Quote of the day—Linoge

I cannot help to see Joan and every other “gun control” supporter like her as being roughly analogous to book burners, especially when viewed in the light of their infatuation with censorship and controlling the message.  Not only do they want us defenseless and easy prey for criminals, they want us quiet, docile, controlled.

Linoge
January 15, 2012
tellin’ riddles in the dark
[There is lots of evidence to support this. Reasoned Discourse, telling us we should just sit back and shut up, and of course the violence and threats of violence from these people.

It’s as Weer’d Beard has said, “Anti-Freedom, not just Anti-gun!”—Joe]

Quote of the day—Roberta X

Both of the big parties — matched set of jackboots that they are — assume they own women’s bodies. They just have differing plans for them.

Roberta X
January 14, 2012
They Both Think They Own Me
[I was just listening to Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One by Thomas Sowell. One of the things he pointed out that it’s the wrong question to ask, “Where did slavery come from?” As near as we can determine slavery has been around (and continues to exist) since before writing was invented. The real question is, “Where did freedom come from?”

With this background it seems likely that the desire to “own” other human is hardwired into some primitive part of most peoples brains. This manifests itself in many different ways.

Some people are more aware of these urges than others and outright claim, “I was born to regulate.” Others have claimed a divine right from the god(s) to rule other people. Even many of those who do not claim ownership or the right to rule others for their personal benefit will insist there be a ruler to take ownership of both them and their neighbors.

It may be that brief twinkle of freedom in history was an aberration and those reaping the benefits of freedom grew too fatigued to support it (see Thomas Paine). I know that at times I feel the fatigue and yearn to have the burden lifted even as I see our freedoms rapidly disappearing.—Joe]

Required reading

I have read a few books on “The Rape of Nanking”:

I posted a little about them and the event here and here.

What I haven’t said is that when I read those books my mind was racing on how the civilian population could have better defended themselves. If I were able to go back in time and space and take whatever I could carry with me to that city it would be a backpack full of suppressed .22 LR pistols and several thousand rounds of ammo.

There probably would still have been thousands of Chinese who would have been gang raped and murdered but it wouldn’t have been hundreds of thousands and there would have been a lot of Japanese bodies floating down the rivers along with the Chinese.

A Girl and Her Gun posted about a woman from London who was in China when the Japanese invaded. This brought a flood of memories from reading those books. The well, so to speak, was primed so I guess it’s isn’t too surprising that my eyes filled up with tears as I got to the end of her post An Open Letter To The Anti-Gun Folks.

H/T to Say Uncle.

The Quintessential Republican

Sure; they know what you want to hear, at least for the most part, though they’re playing the Bible-thumper card a bit too heavy.  They know pretty well how to push your buttons, getting the applause at the rallies and so on.  As they see it, they know how to win over us stupid bumpkin Elmer Fudds in fly-over country (just throw ’em some red meat and watch them bark like dogs).

Here’s an example of what they really think, gleaned from a rare moment of partial honesty.  Newt calls himself a “Realpolitik Wilsonian.”  Yeah; that Wilson.  Be sure to watch both videos on the page.  I don’t care what you think of Glen Beck.  Screw that.  Listen to the words.  The “Four Freedoms”.

That’s the Republican Party today.  You can’t mix the liberty talk with the Four Freedoms.  That’s a lie, and yet it represents everything the Party stands for.

Make no mistake.  We’re being offered what amounts to a plea deal.  Either we take the deal (vote Republican) or we’re sentenced to another four years with a Democrat in office.  Bleed slowly or bleed quickly.  It’s a threat you see– take a Progressive dirt bag (Republican) or else.  That’s how this works, and I’m not playing that game.  I’ll get interested in an election when liberty is on the ballot, but don’t expect that to happen any time soon.

Quote of the day—Amos

It’s about feelings and self-identity for Progressives. They’re like monkeys. They’ve got enough primate brain to form tribes, but they just don’t use the higher faculties. So it’s no surprise that flinging crap is their modus operadi.

