `(i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action; `(ii) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or `(iii) is an antique firearm; `(C) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds of ammunition; or `(D) any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than 5 rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine. The fact that a firearm is not listed in Appendix A shall not be construed to mean that paragraph (1) applies to such firearm. No firearm exempted by this subsection may be deleted from Appendix A so long as this subsection is in effect. `(4) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to-- `(A) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty); `(B) the transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials; `(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving a firearm, of a semiautomatic assault weapon transferred to the individual by the agency upon such retirement; or `(D) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of a semiautomatic assault weapon by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary.'. (b) DEFINITION OF SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPON- Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph: `(30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon' means-- `(A) any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as-- `(i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models); `(ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; `(iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70); `(iv) Colt AR-15; `(v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC; `(vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12; `(vii) Steyr AUG; `(viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and `(ix) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12; `(B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of-- `(i) a folding or telescoping stock; `(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; `(iii) a bayonet mount; `(iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and `(v) a grenade launcher; `(C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of-- `(i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip; `(ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer; `(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned; `(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and `(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and `(D) a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least 2 of-- `(i) a folding or telescoping stock; `(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; `(iii) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and `(iv) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.'. (c) PENALTIES- (1) VIOLATION OF SECTION 922(v)- Section 924(a)(1)(B) of such title is amended by striking `or (q) of section 922' and inserting `(r), or (v) of section 922'. (2) USE OR POSSESSION DURING CRIME OF VIOLENCE OR DRUG TRAFFICKING CRIME- Section 924(c)(1) of such title is amended in the first sentence by inserting `, or semiautomatic assault weapon,' after `short-barreled shotgun,'. (d) IDENTIFICATION MARKINGS FOR SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS- Section 923(i) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following: `The serial number of any semiautomatic assault weapon manufactured after the date of the enactment of this sentence shall clearly show the date on which the weapon was manufactured.'. SEC. 110103. BAN OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES. (a) PROHIBITION- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 110102(a), is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: `(w)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device. `(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection. `(3) This subsection shall not apply to-- `(A) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty); `(B) the transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials; `(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving ammunition, of a large capacity ammunition feeding device transferred to the individual by the agency upon such retirement; or `(D) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of any large capacity ammunition feeding device by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary.'. `(4) If a person charged with violating paragraph (1) asserts that paragraph (1) does not apply to such person because of paragraph (2) or (3), the Government shall have the burden of proof to show that such paragraph (1) applies to such person. The lack of a serial number as described in section 923(i) of title 18, United States Code, shall be a presumption that the large capacity ammunition feeding device is not subject to the prohibition of possession in paragraph (1).'. (b) DEFINITION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE- Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 110102(b), is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph: `(31) The term `large capacity ammunition feeding device'-- `(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device manufactured after the date of enactment of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but `(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.'. (c) PENALTY- Section 924(a)(1)(B) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 110102(c)(1), is amended by striking `or (v)' and inserting `(v), or (w)'. (d) IDENTIFICATION MARKINGS FOR LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES- Section 923(i) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 110102(d) of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following: `A large capacity ammunition feeding device manufactured after the date of the enactment of this sentence shall be identified by a serial number that clearly shows that the device was manufactured or imported after the effective date of this subsection, and such other identification as the Secretary may by regulation prescribe.'.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 02:57 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Predictable: Gail Collins Recycles Brady Campaign Lies
Dear Gail Collins,
You are entitled to have your own opinions about firearms, but you are not entitled to your own reality. That means you should not parrot the speech of people with a vested political and financial interest in lying, like, say, a spokesperson for a gun control organization who is paid to pass along absurdities such as this.First, Collins' is factually wrong when she asserts that a Glock 19 is not "a regular pistol." It is perhaps the single most "regular" pistol in the United States, being one of the family of the most popular sidearms purchased and used by civilians, military and law enforcement around the globe, and it uses the most common centerfire pistol caliber in the world (9x19mm). It is perhaps possible for Collins to be more wrong in her characterization of the Glock 19, but I fail to see how. Then we have Paul Helmke, of the Brady Campaign, who claims that the Glock 19 is "not suited for hunting or personal protection." He is perhaps half right. I don't know of anyone who would advocate the use of a compact 9mm pistol for hunting, but that doesn't mean it could not be done. It would be too small to take big game humanely, and is generally regarded as too large of a bullet for small game such as rabbit or squirrel, but I've heard the occasional anecdotal stories of mid-sized handguns being used to dispatch predators such as coyotes and feral dogs. Helmke is of course laughably dishonest when he claims the Glock 19 "is not suited... for personal protection." Personal protection is the entire reason the Glock 19 was created! It was conceived of, designed to be, and marketed as a personal protection handgun from the ground up. It is particularly well-suited for concealed carry by law enforcement and citizens, and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, have been sold just to fit that role, just in the United States. Perhaps it is too much to expect either competence or honesty from left-wig ideologues such as Collins and Helmke, but I do appreciate the fact that they don't even attempt to hide their dishonesty.
