Category Archives: Politics

Quote of the day—Sen. Charles Schumer

Posted on by

America is going to get a lot less safe.

…

are not only scary, they’re outright dangerous in the way they can mimic the look and the capacity of a hardened, fully semiautomatic weapon.

Sen. Charles Schumer
D-N.Y.
July 22, 2018
Schumer Goes Full Semi-automatic
[NRA-ILA comments:

Gun owners often share a laugh over what appears to be the profound ignorance of much of the anti-gun community. However, gun rights supporters must also be aware that some of these absurd moments might just be attempts to mislead the less informed. Understanding this, gun owners must work to better educate the public and dispel the lies our opponents traffic in.

This sort of thing is to be expected. Attention to detail and the truth would get in the way of his evil agenda. No need to quibble with him. Just do your best to keep him as far from power as you can.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Andrew Whitehead, Landon Schnabel and Samuel Perry

Posted on by

In our newly published and freely available study, the connection between Christian nationalism and gun control attitudes proves stronger than we expected. It turns out that how intensely someone adheres to Christian nationalism is one of the strongest predictors of whether someone supports gun control. One’s political party, religiosity, gender, education or age doesn’t matter.

You could be a mainline Protestant Democratic woman or a highly educated politically liberal man — the more you line up with Christian nationalism, the less likely you are to support gun control.

Andrew Whitehead, Landon Schnabel and Samuel Perry
July 25, 2018
Why some Christians don’t believe in gun control: They think God handed down the Second Amendment
[Interesting observation. But probably not that surprising when you know their definition of Christian nationalism:

Americans who subscribe to Christian nationalism believe that America has always been ― and should always be ― distinctively Christian in its national identity, sacred symbols and public policies. What’s more, for adherents to this ideology, America’s historic statements about human liberties (e.g., the First and Second Amendments) are imbued with sacred, literal and absolute meaning.

If I understand this correctly they believe a higher power, the Christian God, created our nation and constitution. And, I would imagine, therefore claim that God’s creation must be in His likeness—i.e. perfection. Any utility argument, or even a principled argument, that does not address the creation of the U.S. Constitution by a perfect being is pointless.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Cam Edwards

Posted on by

That pile of cash is the Venezuelan equivalent of one US dollar. Behold the power of socialism.

ThePowerOfSocialism

Cam Edwards @CamEdwards
Tweeted on July 23, 2018
[The destructive power of socialism is absolutely amazing. No other political system has been so well tested and proven again and again to be such a threat to property and lives. Only an “intellectual”, completely out of touch with reality, could honestly advocate it as an improvement in the living conditions for the majority of the people.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Kurt Schlichter

Posted on by

Right now, social justice fascism is just too valuable to them to just abandon. It works. It lets those who rightfully would have no power exploit the stupid and weak elite to exercise unearned authority. These goose-stepping aspiring Red Guards got a taste of power and they like it. And they are bad people. They have to be stopped, here and now.

Kurt Schlichter
July 23, 2018
Conservatives Reject Unilateral Disarmament In The Face Of Liberal Social Fascism
[He makes some very good points. There days when I think risking riots and civil war by standing up to the fascists isn’t worth it. Perhaps we should just let them throw their tantrums and don’t make a big deal about it.

No. Compliance with insane demands just encourages more insanity.

At the class this last weekend Greg make what I thought was great point that I have mentioned several times, expressed in different words, by my counselor. Greg expressed it more succinctly:

Have you ever noticed that crazy people will act only as crazy as you let them be?

We have to set boundaries and enforce them. Schlichter drew a line in the sand. I’m willing to enforce it. Are you?—Joe]

Quote of the day—Larry Correia

Posted on by

If you guys come up with a plan to dissolve this marriage through an amicable divorce rather than a murder-suicide, I’m all in.