Amos
January 4, 2012
Comment to Well, your legislature asked for it
[The tribes thing stuck with me. They do have thing about about groups don’t they? The individual and individualism is denigrated. They say things such as “The good of society is more important than the individual.” And “It takes a village.” They put a lot of effort into masses of people into the streets without any clear rational message.

Yet it was individualism that created the tremendous advances in Western Civilization which other societies were forced to adopt (or attempt to destroy) lest they be left far, far behind.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Robert W. Burke

Entirely too much energy of our state police force is spent controlling honest citizens, simply because it is something they can succeed in doing.

Robert W. Burke
From here.
[I haven’t studied this much but I suspect it is true. If so then the solution is probably to change the incentives. I suspect the incentives are for arrests and convictions rather that low crime rates.—Joe]

Justice

Billy Beck wanted some discussion on the matter of Eric Holder a while back, but I didn’t see much of it.

While I agree with Beck’s sentiment, I question the idea of firing Holder’s ashes from a cannon into Mexico.  It could be seen as an act of hostility toward Mexico, but then I wonder if that would be such a bad thing.

I’d be OK with the extradition of Eric Holder to Mexico (alive or dead) but only after he received justice here in the U.S.  That is both our right and our grave responsibility.

But justice for the pawn is only the beginning, not an end.  It would be a mistake to focus on the lieutenant to such a degree as to forget his commander.

Can Someone Please Explain

…in short, sweet, straight-forward detail, the “conservative” position on immigration?  I’ve heard vitriolic disagreement and angry attacks toward any policy proposal that even remotely smacks of “amnesty” and I’ve heard demands for building a wall around the country (like that ever works) but I’ve never heard what the attacker actually wants, exactly.

For the record (and I know this is off-subject as it doesn’t answer the question, because I have no idea as to the answer, which is the point of the post after all); In principle, I believe it should be easy to get into this country, and to become a citizen.  The problem as I see it is the socialism – the goodies – people coming here for a share of the loot.  Turn off that loot spigot and the problem, such as it is, evaporates overnight.  “Heal the World – Outlaw Socialism” would be my bumper sticker if I ever got ’round to putting one on my vehicle, which I probably won’t.

Outlawing socialism would include doing away with labor laws, minimum wage being a big one at play here.  The other loot spigot in play was also manufactured by our government– the “War On Drugs” and we all know for certain that Prohibition failed the first time due to human nature, and that human nature dictates that it will fail just as catastrophically every time, which is what we’re seeing every day.  But we can’t separate it from imigration policy.  Because we’re sniveling cowards.

“They’re takin’ Our Jobs!” (Der Derkin’ Er Jerrrbs!”) is an idiotic assertion.  So forget it.  When the Europeans first started coming here in the late 1400s and early 1500s, they took all the jobs from the “Indians” very quickly, so there haven’t been any jobs here since then anyway, right?  I mean, if you figure that the “Der Derkin’ Er Jerrrbs!” argument has any validity whatsoever.  IF people coming here from other places “takes jobs away” then the peak in the number of available jobs in North America would have taken place before Columbus’ voyage (or much earlier – before the migration out of Siberia during the last Ice Age) and as the Euros et al started coming in, the number of jobs available would have been shrinking constantly ever since.  QED.  So there.

Anyhow;  What, exactly, is the “conservative” policy on immigration – the one that won’t get the pundits, the self appointed Representatives of Modern American Conservatism (the RMACs) all pissed off?  I maintain that there is no such thing, which is why I brought it up.

I figure Newt has a four thousand page preliminary proposal, submitted by his Provisional Committee on Immigration Policy Proposal Research Exploratory Studies, complete with thousands of cross-references and cross-cross-references to the cross-references, which means he doesn’t have a clue and is desperate to avoid clues as it would mean standing for something meaningful and concrete which is to be avoided at all cost.

