I thought Obama was brilliant. He’s so informed. He’s circumspect. He’s articulate. He’s thoughtful. Well, I think in my lifetime, there’s never been anything like it.
David Shuster
June 2009
[And how brilliant and thoughtful do people think he is now?—Joe]
The left needs a sacrificial lamb. So it has nonsensically turned with a fury on Obama as if he were culpable for getting through the left’s own agenda. If Democrats don’t blame the public’s anger on their once-beloved messenger, then they’re left only with their message itself. That’s something they simply can’t accept.
Victor Davis Hanson
September 14, 2011
Why liberals are giving prez the shiv
[And I’ll bet they thought the “Occupy Wall Street” protests would resonate more as well. As near as I can tell the left lacks a grasp on reality. That limits their ability to accomplish anything other than by using violence. They apparently realize that and are making what they think are the appropriate plans. But as son James said last night (paraphrasing), “Bring it on.”—Joe]
If you oppose the people’s Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms in defense of their families, lives, homes and liberty, perhaps it is you who have some explaining to do.
Kurt Hoffman
October 12, 2011
Brady Campaign offended by truth about Second Amendment
[If someone opposes a right guaranteed by the Bill of Rights I think they are past the explanation stage. Either they are ignorant and need to go back to their high school government class or they are opposed to the basis of our nation and should leave the country. They simply don’t belong here. You can’t get much more fundamental about our political underpinnings than the Bill of Rights.—Joe]
All of this is the stuff of a conspiracy theory that most of us would dismiss as so much rumor. Disturbingly, we have documentation that proves otherwise. Fast and Furious may have been the name the administration chose for this operation as a means of further curtailing our Second Amendment rights in a fast and furious manner. We the People must remain vigilant. For without the Second Amendment, the other nine could never stand.
Joan R. Neubauer
Conspiracy Theory: Fast and Furious an Attempt at Further Gun Control
October 11, 2011
[Yes. It is more and more disturbing. If this were a movie plot it would be dismissed as “too far out there”. The big questions now are, as in the movies, how and will the good guys win?—Joe]
Gov. Jerry Brown announced early Monday that he had outlawed the open carrying of handguns in public in California, a controversial practice that top law enforcement officials had denounced as dangerous.
Combined with the near impossibility of getting a concealed carry license in most of California this will, almost for certain, go to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The fact that I have no remedy for all the sorrows of the world is no reason for my accepting yours. It simply supports the strong probability that yours is a fake.
Henry Louis Mencken
Minority Report, H. L. Mencken’s Notebooks [78], 1956
[I’ve seen this in engineering as well as politics. Someone who doesn’t really understand the problem has great enthusiasm for a simple solution that on the surface is very appealing. This enthusiasm and confidence can sometimes be very difficult to combat because it can take a great deal of effort to educate the people advocating the solution on the error of their ways. And in fact it may be impossible to educate them because they are too stupid to understand. Gun control is one such example.
This brings us to another Mencken quote, “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.”
I have no idea how to deal with this in politics. I have enough trouble with it in engineering where most of the people are rational and reasonably smart. This is part of the reason that government powers should be severely constrained. Political decisions are frequently very complex issues with incomplete data sets. Even if you had rational people involved, which you frequently don’t, and they had the general populace’s best interests at heart, which they almost never do, getting a consensus on the solution that best fits the available data is nearly impossible. In politics data, if present, is cherry picked. Proper data analysis is completely absent.
It is far better to let the free market provide the “remedy for all the sorrows of the world” because the solutions attempted will be varied. The non-solutions will quickly end up in the dustbin. The partial solutions will be tweaked and retried. The true solutions will dominate and another “sorrow of the world” will be reduced or eliminated.—Joe]
The most effective means of fighting crime in the United States is to outlaw the possession of any type of firearm by the civilian populace.
Janet Reno
U.S. Attorney General during the Clinton administration
1991
[Ms. Reno was mistaken. Had such a law been passed there would have been a great deal more “crime” than she would have imagined or been able to handle.—Joe]
Feldman is trying to organize a politically moderate gun owners’ association as an alternative to the NRA. So far, he has not had much luck with that project.
Paul M. Barrett
Glock: The Rise of America’s Gun page 267.
[Richard Feldman,Esq. doesn’t have anything on his web site about trying to do this but Barrett knows him personally and perhaps has inside knowledge that I am not privy to. That aside, this would appear to be the worst error I found in the book. I have a lot of good things to say about the book and will do so in another post. I really liked the book so don’t let my disagreement with Barrett about the quote above adversely color your thoughts about the book. That would be very unfair.