If Loughner had gone to the Safeway carrying a regular pistol, the kind most Americans think of when they think of the right to bear arms, Giffords would probably still have been shot and we would still be having that conversation about whether it was a sane idea to put her Congressional district in the cross hairs of a rifle on the Internet. But we might not have lost a federal judge, a 76-year-old church volunteer, two elderly women, Giffords's 30-year-old constituent services director and a 9-year-old girl who had recently been elected to the student council at her school and went to the event because she wanted to see how democracy worked. Loughner's gun, a 9-millimeter Glock, is extremely easy to fire over and over, and it can carry a 30-bullet clip. It is "not suited for hunting or personal protection," said Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign. "What it's good for is killing and injuring a lot of people quickly."
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:32 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
And the Parade of Idiots Continues...
As we discussed in some detail yesterday, the writers and editors of Salon are remarkably incompetent when it comes to fact checking their claims about the expired "federal ban on firearm cosmetics" (if we are to describe what the bill actually did).
Apparently the Village Voice is similarly staffed with writers and editors that simply can't be bothered read the actual law.The Glock 19 used by Loughner was never banned by federal law, nor was the sale, ownership or possession of the aftermarket extended magazine that he used in the shooting. The only thing covered in the expired federal bill was the manufacture of new magazines after the law went into effect. Any new or used magazine made prior to the ban could be sold in retail stores, and in actuality, that is precisely what occurred. There was a shortage of standard capacity magazines for more obscure firearms, but standard capacity magazines and high capacity magazines like those used by Loughner were available for sale—quite legally—during the entire life of the ill-conceived law.
As Gail Collins points out in today's Times, the Saturday shooting of Gabrielle Giffords and 19 others -- six fatally -- at the shopping mall parking lot was deadlier than the gunfight at the O.K. Corral in nearby Tombstone. And Loughner never would've been able to buy his Glock with its extended clip if the Federal Assault Weapons Ban hadn't been allowed to sunset in 2004. Which means, as Collins writes, that if the 22-year-old had been limited to your standard assassin's pistol, we might well have lost a congresswoman, but "not a federal judge, a 76-year-old church volunteer, two elderly women, Gifford's 30-year-old constituent services director, and a 9-year-old girl who had recently been elected to the student council and went to the event because she wanted to see how democracy worked."
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:13 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
January 09, 2011
The Politics of Political Rhetoric
In the wake of the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Arizona) and 19 others outside a Tucson supermarket, the usual rhetoric about political rhetoric has been flying wildly about. “Contemporary political rhetoric,” contemporary wisdom says, “is uniquely harmful. It is far more venomous and dangerous than ever before, and something ought to be done about it.” Political graphics, such as those with what appear to be telescopic sight crosshairs “targeting” the states of political opponents are particularly likely to incite the unstable to violence. Nonsense.
A cursory reading of the history of American political campaigns and political cartoons reveals that, in many ways, our political discourse is, by comparison, reasonably polite and restrained. Few of the political figures we revere today escaped having their parentage, intellect, honesty and personal morals and habits publicly questioned in less then delicate and tasteful terms. And while we do have more or less instant means of communication that our predecessors lacked, the kind of obscene, witless nastiness often seen there is commonly confined to a few very specific and partisan websites where those inclined to fling feces through the bars of their cyber cages are able to fling it almost exclusively at, and to the deranged delight of, each other. Most people become aware of it only as the result of bloggers who seek out such vitriol for the purpose of illustrating the derangement of their political opponents and post it as representative examples. Thankfully, it represents the thinking and juvenile tendencies of only a tiny portion of the population, a portion that likely still laughs uproariously at fart jokes some ten years or more on from high school.Posted by: MikeM at 09:57 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Salon Posts Completely False Article About Giffords Shooting
Some guy named Justin Elliott is claiming that the Glock 19 and magazines used in the Giffords shooting yesterday would have been banned by the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.
The only thing he got right in his article was the punctuation.Unfortunately for Elliott and the dolts he has for editors at Salon, his claims are almost entirely untrue. The Glock 19 was completely legal and freely available during the entirety of the laughably ineffective law. It was never illegal to purchase, manufacture or own at any point, and Glock actually introduced 11 new models to the US market during the time Elliot claimed they were banned. Likewise, the 31-round magazines used in the shooting have never been banned from civilian ownership, or commercial and retail sale. Only the manufacture of new magazines was banned during the time the law was in effect. Sale, ownership, possession and use was always perfectly legal as a federal matter. Elliott's post isn't just wrong, it's embarrassingly wrong. Update: Salon has since updated the article, and it's still wrong:
The semiautomatic handgun used in the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and more than a dozen other people on Saturday would have been illegal to manufacture and difficult to purchase under the Clinton-era assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004. According to police and media reports, the alleged shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, legally purchased a Glock 19 with a high-capacity magazine in November at a gun store in Tucson. Under the assault weapons ban, it was illegal to manufacture or sell new high capacity magazines, defined as those that hold more than 10 rounds. The magazines used by Loughner had 31 rounds each, according to police.