My explanation for the absurdity is that the Republicans believe in the all the negative stereotypes that the Democrats have created for conservatives– racist, sexist, bigoted homophobes….ad infinitum, thumpin’ a Bible and cryin’ ’bout Jeezus! and so the Republicans are trying, like frightened little kids faced with putting out a house fire, to pander to the Saturday Night Live stereotype “conservative”.  They have no idea how to please us stereotype bigot buffoons without getting into trouble.  They’re scared and frustrated, but they know they have to at least pretend to try, because that’s on the list of things to do to get elected.  So it’s a contest to see who can come up with the most plauseablely meaningless proposal that will offend the least people and will never get enforced anyway.  It makes for good theater all ’round I suppose.

We know for certain that outlawing socialism would be among the most frightening prospects ever presented to a Republican.  Right?  The planet being wiped out by an asteroid would be bad, but at least it wouldn’t leave them blinking in the lights in front of a camera babbling like idiots, knowing they’d have to face the criticism for it the next day– they could die right along with the rest of us and that would be much more comfortable as it wouldn’t require any acts of courage or any application of principles.  It would let them entirely off the hook.

Is it still paranoia?

Fear of big government is near an all-time high (via a Tweet from Michelle Malkin):

A near-record level of Americans, 64 percent, say that “big government” is a bigger threat to the country than “big business” or “big labor,” according to a new poll.

While nearly two-thirds say big government is the major threat, 26 percent name big business, according to the Gallup survey conducted November 28 – December 1. Just 8 percent name big labor.

Since Gallup starting asking the question in 1965, Americans have typically named big government as the biggest threat; an all-time high of 65 percent named it as the biggest threat in 1999 and 2000.

If a large majority of the population think they really are out to get us can it still be considered paranoia?

Quote of the day—Christopher Merken

Guns are designed with one purpose only: to kill. Ending a life is the purpose of a gun. The argument that it’s preventative, that it’s the “well it’s either me or the guy coming through my door” mentality, or that guns create a safer society is just plain wrong. Guns are designed to kill. A specially designed piece of metal, slotted into another piece of metal and projected at incredible speeds at another person is designed to kill. There is no way to deny, refute, or get around this simple fact. So why are guns allowed? Why do we as a society accept these dangerous weapons into our community?

Christopher Merken
December 8, 2011
Another Virginia Tech Shooting, and What Should Be Done About It: It’s time to take a stand against gun violence
[Heavy sigh. Here we go again.

I’ve fired about 100,000 rounds through my guns without killing anything but two deer and a rattlesnake. By his logic my guns must have malfunctioned with nearly every shot.

He offers no studies to support his assertions. The best he can do is proof by vigorous assertion.

He asks, “Why are guns allowed?” as if that which government does not allow is forbidden. He apparently missed out on the high school government class where it was taught that government is only allowed certain enumerated powers and the people retain all other rights and powers. He has it exactly backward.

He’s got crap for brains.—Joe]

On the shoulders of giants

As I have said before, public servants who advocate gun control must have forgotten they are servants or intend to change the relationship.

I now read in David Kopel’s new paper, How the British Gun Control Program Precipitated the American Revolution (via Say Uncle):

The ideology underlying all forms of American resistance to British usurpations and infringements was explicitly premised on the right of self-defense of all inalienable rights; from the self-defense foundation was constructed a political theory in which the people were the masters and government the servant, so that the people have the right to remove a disobedient servant. The philosophy was not novel, but was directly derived from political and legal philosophers such as John Locke, Hugo Grotius, and Edward Coke.

The laws of economics cannot be violated

Recently I’ve been listening to Basic Economics 4th Ed: A Common Sense Guide to the Economy by Thomas Sowell as I drive to and from Idaho and on my commute into Seattle. One of the lessons was that if prices are fixed by the government you will have problems.

If the prices are fixed too low it results shortages, poor quality, and under the table payoffs to suppliers and/or government price control enforcement agents. If prices are fixed too high it results in surpluses, wasted resources, less efficient means of producing the product (no incentive to reduce costs), and a heavier tax burden. Letting the free market adjust prices dynamically results in much closer to optimal allocation of scarce resources with alternative uses.