The error in the quote above is as follows: I know many people who have left the NRA and having nothing good to say about the organization. All of them left because the NRA was too “moderate”. They felt the NRA compromised when they shouldn’t have. The anti-gun groups try to paint the NRA as extremist but that is certainly not the viewpoint from the majority of gun owners that I know. That Feldman hasn’t “had much luck with that project” would indicate to me that there may be a problem with his vision. Admittedly the “market” for political gun organizations is a bit crowded and it is always difficult to break into a new market even if you do have a lot of money and/or an exceptional product. My impression is that Feldman has neither. The “product” Feldman is selling, if he is in fact trying to do this, is not going to find a very large market. The people that yearn for a more “moderate” NRA either advocate against guns and gun owners or don’t care about the issue. Neither of which would join such an organization.
Barrett has done a very good job with this book. He has done a lot of research and he accurately reports on many subtle points that I would not have expected him to have found. I’m a little surprised he didn’t realize the statement above does not match the reality as I know it. Perhaps he does recognize it as an error on Feldman’s part but he didn’t comment on it beyond the “not had much luck” quip.
I found similar things in the book on other topics. He has all the facts right and then fails to draw the obvious conclusion or sometimes a jarringly different conclusion from what seems obvious to me. But these are mostly little things. I really liked the book and will report about it at length very soon.—Joe]
Socialism is reaping the usual results in Greece:
Airliners will be grounded, trains halted and tax offices shut when Greek state workers strike against austerity measures on Wednesday, defying a plea by the government to rally behind its effort to fend off national bankruptcy.
Most probably don’t really understand what is happening. They think they can just demand the government hire people and people will have jobs. What their simple model doesn’t take into account is that they are no different than looters with the government doing the actual theft. The one level of indirection and the facade of respectability allows them to believe they are not engaged in immoral behavior.
The truth is that while economic laws are less well understood and probably more subtle than the laws of physics they are no less certain. There’s no such thing as a free lunch. They have been looting the people who produce for so long the producers have either left the country, given up, or have simply run out of wealth to loot.
I’ve often wondered what it looks like when those who know no life outside of looting run out of places to loot. We sort of saw what happened in the USSR in the ‘80s but that was before the Internet and they were a much more closed society than Greece.
Popcorn anyone?
…[P]olitically motivated entities like the Brady Campaign to Prevent Handgun (formally Handgun Control, Inc.), the oddly named Violence Policy Center, and Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Handguns rely on discredited studies that were rejected elsewhere, or by pulling numbers out of thin air to craft an argument while they attempt to smugly and piously stand in the way of continuing reforms. Gun control was a failure. Gun control is dead. It’s time to bury it once and for all.
Richard Samuel Najjar
October 1, 2011
Comment to Cause and effect or coincidence? Gun control scrapped …crime plummets
[The only nit I have to pick with this is I wouldn’t say gun control is dead. As long as there exists an anti-gun organization with fulltime staff or an electable politician that supports gun control we have work to do.—Joe]
I come from a family of liberals. We believe that people that don’t work should live better lives than those that do.
Kelsey Leal
October 3, 2011
[Kelsey is my soon to be daughter-in-law.
This was in response to me giving her a bit of a hard time about not even recognizing the name of the Cato Institute. When I explained it was a Libertarian think tank part of her response was the quote above. It achieve the desired results. I was speechless.
She says she was joking—mostly.—Joe]
There are rumors the ATF is about to be thrown under the bus. Although there are people calling this rumor “a bombshell” (via Say Uncle and son-in-law John) it isn’t really all that new (from almost three months ago):
The unfolding scandal over a gunrunning investigation allegedly botched by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives could do what years of criticism of the long-beleaguered agency never quite accomplished — result in its demise.
People on both sides of the issue commented on it:
“I think something like that is likely to happen,” said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
…
Christopher Cox, legislative director for the NRA, the agency’s longtime nemesis, also said arguments for shuttering or breaking up ATF are building.
“Their criminal investigation tactics are going a long way to proving that point,” Cox said. “If they cease to be an effective law enforcement organization, they will cease to be legitimate, and the calls for restructuring or abolishing of ATF are going to become more and more valid.”
Sebastian says, Careful What You Wish For and he has some good points. The concern that the FBI has credibility and respect the ATF doesn’t and we would rather have a money starved easily demonized bunch of screw ups instead of the FBI, the Secret Service, or the U.S. Marshalls enforcing the regulations has been the whisper from behind the scenes since as least the Regan years when the first serious thoughts of disbanding them came up.
Things have changed with the FBI since the 1980’s. Remember Ruby Ridge and Waco? The ATF created the messes but it was during the FBI “cleanup” that the FBI shot the woman holding the baby and burned down the church with the women and children in it. The FBI has it’s own public relations issues to be concerned about.