Larry Correia
July 11, 2018
Facebook post regarding the political left advocating for a civil war.
[I’d give serious consideration to a “divorce” but as of now I’m not seeing the amicable path.—Joe]

Washington State I-1639

Posted on by

I-1639 is almost for certain going to be on the Washington State ballot this fall. This draconian initiative defines any semi-auto rifle as an “semi-auto assault rifle”. This includes those with tubular magazines firing .22 LR ammunition.

Furthermore:

  • Requiring a training, to be renewed every five years, for purchasing any semiautomatic rifle
  • Requiring all semiautomatic rifle purchases to be approved by local law enforcement authority
  • Applying the same process for purchases of all semiautomatic rifles as it currently exists for handguns – but without the exception for people with concealed pistol license and with a mandatory 10 day waiting period
  • Amending that paperwork to state that owning guns is a danger to the purchaser
  • Establishing a fee, up to $25 to fund all of the above
  • Banning sales of semiautomatic rifles to out-of state residents
  • Establishing the minimum age of 21 for purchasing semiautomatic rifles
  • Banning possession of semiautomatic firearms for people under 21 outside their property boundaries

Oleg has a blog post and image for us:

No_to_I1639_0929web

Just say no to I-1639 and those who sponsor it.

Quote of the day—Windy Wilson

Posted on by

The ability of people to rationalize their way to slavery is one of the mysteries of psychiatry.

Windy Wilson
July 3, 2018
Comment to Quote of the day—Jim Mastro
[My hypothesis is that it has to do with the failure of socialism/communism to scale up from the tribe level to larger populations. These dysfunctional political systems “feel right” in a lot of ways. This probably was extremely useful in evolution and increased the probability of successful tribes. But when those feelings are acted upon at a level where evil tyrants can retain power bad things happen and many people don’t, or can’t, understand why.—Joe]

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by

Via Reddit:

LeftistsShouldDisarm

While this is a certain amount of logic to this line of reasoning I suspect leftists believed they would take over the government in this country without a violent revolution. And, of course, guns in the hands of their political enemies would be a very bad thing when they started the purges.

Now, I suspect they are a bit conflicted.

Quote of the day—Hamilton Nolan

Posted on by

Read a f****** history book. Read a recent history book. The U.S. had thousands of domestic bombings per year in the early 1970s. This is what happens when citizens decide en masse that their political system is corrupt, racist, and unresponsive.

‘The people out of power have only just begun to flex their dissatisfaction. The day will come, sooner that you all think, when Trump administration officials will look back fondly on the time when all they had to worry about was getting hollered at at a Mexican restaurant.

Hamilton Nolan
June 25, 2018
This Is Just the Beginning
[There may be interesting times ahead. I was asked last Monday if I thought there would be a civil war in our country soon. I told them, “No. At least not one like the previous one with two or more militaries and visible government support on each side.”

However, Jim Goad does point out:

Third of Americans see a new US Civil War likely soon. As it stands currently: North 1, South 0. https://t.co/v8EtMgxgTz

In the following thread Jordenius‏ @Jordenius offered a correction of:

Republicans 1, Democrats 0.

Which, for some reason, in my mind, made it more real and likely to occur.

But when I think about it I still don’t think it will be military v. military. It will be left wing terrorists against the existing governments and hapless individuals caught in the middle. Which means the left wing terrorists will not have broad public support and will for the most part lose. It might play out similar to how it did in the 1970s.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Brian Keith

Posted on by

The true diversity test

Liberals love to talk about diversity.

Churches in Seattle are festooned with “love your Muslim neighbor” signs.

But the real test of diversity isn’t whether you can break bread with someone who worships differently than you.

The real test is if you can be civil, be courteous, be inviting… to gun owners.

Consider this: all gun owners, in the minds of liberals, are responsible for all mass shootings.

Remember, a bombing or knife attack is the responsibility of the person, but attacks with guns are the responsibility of the inanimate object and all people who have those inanimate objects are at risk of engaging in the same criminal behavior.

This is the liberal mentality of, “I wouldn’t trust myself with a gun because I might go shoot someone the first time I got angry!”