This lesson has been known for decades, if not a century or more, but politicians have no incentive to adhere to the laws of economics.

Via email from Ry we have the further proof that the laws of economics cannot be violated without suffering known punishments:

A federal power agency discriminated against wind operators in the Pacific Northwest when it unplugged their generators to cope with a surplus of renewable energy on its transmission system this year, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ruled on Tuesday. It ordered the agency, the Bonneville Power Administration, to rewrite its rules.

Bonneville had argued that it had no option but to lock out the wind generators to protect salmon in the Columbia River.

While the agency could have reduced the power output of hydroelectric dams by routing excess water through a spillway, doing so would violate the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act, it said.

But a group of wind companies filed a complaint with the energy regulatory commission saying that instead off turning off wind turbines, Bonneville should have resorted to “negative pricing,” or paying customers to take the excess power. Bonneville countered that this would conflict with its obligation to repay loans from the federal government and to provide power cheaply.

The problem could crop up more often as companies build wind and solar farms to meet state requirements for renewable energy.

“Negative pricing”?

We need a Constitutional amendment that guarantees freedom of commerce. That would have prevented the health care bill, the war on drugs, subsidies for farmers, and the $200 tax on firearm noise suppressors as well as crazy stuff like people advocating “negative pricing” for electrical power.

Larry Johnston died

I wrote about Professor Johnston before and the message he wrote on the Hiroshima atomic bomb was a QOTD. I received his obituary below via email from one of his children:

Nuclear physicist Lawrence H. “Larry” Johnston, one of the last survivors of the Manhattan project, died peacefully Sunday at his home in Moscow, Idaho. Millie, his wife of 69 years, and family were with him. He was 93.

Johnston designed the first atomic bomb detonator and is believed to be the only eyewitness to all three 1945 atomic explosions—at White Sands, NM, and in Japan at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, events that killed some 200,000 people and ended World War II. Johnston was assigned to measure the impact of the bombs.

Johnston had just completed his bachelor degree and begun graduate work at University of California, Berkeley in 1940, when he agreed to follow his mentor, Nobel-prize-winning Luis Alvarez, to Boston to help develop microwave radar at MIT’s Radiation Laboratory. By 1943, Johnston had helped develop a ground-controlled- approach radar blind landing system for airplanes, an invention critical to the success of World War II Battle of Britain and the post-war Berlin Airlift. Both Alvarez and Johnston then moved to Los Alamos, NM, to help develop the atomic bomb.

Back at Berkeley after the war, Johnston helped Alvarez build a new type of proton linear accelerator. Johnston then headed construction of a larger version of it at the University of Minnesota , and worked on another at Stanford University . In 1967 the Johnstons moved to Moscow where he served as physics professor at the University of Idaho until 1988. He focused on nuclear physics, lasers, and molecular spectroscopy. After retiring, Johnston continued to give talks about his experiences to all ages, from elementary school children to scientists. A natural teacher, Johnston used many occasions as teachable moments. When fishing, gutting fish meant also examining contents of the fish’s stomach and asking his kids to decipher it’s last meal. “Hmm, caddis fly larvae.”

Friends and family teased Johnston that his interest in explosives went back to his birth on Chinese New Year—known for its fireworks—Feb 11, 1918 in Shantung Province, China, to Christian missionaries. A picture at age 3 shows him grinning and holding a large Chinese firecracker. The family spent Larry’s fifth summer traveling across the USA in a Model T Ford, paying farmers 25-cents to camp on their property, and visiting national parks. Ever after, Larry loved camping and the outdoors.