Salon was embarrassed enough to partially correct the claim about the gun (without having the integrity to acknowledge their gross error), but is still completely incorrect in claiming that so-called "high-capacity" magazines were illegal to sell during the ban. They most certainly were not. Shooters could buy high capacity magazines—new or used—during the entire ban. But Elliott still isn't done being incompetent, even in the revised article. Such as this false claim, which still remains:
The high-capacity magazine of the semiautomatic pistol used in the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and more than a dozen other people on Saturday would have been illegal to manufacture and difficult to purchase under the Clinton-era assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004. According to police and media reports, the alleged shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, legally purchased a semiautomatic Glock 19 with a high-capacity magazine in November at a gun store in Tucson. Under the assault weapons ban, it was illegal to manufacture or sell new high-capacity magazines, defined as those that hold more than 10 rounds. The magazines used by Loughner had 31 rounds each, according to police.
Manufacturers could indeed legally manufacture and market guns capable of using high capacity magazines during the entire life of the so-called ban. What they could not do is manufacture new high capacity magazines after the law went into effect. Elliot is still incompetent, as are his editors. It is obvious that Joan Walsh's magazine is far more interested in misleading their readers and pushing a radical agenda than telling anything resembling the truth.
Between 1994 and 2004 when the assault weapons ban was in effect, gun manufacturers such as Glock could not market handguns with high-capacity magazines. If the ban were still in effect, it's less likely that Loughner could have obtained a gun with a high-capacity magazine. Stores could legally only sell used high-capacity magazines at that time, and new magazines could not be manufactured.
MIKE’S UPDATE: There are a number of additional mistakes and misrepresentations in the article, as well as plainly misleading statements. Among them: MISREPRESENTATION: “If Loughner had been using a traditional magazine, "it would have drastically reduced the number of shots he got off before he had to pause, unload and reload -- and he could have been stopped," Daniel Vice, senior attorney at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, tells Salon.” FACT: The standard Glock 19 magazine holds 15 rounds, With one round chambered, that’s a total of 16 rounds. With one additional magazine (Glocks are factory shipped with two magazines), a total of 31 rounds. To “unload,” one need only press the magazine release which causes an expended magazine to drop free from the magazine well and takes only a fraction of a second, or perhaps a bit longer than a second for an untrained operator. Inserting a loaded magazine and releasing the slide to chamber a round would commonly take no more than six seconds for an untrained operator. I have no idea what Vice considers a “traditional” magazine, but even if it was a Clinton ban magazine of only 10 rounds, the shooter would still have 21 readily accessible rounds. Vice is trying to suggest that there would be substantial time differential with “traditional” as opposed to “extended” magazines, but that differential would have been far less significant than he suggests. The best means of stopping the shooter would have been one or more honest citizens carrying their own weapons in the crowd, but the Brady Center opposes that as well. It’s tragic that none were apparently present. MISTAKE: “State laws are also an issue....‘Even if folks had seen Loughner with the gun walking up to the congresswoman, it was perfectly legal until he started firing,’ Vice says.” FACT: The applicable Arizona laws are: “13-1202. Threatening or intimidating; classification
A. A person commits threatening or intimidating if the person threatens or intimidates by word or conduct:
1. To cause physical injury to another person or serious damage to the property of another; or...” “13-1204. Aggravated assault; classification; definition
A. A person commits aggravated assault if the person commits assault as prescribed by section 13-1203 under any of the following circumstances:
2. If the person uses a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument.
B. A person commits aggravated assault if the person commits assault by either intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causing any physical injury to another person, intentionally placing another person in reasonable apprehension of imminent physical injury or knowingly touching another person with the intent to injure the person, and both of the following occur:” 13-1202 is a misdemeanor and 13-1204 is a felony offense. Vice could not be more wrong if he tried. “Loughner with the gun walking up to the congresswoman...” is violating both statutes, particularly if he had the weapon in his hand. The laws pertaining to self defense and use of deadly force would also have empowered any armed bystander to, at the very least, point their weapon at Loughner and challenge him. The second he began to raise his weapon toward anyone--arguably, particularly the congresswoman--he could have been immediately shot. MISREPRESENTATION: “He [Vice] also notes that Glock pistols are particularly easy to fire, letting off rounds as quickly as the operator can pull the trigger. "They are very good at killing people quickly," he says. FACT: Any handgun, revolver or semi-automatic pistol like a Glock, will fire “as quickly as the operator can pull the trigger.” Vice is suggesting that Glocks, apart from other types of firearms, are somehow uniquely adept at “killing people quickly.” This is nothing more than an attempt to demonize a tool and to mislead those not well acquainted with firearms. While Glocks are rugged, reliable handguns, they possess no unusual or unique “killing” abilities. No firearm does. It is more than a mere issue of semantics to observe that it was Loughner who killed six people, not the tool he used. MISLEADING: “‘Our gun laws are so weak that someone who couldn't get into the military, who was kicked out of school, and who used drugs walked into a gun store and was able to immediately buy a semiautomatic weapon,’ he [Vice] says.” FACT: Many people are not accepted for military service, some are kicked out of school, and many have used illegal drugs at one time or another, yet these are not, by themselves or together, a bar on possession of legal ownership of firearms, or even to driving, in any state. While the Brady Center has, over the years and under various names, tried to ban virtually all gun ownership by various devices, unless Vice is suggesting that anyone who has ever been unfit for military service, been ejected from school, or has used illegal drugs should be forever banned from buying a gun--this would require nationwide laws and a massive computerized registry--he is being particularly misleading here. One of the supreme ironies and unintended consequences of the Clinton Gun Ban was that it actually inspired the design and manufacture of a variety of new, particularly concealable weapons and the foundation of a variety of manufacturers. It was Glock that led the way with the Glock 26 in 9mm, designed for the 10 rounds to which all newly manufactured magazines were then limited. Needless to say, the design was a runaway success and spawned many successful copies from other manufacturers.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 06:25 PM | Comments (29) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Just Like Virginia Tech; CBS Spreads Lies to Further Their Gun Control Agenda
It pisses me off how the hacks in the MSM take every horrific shooting like the one today in Arizona to further their favored cause of gun control. Not only do they try to demonize and entire class of citizens (gun owners) and firearms (everything is "high-powered" or "high capacity" or an "assault weapon" or "military-style"), they also lie about the effect of gun laws they champion, claiming these seemingly magical laws would have prevented such a crime.
CBS is guilty of fabricating such a lie:Any detachable magazine fed firearm--which includes the most common target rifles, hunting firearms, and the most common self-defense and sporting pistols--can use a "high-capacity" magazine. Someone simply needs to make it. But the claim that such magazines were ever outlawed is an abject and bald-faced lie. Magazines holding between 10-100 rounds were perfectly legal to buy, sell, possess, own, and shoot the entire time the so-called "federal assault weapons ban" was in place. They were available in every sporting good store that wanted to carry them, via catalog sales, or on the Internet, just as they are today. The "ban" simply made it illegal to build new magazines during that time period, which affected the supply of magazines for many firearms very, very little. It simply made the less common and higher demand magazines a bit more expensive. CBS knows this. They know they are selling a lie to a public reeling in shock from a horrible massacre. And that is exactly what they intended to do, to further their political agenda.
A source with knowledge of the gun involved in Saturday's shooting says the weapon used was a Glock 19 9mm semi-automatic pistol. Importantly, the source said, the gun had a high capacity magazine that can hold up to 30 or more rounds, two to three times a normal magazine capacity; and witnesses said the magazine stuck out about 12 inches. The Glock website confirms that, reading that the standard magazine hold 15 rounds, while the high capacity magazine Loughner had can hold up to 33. One reports says the magazine was probably purchased separately. The high capacity magazine was banned while the federal assault weapons ban was in place during the Clinton administration; the ban was allowed to expire during the Bush administration.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:32 AM | Comments (22) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
January 08, 2011
Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords Shot, At Least 6 Killed at Town Hall Shooting
I just got home from a very enjoyable day with my parents, my brothers, and their families, to discover a man in Arizona just ripped families apart, forever.
The local sheriff seems to think there may have been accomplices, but comments I've read about him elsewhere make me suspect he doesn't know what he's talking about. That would give him something in common with the shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, who seems to have gone off the deep end quite some time ago, with a history of substance abuse and bizarre statements many are interpreting as signs of mental illness. Descriptions from those who knew him make him sound a bit like Andrew Mickel, an Indymedia blogger that assassinated a police officer in hopes of triggering a civil war, and who is now on California's death row. At the moment, though, I could care less about the shooter or his motivations. My prayers are with the families of those killed and injuries and the shock and agony they are enduring. My thoughts are of my family, how precious they are to me, and how I must focus on living every day with them like it is my last, because some day, it will be. God be with us all.
A shooting rampage at a town hall-style event Saturday in Tucson, Ariz., left six dead, including a federal judge, and critically wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who police said was the target of the attack. There were more than a dozen others wounded. Giffords is in intensive care but expected to survive after being shot in the head at close range.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:56 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Michael Vick More Important to Obama Than Family of Soldier Killed In Combat
Not that anyone didn't already know this by now, but our President is a shallow, self-absorbed buffoon:
Barack Obama is an embarrassment who belittles the high office he holds every day he occupies it. I cannot wait for the day that he departs.