To most readers here who concealed carry on a regular basis that sounds absurd, but I promise you it is a devout belief among Seattle liberals.

They believe that having a gun makes you into a crazy person who murders people.
Which book your worship out of, or if you pray with your hands in front of you or on the ground- that is small potatoes compared to having a device that instantly makes you a murderous psychopath.

And so the true diversity test is not whether you would shake a Muslim’s hand, or eat dinner with someone of a different skin color, or even a different sexuality. These kinds of diversity are officially encouraged, condoned, and safe.

The true diversity test is- would you have coffee with a gun owner?

With someone who lives on the responsibility plane of “I keep myself, my family, and my community safe from violence” and relies on police as the second line of defense?

My experience among liberals tells me, mostly not.

And I think it’s not just the gun- it’s the self-reliance that’s to blame.

Apart from my neighbors, I don’t accept that violence just happens randomly and I can do nothing to stop it.

I don’t wait meekly while evil people do evil things.

And in Seattle, that separates me from my community.

That stigmatizes me.

If I ever let it be known.

Check out the Pink Pistols experience in the Pride Parade. Flagrantly gay? Two thumbs up. Want to talk about defending yourself? We’ll follow you around and shout you down so everyone knows you aren’t welcome here.

I imagine inviting my more liberal friends to coffee and letting them know I’ll be armed. Or revealing during coffee that I’m carrying.

I don’t have the courage.

I don’t want the scene.

I can’t bear to lose yet more friends because I believe life is worth defending and I actually prepare to live that belief.

But you, dear reader of Joe’s blog- perhaps your liberal friends are different?

Perhaps you could invite them to a social situation where they explicitly know you’ll be armed?

I’ll love to hear the results of your True Diversity Test in the comments below.

Brian Keith
June 25, 2018
Via email. Slightly edited with permission.
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Tiffany Johnson

Posted on by

One: I really wish my pro-gun friends would stop calling people “libtards.” Two: I really wish my gun-averse friends would stop calling people “Nazis.” #NotHelping. That is all.

Tiffany Johnson
June 24, 2018
Please Just Stop
[I have a strong inclination to agree with this. I used to call certain groups derogatory names and probably still do at times. But I try to avoid the name calling and talk about factual stuff and tendency instead. I still use insulting terms, such as having “crap for brains” for individuals if I think they deserve it on a particular issue or point.

The reason I think it doesn’t help is because it alienates people who might be aligned with you on one or more topics. For example, someone might identify as a liberal because of their strong support for equal rights and access to legal abortion. They might also think gun ownership is important but is not what they mostly identify with. Getting them to help teach an introductory gun class is going to be a lot easier if you haven’t, even indirectly, called them a “libtard”.—Joe]

Quote of the day—ACLU

Posted on by

The ACLU generally will not represent protesters who seek to march while armed.  It is important that this content-neutral rule be applied without regard to a speaker’s political views.  It should also apply whether or not state law permits or prohibits the carrying of weapons in a protest.  To this end, and consistent with time and resource constraints (including assistance from the national office to affiliates and vice versa), we should exercise due diligence in assessing whether the potential client seeks to march while armed.  If there is reason to believe that the clients do so intend, and we are unable to satisfy ourselves that they will not do so, we should be reluctant to accept representation.

ACLU Case Selection Guidelines: Conflicts Between Competing Values or Priorities
2018
[H/T to Chet in the comments.

See also: Memo: ACLU Will Weigh ‘Effect on Marginalized Communities’ in Free-Speech Cases

Apparently some speakers are more protected than others. Neo Nazis marching down the streets of Jewish residents should be protected. Gun owners advocating for the right of Jewish residents to have the ability to defend themselves should not be protected.

Okay, that makes things perfectly clear for me. Whatever “principles” the ACLU claims to have do not have a significant overlap with mine.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Phil Watson

Posted on by

After further examining and scrutiny of printed text on an official I-1639 petition it is apparent that language designated to be changed or removed is not “lined out,” nor are proposed new statutory additions underlined as they appear in the version submitted to the state and published on the Secretary of State’s website.