Larry was beginning graduate studies at the University of California Berkeley when he fell in love with the beautiful Mildred “Millie” Hillis, finding in her a match for his wit and intelligence and a partner in his Christian faith. After Luis Alvarez recruited Larry to come to Boston to help invent radar, leaving Millie behind, Alvarez thought Larry seemed depressed. When Larry admitted he was missing Millie, Alvarez pulled strings to fly Larry to Berkeley, where they were married and returned together to Boston. Millie sometimes accompanied the radar team on trips to test their new blind landing system. She had a ringside seat for history in the making.

As children arrived, Millie ensured that they had quality time to spend with their busy father, who often worked around the clock on war projects. Thus began a tradition of his telling bedtime stories that continued throughout their 5 children’s childhoods. Intermingled with stories of Reddy Fox were tales of Larry’s youthful experiments with electricity, involving chewing gum, his sister Eunice, and her bedsprings. Stories about his summer adventures tide pooling at La Jolla also figured prominently. “Though we have mostly lived inland, we all think our love for the sea is thanks to Daddy’s bedtime stories,” said daughter Margy. His kids could stall the going-to-bed process by asking scientific questions, “Tell us about the giant squids, Daddy!”

Johnston was asked in post-war years whether he regretted working on the A bomb. “My answer,” Johnston told an MIT interviewer in 1991, “is that I felt very privileged to be part of an effort that promised to end the war abruptly, and which had the prospect of saving many lives, both Japanese and American.” Johnston, known for his wit and kindness to all, held this view even during heated debate over the ethics of the bomb in more recent decades.

Johnston devoted much of his retirement to improving the relationship between modern science and the Bible. A proponent of intelligent design, Johnston sought understanding of evolutionary biology from the University of Idaho’s Holly Wichman and James Foster through weekly lunchtime sessions that continued until his death. Millie and Larry treasured two trips to Israel where they worked on Biblical archeology projects and Larry helped Israeli scientists use sonar to locate potential dig sites. The Johnstons supported Christian ministries in Moscow and attended Bridge Bible Fellowship.

Johnston died of lung cancer. He is survived by his wife Mildred, and 5 children, Mary Virginia “Ginger” Johnston, Milton-Freewater, OR; Margy McClenahan (Tom) , Salt Lake City, UT; Dan Johnston (Olivia), Benicia, CA.; Lois Johnston, Spokane, WA; Karen Johnston (Barlow Buescher), Lakewood, WA; also 4 grandchildren and 2 great grandchildren, nieces and nephews.

A Memorial Service will be held Friday December 9 at 3 p.m. at the First Presbyterian Church, 405 Van Buren Street, Moscow, with a reception to follow. Memorial gifts may be sent to Bridge Bible Fellowship, Moscow, or The American Physical Society.

Quote of the day—Robert Breedlove

The majority of (real)Amer­icans agree with everything the OWS stands for and you ignore their message at your own peril. You will “get it” from their peaceful protest or you will get it through more forceful means, but you will get it.

Robert Breedlove
December 2, 2011
Comment to Gun Ad Likens Obama To Hitler, Other Dictators.
[Why are liberals so violent?

Oh yeah! Now I remember.—Joe]

Holder shouldn’t be asked to resign

The evidence is sketchy in places and testimony is changing in the Fast and Furious scandal so we don’t yet know for certain what happened. But many people, including 52 members of the House and two senators, are calling for the resignation or firing of Holder and even indictment ATF officials.

There is one nagging piece of evidence that I haven’t been hearing requests for that should, and I think must, be demanded by the investigating committees. Was operation Fast and Furious what President Obama was referring to when he said, “I just want you to know that we are working on it. We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”? If it wasn’t then what was he referring to?

Based upon the “guns in Mexico” mantra the ATF implemented a regulation requiring some firearms dealers to report multiple sales of some rifles in direct violation of U.S. law (18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(1)(A)):

…dealers shall not be required to submit to the Attorney General reports and information with respect to such records and the contents thereof, except as expressly required by this section.

The following hypothesis is thus fully supported by all the evidence I have seen:

The administration deliberately enabled and in some cases delivered firearms to Mexican drug cartels in an effort to justify subversion of U.S. law with illegal regulations imposed upon U.S. gun dealers and owners.

If this was the intent of Fast and Furious then it would appear the entire chain of command from President Obama on down knew and were responsible for the results. This isn’t resignation material.

18 USC 242:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

If Fast and Furious was “under the radar” gun control and resulted in the deaths of not just a Border Patrol agent but hundreds of Mexicans then it would appear to me that the administration doesn’t just have the shame of resignation hanging over them. They have the specter of a death sentence starting at them. The investigating committee should use that as a bargaining chip to get their full cooperation. Once all the facts have surfaced the culprits should be given a fair trial and appropriate sentences.

Violation of civil rights under the color of law must be taken very seriously. Inalienable civil rights of the individual are one of the key difference between our supposed form of government and that of a totalitarian government. If the U.S. Attorney General and/or the President of the United States were and/or are treating their positions as if this is a totalitarian society they need to be subject to extremely severe sanctions to not only to punish them for their crimes but as a deterrent for future aspiring tyrants at both the national and local level.

soldiers’ angels fundraiser and giveaway

I just donated $100 to Soldiers’ Angels as part of the fundraiser being put on by Linoge at walls of the city.

Boomershoot did fundraisers for Soldiers’ Angels in 1998, 1999, 2010, 2011 after hearing Chuck at Gun Blogger Rendezvous in 2007. Boomershooters have donated at total of over $6000 to Soldiers’ Angels and at Boomershoot 2012 will donate still more. I’m know I’m biased but I think this is a good charity.

My nephew Jason lost his right arm and the vision in his right eye while serving in Iraq and Soldiers’ Angels was a huge help to him when he was in the hospital.

My son-in-law John, Xenia’s husband, was deployed to Afghanistan a few days ago. This is his third deployment.

Please consider donating and make Linoge’s fundraiser a success.

Quote of the day—Crotalus

The U.S. is done. It’s all over but the killing and eating. I just hope we have the ‘nads to never let another government take root in this country. Governments are always corrupt. Always.

Crotalus
November 9, 2011
Comment to Theory.
[Ubu52’s comments here reminded me of this quote.

While I could find a lot to agree with this I fear that for the foreseeable future government will always be a necessary evil. Hence the best we can do is minimize the evil. We probably will not be able to eliminate it without going to a small tribal society which looks to be an even worse option.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Lyle

This is the power of victimhood in the “social justice” (Marxist) movement, and it’s why I’ve said many times that victimhood– real, genuine, beautiful, wonderful, rich and delicious victimhood, is so deeply cherished, sought after and uplifted with such passion by the left. It’s their gold and diamond currency and they mine it, mint it, wear it and show it off with a greedy, lusty fervor.

Lyle
November 30, 2011
Comment to Peterson Syndrome example.
[You don’t have to think about this very long to realize Lyle has nailed it.

The NRA says, “Refuse to be a victim” and trains people to enforce this refusal with knowledge, confidence, and, if necessary, force. The anti-gun people seek out victims, hire them, and not only enable more victims but work to force others into being victims.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John/az

When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it’s yellow

John/az
From his signature line on a The Firing Line post May 4, 2000.
[Via a link from Tamara.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Aesop

Any excuse will serve a tyrant.

Aesop
[It is also true that any excuse will serve those that enable tyrants. Here are some of the many I have come across:

  • It’s for the children.
  • No one needs one of those.
  • It’s an ASSAULT weapon!
  • It’s a collective, not an individual, right.
  • The Brady Act works. It has blocked XX million gun sales. (Never mind that no measurable increase in safety has occurred. The mere fact that sales have been blocked is proof of success.)
  • Road rage will become gun fights.
  • Assault clips can hold 30, 50, or even 100 rounds!
  • 32 rounds in just 16 seconds!
  • States and cities should be allowed to make their own laws.
  • The Federal government must do it because many states have lax laws.

It’s interesting how there are truths which appear to be universal yet people never learn.—Joe]