It was bad enough that after Sgt. Sean Collins was killed in Afghanistan his parents received a senator's letter of condolence with the wrong name. But the soldier's father says the White House added to the sting by subsequently turning down a request for President Obama to personally call Collins' mother. Pat Collins, a retired lieutenant colonel, told Q13 FOX in Seattle that the family was told last month that the president could not fit it "into his schedule" to call mother Linda Collins about their son's death. Pat Collins, who initially made the request with the White House, said he would've understood, except for the fact that around the same time, Obama found an opening in his schedule for a much-publicized phone conversation with Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:22 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
January 06, 2011
Juan Williams Rides Again
After an exhaustive investigation into its firing of Juan Williams, National Public Radio has announced that it acted entirely legally, that its Senior Vice President for News, Ellen Weiss, is resigning, that its CEO Vivian Schiller will lose her 2010 bonus, and, oh yes, NPR sort of kind of wishes it had handled things a little, you know, differently and will take steps to ensure that it handles such things sort of kind of differently in the future. Those interested in reading NPR’s various statements and the statement of their ombudsman, Alicia C. Shepard, can find that information here.
For those who have not closely followed the case, in October of 2010, the news broke that Juan Williams, who had worked for NPR for a decade, had been fired for a statement he made on an edition of The O’Reilly Factor. Williams, billed as a liberal commentator on Fox, told O’Reilly that he experiences a moment of anxiety when he sees people in obviously Muslim garb about to board the same aircraft on which he is flying. Williams was careful to note that this did not mean that all Muslims should be considered terrorists. Weiss soon fired Williams--by phone. She refused to speak to him in person and generally treated him shabbily.Posted by: MikeM at 07:45 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Mewling Obama Supporter Calls Secret Service, Attempts to Inform on UFC Fighter
The petty little tyrants just can't stand dissenting views, can they?
Volkmann's comments were clearly rhetorical, and requesting someone to compete in an organized sporting event with rules, attending physicians, a referee and panel of judges can in no way a threat. But because our timid little President is so delicate and easily offended, the Secret Service has wasted our tax dollars to harass a citizen and small business owner for comments that would have elicited a yawn under the previous administration, where liberal death threats against President Bush were a staple of their protests. Democrats aren't tough enough to face domestic criticism. We should hardly be surprised that they are so easily rolled by our nation's real enemies.
UFC lightweight Jacob Volkmann, following his UFC 125 win over Antonio McKee, declared that he wanted to fight President Barack Obama for his next fight. [snip] After defeating McKee, Volkmann was asked who he would like to fight next. Volkmann first requested Clay Guida, then said "Actually, Obama. He's not too bright … Someone needs to knock some sense into that idiot. I just don't like what Barack is doing." [snip] The Secret Service showed up both at his residence and during a youth wrestling camp he coaches. [snip] "This guy had the whole interview on a piece of paper and it had my picture and everything," said Volkmann. "He was like 'is this what you said?' and I said, 'yes it is.' He's like 'I want to let you know I'm a little embarrassed for coming here and doing this because obviously nothing happened.' He actually apologized for coming, but he had to come. He wanted to make sure I wasn't going to D.C to hurt the President. "The thing is, I got home and I checked my e-mail and I had about 20 e-mails and one of them, one of ladies had actually contacted the FBI and the Secret Service, and she was telling me that she was going to do it." The person who contacted Volkmann, according to the fighter, was a member of the election committee that worked for President Obama's campaign.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 02:52 PM | Comments (26) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
An Honest Question About the Debt Ceiling
So we seem to be facing a problem:
If we refuse to raise the $14.3 trillion debt limit, interest rates could go up and jobs could be lost in an already depressed economy. I get that. But which is worse? Hitting our debt limit, or raising it again, only to hit it in the near future with even more catastrophic results? It would seem better for the nation to run out of money we frankly don't have now, instead of piling up the debt and defaulting on it later, hurting both us and our creditors in other nations that much worse when we finally do default, which we assuredly will as we keep kicking the proverbial can down the road, borrowing far more than we have the financial resources to repay. At this point, refusing to raise the debt ceiling and dramatically cutting government spending would seem to be the only logical and fiscally responsible action out Congress can take. Continually raising the debt we owe to other nations would seem to be a clear and present danger to our economy and Republic. What say you?
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner warned congressional leaders Thursday that the government could reach its borrowing limit by spring and failure to raise it could affect millions of American jobs. The government will reach the limit between March 31 and May 16, Geithner said in a letter to congressional leaders. Not increasing the $14.3 trillion debt limit could lead to job losses, he said. Inaction could drive up interest rates and make it more costly for U.S. companies to borrow money. Geithner's warning is directed chiefly at Republicans, who are vowing to block an increase in the debt limit and use the fight to restrain government spending.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 02:38 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Quick Takes, January 6, 2011
Welcome to the first edition of Quick Takes for 2011. Let's get right to the lunacy:
ITEM: Katie Couric thinks what America needs is a Muslim version of the Cosby Show. Presumably, this would teach all the gun and God clingers a thing or two about tolerance. What Ms. Couric, and those like her, cannot tolerate is that religious tolerance is written into the DNA of Americans. We tolerate those professing any religion so long as they are Americans first, for if they are Americans first, they’ll be tolerant. The problem is and always will be that there are too many Muslims who are Muslims first, last and always, and who will actively try to impose Islam on and/or kill those who aren’t. How do you add a laugh track to that? ITEM: DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano made a surprise visit to Afghanistan to meet with Afghan President Hamid Karzai. The topic: How to better police the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Well of course! She’s doing such a magnificent job of border enforcement, such as posting signs warning Americans that entire sections of Arizona are so infested with drug gangs and illegals that they’re not safe. It’s now official: So far has Napolitano sunk into self-parody, trying to parody anything she says or does is a lost cause. ITEM: Chief White House economic advisor Austan Goolsbee has warned Congress that if they don’t raise the current 14.3 trillion dollar debt ceiling--we’re now at 13.9 trillion--an unprecedented economic crisis will occur and has further warned Congress not to “toy” with the issue. Let me see if I have this right: Goolsbee and his pals are largely responsible for the kind of economic theory that supports an absolutely unprecedented spending spree and are getting petulant when it appears that we won’t let them spend even more and raise the debt ceiling to hide their failure of intellect? And this is going to fix things? We’ve hired a group of particularly feckless foxes to guard our national chicken coop. ITEM: Using his recess appointment powers, President Obama has appointed James Cole to the number two position at the Department of Justice. Cole was hung up in the Congress because of his blatantly public stance on the war on terror: Like Eric Holder and President Obama, he sees it as a law enforcement matter. In an 2002 op-ed, he compared 9-11 to rape, murder and child abuse. Some of our representatives inexplicably think that terrorists who have declared war on America should be handled like, well, terrorists who have declared war on America. While all presidents occasionally use the recess appointment power, some use it more wisely than others, President Bush’s appointment of John Bolton as Ambassador to the UN, for example. During his tenure, Bolton never failed to properly and forcefully work for American interests. Cole will arguably work against them. Heck of a job, Jimmy! ITEM: In 2010, President Obama flew on Air Force One 172 times. That’s one flight every 2.1 days. The Air Force estimate of flight hours costs: $181,757. So for a trip with a flight time of eight hours, the cost would be $1,454,056. Mr. Obama also made 196 helicopter trips which also tend to be a bit pricey. Americans will be glad to know that Mr. Obama has recently announced that he plans to spend a great deal more time outside Washington, actually mixing and mingling with the great unwashed. He thinks his failure to do this during the last two years is the source of his difficulties. He also thinks we are involved in overseas contingency operations that there are 57 states and that Americans universally respect Joe Biden. ITEM: Uh-oh. Looks like Mr. Goolsbee will have closure sooner than we thought. As of the last day of 2010, the national debt...wait for it...is officially over 14 trillion dollars! It’s the first time in world history a national debt has been so high! A new record! We’re number one! We’re number one! But it’s even better! It took Mr. Obama and the Congressional Dems a mere seven months to achieve that kind of greatness. And they want to raise the debt ceiling so they can go for a new record! Considering the current rate of increase, we’ll likely hit the current ceiling in, oh, 23 seconds? Nope. Twenty at best. Another new record! Yet another amazing accomplishment from the administration whose greatest accomplishment--according to VP Joe “The Sheriff” Biden--is winning the Iraq war. I mean, other than the fact that almost everyone in the administration has consistently opposed it... SUB-ITEM: Galaxy-Class Hypocrisy Department: “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.” Barack Obama in 2006--when Republicans were in charge--prior to voting against raising the debt ceiling. According to Robert Gibbs, Obama only said that because he knew no one would listen to him. Ah. ITEM: According to The Weekly Standard, the Obama Administration, through HHS, is spending taxpayer money to direct Google searches to the Government’s website praising Obamacare as the slickest thing since sliced bread. So I googled “obamacare,” and a variety of variations and sure enough, the official government cheerleading site always come up first. Ben Smith of Polltico was able to get HHS to confirm the ad buy. Imagine the hue and cry if the Bush administration did that in support of any of its policies. Hope. Change. Transparency. Deception. Economic catastrophe. ITEM: DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, during a recent trip to Israel, told Fox News that the Israeli system of screening air travelers--arguably the most effective in the world--was impossible in America because the Israeli system is “a very different model,” and because Israel is smaller and has less air traffic. The Israelis rely on well trained officers to actually look for the types of people and behaviors that are potentially dangerous rather than spending billions on poorly performing technological marvels and on body searching grandmothers and infants. Amazingly, many of those the Israelis watch most closely are young Islamic males from countries known to produce terrorists! But Secretary Napolitano is correct. The Israeli system could never work in America. It isn’t wasteful, requires intelligent, capable administrators whose primary concern is citizen safety rather than political correctness, focuses on the people most likely to be dangerous rather than “making statements about who we are,” recognizes that Israel is at war and clearly identifies the enemy and actually works. Can’t have that. We might be accused of failing to reach out to those who want to cut our heads off with dull knives on You Tube. ITEM: Commentarymagazine.com has an article by Alana Goodman that is both fascinating and frightening. It seems that Brown University Alumni Matthew Reichel and Nick Young were worried about “one-sided” media coverage of North Korea, so they established a student visit program that has expanded to a semester-long study abroad excursion to the worker’s paradise. Now that I think of it, there is a surprising lack of media coverage of all the good North Korea is doing in the world. Of course, there's a surprising lack of media coverage of all the good Satan is doing in the world too, but... Reichel says: “The US and North Korea don’t have established relations, and talks are indirect at best. And what we believe is that there is a need for a grassroots level of engagement that we haven’t seen yet between citizens. We feel that education is the best ice-breaker.” Well of course. As most North Koreans outside of Pyongyang actually eat grass and tree bark daily in the often vain hope of prolonging their miserable, severely malnourished, growth-stunted lives, “grassroots” engagement is entirely appropriate. The good intentions of Leftists, combined with what they know about reality, combined with a dollar, will purchase a hamburger in any McDonalds--except in North Korea. Read the entire article (here) for the full version of leftist adventures in Wonderland. ITEM: Presidential Press Secretary Robert Gibbs whose smug condescension and easy way with spin so blatant it has, upon occasion, nearly thrown the planet off its axis, will be stepping down immediately after the President’s upcoming State of the Union speech. However, for those who enjoy being looked down upon, having their intelligence insulted, lectured at, denigrated and lied to, Gibbs will continue to be in the public eye as he works to reelect Mr. Obama in 2012. ITEM: It’s a pleasure to end this week’s Quick Takes with the news of Kathryn Gray, 10, of Canada, an amateur astronomer who recently discovered a previously unknown supernova. By painstaking work, she found the supernova in the galaxy UGC 3378. The galaxy is in the constellation of Camelopardalis, about 240 million light years away. Kathryn is reported to be “really excited” by her discovery. Well, yeah! Those darned kids these days, discovering supernovas and such... Congratulations Kathryn! And congratulations to all of our readers who do their best in their busy lives to keep themselves informed, thereby helping to make a difference for us all.Posted by: MikeM at 01:23 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
January 05, 2011
Mark Twain Must Be Spinning Like A Lathe
As a teacher of high school English, I have the great pleasure to teach “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” every year. A part of teaching that indispensable work is discussing the issues that cause a great many people to try to censor it each and every year. I am always delighted to discover that my students--bless their little pointed heads--universally express surprise and outrage upon learning that people--on the left and right--want to censor the book. Yes, some of the kids have the vague feeling that they should feel uncomfortable with the word “nigger,” because it’s like, well, prejudiced or something, but they all understand that Twain was not using the word to denigrate blacks, but to help the people of his time see blacks through the eyes of Huck and Jim, as people equally worthy of respect and human dignity.
Comes now the equally indispensable Michelle Malkin (here) and Hot Air (here) to inform a public desperate for sanitized versions of literary classics of an outfit known as New South Books that is publishing a version of “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” without the words “nigger” or “injun.” Both words will be replaced with “slave.” It’s hard to know what Twain, arguably the greatest satirist America has ever produced, would have thought of this. On one hand, he delighted in stirring up controversy, so he doubtless would have enjoyed the fuss. But on the other hand, he worked for seven years on this book, agonizing over getting it right. He did, and the very words modern literary police find distressing are the very words that Twain used to change innumerable hearts and minds. I can think of no single book that has done more over a longer period of time to magnificently champion the cause of human rights without beating people over the head with outrage. Changing even a word is akin to a contemporary composer “improving” the works of Mozart or Bach to make them more “accessible” to contemporary listeners. A related cautionary tale is the continuing saga over “niggardly,” a perfectly respectable adjective that means “cheap, closefisted or stingy.” The etymology of the word is probably Scandinavian, a part of the world not known for having anything to do with blackness. John Derbyshire of National Review Online wrote a delightful article about this, available here. In 2002 a North Carolina 4th grade teacher, Stephanie Bell, was reprimanded for using the word and condemned to “sensitivity training” when a parent declared herself offended. I had the displeasure of watching a “community activist,” if memory serves, on The O’Reily Factor soon after the incident. Said activist proudly proclaimed that even though she realized that the word actually had nothing to do with race, it sounded like “nigger,” or something, and therefore Ms. Bell ought to be fired. Since then, others have suffered for having similarly advanced vocabularies. Sigh. As a writer of satire, Twain was more than aware of people who could not or would not “get it.” Arguably, an entire chapter of “Huck Finn” (be careful of accidental letter transposition) is devoted to this very topic. Considering the desecration of his masterpiece, Mr. Twain is doubtless spinning like a lathe. So should we all be.Posted by: MikeM at 09:18 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
The Erik Scott Case: Update 9.2: Intent
Since I posted Update 9 only a few days ago, the Clark County Commission has finalized the changes suggested by a commission established for that purpose. Local news articles (available here and here), have brought to light several significant details that were heretofore unclear, and the comments following those articles, suggest that much of the public may not fully understand the fundamental issues relating to the criminal justice system in general and inquests in particular. For those interested in the Nevada Revised Statutes relating to these matters, continue to scroll past this Update to Update 9 where I’ve included that information.
