Confederate Yankee
January 03, 2011
What Is Going On In Arkansas?
I read the other day of the deaths of a thousand blackbirds that fell dead out of the sky in Arkansas. The original claim by "experts" was that there must have been some sort of cloud-to-cloud lighting that lit up the flock, but now that the total is over 5,000 birds, that theory just doesn't seem to hold water. And speaking of water, at least 100,000 drum (the freshwater fish, not the saltwater game fish, or the musical instrument) have died in an Arkansas river, and the toll may go into the hundreds of thousands. disease is suspected instead of pollution since only one species was killed (other native fish seem to be unaffected), but when you have two bizarre die-offs within days and within fairly close proximity, you have to start wondering if this is a coincidence, or if the die-offs are somehow tied together to the same biological organism.
There is no word yet an whether or not if any of the fish and fowl have come back from the dead with a dietary preference for brains, but we'll keep a look-out, just in case.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:42 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
While I'll restrain myself from jumping to premature conclusions here, I have to wonder if it's possible, with all the storm activity of late here in the Midwest and the moisture, as it always is in these instances, being pulled from the Gulf to feed them, that we are seeing pollutants from the Corexit and other materials contaminating the Gulf being dropped inland as many thought they would be.
On the other hand, huge die-offs of fish are not uncommon in big rivers. I've seen the Mississippi with dead fish all over the place; same on the Missouri and smaller Ozark streams. And this wouldn't be the first time large numbers of birds have been found dead on the ground.
This could portend a frightening ecological disaster or be just more of the strange things that nature has to offer. All we can do is wait and see.
Posted by: -1Tom Usher at January 03, 2011 01:13 PM (jkqDg)
2
The conclusions of the article are dumb. Firecrackers causing the birds to be frightened to death??? In this area of the country, Louisiana, black birds are a nuisance. We commonly fire guns in the air to try and get rid of them. The only thing I can say for 5000 birds falling out of the sky, what a good gumbo that would make!! The most likely explanation for the birds might be comtaminated bird feeders. Many of us put these out and with the wet weather they can develop fungus that can kill the birds. The reason that other birds are not as effected is that when black birds flock they take over everthing and would strip the feeders very quickly. The fish, who knows, fish die and don't indicate why. Believe me, they will all be back.
Posted by: david at January 03, 2011 02:02 PM (Z2Yfb)
3
Firecrackers can cause birds to scare to death, I've seen it happen when someone set off a string of the things outside my window and my canaries literally dropped dead.
But firecrackers causing thousands of noisy blackbirds to drop from the sky all at once? I don't buy it either.
Bird feeders maybe, depending on how long the thing lasted (impression I got from the press coverage was that they all died almost at the same moment, poisoned food would provide for a larger stretch, they'd die over a period of days or even weeks).
Some cloud of poisonous gas catching a flock of birds seems the most likely cause, maybe released from that river after whatever it was caused those fish to die (only to be discovered after the birds).
Posted by: JTW at January 05, 2011 02:57 AM (jMRqb)
4
Evaporation is how nature distills water.
The pollutants cannot evaporate with the water. Oil cannot evaporate with the water and remain a part of it. The substances are immiscible. The people need more science if they want to get involved in debates about science. That most especially includes attorney/politicians. One needs to actually have knowledge about the subject to legislate about it in a reasonable fashion. Hence: AGW.
Posted by: Odins Acolyte at January 05, 2011 06:25 PM (brIiu)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
The Erik Scott Case, Update 9: Mindset and Mutiny
Webster-Merriam defines “Mutiny” as “forcible or passive resistance to lawful authority.” The threatened mutiny of Las Vegas Police against lawful authority is the primary subject of this update. But first, a list of sources:
(1) Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) dealing with Coroners may be accessed
here.
(2) NRS dealing with Peace Officers may be accessed
here.
(3) Kevin Scott’s (brother of Erik Scott) letter to the Clark County Commission (CCC) may be accessed
here.
(4) Bill Scott’s (Erik’s father) letter to the CCC may be accessed
here.
(5) A LV Review-Journal Story on Metro recruit training may be accessed
here.
(6) A LV Sun story on threatened Police mutiny may be accessed
here.
(7) A LV R-J story on threatened Police mutiny may be accessed
here.
(

A LV R-J story on a citizen killed by police tasers may be accessed
here.
“Someone’s gonna have to get killed before they do anything.” So goes the common citizen’s refrain about intransigent, uncaring government, and like most such aphorisms, it is often true because it reflects a significant, unpleasant truth about human nature: We tend to ignore injustice and danger until the threat of personal consequences becomes too great to ignore.
And so it has been in Las Vegas for decades, but it didn’t take someone getting killed. It took a great many someones getting killed by the police--some 200 since 1976--and finally, one particular someone: Erik Scott, killed by three Metro officers on July 10, 2010. Although his death was the starting point for the process of change, even that wasn’t enough to force glacially slow local politicians to take the smallest steps toward correcting decades of injustice.
Posted by: MikeM at
02:54 AM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
"...the right against self incrimination applies only to the individuals directly involved. Officers who are witnesses, before, during or after the fact of a police shooting, have no such right."
Unless they have already provided false or misleading information as part of an attempted cover-up. But the solution to that is to immunize those 'witnesses' from prosecution for any - prior - false or misleading statements.
Then they have no excuse not to talk.
This whole thing needs to be approached just like they are all members of organized crime.
Which, it appears, they are.
Posted by: ThomasD at January 03, 2011 11:52 AM (i/tnP)
2
If the possible end result when dealing with the police is your death, then why not change this result with overwhelming premptive gunfire? After all we have the right to defend ourselves from assault regardless of who is assaulting us. This attitude if adopted would see a dramatic shift in police procedures, they might remember their job is to "PROTECT AND SERVE"!
Posted by: David at January 03, 2011 05:16 PM (iw/uF)
3
And Eric Scott have enough illegally obtained prescription drugs in his system to kill the proveribal horse.
It is nice to see that you think that police officers don't have 5th Amendment rights against self incrimination. That is what this is all about.
And this certainly is not a mutiny, as the officers are just exercising their rights. They cannot be compleled or ordered to testify. Therefore they are not resisting or impeding legal authority. Nor are they in "concerted revolt (as of a naval crew) against discipline or a superior officer."
Posted by: Federale at January 03, 2011 05:24 PM (PWWdd)
4
Federale,
Your comment makes no sense - these officers are not wanting to obey their legal obligations to comply with the possibility of receiving subpoenas and then, on the stand, claiming their 5th Amendment rights on each indiviudal question.
They seem to want to say, f..k you, we won't obey the subpoena because we've already answered the questions elsewhere.
Posted by: Bryce at January 03, 2011 08:38 PM (uF07B)
5
There is another wrinkle in this pleading the 5th strategy.
In civil court, you can plead the 5th just like in criminal court. If you do, however, the judge has a duty to instruct the jury that they are to infer an adverse inference, meaning that the testimony you would have given would have been incriminating and that it would support the testimony given by witnesses against you.
In other words, if they plead the 5th in the inquest (sworn testimony) then it gets entered in the civil case as an admission of guilt and a confirmation of the plaintiff's witnesses.
Posted by: Phelps at January 04, 2011 08:36 PM (50ajE)
6
You may hate cops, but they still have 5th Amendment rights. They don't go away because you oppose those rights for cops. You are like the left who claim adherence to the 1st Amendment, but want to arrest anyone who disagrees with them.
If you want their testimony, then you have to waive criminal prosecution. You may not like it, but the 5th Amendment stands in your way.
No cherry picking of Constitutional Amendments allowed.
Posted by: Federale at January 05, 2011 11:50 AM (PWWdd)
7
Federale, you have been full of nothing but a total disregard for the arguments as laid out combined with baseless accusations.
All of which is blatant evidence that you have nothing of substance to stand on.
A weaker argument could not be made. Bravo for discrediting yourself so succinctly.
Posted by: ThomasD at January 06, 2011 01:19 AM (i/tnP)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 01, 2011
UFC 125 Tonight
I owe a shout-out to Stephan in the previous post for pointing out that UFC 125 is tonight. Frankie Edgar is defending his lightweight title against Gray Maynard, the TUF 5 alum that is the only person to have been beaten Edgar in his 14 pro fights. I checked out the sports betting news by BetUS and was mildly shocked to see that Edgar is the odds on favorite to retain his title. I disagree with the pros, and expect Maynard to decisively out-point Edgar to take the title. The conventional wisdom is that you can't take the title on points in a close fight, but I think Maynard simply has Edgar's number. Actual Result: Draw
Edgar-Maynard may be the headliner, but the fight I'm most interested in seeing is between two of my favorite fighters, the bad boy Chris Leben versus the Marine officer and combat hero, Brian Stann. Both fighters are tough strikers with knockout power, but Stann's almost purely a puncher, while Leben has serious ground game, even through he prefers to stand and trade punches. I'd kind of like to see Stann win this one, but doubt he will unless he is one of the few people that can find a soft spot in Leben's chin. I predict the Crippler takes out the Silver Star recipient in the first or second round by strikes or submission. If it goes to the third round, I think the odds swing back to even, giving Stann's cardio a chance to pull out a victory.
Actual Result:Stann KOs Leben, 1st Round
For some reason, I just can't seem to bring myself to care about the Brandon Vera vs. Thiago Silva fight. If Vera can get his knees going he has a shot, but I'm predicting Silva grounds and pounds him after following a staggering punch in mid-to-late in the first round.
Actual Result:Silva by decision
Further down the ladder, I'm predicting:
- Diaz over Kim (submission) Actual Result: Kim by decision
- Gomi over Guida (split decision) Actual Result:Guida by submission
- Davis over Stephens (submission) Actual Result: Stephens by KO
- Poirier over Grispi (strikes) Actual Result
oirier by decision - Tavares over Barone (strikes) Actual Result: Tavares by KO, Round 1
- Brown over Nunes (submission) Actual Result: Nunes by split decision
- Soto over Roberts (decision) Actual Result: Roberts by submission, Round 1
- Volkmann over McKee (strikes) Actual Result: Volkmann by split decision
Keep in my that I
suck at guessing the winner of any given fight, and in any given slate of fighters there always seems to be at least one significant upset.
Update: Added results.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
05:06 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
And Now, the Bowls That Matter
Remember college bowl season as a kid? There were just a handful of bowls, and only the very best teams got a post-season bid. It's a far cry from the scene of today, where any empty stadium that can find a sponsor and a pair of teams without a losing record suddenly has a "bowl game" from a matchup that would only draw regional television otherwise. I'm sure the folks at gambling sites see a benefit to this, and the universities pick up a little more money for their athletic programs and some advertising for their recruiting efforts, but lets face it: unless we're watching top-ten teams or a real playoff system, it's just fluff.
That said, most of the fluff games are over. The New Year is here, heads are pounding, eyes are bleary, and the bowls that matter are
just around the corner.
I'm ready for some football; just as a soon as I put away this Christmas tree...
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:44 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
The bowls on today are okay, but the really good ones are on next week. I guess UFC 125 tonight looks like it could be a good one. Happy New year to all!
Posted by: Stephan at January 01, 2011 02:24 PM (530OM)
2
My alma mater, the University of Maryland, already made quick work of East Carolina University in the Military Bowl. Not that interested in any others!
Tarheel Repub Out!
Posted by: Tarheel Repub at January 01, 2011 06:27 PM (OQEcO)
3
I wish they would just name them the "(Insert sponsor here) Revenue Generation Bowl".
Posted by: Veeshir at January 02, 2011 10:24 AM (KWjJN)
4
Actually, you mention in the post that the universities pick up a little more money for their athletic programs by getting to play in these new, watered-down bowl games. That's actually not the case. Only the upper tier bowl games pay-out enough for universities to not lose money in the venture.
The following article talks a bit about this. Surprisingly, it was posted 10 years ago, before the additional bowl problem completely exploded.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/sfc/sfcfs69.htm#readmore
The only benefit provided by the additional bowl games for the schools is that more teams get the benefit of the additional practice time. If you fail to make a bowl game, your practice season ends in late November/early December.
Posted by: ErictBBC at January 02, 2011 11:58 AM (UuIJ5)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 31, 2010
"Grandmother" of Obama's Socialist Philosophy Calls for Violent Revolution Against Capitalism
I saw yesterday that Ron Radosh had uncovered a recent rant from leftist agitator Frances Fox Piven in the pages of the the radical left The Nation. Piven and her husband Richard Cloward had formulated the so-called "Cloward-Piven" strategy to overwhelm the welfare system and collapse capitalism in a prior article in The Nation in 1966, and the strategy has been a focus of leftist ideologues for more than four decades, including ACORN and it's most famous community organizer, Barack Hussein Obama.
The Blaze wades back into the newer article again today, noting:
She's considered by many as the grandmother of using the American welfare state to implement revolution. Make people dependent on the government, overload the government rolls, and once government services become unsustainable, the people will rise up, overthrow the oppressive capitalist system, and finally create income equality. Collapse the system and create a new one. That's the simplified version of Frances Fox Piven's philosophy originally put forth in the pages of The Nation in the 60s.
Now, as the new year ball drops, Piven is at it again, ringing in 2011 with renewed calls for revolution.
In a chilling and almost unbelievable editorial again in The Nation ("Mobilizing the Jobless," January 10/17, 2011 edition), she calls on the jobless to rise up in a violent show of solidarity and force. As before, those calls are dripping with language of class struggle. Language she and her late husband Richard Cloward made popular in the 60s.
Americans well aware of Barack Obama's influences have always regarded him as a potential threat to the Republic, and when his Administration's "accomplishments" are viewed through the prism of Cloward-Piven, and that suspicion seems well-grounded.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
07:34 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
I don't believe these fools have considered the possibility that the people might rise up and overthrow the welfare system along with the self-styled elites who aspire to political power. Their fundamental blindness is their belief that we are ignorant of world history and cannot see the disastrous results of similar efforts elsewhere.
Posted by: Jerry at January 01, 2011 09:26 AM (FTU7l)
2
She's got to be one of the ugliest women I've seen in recent memory. But then, that's usually the case with hardcore leftists, it's like a poison that affects the entire body.
Posted by: Isaac at January 01, 2011 05:42 PM (50XhB)
3
when Obama worked as a community organizer he worked for the Catholic Church
Posted by: John ryan at January 01, 2011 07:04 PM (0YS61)
4
when Obama worked as a community organizer he worked for the Catholic Church
Posted by John ryan at January 1, 2011 07:04 PM
Any diocese that allows Michael Pfleger to preach has precious little credibility--assuming that was what you were seeking. OTOH, are you suggesting that Obama was a pedophile? Pedophilia is consistent with the religion of Obama's youth...
Posted by: iconoclast at January 02, 2011 03:39 PM (O3Wv1)
5
Pfleger, like Obama, is a Marxist of the Liberation Theology vein (South American Marxist priests created it, James Cone provided the racist element that attracted Jeremiah wright and Obama to the cult). He spoke often at Trinity UCC, and famously called for the lynching murder of a gun store owner who lived outside Chicago because he believes people should be forcibly disarmed.
Want to try to "help" Obama some more, John Ryan?
Iconoclast, Child rape was also consistent with one of OBama's other early mentors, communist Frank Marshall Davis, who was quite proud of his rape of a young teenage girl.
Considering Davis was also a bisexual as well as a statutory rapist, I can only imagine what else young Barry Obama learned from him.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at January 02, 2011 03:48 PM (S9Rfu)
6
Once again one wonders what courses and advisors appear in Obama's hidden Columbia transcripts.
Posted by: Bohemond at January 02, 2011 06:53 PM (krvSm)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
New Years Looking Back - Road Trips
First inkling. If I had to look back to where the lure of some far off place beckoned, it would be to the thought of blue. Not the blue of a night sky, but the light blue of a well traveled station wagon. The blue was the color of ocean meeting sky, catching the sun like water, reflecting upwards the glint of the day off abundant chrome, as we set out for yet another weekend or vacation drive. As children we were highly embarrassed by this car, but I could see Dad's point, it was paid for, it was in good running order and it wasn't so pristine that anyone would panic if there was a dent or a spill .
Posted by: Brigid at
09:40 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Now the kids look at their I phone and don't need no stinken windows
Posted by: Mitch Rapp at December 31, 2010 11:17 AM (p/VzK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Quick Takes: December 30, 2010
Welcome to the last Quick Takes of 2010. On to the fun:
ITEM: According to the U.S.Treasury, the national debt, as of December 22, stands at $13.859 trillion dollars. That represents $44,886.57 for every man, women and child in America. Another way to put it is that the 111th Congress racked up more national debt than did the first 100 congresses combined. Something to remember in 2012.
ITEM: It’s difficult to stop talking about Barack Obama, if for no reason other than that he is constantly sticking his nose into matters that aren’t the business of any president, constitutionally or otherwise. Mr. Obama, on Dec. 28, called Jeffrey, Lurie, owner of the Philadelphia Eagles, to congratulate him for hiring animal abusing felon Michael Vick. Whatever one believes regarding redemption for felons, this is just one more example of Mr. Obama debasing and lowering the office of POTUS, though it’s hard to imagine how he could harm the office more than he has in his first two years. Has to be some kind of record.
ITEM: The Good Guys Win One. The Ohio Supreme Court struck down an “assault-weapon” ban and handgun registration requirements imposed by Cleveland, ruling that the state law on such matters preempts local ordinances. Yet again is the brilliance of the urban elites who would rule us for our own good exposed as so much bovine flatulence.
ITEM: Barack Obama, arguably the most vacationed president in memory, currently suffering the unimaginable horrors of Hawaii for all of us, has announced that he is planning to extend his vacation at least another day due to the stresses of the extended lame duck session of Congress which delayed his vacation so that he could more effectively and extensively damage American national security and the economy. This has to be some kind of record.
ITEM: Union workers--at least some have a conscience--have confessed to a NYC Alderman and other that their union purposely conducted a “slow down” during the recent NYC blizzard as a crude power play protesting potential budget cuts. This sabotage is responsible for at least two known deaths. Mayor Bloomberg says he doesn’t think the Union would do anything like that, but he’ll look into it. Big of him. Surely no labor union would do anything like that? Engage in thuggish, dangerous tactics that endanger the lives of others for the purpose of enriching themselves? Nah. Manslaughter charges anyone?
ITEM: It is, from time to time, good to recall what those who would rule us actually think of us. Recall, please Mr. Obama’s explanation of most Americans to a group of self-imagined elite San Franciscans as the incomprehensible and dangerous who cling to God and guns and who have antipathy for those who are not like them. Remember too, please, Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor who believes that a “wise Latina,” is uniquely qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. Have either of them done anything that would tend to make us believe that they think otherwise? What’s the definition? A gaffe is when a politician accidentally tells the truth? That’s it.
ITEM: He did it again. Mr. Obama, and his press secretary, Robert Gibbs, both recently claimed that Gitmo is the number one Jihadist recruitment tool. Why would they say this? What could they be planning? They must truly believe that Americans are irredeemably stupid. In this, as in much else, common sense is generally sufficient, but for those who would appreciate a quick brush up on the facts, read Karl Rove’s recent
addressing of this self-inflicted wound to the foot before it disappears in someone’s mouth.
ITEM: Lisa Murkowski is now legally certified to the Senate from Alaska. Harry Reid won reelection from Nevada. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson is considering a pardon for Billy the Kid for the murder of a sheriff. Can entire states actually go temporarily insane?
ITEM: Food For Thought Department: Recent zero tolerance idiocy by local school officials has, as usual, renewed conservative calls for school vouchers. Question: Why do conservatives rightly abhor governmental interference in local control, and reject public handouts in every area but this? Shouldn’t conservatives merely redouble their efforts to fix local problems through their elected school boards, who are, after all, their neighbors? Wouldn't we all be better served by removing incompetent school officials, one nitwit at a time?
That’s all for now until next time. Stay warm!
Posted by: MikeM at
12:42 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Years ago when I flew for an airline that had a lot fo labor problems with the IAM, it was discovered that some mechanics had gotten onto the roof of the terminal and were trying to shoot ball bearings into the intakes of the starting jet engines with sling shots. DO NOT EVER UNDERESTIMATE HOW BAD A UNION CAN BE! When a union has an issue it is them against the entire world. They consider anything to be acceptable as long as it furthers their cause. Obviously not all members are that evil but if their votes for evil acts are needed they will vote for them. We have created a legal mafia and politicians are to cowardly to confront them. Can you imagine a true leader running for President and making their number one issue the decertification of all public sector unions?
Posted by: inspectorudy at December 31, 2010 01:27 PM (KOOZL)
2
"Barack Obama, arguably the most vacationed president in memory"
Uh...Were you awake for the Bush presidency?
Posted by: Jones at January 01, 2011 08:53 AM (6cNb/)
3
Bush took "working vacations". Thankfully, Obama does not.
Posted by: nelle at January 01, 2011 12:33 PM (ByQuA)
4
Dear Jones:
I'm not in the habit of tit for tat in the comments sections, but merely to set the historical record straight, virtually all of President Bush's vacations were short jaunts to his ranch in the international garden spot of Crawford, TX which was actually set up as a working mini White House, and where, on every "vacation," he actually conducted the nation's business while taking the occasional bike ride or doing actual ranch work.
Dear Nelle:
Thankfully indeed!
Posted by: mikemc at January 01, 2011 02:48 PM (p5kd7)
5
I was nodding my head in agreement until your last item. Why would anyone support the tyranny of the majority (even a local one) with respect to an extremely important individual decision - the education of one's children?
The costs are exorbitant (through property taxes, usually), bad results virtually impossible to reverse, teachers unions often controlling the debates and budgets, historically craven school boards (neighbors or not...and don't get me going about the power structures of small communities) giving away the taxpayer money because they won't be around when the pensions kick in, etc.
Removing nitwit school boards is like removing nitwit congress critters. Virtually impossible, especially when there is no effective constitutional constraint on them. (State law and local ordinances being singularly ineffective at reigning in misuse of local power.) Local government can be just as tyrannical as big government.
Finally: Vouchers aren't necessarily a handout. They could be just giving the payor some vote in who gets to be the payee, and for what exact services.
Try again.
Posted by: ruralcounsel at January 02, 2011 03:23 PM (7VtDw)
6
Pretty! You describe the topic very well. Thanks once again for the push!
Posted by: burberry at January 02, 2011 11:21 PM (1q5RN)
7
On schools:
You ask me to ask a certified idiot to fix the problems he himself created?
Fsck the school boards. Kill them all. Anyone who wants elective office needs shooting. Anyone who wants to run my life, ditto....
Elective office is a punishment, through which one may atone for past sins, if one does well enough. At best. Although not seen as such as yet...
Posted by: who gives a rat's ass? at January 03, 2011 10:10 PM (9X1+H)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 30, 2010
The New McCarthyism
An arresting poster making the rounds of the Internet depicts American soldiers shielding an Afghan man and child above the legend “HONOR” (view it here). The point being that the dishonorable make others involuntary human shields while the honorable voluntarily make themselves human shields. This concept is apparently far too common and crude for the elite who imagine themselves, in the exclusive company of like-minded souls, to be the epitome of courage for denigrating the truly honorable.
Comes now Colman McCarthy, billed as ”a former Post columnist” who “directs the Center for Teaching Peace in Washington and teaches courses on nonviolence at four area universities and two high schools,” writing in the Washington Post what he and those like him no doubt consider a very courageous denunciation of ROTC, apparently in the hope of establishing new, compelling justifications for keeping ROTC at arm’s length. McCarthy’s article may be accessed
here.
Mr. McCarthy opens with a charming tale of lunch with Father Theodore Hesburgh who served as Notre Dame’s president for 35 years. Fr. Hesburgh, in McCarthy’s telling, was proud of Notre Dame’s long relationship with ROTC, with patriotism, and with the university’s role in preparing capable, Christian officers for service in the military. McCarthy is clearly one of those progressives who is absolutely certain of their intellectual and moral superiority, and he boldly flounces in where angels fear to tread. To wit:
Posted by: MikeM at
11:20 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Ideological Purity? I guess diversity is a smoke screen.
Posted by: Wild Bill at January 01, 2011 07:42 PM (RHeB7)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Ezra Klein Less Well-Educated Than Thought
Twitter users have been ripping Ezra Klein apart for his dim-witted televised pronouncement that the Constitution is too difficult to understand because the document was written "more than 100 years ago."
The thing is that Klein isn't nearly done on displaying his ignorance of the Constitution, baring his ignorance for all to see
in print as well.
My friends on the right don't like to hear this, but the Constitution is not a clear document. Written more than 200 years ago, when America had 13 states and very different problems, it rarely speaks directly to the questions we ask it. The Second Amendment, for instance, says nothing about keeping a gun in the home if you've not signed up with a "well-regulated militia," but interpreting the Second Amendment broadly has been important to those who want to bear arms. And so they've done it.
The contextual ignorance Klein puts on display in this one simple paragraph is stunning.
Anyone with a decent classical education would know that "well-regulated" in this context has nothing to do with a legislation. When something is "regulated," it is brought into a state of uniformity. Something that is "well-regulated" is in
proper working order, or in colloquial terms "well-oiled." It functions smoothly.
The purpose of the Founders, easily reinforced by the their own writing, was to assure that the civilian militias could function effectively in their military role. They wanted America's citizens to shoot, and shoot well. They wanted us to be able to fight, defending both our rights and our communities.
That Klein—a supposed intellectual—is dim to this rather common definition simply lends credence to the theory that a "liberal" education involves very little actual education at all.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
02:05 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
I'm sure that he feels that what he is saying is true. In a modern liberal education, feelings trump knowledge. He feels like it's too difficult to understand then it is too difficult to understand.
Posted by: Jason at December 30, 2010 03:22 PM (zw8QA)
2
one question no anti-gun zealot has ever been able to answer for me is how they can contend "the people" in the second amendment only refers to a "group right" without rendering the individual protections they cherish in the first, fourth, ninth and tenth amendments group rights also, since they too reference "the people" .
either "the people" consistently refers to an individual right or it doesn't. anything else is sophistry, at best.
Posted by: redc1c4 at December 30, 2010 04:18 PM (d1FhN)
3
He's right. The Constitution DOESN'T say anything about needing to be "signed up with a "well-regulated militia..." in order to keep a military capable weapon at home.
I always ask these people to produce for me citations of laws passed by the new government that OUTLAW the possession of firearms by private citizens. Where are the public notices directing citizens to turn in their weapons to the local armory? Where are the records of prosecutions of people for not doing so?
Why does he think that the Constitution OUTLAWS everything for private citizens that it does not specifically permit -- when it does precisely the opposite? Oh. Right. He had a liberal education.
I mean, I learned this stuff in GRADE SCHOOL!!
What does he think a Minuteman was? Oh. Right. His girlfriend probably knows.
Posted by: Bill Smith at December 30, 2010 08:51 PM (ex9/E)
4
Yes well you don't need to be smart to qualify as a progressive intellectual. You just need to be able to emote the right feeling in support of your argument. "Duh, I don't get it" Said with a certain disdain is oh so persuasive. I guess.
Posted by: Cameron at December 31, 2010 03:25 AM (ewicX)
5
In fact, the Constitution does give Congress some regulatory powers over the militia. See Article I, paragraphs 15 and 16. Further, Congress has in fact regulated the militia, beginning with the Militia Act of 1792. (Note that I think the right to bear arms was intended to be individual, and not collective, even if the militia was regulated.)
I suppose now you will explain that "regulate" in Section 8 doesn't mean "regulate," but something else. That rather proves Ezra's point that the Constituition can be interpreted differently.
Further, as Ezra said, the House's constitutional citations on its bills would not be binding, because the Constitution doesn't give the House the sole discretion in deciding the constitutionality of its own legislation. Making the House's constitutional citations binding would be unconstitutional, in other words. The laws could still be challenged in court and declared unconstitutional later, no matter what the House says. There's nothing wrong with the citations, but I think you'll soon see that the citations serve no real purpose, which is Ezra's point.
Posted by: maha at December 31, 2010 12:46 PM (jP3qC)
6
Please excuse me -- that last comment should have cited Article I, Section 8, paragraphs 15 and 16. I left out Section 8.
Posted by: maha at December 31, 2010 12:48 PM (jP3qC)
7
I've decide to utilize my marginal bully pulpit in defense of what Ezra Klein was implying. He obviously was not clear enough, perhaps an analogy would do the trick :
Ezra Klein In The Cross-Hairs Of Right Wing Outrage
Posted by: Ryan Colpaart at December 31, 2010 01:22 PM (QSgUx)
8
The problem isn't that the constitution isn't clear-- the problem is it is crystal clear. Read the dicta in both the Heller case SCOTUS and DC Court of Appeals rulings. Pages and pages basically stating- it means what it says. The already existing right the colonists had as Englishmen to keep and bear arms as individuals would not be infringed by the new government.
That's the problems most of the left and people like Klein have. It is a simple, clear and very understandable document- but they don't like what it says and have to try and twist it to argue it means what they would like it to mean.
Posted by: styrgwillidar at January 03, 2011 01:40 PM (xGZ+b)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Another Kind of Death, From Another Kind of Death Panel
We've watched Obamacare become the poster child for death panel socialism, but that is hardly the only venue that leftists are using to destroy America.
Investors Business Daily has a
very disturbing article on how left wing environmentalists are in the process of destroying the most fertile farmland in the nation—and forcing people to go hungry—in order to save a nonviable species of minnow:
Fresno is the agricultural capital of America. More food per acre in more variety can be grown in the fertile Central Valley surrounding this community than on any other land in America — perhaps in the world.
Yet far from being a paradise, Fresno is starting to resemble Zimbabwe or 1930s Ukraine, a victim of a famine machine that is entirely man-made, not by red communists this time, but by greens.
State and federal officials, driven by the agenda of environmental extremists, have made it extremely difficult for the valley's farms, introducing costly environmental regulations and cutting off critical water supplies to save the Delta smelt, a bait fish. It's all driving the economy to collapse.
This isn't really about saving a
forgettable species that contributes little to it's own ecosystem. It's purely about human's attempting to exert power and control over other humans. More to the point it is about evil humans subjugating their fellow man to economic ruin and starvation in order to assert their own political agenda.
I suppose it could be worse. Those responsible for this debacle could wall off the region they are starving and put up a gate that glibly suggests "work will set you free," putting aside all pretense of being representative of a "free" society.
Frankly, I'm surprised that dams and irrigation-restricting controls haven't mysteriously started experiencing malfunctions or outright failures.
Perhaps the starving farmers in Fresno aren't feeling the pangs of hunger severely enough to take direct charge of their own futures. Or perhaps like far too many citizens of California, they've simply lost their sense of self worth, and lack the will to exist.
(h/t
Hot Air)
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:26 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
They are going to turn the Central Valley back into a desert... and I don't even want to think about what that will do to food prices, much less the generations of farmers that will lose their livelyhood and all the employees that will lose their jobs...
Posted by: Old NFO at December 30, 2010 12:42 PM (kCq7A)
2
On the flip side, imagine all the illegals this will force onto welfare!
Posted by: Rob Crawford at December 30, 2010 07:00 PM (0onAO)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Lucid HD7 Review
I've been trying (with varying amounts of success) to confine my gun-related blogging to my new-ish gun blog, but I figure it's fine to may exceptions for special occasions.
I've joined
Shooting Illustrated to write about guns and gear, and have my first article, a review of the Lucid HD7 red-dot optic,
posted now.
The staff I've worked with so far have been excellent, and I'm hoping that we team up for a long an fruitful relationship both online and in the print magazine.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
01:34 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
December 29, 2010
R. Lee Ermy Rips into the Obama Administration
I'm starting to think the character of Gunny Hartman wasn't that much of a stretch to play. He's no fan of the Socialist-in-Chief, and flat out states that Obama's goal is to bankrupt the country.
"...We should all rise up and stop this administration from what they're doing because they're destroying this country. They're driving us into bankruptcy so they can impose socialism."
I'm not sure where he's raising troops, but listening to the crowd, he's still one hell of a recruiter.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:01 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Let's begin with an acknowledgment that he is correct in his observations about Obama -- but it strikes me as inappropriate in this venue of an event focused on a Marine Corps sponsored program (Toys for Tots) with uniformed Marines on the stage. It just isn't the right time or place to go off on the commander-in-chief.
Now maybe I'm being over-sensitive in thinking that, but it just strikes me as problematic. Of course, others may 9and likely will) disagree, but I grew up in a military family where we were always told that the civilian command authority was to be respected any time the uniform was worn or the official imprimatur of the military was upon an event.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at December 29, 2010 10:11 PM (xs+5G)
2
"I'm starting to think the character of Gunny Hartman wasn't that much of a stretch to play."
I'm going to guess that you don't know very much about Sgt Ermey's background. Playing Gunny Hartman wasn't a stretch at all for him. R. Lee Ermey is really a Marine and spent time as a drill instructor at both Parris Island and San Diego. Kubrick gave him free rein during filming of Full Metal Jacket, which is why Gunny Hartman seems so authentic. Ermey retired as a Staff Sergeant in 1972 due to permanent medical disability. He was promoted to the honorary rank of Gunnery Sergeant in 2002, in recognition of his support for the Armed Forces in general and the Marine Corps in particular.
Dude's a combat veteran and a Marine to the core. Ain't nothing phony about him.
Posted by: wolfwalker at December 29, 2010 11:27 PM (Act2k)
Posted by: Tim at December 29, 2010 11:39 PM (s0R0P)
4
The Gunny represents the Corp, but is not active, and therefore is entitled to vent his spleen, even the "Gunny" is honorary, he retired just below the rank iirc. I wondered about him showing up on the Geico commercials if they went with him to try and offset the leftist fool they fired. . .
I see him do the ads for Glock as well, but when I've see him shoot not in any ad, but either of his shows, or a hunting program or two, he more often than not is using a 1911.
Posted by: JP at December 30, 2010 05:34 AM (Tae/a)
5
I saw it the other way, RWR. I had the same gut reaction, but then I realized that Ermey wouldn't do this on a whim. This was Ermey saying what the vast, vast majority of Marines believe, but are unable to say.
This was a wakeup call from the corps to the administration.
Posted by: Phelps at December 30, 2010 11:51 AM (YseYs)
6
Also, since conservatives give significantly more to charity, this was also pandering straight to the target audience.
Posted by: Phelps at December 30, 2010 11:55 AM (YseYs)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Sorry, Gun Owners: Chris Christie No Better Than a Liberal Democrat
New Jersey Chris Christie commuted Brian Aitkens. Too bad he supports every idiotic left-wing gun law that put him in jail. So much for "President Christie."
My latest post is up at
Pajamas Media.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:41 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Christie comes from a "Blue State" prosecutorial background, where only the goblins and the LEOs he worked with, had guns.
He seems trainable on this issue, but it has to be done the right way from knowledgable, fair-minded gun owners!(like me!!!)
Posted by: Earl T at December 29, 2010 05:41 PM (/o6Qz)
2
ugh. i just shared it on facebook. there are going to be a ton of gun-loving, starry-eyed christie-ites crying there; including me.
thanks for the post!
Posted by: kate at December 29, 2010 06:22 PM (0/wW+)
3
Great, now I don't have to worry about voting for the N.J. Gov.!!! I guess I'll stick with my first choice, that Alaskan huntress of the Great Northern Territories.
Posted by: mixitup at December 29, 2010 10:19 PM (Z21cb)
4
Well, he outright said he didn't want to run for President, so I'd say this doesn't matter too much. Also, I really don't put gun issues on the make or break line for a candidate. National defense and fiscal sanity trump guns, abortion, and a whole lot of other issues.
Posted by: OmegaPaladin at December 30, 2010 05:38 AM (dQX+G)
5
There is a much bigger problem than gun-grabbing right now, and that is the moral bankruptcy of the administration of states in dealing with fiscal problems. The gun-grabbing proclivity, or lack thereof, of CC is not all that important today compared to the 800 lb gorilla of a state going bankrupt over pensions and salaries.
Posted by: MunDane68 at December 30, 2010 04:53 PM (dlS06)
6
MunDane hit it right on the head. Christie has one HUGE problem right now. How to keep Jersey from going flat broke, boom. Anything else will be a distraction, and that includes doing something stupid like trying to push pro-gun legislation in Bluest Blue NJ. (even if he wanted to)
He's doing exactly what he should be doing for New Jersey's financial health.
Posted by: Georg Felis at January 01, 2011 12:15 AM (i5bRG)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 28, 2010
Choices
I've always believed, and experience has born out, that the true test of character is not how one behaves when life is easy, but when life is hard, when choices have to be made, choices that pit personal comfort and security against what is best for others.
Bob and I have been delighted and honored with the presence of our co-blogger, Brigid. She also blogs at her own blog, Home On The Range, which is very much worth your time on a regular basis. I recommend her most recent post which is not only intensely personal, but compelling and revealing of the kind of character of which I speak. It also proves that happy endings are still possible, even if they take a long time.
The story can be accessed
here.
Posted by: MikeM at
07:46 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Thanks. I've done my own share of screw ups as an adult and hurt those I loved and respected. I try and move on, say I'm sorry, and look forward, that's all any of us can do.
Thank you for seeing the good in me. It's a pleasure to be here.
Posted by: Brigid at December 28, 2010 09:33 PM (yKDjw)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Is America Worth Defending
Recent developments in the domestic and international arenas have raised several important questions. Among the most important is: Does Barack Obama believe America is worth defending? My most recent article at Pajamas Media seeks to answer that, and other pertinent questions. The article can be read here.
Posted by: MikeM at
07:01 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
December 27, 2010
The Road to Mecca
My latest post on Pajama Media is about a middle school teacher who asked for three weeks off during December to attend the Hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca observant Muslims are expected to make once in their life, if possible. When her principal sensibly refused, she took offense, decided to sue, and found an ally that, for the first 232 years of America's existence, would have been most improbable.
The article can be accessed
here.
Posted by: MikeM at
10:44 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Imagine a country where it is illegal to celebrate Christmas or New Years. Where there is not a single decoration to be seen anywhere indicating that Christmas even exists. Where alcohol and pork are illegal. Where celebrating any other religious belief can be punished by jail time if you are from another country working here, much worse if you are a native. This is the lovely country where this teacher wishes to make her pilgrimage. I believe all muslims in the US should be treated the same way non-muslims are treated in Saudi Arabia. Take a journey about 1,400 years into the past intellectually and you'll begin to comprehend this belief system of peace.
From the Magic desert Kingdom (orange country)
Have a happy new year.
Posted by: JM at December 28, 2010 02:14 PM (3eF9l)
2
Should we have gassed American citizens of German descent in WWII? Get off your high horse JM, just because a country that some of these American citizens have never been to is intolerant, doesn't give you an excuse to be a bigot.
*rant over*
Why on earth did she want to go during december? If she wasn't a teacher I would understand, but unlike the rest of us, she has 2 months off during the summer to do with as she pleases.
Posted by: MAModerate at December 28, 2010 03:51 PM (Y+W29)
3
Under Islamic law, the hajj takes place at a specific date-span in the Islamic calendar. Islam is as backwards in its calendar as it is in most other ways: it uses a strict lunar calendar which has only 354 or 355 days in a year. As a result, dates on the Islamic calendar drift with respect to the Gregorian calendar that the rest of us use. This year, the date of the hajj falls in December.
Posted by: wolfwalker at December 28, 2010 08:21 PM (Act2k)
4
MAModerate. High horse? Obviously you are quite ignorant as to the intolerance of Islam to all other beliefs. How the frig do you make the jump from treating muslims in the US like they treat infidels in Saudi to Nazi Germany and gas chambers. Obviously your title shoud be IgnorantLiberal. Do a bit of research before you spout off uncontrollably.
And for your benefit. Try to be a bit more accurate if you are going to throw out acusations.
Bigot–noun
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
I am overly tolerant. I use my mental capacity regularly to not commit GBH against ignorant Liberals every day. Your question proves you are totally ignorant of what Islam involves or is about.
Posted by: JM at December 29, 2010 04:05 AM (TCeKv)
5
I'm just one of those crazy sentimental types who believes that America should be better than we have to be, we are not a christian country or a jewish country or a muslim country, we are a free country, unlike Saudi Arabia. The religious right are already ruining the Middle East, we don't need them taking over here. It's a slippery slope when anyone, even the best intentioned, advocates different treatment based on race, creed, belief or opinion.
And if what wolfwalker said is true, she should have waited a couple of years until it aligns with the summer again
Posted by: MAModerate at December 29, 2010 10:52 AM (Y+W29)
6
I was talking with a few coworkers (Muslim)about this particular situation and they stated that in Algeria and other countries (besides Saudi) teachers were not allowed to leave during the regular school year for Hajj unless it is a special case. Even then the teacher must arrange for a qualified replacement. They basically called BS on this teacher making a big stink about going to Hajj during the school year. No doubt Nobama will use this for perceived political points with the Muslims.
In the US the politically correct sensitivity toward Islam is way over the top IMO. Islam is nothing like other beliefs. Islam is a complete system of government, law, and belief. Every aspect of ones life under Islam is structured. The big problem for the US is that Muslims will not assimilate into society. They will change society to fit into their structured lifestyle. Conformity is paramount to Islam.
Posted by: JM at December 29, 2010 03:05 PM (swrCJ)
7
"Should we have gassed American citizens of German descent in WWII?"
Is that a serious question?
Posted by: brando at December 29, 2010 04:07 PM (IPGju)
8
It was absolutely not a serious question, it was just the most extreme example I could think of that was along the same lines of punishing US citizens for the sins of people who they have never met
Posted by: MAModerate at December 29, 2010 10:19 PM (Y+W29)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
It's ReVolting
Life comes at us fast, as the commercial tag goes, and change is ubiquitous. In our fast paced, ever-changing lives, we can take occasional comfort in the fact that some things never change. We can rely on death, taxes, McDonald’s, the fecklessness and narcissism of Barack Obama, and above all the obsequious New York Times.
Yes, the NYT has, once again, lived down to expectations. Thus comes Lawrence Ulrich, on the Times website, with a review of the much-ballyhooed Chevy Volt, a review that could not be more fawning if it was named “Bambi.” In fact, “Volt” could easily be replaced with “Obama” in much of the review and it would yield yet another Obama puff piece for which the NYT has become justly infamous. That review, entitled “Loaded with Baggage and Planning to Go Far,” may be accessed
here. My original take on the Volt may be accessed
here. Oh, and about the title...I couldn’t help myself. Stop me before I pun again!
Posted by: MikeM at
09:59 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
A proper Cost-Benefit Analysis should also take into account the increased cost of Insurance and taxes. Also has crash-survivability numbers on this car been compared to other vehicles of the same size class?
Posted by: Georg Felis at December 28, 2010 04:13 AM (i5bRG)
2
g technology is always more expensice. Both the Japanese and Chinese are working hard at electrics. Some people I guess think that they should be allowed to have that entire market. I do not.
Posted by: John ryan at January 01, 2011 07:14 PM (0YS61)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Racing the Wind - a Story of a Hunt

I remember what it felt like to jump off the ledge. That was the best part, the part where I was just a little afraid. The swimming hole. Out West there were multitudes of rivers and streams in which we could swim, many with ledges that looked down on deep pools in which the braver kids would jump.
First steps, first leaps. Over the years it became a car, then an airplane, then marriage. All attempted with the luminosity of not knowing any better, each a new journey, some ending better than others.
Posted by: Brigid at
12:28 AM
| Comments (0)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
December 26, 2010
American Gunned Down, Framed by Mexican Troops
Remember folks: it's American gun dealers that are the cause of violence in Mexico, not rampant Mexican corruption:
Joseph Proctor told his girlfriend he was popping out to the convenience store in the quiet Mexican beach town where the couple had just moved, intending to start a new life.
The next morning, the 32-year-old New York native was dead inside his crashed van on a road outside Acapulco. He had multiple bullet wounds. An AR-15 rifle lay in his hands.
His distraught girlfriend, Liliana Gil Vargas, was summoned to police headquarters, where she was told Proctor had died in a gunbattle with an army patrol. They claimed Proctor — whose green van had a for-sale sign and his cell phone number spray-painted on the windows — had attacked the troops. They showed her the gun.
His mother, Donna Proctor, devastated and incredulous, has been fighting through Mexico's secretive military justice system ever since to learn what really happened on the night of Aug. 22.
It took weeks of pressuring U.S. diplomats and congressmen for help, but she finally got an answer, which she shared with The Associated Press.
Three soldiers have been charged with killing her son. Two have been charged with planting the assault rifle in his hands and claiming falsely that he fired first, according to a Mexican Defense Department document sent to her through the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City.
It is at least the third case this year in which soldiers, locked in a brutal battle with drug cartels, have been accused of killing innocent civilians and faking evidence in cover-ups.
A ban of non-commercial travel and mined border would go a long way towards minimizing this and other problems, including illegal immigration, terrorist infiltration, and drug smuggling.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:02 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
If this had happened in the US, there would be hordes of civil rights activists and Mexican community leaders in the street protesting.
In Mexico, however, foreigners are subject to deportation if they try to demonstrate against the government.
Yet somehow it is the United States that is oppressive of foreigners.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at December 26, 2010 03:36 PM (19lFx)
2
"Safest Border in 20 years"-O Imam
50 miles south of Brownsville the cartel took a businessman's ranch by force, Alamo of 2010.
I wonder how that would fly on the King Ranch?
Posted by: LAZRTX at December 27, 2010 12:07 PM (WvqFW)
3
My wife has asked on several occasions to go to Mexico for vacation, and things like this just keep stacking up in the "Reasons Why Not" column. We need to face facts. We are bordered to the south by a Third World country that is run by criminals,either elected or cartel. The police cannot be trusted. the Mexican army seems to waver between legitimate uses and acting as hired guns for the cartels.
We need to cut off all non-essential contact with Mexico, and advise our citizens to get out of that hell hole as soon as they can.
Posted by: DaddyBear at December 27, 2010 01:50 PM (9D2tn)
4
The police in Mexico are just as bad, if not worse. We had a girl in our town that went to Mexico for a senior trip. She entered a bar and ordered a drink, with friends. She felt uneasy and left. When she got to the road, the police came out of the bar and accused her of passing conterfient money. She was put in jail. I might add she is very attractive. Her parents learned of the problem and called a local attorney. He knew the game and went to Mexico with $5000. This made the whole thing go away. Rule of thumb, don't go to Mexico. There is nothing there worth seeing or doing.
Posted by: david at December 28, 2010 11:03 AM (dccG2)
5
Not to blame the victim, but who in their right mind would *move* to Mexico in this day and age? Had they not been watching the news the last few years? I'm with David: There is nothing there worth seeing or doing.
Posted by: Carol McL at January 01, 2011 03:06 PM (mnEL0)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Snow Makes Concealed Carry Illegal in North Carolina
It is difficult to hold the intellect of politicians in the proper disdain. As citizens, we hope that our elected officials are the best of us, or at the minimum, are as intelligent as we are.
Here in North Carolina, that is decidedly not the case. We've awoken to a rare covering of snow, and can expect a half-foot or more of it across much of the state. As a result of the winter wonderland, hundreds of thousands of our most law-abiding citizens are now potential felons.
North Carolinians have been plagued with Democrats in our state legislature for far too long, and one of the more ignorant bits of legislation they've passed is a law making it illegal for concealed carry permit holders to carry their firearms during any state of emergency declared by our elected officials.
It is an absurd law, by any measure. A coating of snow or ice or does not revoke the God-given rights recognized in our federal or state Constitutions, and yet the dim representatives of year's past have attempted to usurp these natural rights.
The 2010 elections have swept a Republican legislature into office, and gun owners in our fair state are determined that these an other restrictive laws passed by anti-gun Democrats are defeated. Freedom is not a weather-related phenomenon.
It's too bad past legislators lacked the common sense to understand that.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:23 AM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
I'm from that wonderful state and it pains me to see the results of Demonrat rule. A lot of folks in that state are lifelong Democrats based on the JFK type of Democrats. Today's Democrat is anything but. Todays Demonrats are closer to Stalin and Hitler than to JFK.
Fight hard for this one NC. This is a ridiculous restriction on your rights. I now live in Cali so I'm disarmed by my politicians. (As far as they know)
We let little things pass, and over time those little things have progressed to Now CCW is damn near impossible, Ammo from out of state is outlawed, 10 day wait for ANY firearm, registration of handguns is mandatory and anything of 10 round Cap is illegal, not to mention several firearms are now illegal in Cali.
As I said FIGHT every gun reg or you get California'd
Posted by: Robert at December 26, 2010 11:44 AM (IEh7K)
2
My nephew got a Nerf machine Gun for Christmas. It comes with two large magazines and one small one (for California).
Posted by: professor Hale at December 26, 2010 12:20 PM (FJTpO)
3
I just checked the Governors website and no executive order has been issued calling a State of Emergency.
http://www.governor.state.nc.us/NewsItems/ExecutiveOrderList.aspx
Do you think that she's scared to give the Second Amendment Foundation more "ammunition" in their suit against her?
Posted by: Sean D Sorrentino at December 26, 2010 12:55 PM (VqfWn)
4
Well, my bad. the Lt Gov declared a state of Emergency.
http://www.wect.com/Global/story.asp?S=13740967
How is it that any two-bit jumped-up dog catcher can affect my fundamental Constitutional rights?
Posted by: Sean D Sorrentino at December 26, 2010 01:04 PM (VqfWn)
5
This forms an excellent summation of why I left NC when the service gave me an excuse.
The problem is that I have six grandchildren resident in NC and thus cannot just divorce myself from caring.
I saw the drift from the old Dixiecrat to the moder uber-left coming and got out early. I think my decision to relocate to AZ to be the smartest move I ever made.
Posted by: Old Dog at December 26, 2010 04:59 PM (z/KTb)
6
My Gawd, man! If they didn't have this law, you'd be going around shooting innocent icicles!
Posted by: MikeM_inMd at December 26, 2010 11:51 PM (6hI0A)
7
You can still open carry candy canes off a school campus right?
Posted by: Pinandpuller at December 27, 2010 12:14 AM (07w/N)
8
It's the fastest way for gun grabbers to make an impact. Remember in New Orleans during the Katrina fiasco, Mayor Nagin ordered the NOPD to confiscate any weapons. He was challenged in the SCOTUS over his infringement of the people's civil rights guaranteed by the US Constitution. He was found guilty and ordered to return all of the weapons. Unfortunatley, they can't find them to return them. I'm guessing the guns were all sold to Mexican drug cartels.
The point is to never give up your rights. If they try to confiscate, you may have to stand your ground and protect what is yours.
Posted by: TheBitterPatriot at December 27, 2010 12:22 PM (/Frbf)
9
If I deem a law unconstitional, I will disobey it just like they did in the founding era. "If they want my gun, they'll have to pry it loose from my cold, dead hand. Thank you Charlton Heston for these words of wisdom.
As a NC resident and CCW holder I am interested in how to go about changing some of these idiotic gun laws that are on the books. I've sent a letter to AG Roy Cooper in the past month about this very issue. But have not heard back from him as of yet.
Any advice?
Posted by: Jankee Doodle at December 29, 2010 08:47 AM (hj7k0)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
<< Page 33 >>
Processing 0.02, elapsed 0.2205 seconds.
36 queries taking 0.2098 seconds, 103 records returned.
Page size 90 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.