If petitions being circulated are not “true and correct” it is agreed that we must challenge these petitions and have them legally invalidated.

Since the outset of I-1639, our campaign has raised questions about not just the unethical nature of the initiative and its backers, but also the unethical gamesmanship of the public policy process.

Phil Watson
Committee Chairman
Save Our Security | NO on I-1639
https://saveoursecurity.net
[Regarding a petition intended to be put before Washington State voters this fall.

Via email June 22, 2018.

And from here:

I-1639Deception0

I-1639Deception1

They have to lie to win. Lying has become a part of their nature. I suspect they literally cannot resist the urge to lie. These are evil people committing evil against the people of this state. The signature gathers, the signers of the initiative, and especially the people financing this fraud are conspiring to infringe the rights of Washington State citizens and should be prosecuted.

And via email from Brian Keith:

I-1639Deception2

Keith also said:

The sign on the right says “protect kids from guns.”

This is at Trader Joe’s in Seattle.

So we have a few lies here:

A 20 year old is a “kid”

A law can protect a kid from violence

A 18 year old would only be hurt by owning a gun, and wouldn’t be defending themselves

18-20 year olds are actually attacked with “assault weapons” to a significantly significant degree

People who serve in the military aren’t competent to possess firearms in their daily life

The list goes on…

So, crap for brains, or knows they are lying and just wants power at any cost?

Does it matter?

Brian Keith

Don’t sign this petition.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Quinn Norton

Posted on by

Facebook and Google seem very powerful, but they live about a week from total ruin all the time. They know the cost of leaving social networks individually is high, but en masse, becomes next to nothing. Windows could be replaced with something better written. The US government would fall to a general revolt in a matter of days. It wouldn’t take a total defection or a general revolt to change everything, because corporations and governments would rather bend to demands than die. These entities do everything they can get away with — but we’ve forgotten that we’re the ones that are letting them get away with things.

Quinn Norton
May 20, 2014
Everything Is Broken
[This appears to be true. I suspect part of it is because most people want to belong to a social group. They want to be “normal” and liked and “supported”. If you take someone out of their social support group they loose their confidence. Making someone an outcast, for many people, is a terrible punishment. “Public opinion” matters because we evolved in an environment where shared values and group support gave us an advantage. Those shared values could contain some great falsities—a rain dance doesn’t change the weather, sacrificing a young girl to a “volcano god” doesn’t appease it, and the Final Solution to the “Jewish problem” didn’t make the world a better place. But a common belief that they could change the unchangeable and improve society by murdering millions probably improved morale, gave them a sense of accomplishment, and increased the productivity of the group.

Belonging to “the tribe” is important at a very deep level. This knowledge gives us power to take down powerful forces. But to be effective you can’t just make large numbers of people outcasts. You have to replace their existing “tribe” with another tribe. Religious cults recruit social outcasts and fulfill this basic need and they will believe the craziest things. Democrats recruit groups of people that believe such crazy things as a people can tax their way to prosperity, the government can control prices with no ill effects, or people and even states cannot afford health insurance but taxing people and filtering the money through the federal government will result in plenty of money. This coalition works and is powerful despite the crazy beliefs for the same reason the rain dancing and sacrificing to the volcano gods work. We can’t just mock them and make them outcasts. They will further insolate themselves from the truth.

I appears to me that all political parties have their share of crazy beliefs and do their share of rain dancing, appeasing non-existent gods, and murdering innocent people. Don’t align yourself with political parties and leaders any more than you have to. Align yourself with the truth and work to make social outcasts of those who promote falsity. Yes, I know truth is very hard to discern but as long as you don’t get emotionally involved with the answers you find along the way you can work your way closer with very little backsliding.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Oleg Volk

Posted on by

In going after rifles, prohibitionists are more concerned about politically significant firepower than they are about crime. The authoritarians aren’t comfortable with constituents who don’t need state services, however unwanted those “services” may be. This is why shotguns with short effective range remained legal in many countries where rifles were banned from private ownership.

Oleg Volk
February 26, 2018
Rifles as canaries in the coal mine.
[I interpret “politically significant firepower” as meaning significant firepower to affect the balance of power between the state and the people.

This is a profound point. By attacking the ownership of rifles, involved in a such a small portion of the violent crime, anti-gun people are admitting it is not crime they are interested in reducing. It must be something else which motivates this action. The obvious answer is they want people less able to resist a powerful government.

Let that sink in for a while and then take the appropriate action.—Joe]

Quote of the day—John Robb

Posted on by

These networks don’t rely on government bureaucracies to coerce people.   They coerce bureaucracies.

Moreover, they are more effective than bureaucracies in the elements of power that matter.

They are capable of spying on more people than the East German secret police and they can stifle free speech without recourse to a gulag. 

They don’t have any need for state produced propaganda or the media to control the narrative.  They can produce a blinding blizzard of spin that can overwhelm official narratives.

John Robb
May 24, 2018
21st Century Authoritarianism
[There seems to be a fair amount of support for this hypothesis.—Joe]

Democrats can’t get their message out

Posted on by

Interesting perspective:

Democrats looking to make good in November have a hard row to hoe, what with a booming economy, low unemployment, rising paychecks, and President Trump’s increasing foreign policy successes. They might get a foothold with the far left if they could talk about free college tuition, gun control, or opening U.S. borders, but they cannot get a word in edgewise with the media. They are only talking about on one thing: Trump’s supposed collusion with Russia.

It’s true that I have heard even less substance than usual from the Democrats. And what does come out seems to be random crazy talk.

After the November 2016 election the media cranked the crazy up to 11 and it still hasn’t come back down a year and a half later. But is the media really preventing a Democrat message getting through? Or is it that the entire political left is, in some sort of late stage insanity, frothing at the mouth and howling at the moon with Trump poking them with a virtual stick?

Quote of the day—Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Posted on by

Liberal feminists pick and choose which types of violence against women are worthy of this studiously nonpartisan approach. For example, female genital mutilation, forced marriage and honor violence seem not to be considered egregious enough to be taken up by the broader women’s movement. Instead, these barbaric violations of human rights don’t make it onto progressives’ radar. Rather, they’re excused or ignored by feminists because the perpetrators inflicting the violence tend to have brown skin.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali
May 24, 2018
The anti-woman violence feminists are afraid to confront
[I don’t think it is fear.

Progressive feminists also are very anti-gun. A woman who owns and knows how to shoot a gun has become empowered to such a level that in a physical confrontation she is virtually equal to thugs twice her size.

Here we have two very clear examples of where progressive feminists have deliberately made choices to increase the number and severity of the female victims. There can only be one conclusion. For whatever sick reason or messed up emotional decision making process they want more victims.

I think it is some sort of mental illness in which victimhood equates, in their sick minds, to status and/or power.

Give them the gateway drug to freedom, healthy minds, and true equality. Teach them to shoot.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Korwin

Posted on by

When it comes to gun policy, the political left is harming America, delaying rational programs, and flatly denying the public’s rights. Denying civil rights always has bad consequences, as we saw here.

Alan Korwin
May 21, 2018
Liberals Must Step Back for School Safety
[School shootings are one of the most effective tools in the political left’s toolkit for denying people their right to keep and bear arms. They will not let us put a stop to them no matter how many children’s lives it costs.—Joe]

The world according to the left

Posted on by

Via a tweet from Far Left Watch‏ @FarLeftWatch

TheWorldAccordingToTheLeft

I find it very telling the left resorts to lies of such a grand scale in hopes of achieving their agenda. The truth is not only insufficient. It is counterproductive to their goals.

From US Office of Strategic Services in describing Hitler’s psychological profile:

His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.

Hitler would be proud of the lessons our political left have learned from him.