Category Archives: Current News

This is about stuff in the mass media that generally has a short interest life span. Speculation about an election outcome a few days before the election is an example.

Making choices

Posted on by

For decades Libertarians and Republicans have been saying the economic and social policies of the left were destined to be catastrophic. Eventually all looters stop. There are only three options; 1) They stop because they realize theft is wrong, 2) They are stopped by force, or 3) They run out of places to loot.

Greece is the harbinger of our future and has the opportunity to select their option. Yet even now many do not see impending doom crashing in on them:

Riding a wave of anger to rise from obscurity to contender for power, leftist SYRIZA leader Alexis Tsipras, 37, promises to reject the punishing terms of the 130 billion euro ($163.75 billion) bailout if he wins the nail-biter vote on Sunday.

On the right, establishment heir and New Democracy leader Antonis Samaras, 61, says that would send Greece crashing out of the single currency and condemn it to even greater economic calamity.

With the election set to go down to the wire, European leaders weighed in on Saturday, urging Greeks to vote with their heads.

The bailout will not be renegotiated, warned German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose country’s wealth is vital to shoring up its weaker partners in the bloc.

…

Some global businesses and banks are already in retreat: Europe’s biggest retailer, Carrefour, said on Friday it was selling up in Greece, a day after French bank Credit Agricole moved to take direct control of its Albanian, Bulgarian and Romanian units from its Greek bank Emporiki.

On Saturday, Germany’s Biotest appeared to become the first drugmaker to say it was exiting the Greek market in July after its customers there failed to pay outstanding bills of 7 million euros. Others have threatened to do likewise, as the Greek health sector struggles with huge spending cuts.

Spain and Italy will probably be next in line to make a choice.

When it comes time for the American left to select an option which do you think it will be? And will those that oppose them be ready if the left choses options 2) or 3)?

Seriously scary stuff

Posted on by

While Bloomberg’s retarded proposal to limit the size of soft drink containers is getting a lot of attention I don’t think most people really understand how serious the problem is. I’ve had conversations with a few people who were admitted Marxist and many others who merely claimed they were Liberals or Progressives. One of the things they all had in common was their extremely simple view of the world while simultaneously proclaimed they were smarter than others and that gave them the authority to force others to live as they demanded. Any mention of individual freedom was immediately shot down because “People don’t do what is best for themselves or society.”


One of the admitted Marxists proclaimed, “I’m a firm believer in the good of society over the good of the individual.” In his world view the individual just doesn’t matter. Government must do what is best for the good of society and if the individual sometimes doesn’t get what they want or gets hurt that is just too bad. Pointing out I could find nothing different in that justification versus that used by those who murdered innocent civilians in 10s of millions in the last century yielded comments to the effect of “They made some horrible mistakes. We just need the right people in charge.” Of course he believed he was one of the right people.


Just as Bloomberg apparently cannot think one step ahead to how easily his proposed restriction on “high capacity” soft drink containers would be defeated these people cannot envision what follows next from their every proposed attempt at restricting individual liberty and the free market. In one of the recent books of Thomas Sowell that I listened to he related the story of when he was a economics student and was enamored with some idea that would “force people to do the right thing”. He proudly presented it to his instructor who asked, “And then what happens?” Sowell initially was perplexed. Why of course, the desired outcome would happen. There was a law or regulation that required people to do the right thing. The instructor pushed him to think it through from an economics point of view. And Sewell thought it through and gave the answer that only slightly diminished his enthusiasm for the idea. The instructor again pushed, “And then what happens?” Again Sowell answered and his enthusiasm damped just a bit more. As the instructor pushed him again and again Sowell walked through the rippling effects of the simple one law and it was not long before he realized that not only was the effect of the law far less simple than what he thought but it would not result in his desired outcome. Everyone touched by the “one simple law” would pay a price with no one, except perhaps the bureaucrats and the politicians, receiving a net benefit.


The typical gun controller cannot conceive of why registration of firearms would not make society safer. Unintended consequences escape their grasp all the while they proclaim themselves to be morally and intellectually superior to us. It’s all just “common sense” to them. They vehemently insist there are, literally, easy answers to some difficult problems that involve the constitution, criminology, psychology, and practicality of implementation. I sometimes believe those that insist that if someone had not had a concealed carry permit they wouldn’t have committed multiple murders must be suffering from some kind of insanity. If one is willing to break the law against murder why would they obey the law against carrying a concealed firearm or even ownership of a firearm? Why is it so incredibly difficult for them to think even one step ahead?


I struggle with how to get what I think are extremely simple concepts across to these people. Even everyday things Liberals/Progressives claim to be experts on they are profoundly ignorant and/or stupid on. One Liberal I know went on about how because something was “natural” it was “so much better for you”. I asked what the definition of “natural” was. Was this opposed to “super-natural”? This is about the only thing that even comes close in my mind. She said, “No. Natural is something that is not man-made.” “So”, I queried, “Does that mean the lemonade you are drinking is not natural? At the bare minimum a man or woman had to squeeze the juice from the lemon and mix it with water.” The response was, “If you ask that then you are just stupid.”


This liberal can’t even present a defendable definition of a word that she uses in probably 25% of her conversations with me and she calls me stupid? How do you get through to someone like that?


Sowell’s instructor had an advantage we don’t. He or she had a very bright student with a grasp of economic theory and the student was in a subordinate position. Liberals/Progressives will not tolerate being in a subordinate position. They believe they are superior to non-liberals and any challenge to that world view is met with an attack. And if the verbal attack isn’t sufficient to “win” their argument they are more than willing, as Bloomberg is demonstrating, to use force to get our compliance.


People with the intellectually power and problem domain knowledge of a 2nd grader are demanding they be put in charge of essentially everything with guns to back up their decisions. This is some seriously scary stuff.

Quote of the day—Bruce Ramsey

Posted on by

We live with guns and occasionally worry about them. If this leaves you feeling at a disadvantage, Lynne, maybe you need to get one.

Bruce Ramsey
May 31, 2012
Seattle shootings: Is it time for gun control?
[Considering the political atmosphere of Seattle in general and the Seattle Times in general this was actually a pretty positive editorial about guns. It certainly wasn’t “SHALL. NOT. BE. INFRINGED.” or molṑn labé! But compared to what Seattle Times editorials would have been 15 years ago it is absolutely awesome.

And I would like to go on record as making a public offer to Lynne Varner, or anyone else in the Seattle area, to take them shooting for their first time.—Joe]

It’s a Matter of Context

Posted on by

I point out, to those who are befuddled by the Chinese criticizing America’s human rights record, that we are talking about one communist government criticizing another.


See?  It makes perfect sense.


“Human rights” you see, means the right to be controlled by an all-knowing and all-powerful government.


Better now?

Your bias is showing

Posted on by

Google news shows Fidel Castro’s niece endorsed President Obama (last Google entry shown on this page):

 CastroEndorsesObama

Yet when you go to that page the name “Obama” and that quote is not to be found.

Other sources include the quote, “I would vote for President Obama. I think he’s sincere and speaks from the heart.”

Apparently the AP removed that portion of the story. Perhaps because it is because it really shouldn’t be considered news. Communists endorsing communists is even less newsworthy than “dog bits man”.

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by

040309

To be accurate the ATF logo should be added to the U.S. flag on the side of the truck.

Read Fast and Furious: Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and the Shameless Cover-Up. It’s a quick read and very good. One of the more interesting things I discovered from reading the book was that the Mexican government stopped making such a stink about the ATF running guns into Mexico because the U.S. threatened to cut off $500 million in aid if they didn’t shut up about it.

Ry recommends the book too.

Quote of the day—Alan Dershowitz

Posted on by

A medical report by George Zimmerman’s doctor has disclosed that Zimmerman had a fractured nose, two black eyes, two lacerations on the back of his head and a back injury on the day after the fatal shooting. If this evidence turns out to be valid, the prosecutor will have no choice but to drop the second-degree murder charge against Zimmerman — if she wants to act ethically, lawfully and professionally.

Alan Dershowitz
May 18, 2012
Drop George Zimmerman’s murder charge–New evidence suggests Trayvon Martin’s killer acted in self-defense
[If the name Alan Dershowitz doesn’t ring a bell then go read up on him. For Dershowitz to say this is a big deal.—Joe]

I like it, but…

Posted on by

…she should be suckling an adult if it’s supposed to depict The Obama Way.  Well, children, adults– everyone.  Maybe there should be a long line behind the kid, all carrying signs and complaining/competing over who gets to suckle next.