I’ll leave making a recommendation on this specific topic at this specific time to others more politically savvy but if we are to make progress trimming down the size and scope of government agencies need to start disappearing. Why is now not as good a time as any to get rid of the ATF? The ATF is heavily involved in a major scandal, the Heller and McDonald decisions imply that many of their duties are constitutionally suspect if not right illegal. Because they are so weak this might be the time to get rid of them simply because it is politically possible.
If now is the time then to “avoid overloading the FBI” with either new tasks and/or the training of large numbers of new personal Congress should simultaneously cut back on a lot of the obsolete laws. Here is my list of gun laws that could be put on the chopping block along with the ATF:
I’m sure there are lots of other nonsensical laws and regulations that could be cut at the same time which our opponents would be hard pressed to defend. And with all the grief the ATF has had because of their “mistakes” perhaps the agencies that take on the remaining functions will “play nice” compared to the ATF.
If we could ban the ATF and “ease the burden” on the FBI at the same time would it be worth taking the risks associated with having the remaining ATF functions divided up among other agencies? I’m thinking it might be.
As part of Ry’s quest to hold a world record we need a name for a game. The rules for the game haven’t been finalized but it will probably be something like Steel Challenge only using one time use reactive targets (Boomerite). You are timed as you shoot the five to ten targets (not sure yet) and the fastest time wins.
We have tentative plans to use this game as a fundraiser for pro-gun (duh!) political lobbying groups at “Legislative Shoots”. The first official event is tentatively planned for January or February of 2012 but I expect we will be doing some dry runs prior to that to work out the bugs and give Ry his chance at a world record. This will also give us a chance to make videos and put together promotional material.
I expect the range will be something on the order of 15 to 20 yards and there will be very few different courses of fire. Perhaps even just one course of fire. There will be no direct “power factor” requirements. If the boomers don’t go off then you didn’t bring enough gun. This typically means participants will use a centerfire rifle but with the right ammo and caliber some centerfire pistols and rimfire rifles may work.
I expect we will have the following classes of firearms:
Here are the candidates so far:
What are your suggestions for a name? The prize will be the fame and fortune (one free entry into the next Zoom Boom event you participate in). The winner will be chosen by the political lobbyist who schedules the first event.
As a side note I have to wonder at the participation level of an event like this versus the events the Brady Campaign put on where they try to find people to lay on the ground and pretend to be dead for a few minutes.
Isn’t the smallest form of government a dictatorship? Is that really what Libertarians crave?
Ubu52
September 29, 2011
Comment to The Mind of the Left.
[I suppose it could be very ignorant question. After all, even if you were to grant that a libertarian dictatorship is technically possible the smallest form government would be no government at all or anarchy.
But I think I smell a troll.—Joe]
That’s Left-Speak for “a People’s [communist] Revolution”. Cornel West wrote an article for the NYT to describe it. “Martin Luther King Jr. Would Want a Revolution…”
Often has the left attached itself to good causes, co-opting them and bending them into radicalized socialist movements.
Have you heard much about the protests on Wall Street? Me neither. Here is Cornel West leading a group of drones in one of those protests. Listen carefully. He wants an “American Fall” to coincide with the recent Arab Spring. The Belt-way left is in a pickle. The base was fired up and ready to go, but they didn’t get their revolution. They feel it’s time to pounce. They’ve taken off the masks, taken to the streets, and now they’re feeling let down. Wait ’till they’ve simmered and seethed for another year and then see their hopes and dreams, their radical democratic vision, slip away. That could get ugly.
This is why we aren’t supposed to feed the bears in the national parks. You give them a little bit of socialism here and there, and before you know it they’re ripping the doors off your car trying to eat your children. Then you’re forced to shoot them. It’s inhumane. DON’T FEED THE SOCIALISTS! The Republicans have been happily feeding socialists for generations, trying to prove their own good intentions, the fools;
“Look! Aren’t they cute? And that one has some little cubs! Awww! I’ll be nice and give them my cold french fries, so they don’t go away unhappy…”
I think we should convince some park rangers to have words with the GOP leadership.
You can’t make Socialists out of individualists — children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming, where everyone is interdependent.
John Dewey
From Accuracy In Media
[Ahhhh… yes. The collective society. The good of the collective is more important than the good of the individual. The individual must not think for themselves. Except of course the dear, enlightened, leaders who decide what is best for the collective and just happen to live lives of luxury.
What the “intellectuals” need to understand, if history has any lessons to be learned on this topic, is that the “intellectuals” are the first to get the bullet in the back of the neck and occupy the mass graves in the woods. