# Monday, October 13, 2008

Obama is trying to trample on the first amendment. And then Obama saying, "Don't tell me words don't matter" in combination with saying people with "traditional values" cling to their guns and religion.

Joe Huffman  Monday, October 13, 2008 4:09:05 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Sunday, October 12, 2008

Say Uncle says he knows the guy quoted in the newspaper article. The article is about the NRA ad being correct when it says Obama voted for a bill that would have outlawed most common hunting ammo. Obama and others on the left say the NRA ad is a lie. The reporter quotes a gun blogger as a reference to support the NRA's claim. I know that guy too.

That blogger would be me and this blog post.

Sebastian also noticed.

What I noticed was that the headline to the article wasn't something to the effect that "NRA is right--Obama tried to ban hunting ammo" but instead, "NRA ad draws fire for dubious claims".

What media bias?

Joe Huffman  Sunday, October 12, 2008 7:27:11 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 

There is no kind of dishonesty into which otherwise good people more easily and more frequently fall into than that of defrauding the government.

Ben Franklin
[Socialized medicine anyone?--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Sunday, October 12, 2008 4:01:29 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Friday, October 10, 2008

I am a new NRA member. I have been a citizen for only fourteen years. I believe in the Constitution and the Second Amendment, and when I see Obama, I see Communism, and I am afraid. I believe he is going to win the election. Do you have any plans in place if this happens?

Ly Chho
October 9, 2008
A question for NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre.
Via Kevin Baker.
[Kevin reports Mrs. Ly Chho, was born of Chinese parents in Cambodia, raised and schooled in Taiwan, and hence "she should know".--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Friday, October 10, 2008 7:23:06 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Thursday, October 09, 2008

One might reasonably speculate that the NRA is going to engage in a full court press against Barack Abomination Obama starting today and continuing until election day.

Here are some hints of what we will see today:

The news should be out of the bag by now. It's 8:00 in PA but I haven't seen what is being said yet and I really need to get back to bed and get some sleep.

Joe Huffman  Thursday, October 09, 2008 4:05:55 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]  | 

Fear not those who argue but those who dodge.

Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach
[Ebner-Eschenbach is apparently the originator of the "stopped clock is right twice a day" quote:

Even a stopped clock is right twice every day. After some years, it can boast of a long series of successes.

Which wouldn't be a bad QOTD during this political season as well. But back to fear and dodging...

Obama dodges. What does he mean when he says the following?

"I think we have two conflicting traditions in this country." (gun ownership and restrictions on guns)
Politico, 2/11/08

"I think that local jurisdictions have the capability to institute their own gun laws."
BaltimoreSun.com, 2/15/08

He could settle all this by promising, as President of the United States, to veto any gun control restriction bill that reaches his desk. But he doesn't.

Gun owners have something to fear in Obama as a person in power.--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Thursday, October 09, 2008 3:41:28 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Wednesday, October 08, 2008

Health care is a right the same as guns are a right. You have the right to provide it, or to purchase it as you are able, and government should have no role in the matter except as protector of your rights.

I know that wasn't the framework of the question however. Honestly put, the question would have been, "Do you believe free healthcare, paid by someone else under threats from the government, is your right?"

But liberty isn't even on the table for discussion in this election. How can we be bothered with such abstractions as liberty when we're worried about the crisis-of-the-day, and who is going to take care of us and keep us all safe, happy and warm?

Lyle @ UltiMAK
October 8, 2008
In the comments.
[We have a long way to go. Sometimes it takes Lyle and others to put it in proper perspective.--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Wednesday, October 08, 2008 1:16:44 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [6]  | 
# Tuesday, October 07, 2008

From a random link I clicked on:

One moment struck me as particularly unfortunate for McCain: When Tom Brokaw asked whether health care was a privilege, a responsibility or a right. McCain said it was a responsibility, but left unclear whose responsibility it might be. Obama said he believed it should be a right...

Did Obama really say health care should be a right?

Wow! And I thought he was supposed to be a constitutional scholar. Anyone that passed their high school government class should give Obama a failing grade for even being on the city council or the local school board for getting that one item so wrong. As a U.S. Senator he should be tried for attempted treason.

Joe Huffman  Tuesday, October 07, 2008 8:00:24 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]  | 
# Saturday, October 04, 2008

Howard Nemerov gives us some info on possible motiviation for Obama's support for gun control:

In politics, it is often difficult to determine why a person supports a policy. Fortunately, numbers speak louder than words: In this case, follow the money to understand Obama’s support of registration.

One of Obama’s biggest donors is the law firm of Skadden, Arps, Meagher and Flom, LLP, which contributed $340,264 to his presidential campaign as of September 2, 2008.[12] Skadden, Arps represents the inventors of a “firearm safety system,” patent number 6499243, which adds a biometric activator that links a gun to one owner. The “Summary of the Invention” section of the patent application notes:

The safety system further makes use of a person’s fingerprint data, which is a unique personal property that is highly suitable for tracking and control.[13] [Emphasis added]

Sidley Austin LLP has contributed $350,302 to Obama.[14] Sidley Austin represents the inventors of the “Gun identification kit,” patent number 7380706. This invention provides a way for every gun to have a spent cartidge case made available for entry into a ballistic “fingerprint” database. Of course, such a database is useful only if all firearms are entered into it:

Because the vast majority of publicly owned firearms have not been used in the commission of a crime, they will not show up in [such a] database. It would therefore be desirable to provide a means for increasing the number of firearms for which…information and data is available.

The inventors’ solution to this? Pass a law mandating that every gun is registered (serial number matched with shell casing and owner data, all permanently recorded):

One means of populating [such a] database would be to mandate that ballistic information be obtained and entered into the database for all firearms.[15]

$350,000 for supporting gun licensing? Sounds like motive to me. Why else would Obama be so cagey on guns? We know it's not about making people safer because no one has been able to answer Just One Question.

So, when Obama says he "won't take your guns" keep in mind he didn't say he wouldn't register them. See Nemorov's post for more about the wisdom of that. Obama says Chicago is different from Chyenne. See my post on community policy for a response to that.

Joe Huffman  Saturday, October 04, 2008 7:37:12 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 

If all mankind were of one opinion, and one man held the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one man than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.

John Stuart Mill
On Liberty
[This is sometimes attributed to Thomas Jefferson. I believe this to be an error. Regardless it is apparent that Obama does not subscribe to this philosophy and McCain is not much better. They are both scumbags so this year I will probably be voting for Sarah.--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Saturday, October 04, 2008 7:22:14 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Friday, October 03, 2008

I don't know if this will help or her chances of getting elected (vice) President but my guess is it will help:

US Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has caught the eye of Hollywood - as the subject of a movie definitely not for kids.

A major Los Angeles porn studio is on the hunt for a Palin look-alike to play the mother-of-five politician in an adult film.

The successful actress would earn $2535 to $3800 for the role, according to online advertisements posted on the Los Angeles webpage of sales and social networking site Craig's List.

"Looking for a Sarah Palin look-alike for an adult film to be shot in next 10 days," the advertisement said.

It's time for me to dig up the interview I did of a porn actress I posted on Usenet several years ago. I'll try to post that this weekend sometime.

H/T to my Aussie friend.

Update: Via Sebastian here is the Craig's Listing.

Joe Huffman  Friday, October 03, 2008 9:53:57 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Thursday, October 02, 2008

These pictures are via an email from Johnathan on an email list I'm on:

Some people on the left are complaining that Sarah Palin supporters are shallow and all enthused with her because she is good looking. I'm sure that has something to do with it. But her views on most topics are a big boost as well. Still it is hard to defend against the assertion if she were not so hot that she wouldn't have gotten picked.

But one has to wonder why the Democrats are so upset by it. Weren't they smart enough to know that sex sells? I can hardly believe that. After all wasn't that one of Bill Clinton's appeal to a lot of women voters? And if the democrats thought the male voter who thinks with the head between his legs was an important demographic they should have chosen a woman--after all they have lots of politically experienced women on their side to choose from. Here are some examples:





So what's is there for them to complain about?

Oh, now I see. They would still be stuck with the same problem--trying to sell an inferior product at a higher price.

Further evidence of the inferiority of the left will be supplied next weekend at the Gun Blogger Rendezvous in the form of pictures of Ashley Varner from the NRA who will be attending--another reason for gun bloggers and readers to attend. She knows her stuff and it's not just because the male brain turns to mush when in her presence.

Joe Huffman  Thursday, October 02, 2008 9:59:37 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]  | 

As Lyle pointed out the other day some interesting comparisons can be made between the way the left deals with abortion versus guns. Here is another example:

McCain and Obama on the issues

ABORTION

McCain: Opposes abortion rights...
Obama: Favors abortion rights.

GUN CONTROL

McCain: Voted against ban on assault-type weapons but in favor of requiring background checks at gun shows. Voted to shield gun-makers and dealers from civil suits. "I believe the Second Amendment ought to be preserved -- which means no gun control."

Obama: Voted to leave gun-makers and dealers open to suit. Also, as Illinois state lawmaker, supported ban on all forms of semiautomatic weapons and tighter state restrictions generally on firearms.

Notice that even the title puts a positive spin on the repression of gun owners. It's about "gun control", not "guns", not "gun rights", not "the Second Amendment", not "gun ownership". Who wouldn't be opposed to "uncontrolled guns"? Therefore the opposite of uncontrolled guns, or gun control, must be a good thing.

Compare the handling of guns versus abortion. Obama favors a right. McCain opposes a right.

What media bias?

Joe Huffman  Thursday, October 02, 2008 8:22:05 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 

Walter E. Williams has an excellent piece entitled Destroying Liberty in which he accurately describes the process that leads ordinary Americans to support destructive legislation.

But if you were to ask, say, the average senior citizen whether Social Security, Medicare and prescription drug subsidies should be continued, he would probably answer yes. The same would be true if you asked a college professor whether higher education should continue to be subsidized, or a farmer or a dairyman whether their products should be subsidized, or a manufacturer whether there should be tariffs and quotas on foreign products that compete with his product. The problem with congressmen producing favors and privileges to all interest groups is that it creates what none of us wants: massive control, numerous dictates and micromanagement of our lives.

Read the whole thing.  Superb as it is, he missed the hate factor.  There are a significant number of Americans who have been taught to hate the very things that make this country a success.  They hate the very idea of corporations for example.  The term "free enterprise" makes their blood boil.  The sight of a nice home, on a nice lot, with the American flag flying makes them want to spit.  They have a hateful name for it; "McMansion".  They would tend to agree with Obama when he says with contempt that some Americans are clinging to guns and religion (the first two amendments in the Bill of Rights).  I suppose deriding Americans who "cling" to property rights, free speech, the right to a fair trial by jury, etc., will come next.  When FDR was pushing his Raw Deal back in the '30s and '40s, there was a famous (to me) quote, and I paraphrase; "For the first time, the rich are going to feel the same pain that the poor have felt."  Spread the misery.  If I'm suffering, angry, and unhappy, then by damn, if I can't do anything else, I will make you suffer, make you angry, and make you just as miserable as I.  That seems to be the mentality.  It's far easier to tear down someone else's house than to build one of your own.

Now we're faced with the possibility that one of these America haters is going to be elected president.

Lyle at UltiMAK  Thursday, October 02, 2008 2:05:33 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [3]  | 
# Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Joe Huffman  Wednesday, October 01, 2008 7:47:36 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Sunday, September 28, 2008

What will Obama cling to when voters question his commitment to the Second Amendment?

Jacob Sullivan
September 23, 2008
Revenge of the Bitter Gun Owners
[Obama pissed off the wrong people with his "clinging" remark. Gun owners are probably more inclined than any other group to be one issue voters. And what is incredibly telling to me is that Obama could neutralize all the skepticism of his "support for the Second Amendment" by saying he as President would veto any anti-gun legislation that came to his desk. He could easily win the election by continuing his current plan and then repeatedly and convincingly saying that one sentence. But he hasn't. He wants to cling to the possibility of further restricting our civil rights.--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Sunday, September 28, 2008 1:44:28 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]  | 
# Saturday, September 27, 2008

Daughter Xenia sent me these links:

I like the last two best:

Joe Huffman  Saturday, September 27, 2008 3:01:20 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]  | 

Kevin wraps his mind around why the left, and to a lesser extent the right, has so much hate and shares the result via quotes as is his style.

Very good stuff and I highly recommend it. It explains so much.

Joe Huffman  Saturday, September 27, 2008 11:34:07 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]  | 

The shorter and even simpler version is, "You can't fool the free market forever even if the politicians think they can. The laws of economics can no more be changed than the laws of physics. Obama and other Democrats were the biggest contributors. Vote for McCain." Set to music:

H/T to George for the email with the link.

Update: The video was pulled and via Kevin I found the replacement.

Joe Huffman  Saturday, September 27, 2008 11:14:47 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 

... I don't see the real world playing out like the last few chapters of Atlas Shrugged. We're a bit short of Galts and Gulches an' Midas Mulligan's been in a Federal pen for a good long while now, accused of "redlining."

Roberta X
Meanwhile, Back At The Launch
[Atlas Shrugged is a great book but there are lots of deviations from reality. It does have some wonderful points to make but as a plan for restoring our country's freedom it obviously won't work. Economic collapse may be required but an organized strike by the truly intellectual to force that just isn't going to happen.--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Saturday, September 27, 2008 8:05:12 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Friday, September 26, 2008

Barack What First Amendment Obama has sent threatening letters to new agencies in Pennsylvania and Ohio demanding they not run NRA advertisements. This act should be immediate disqualification of him as a candidate on at least two different levels. One is the obvious disrespect he has for the First Amendment (as well as the Second). The other is the crass stupidity. In addition to this being the Internet age where everyone can upload or download almost any video they want in a manner that is virtually impossible to block outside of a hard core police state this makes a news story out of the NRA ads. Which means TV stations are likely to start showing the ads for free!

As Dave Hardy said people will want to see what they are forbidden to see. A psychology prof lecturing about advertising once did a quick survey in his class about signs that were effective in getting the students to spend their money on a product. He was somewhat surprised to find one of the most compelling signs was "Under 17 not admitted without parent or guardian." Has Obama never learned that people buy and read banned books (get your button here) because they are banned? The same thing applies with guns, ammo, and accessories.

Just think of the headlines (the following are copyright exempt) this act of stupidity will enable:

  • Obama Campaign Running Scared (NRA web page headline)
  • What Obama doesn't want you to know
  • See the video Obama wants censored!
  • Obama attempts to ban free speech!
  • Obama jumps the gun and goes for the First first
  • Obama imposing "reasonable restrictions" on human rights
  • What's next? Restrictions on the right to trial by jury?

Someone this out of touch with human nature and the Bill of Rights has no place in American politics.

Update: Barack Enlightened Leader Obama also has local law enforcement pledged to come down on certain anti-Obama ads. This reminds me a lot of the early days of Adolf Hitler. Only here we have these rights specifically enumerated and Obama is, in essence, saying, "Bill of Rights? We don't need no stinking Bill of Rights!"

Update2: It's not just Obama! The Democratic Party is trying to suppress free speech. But that is to be expected I guess. It was one of the most liberal Republications and a liberal that brought us McCain-Feingold. Repression of economic and political freedom--it's what liberals do.

Joe Huffman  Friday, September 26, 2008 3:10:44 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [3]  | 

When will people learn? Upon hearing "you should not be allowed to see this," every real American feels a Pavlovian urge to see it at once, even if it's a Sanskrit manual on chariot repair.

David Hardy
September 25, 2008
Obama campaign tries to get stations to refuse NRA ads
[Apparently Obama is trying to get an early start on gutting the First Amendment. Apparently just signalling his attitude on the Second Amendment wasn't enough. It's obvious that he and his followers think of him as the Great Leader but one would think he could control himself until he seized power. Could it be that he just can't help himself?--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Friday, September 26, 2008 2:32:20 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Thursday, September 25, 2008

Via an email from Simon--Political Fact-Check Sites Proliferate, But Can They Break Through the Muck?

I think the answer is, they could, but they won't because most fact checkers don't know what facts are and freely substitute opinions. See the Heinlein quote for assistance in determining the difference.

Joe Huffman  Thursday, September 25, 2008 6:10:03 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 

It’s the public school system. Let’s be honest, it’s full of liberal loons.

Dann Dalton
September 23, 2008
Fifth Grader Suspended for Wearing Anti-Obama Shirt


[H/T to Say Uncle and David Codrea.--Joe]
Joe Huffman  Thursday, September 25, 2008 5:48:32 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]  | 
# Wednesday, September 24, 2008

The Arithmetic of Cooperation:
When you're adding up committees
There's a useful rule of thumb:
That talents make a difference,
And follies make a sum.

Piet Hein
[Does this remind you of banking regulation committees?--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Wednesday, September 24, 2008 7:59:26 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]  | 
# Tuesday, September 23, 2008

At this time-- this very day when Congress is plotting the final stroke in yet another, years-in-the-making, offensive against capitalism, Bill whittle has brought our attention to his doctorate level thesis on American exceptionalism.  It's called, Trinity (part 1).

If you believe, as I do, that wealth can be manufactured out of thin air, then there is no limit to the amount of wealth you can amass. And since you are creating it out of thin air, there is no moral onus on making money - you work hard to create it and have stolen from no one. There is an expression for this: you earned it.

Indeed, since charity depends on excess wealth, excess capacity, the more you make for yourself the better off everyone else is. You can even throw charity out the window if you are so hard-hearted; the fact remains that you will spend that money to get the things you want, and the more you have the more you can spend. That money goes to other people. This interchange is called "the economy", and rich societies are rich because they understand in their bones the centerpiece of Capitalist thinking: Wealth can be created from thin air by human ingenuity and hard work.

Now people on the left have, in their guts, a revulsion towards the rich and the wealthy, because whenever they see wealth they naturally assume that it was stolen...

So true, Doctor Whittle.

If any of you haven't read Bill's piece, you've missed out.  We know at least 99% of politicians have never read anything like it.  Either that or they were unable to understand it and wandered off to catch happy hour down at the watering hole.  Certainly nothing like this is being presented within our public schools.  Ever.

Well, now's your chance.  It'll take some time, but you'll thank Bill for it, I guarantee.

For you lefties out there; don't bother.  Something like a curse in a foreign language, you won't understand it but it will upset the hell out of you all the same.  Like when certain people ask me how to do something and I say, with total sincerity, "I'm sure you can figure it out."  Curse in a foreign language.

Lyle at UltiMAK  Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:39:04 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]  | 

Reading the blogs today I'm reminded of a Heinlein quote:

If it can't be expressed in figures, it is not science; it is opinion.

-Robert Heinlein-

Apparently certain "fact checkers" didn't get the memo. There is a big buzz in the gun blogger world today:

Our friendly Apex of the Triangle of Death has probably the best information with On Obama's Gun Record, Who Will Fact Check the Fact Checkers? I found this to be the most illuminating:

There's another possible explanation behind FactCheck's positions. Just last year, FactCheck's primary funding source, the Annenberg Foundation, also gave $50,000 to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence for "efforts to reduce gun violence by educating the public and by enacting and enforcing regulations governing the gun industry." Annenberg made a similar grant for $100,000 in 2005.

I see three simple questions, inspired by the Heinlein quote above, to get to the bottom of the controversy. Everyone can answer them for themselves with only a small amount of work using the above links. Those questions are:

  1. How many laws which restrict gun ownership and use has Obama supported?
  2. How many laws which encourage gun ownership and use has Obama supported?
  3. In the last few years how much money has FactChecker given to pro-gun organizations and how much to anti-gun organizations?

There no need for opinions on this topic. There is a need for facts. If "FactCheck" is to honor it's name then it should emphasis numbers and not words.

Joe Huffman  Tuesday, September 23, 2008 1:22:45 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [5]  | 

Something I don't see much of in Idaho is how the NRA spends it's advertising money during elections. Spending the money in my area of the country would be a waste of time. Any money spend getting an election victory greater than 50% of the vote is wasted. Seeing how my money is spend is nice.

Here, for your education and enjoyment, is the latest propaganda from the Apex of the Triangle of Death:

Joe Huffman  Tuesday, September 23, 2008 6:46:56 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [3]  | 

In a Time/CNN poll of 1,000 Americans conducted last week by Yankelovich Partners, two-thirds said it was more important to protect the privacy of phone calls than to preserve the ability of police to conduct wiretaps. When informed about the Clipper Chip, 80% said they opposed it.

The battle lines were first drawn last April, when the Administration unveiled the Clipper plan and invited public comment. For nine months opponents railed against the scheme's many flaws: criminals wouldn't use phones equipped with the government's chip; foreign customers wouldn't buy communications gear for which the U.S. held the keys; the system for giving investigators access to the back-door master codes was open to abuse; there was no guarantee that some clever hacker wouldn't steal the keys. But in the end the Administration ignored the advice. In early February, after computer- industry leaders had made it clear that they wanted to adopt their own encryption standard, the Administration announced that it was putting the NSA plan into effect. Government agencies will phase in use of Clipper technology for all unclassified communications. Commercial use of the chip will be voluntary -- for now.

Philip Elmer-Dewitt
March 14, 1994
Who Should Keep the Keys?
[Those that criticize Republicans for "spying on U.S. citizens" forget how hard the Clinton administration worked to do the same thing.--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Tuesday, September 23, 2008 5:55:17 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Sunday, September 21, 2008

It only stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there's service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master.

Ayn Rand
[I'm thinking of certain Democrats and their tax plans.--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Sunday, September 21, 2008 9:48:48 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]  | 
# Saturday, September 20, 2008

Obama is trying to woe gun owners telling us how he "supports the Second Amendment". As if this should even be an issue, have you ever heard politicians say they oppose the Bill of Rights?? Of course he is a like a teenage boy thinking he is going to get laid for the first time if he says, "I love you" enough times--no matter how insincere he is.

The Apex of the Triangle of Death has a little quiz to help cut through the fog of raging hormones and see the truth about what Obama is really about:

Joe Huffman  Saturday, September 20, 2008 1:33:25 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Friday, September 19, 2008

However, gun owners are not so foolish to believe that House Democrats embraced this legislation just because it was the right thing to do. Many voted for H.R. 6691 to give themselves some pro-gun-rights cover for the upcoming election, and they know it.

Those Democrats are fully aware that chances of this bill getting through the Senate during this session of Congress are virtually nil, but this issue gave them a chance to cast a pro-gun vote they can brag about on the campaign trail over the next seven weeks.You can bet your gun collection that Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will block a vote on this measure.

Alan Gottlieb
Founder of Second Amendment Foundation
September 17, 2008
HOUSE RIGHT TO VOTE ON D.C. GUN REGS, MAKE COUNCIL BEHAVE, SAYS SAF
[It about symbolism over progress on the civil rights front. But at least they using symbols that appeal to us rather than to the Brady Campaign. I'm annoyed D.C. is defying the Supreme Court chastisement for their 30 year repression of civil rights with the attendant hundreds, if not thousands, of lives lost. But at least they are headed in the right direction even if they have their feet dug in and are being dragged into compliance. I'm annoyed at the situation, can you imagine what the anti-gun bigots are feeling? I think I can--at least partly. I remember the passage of the Brady Act and then a few months later the "assault weapon" ban. I felt anger that lasted for months. But I had an outlet. I purchased guns, ammo, reloading equipment, training, and then in 1996 started working on explosives. The Brady supporters don't have nearly as good an outlet. They can only whine, complain, and scream. That isn't nearly as satisfying as putting a bullet through a pop can filled with explosives from 500 yards away. But then they have been whining, complaining, and screaming for years now and are good at it--it what they do. We have better things to do and it is part of the reason why we are winning. We have positive activities with tangible social and self improvement results. They are a hate group and have zero positive results to show for all their decades and even lifetimes of hate. To have even their minimal accomplishments in a few square miles of swamp wasteland near Virginia and Maryland be taken away from them as got to be extremely discouraging. Pity them as individuals but drive them as a group into political extinction.--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Friday, September 19, 2008 2:30:42 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]  | 
# Sunday, September 14, 2008

Six of us made it to the event (click on the pictures to see higher resolution versions):


Left to right, Phil, American Mercenary, Misty (wife of American Mercenary), Barb (my wife), and Gay_Cynic.