Winning

Posted on by

Via a SAF Tweet.

Liberal Whoopi Goldberg Admits She’s a Member of the NRA:

GOLDBERG: But it is also, is it also, John, because those folks are saying, okay, here’s what I have in my house. I’m letting–the government says — I want you–I’m an NRA member, as you probably know or don’t know.

…

STOSSEL: You packing now?
HASSELBECK: Maybe?
GOLDBERG: You don’t want to find out.

I despise emulation of celebrities but I recognize it probably is hard-wired into the human brain. Therefore this is great news. Not only has she “come out of the closet” as a gun owner and NRA member but she is a black female who comes across as reasonably smart, rational, and likable. This makes it more difficult for the anti-gun people to make their usual claims about gun owners being stupid/ignorant/insurrectionist racist white males.

My next book

Posted on by

I just discovered the next book I’m going to read: Fast and Furious: Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and the Shameless Cover-Up.

I’m downloading it from Audible.com as I type…

Some people are speculating that Fast and Furious could be the next “Watergate”. But I’m not really convinced it will become that. Sure, it’s almost certain what happened was worse than Watergate because of the people who died and that an attack on a fundamental right was involved. But Watergate only became such a big issue because the media cared about it. The media cared about it because it was a Republican president involved in the scandal. In this case it’s a Democrat and it was about infringing upon the 2nd Amendment which the media thinks is a good idea.

Quote of the day—Ann Coulter

Posted on by

We don’t know the facts yet, but let’s assume the conclusion MSNBC is leaping to is accurate: George Zimmerman stalked a small black child and murdered him in cold blood, just because he was black.

If that were true, every black person in America should get a gun and join the National Rifle Association, America’s oldest and most august civil rights organization.

Ann Coulter
April 23, 2012
Coulter: Gun control and self-defense
[Great article. As is usual for Coulter there is lots of snark.-Joe]

Right Too Late

Posted on by

Hat tip; Billy Beck  This can’t get enough exposure;

Some of the people close to me are in effect communists.  No; they don’t attend Party rallies and most of them don’t send money to The Party (though some do through their union dues and they may not even know it) but their underlying assumptions are the same.  That’s all it takes.  You don’t need to be a Firm Believer in the teachings of Brother Marx, carrying around the little red book, or even understand where your beliefs came from.  You only need those underlying assumptions you acquired by default sometime in childhood, and just a little bit of envy, or resentment, or frustration, or anger, and plenty of reinforcement from those with whom you’ve chosen to surround yourself.  The Party and it’s allies will then be free to do the rest, because you won’t notice until it’s too late.  It all sounds fairly reasonable, even good, along the way, because “we all know that something has to be done”.  Right?  And that something is, as always, more government (less freedom).

Suckers.  I can forgive the kids (most haven’t received a proper education) but what about you adults?  Seriously.

It’s interesting.  I was listening this weekend to a man who barely escaped with his life from Cuba.  He said his parents supported Castro.  All Castro wanted was justice after all (there was clearly a lack of justice in Cuba, pre revolution) and to serve the collective good of The People.  His parents supported Castro wholeheartedly.  That is, until the newly empowered communists came and took everything they had– everything his parents had worked for all their lives.  I heard the same basic story directly from a famous musician who had escaped from Cuba by skipping out on his handlers while on tour in the U.S.  You risk your life doing that.  If the catch you, they kill you, or take you back to make an example out of you.  The man I was listening to this weekend was in tears, trying to warn us that the same thing is happening here in the U.S., in this land of his Last Great Hope.  They’re using same promises and the same rationale, using the same underlying assumptions, with the same goals right here and right now.  If it succeeds it will have the same outcome.  It always does.  Only this time it’s global.

It has been said that being right is ok (sometimes) but being right too soon makes you a radical extremist.

What about being right too late?  What does that make you?  I ask you Progressives.  You’ve grown up with the warning signs all around you, and now the warning signs have reached ear-splitting decibel levels.  What does it make you if you’re right too late?  Or does your anger or fear, or hatred, or disgust with the human race, prevent you from caring about the consequences?  I know there are those who believe there are too many people on the planet already.  Some people know what we’re headed for and they secretly long for it.  For other Progressives– those who just want to live a good life and want what’s “best” for everyone; What does it make you when you’re right too late?

When Government Is Out Of Control…

Posted on by

…the truth is shockingly radical to some people.  How DARE he say that!  Well it isn’t truth’s fault that truth is sometimes shocking, is it?  Well is it?

Allen West does a pretty good job of standing his ground and staying focused;

Did you catch the fact that the Vice Chairman of the National Communist Party thinks that being called a communist is insulting?  I found myself hoping that West would bring it up.  Could you imagine a high ranking NRA executive thinking it an insult to be called an NRA member?

Communists (Progressives) have to slink around in the dark as a way of life and they know it.  Turn on the lights!

“Well I don’t care what he says.”  I love it.  CNN goes to the actual, openly named Communist Party (they’re probably on a first name basis) for their reaction to someone calling someone else a communist.  Oh, the layers of irony and stupidity.  See; this how these things make the major headlines.

It’s all because Allen West had the gall, the nerve, the cheek, the chutzpah, to describe what was right in front of his face and for all to see.  The loonies go apoplectic, try to beat West over the head with his own comments, and now a lot more people have heard that the communists had to re-brand themselves, that they have a caucus in Washington, the self described Communist Party comes out saying it’s insulting to call people communists, and West gets a boost. This is how it works, people. We win every time we stick to basic truth.

Now if West had gone all Republican (getting scared, going marshmallow, saying he didn’t really mean it, and sorry to be so reckless with my words, please forgive me, mea maxima culpa) he’d have lost.  And we’d lose with him. As it is, the loonies actually look like loonies, making loonies of themselves, calling out more loonies to join the loony-fest, and the truth gets a boost.

Hat tip; Glen Beck, and I credit him also for bringing some of our history (the parts that don’t get taught in the coercive, i.e. government, schools) into the public spotlight over the years.

Ted Nugent About His Chat With Secret Service

Posted on by

Some say the The Nuge is too over the top.  They need to listen more closely.  He says what needs to be said.  If it drives the loonies out of the woodwork, perfect.  That’s exactly what we want– bring the conversation, the principles and the clarity, out, naked, front and center.  That way we win.  There is no other.  Obfuscation and beating around the bush, “moderating” the message, only serves as chum in the water for the sharks.  Don’t bandy words with fools.  Listen and learn;

ETA; You know they were trying to intimidate him.  Don’t be intimidated.  This sort of thing will continue until the left finds out that it backfires on them every time it’s tried.  Alan West, for one, is beginning to figure it out.

NBC producer fired over Zimmerman call

Posted on by

As you probably have heard the call of Zimmerman with the police that NBC aired on the Today Show was edited such that Zimmerman appears to say, “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.” This was not how it happened and a producer was fired over this. Good. The damage this deliberate slanting of the news could have been been millions of dollars in property damage and even people ending up dead from riots. As it is the tremendous amount of time and energy expended by people basing their actions on falsified information is incalculable.

The story is an AP story and is spreading rapidly. It certain deserves exceedingly wide coverage. Perhaps tensions can be reduced and people will look more closely at all the facts related to this event. And long term I hope more people verify stories reported by the media before taking extreme action.

Some of the news outlets reporting this story:

Sometimes it’s no fun being right

Posted on by

In comments here, regarding Hollywood’s lack of ideas and their focus on remakes, I predicted a new series of the Three Stooges.  Turns out I was right on time.  They have the movie coming out this month.  I’ll guess that the new series is already in the works.  The Marx Brothers and then Silent flicks to follow, I suppose.

These are the people who accuse us of being “backward” or “simple-minded”.

Liberty is Not on Trial

Posted on by

Don’t forget it.  This is (partially) in response to the QOTD below.

The argument for liberty is primarily a moral one.  Many people focus on cause and effect.  We could dig into detail after detail, analyzing this and that cause and this and that effect.  In that pursuit, yes, we will find much evidence in favor of liberty.

But liberty is not on trial.  Oh no, Young Grasshopper.  This may be news to most people, but it is the socialist/communist/Fascist (statist) bloc that is on trail.  I hereby accuse it of willfully conspiring to perpetrate envy, hopelessness, fraud, grand larceny, stagnation, decline, anger, hate, conflict, assault, battery, chaos, and mass murder.