In this update, I hope to clarify some issues, and the involvement of some people, that I was not able to address in Update 9. I also hope to make the essential issues as understandable as possible.Posted by: MikeM at 08:12 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Pajamas Launches a New Blog
The Tatler. It's based upon an early 18th century British news and gossip magazine, and will be a group blog featuring commentary from a number of bloggers and personalities you probably already know, including Glenn Reynolds, Roger Simon, Bryan Preston, and some guy named Bob.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:13 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Ace, Fire up the Ewok: I Just Got a Boehner
You pronounce it however you want, but this is gold.
Senate Democrats announced that they would obstruct and attempts by the Republican majority in the House of Representatives to overturn Obamacare. In turn, Speaker-Elect Boehner's office has issued their own terse reply.It's game on, folks, and if the incoming Speaker has the fortitude to stick to this sort of pro-American, anti-Obama message, it could spell even larger gains in the House and the collapse of the Democratic Senate in the 2012 elections.
Senators Reid, Durbin, Schumer, Murray and Stabenow: Thank you for reminding us – and the American people – of the backroom deal that you struck behind closed doors with 'Big Pharma,' resulting in bigger profits for the drug companies, and higher prescription drug costs for 33 million seniors enrolled in Medicare Part D, at a cost to the taxpayers of $42.6 billion. The House is going to pass legislation to repeal that now. You’re welcome. - Speaker-Designate John Boehner's Press Office
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:23 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
January 04, 2011
Like WaPo's Ezra Klein, HuffPo Writer Terkel Confused By Constitution
Think Progress shill Amanda Terkel is not very bright, and seems easily confused by the Constitution like a certain boy blogger we know who can't grasp the plain meaning of documents more than 100 years old (guess we can count out his review of The Mabinogi: A Book of Essays that I worked on as a grad assistant).
Terkel whines:Someone should inform out dim liberal friend that, that isn't "according to" Scalia. That's "according" to a plain text reading of the Amendment itself.
The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not protect against discrimination on the basis of gender or sexual orientation, according to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
The only gender references in the document plainly refer to males... do we need to highlight that? Furthermore, this is a commonly understood reading of the document that is utterly uncontroversial. The single sex nature of the 14th Amendment is the reason that an Equal Rights Amendment creating a Constitutional basis for equality between the sexes has been proposed time and again since 1923. As William Jacobson notes, Terkel and her liberal allies simply don't know the Constitution. Perhaps the failures of the liberal education system in this country are at fault. Can you think of any other reason liberals consistently claim The Constitution says things, that it clearly does not?
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:27 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
UFC Fighter Wants Obama. "Someone's Got To Knock Some Sense into That Idiot"
12-2 UFC Lightweight Jacob Volkman is a chiropractor by trade, and does not appreciate what the President has done to American health care or small business.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:55 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
January 03, 2011
Missing the Main Course
My peers on both sides of the political blogging aisle seem very interested in Republican Rep. Darrell Issa and his promised investigations into the corruption of the Obama Administration, but after seeing what he says he intends to investigate, I'm actually a bit disappointed in the items he hasn't listed:
- the firing of Gerald Walpin, the AmeriCorps inspector general who had his sights on Kevin Johnson, a prominent Obama supporter
- the buy-off of Joe Sestak which Issa once called "Obama's Watergate" and in which Issa suggested three felonies took place
- Pigford and Pigford II, which were fraud-filled payouts to people who claimed to be farmers, that some describe as then Senator Obama's attempt at reparations for slavery
- The Black Panther/DOJ Voter Intimidation case that the Administration dropped after winning, and the alleged refusal by the DOJ Civil Rights division to prosecute minorities
- the Administration's bullying of car companies and Wall Street
- abuse of power by the Administration, including the massive and unconstitutional expansion and assertion of executive power
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:21 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Processing 0.02, elapsed 0.0776 seconds.
36 queries taking 0.0664 seconds, 118 records returned.
Page size 136 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.