Barb insisted I should post a picture of myself as well, so here it is:


Joe Huffman and Gay_Cynic.

We had a nice time. No concrete plans to take over the world or anything. A report on Gun Blogger Summer Camp was requested. Gay_Cynic wanted to know if Tamara was as delightful in person as she is to read. I said she was but she seemed a little bit shy which I didn't expect.

Phil and I talked about our plans for guns to take to Reno next month.

We talked about Seattle Mayor Nickels attempts to break the law and ban gun owners from carrying on City property. Phil reports Nickels will release his plans after getting an opinion from the state Attorney General. If I recall correctly Phil said that was due out on October 20th which will be in time for the election.

In response to something American Mercenary said about Democrats and socialism I said those people have a different set of basic assumptions about reality than I do and Phil says he will have blog post about that on Monday. I'm looking forward to it.

American Mercenary informed us about the use and misuse of full auto in the army. He explained a use I hadn't really thought of before. He said a machine gun set up in a street can prevent anyone from crossing for many hundreds of yards but that same gun on a roof is of limited use.

Barb and Misty talked extensively about being the wife of a military man. Xenia will soon be in that position and Misty has been living that life for quite a while now. Barb arranged for Xenia to take some pictures, "When Misty has her baby." Of course this was ambiguous to me. My first inclination was this probably meant during delivery--which seemed a little odd. But the shock on Barb's and Misty's faces when I wanted clarification on this point got me on the right track.

Joe Huffman  Sunday, September 14, 2008 4:18:31 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Saturday, September 13, 2008

A reliable source recently told me that once the rule change stopping the punishment of people exercising their RKBA in national parks goes into effect there will be numerous lawsuits filed all over the country. The anti-gun bigots are hoping to get some judge, somewhere, to issue a restraining order to stop the implementation of the rule change. Then they will drag things out in court until a new administration is in the White House.

If those lawsuits are filed it is my hope* that on her second day in office (Vice) President Palin sends Federal Marshals to arrest those involved and directs the Attorney General to charge them with violation of 18 USC 241 and/or 18 USC 242.


* I can dream can't I?
Joe Huffman  Saturday, September 13, 2008 4:54:11 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]  | 
# Friday, September 12, 2008

American gun owners, who are increasingly becoming gun rights activists, are not the fools Democrats think they are.

Alan Gottlieb and Dave Workman
September 12, 2008
Democrats may as well tell gun owners the party is over
[I think it's time the Democrats were taught another lesson like the one they forgot from '94.--Joe]

Joe Huffman  Friday, September 12, 2008 5:48:20 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  | 
# Thursday, September 11, 2008

The Apex of the Triangle of Death is cranking up the attack on Obama. The latest is this news release and brochure. There is also the website GunBanObama.com. Find lots of juicy tidbits like, "Just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right." I wonder how he would respond to someone that said something similar about the 13th Amendment.

The odds makers have Obama winning. Former President Clinton says, "I predict that Senator Obama will win and win pretty handily." Of course Clinton is a pathological liar so we can dismiss whatever he says and perhaps even go with just the opposite of what he says. For this reason and others I'm betting on the NRA and predict University of Idaho (everyone in my family is either a graduate or working on a degree from there) graduate Sarah Palin is going to win.

Joe Huffman  Thursday, September 11, 2008 6:57:51 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [4]  | 

On this day, the anniversary of 9/11/01;

By our friend in Israel, this article in HA'ARETZ is brought to our attention.

What I bring away from the article is, well, I won't tell you.

Lyle at UltiMAK  Thursday, September 11, 2008 11:37:12 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]  | 
# Sunday, September 07, 2008

It is a myth, not a mandate, a fable not a logic, and symbol rather than a reason by which men are moved.

Irwin Edman
[This is something everyone who hopes to change the actions of others must keep in mind. And on the flip side those who are moved must be constantly on guard against least they be moved to inappropriate action, hope, and change. I regard Edman's observation as generally true and in most cases as a human weakness.--Joe]