It is not up to us to defend liberty as such.  We who support and uphold it are the plaintiffs, see?  Liberty needs no defense in that sense, because it has done nothing wrong.  It needs to be taught, yes, but if any fingers of blame are to be pointed, they should be pointed at the statists, and if any defense need to be mounted, let the accused try to defend their crimes.  Let them point back and leer at us— but always understand that they are the accused and we are (liberty is) the injured party.

Ultimately it comes down to the fact that Man, by nature, yearns to be free.  Sure; with our liberty intact, we do vastly better than we ever do without it, but the argument is primarily a moral one.  Right and wrong.  Freedom verses force.  Choice verses coercion.  Good verses evil.  America was founded on that principle.  Isn’t it time we strive to understand, and then to fulfill America’s Promise of Liberty?  For once?

The plaintiff doesn’t walk into the courtroom with a defense attorney at his side.  He may need a good prosecutor, but he doesn’t need a defense.  Republicans of course have never understood it.  A plaintiff or a procesuter who is constantly defending himself, with the perpetrator sitting in judgement, is a blithering fool.

Ignorant yahoo

Posted on by

Paul Krugman writes:

Florida’s now-infamous Stand Your Ground law, which lets you shoot someone you consider threatening without facing arrest, let alone prosecution, sounds crazy – and it is. And it’s tempting to dismiss this law as the work of ignorant yahoos.

The Stand Your Ground law does not enable someone to avoid arrest for shooting someone “you consider threatening”. It merely codifies what has been common law since at least Biblical times. If you are reasonably in fear of seriously body harm or death then you are protected from prosecution and civil action if you use deadly force to protect innocent life rather than having an obligation to attempt escape.

As people have known for quite sometime you shouldn’t live in a glass house if you are going to throw stones. If Krugman is looking for someone to call an ignorant yahoo he only need look as far as the nearest mirror.

What’s Going On With Gun Sales?

Posted on by

Via an e-mail from the NRA (Yes; I am part of the “triangle of death” and as a card-carrying member, I get the sooper secret decoder ring and classified e-mails)

What’s up with gun sales?  Americans are rediscovering the fun and utility of gun ownership, that’s what.  People are starting to shrug off the effects of political and social bullying, saying “to heck with all that nonsense – guns are good, I want one and I’m buying one (or three)”.

Fallacy of “Gun-Free” Schools

Posted on by

Via email:

From: David Burnett [mailto:media@concealedcampus.org]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 8:23 AM
Subject: Shooting Highlights Fallacy of “Gun-Free” Schools

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Shooting Highlights Fallacy of “Gun-Free” Schools

April 3, 2012 — Seven students were gunned down yesterday morning in California on the same day that a national protest began to raise awareness about students being left helpless against such murderers.

The national Empty Holster Protest, organized by Students for Concealed Carry, involves students strapping on empty holsters to illustrate their defenselessness at the hands of college gun bans. The event runs through April 6 and involves hundreds of college campuses across the US.

“This is a poignant and ironic example of the very thing we’re protesting,” said David Burnett, the group’s spokesman.
“Colleges invite these shootings by guaranteeing criminals their victims will be disarmed. It takes more than signs to fend off killers.”

Although the details of the massacre are still unclear, it remains apparent that prohibitions against firearms were completely ineffective. Over 20 such college shootings have occurred on so-called “gun-free” campuses since 2001. At the same time, more than 200 campuses in six states allow students to carry handguns to class without experiencing any such rampages.

“Gun-free zones are defense-free zones,” said Burnett. “Since our colleges can’t guarantee our safety, it’s time for them to allow us a fighting chance and decriminalize self-defense.”

A PDF version of this press release is available at:
http://scc.gs/HEXF5S

Media resources available at: http://concealedcampus.org/media

CONTACT:

David Burnett, Director of Public Relations

Students for Concealed Carry

david.burnett@concealedcampus.org

859-576-7522

ABOUT:

Students for Concealed Carry is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprised of over 40,000 supporters which advocates for legal concealed carry on college campuses.

I don’t have anything to add other than I think the college administrators and state legislators that created these victim disarmament zones should be prosecuted for conspiracy to deny civil rights under the color of law with particular attention paid to the following:

…if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section … shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Perhaps if a few of these people are in jail awaiting trial with the possibility of a death sentence others will be a little less eager to infringe upon the specific enumerated rights guaranteed by our Bill of Rights.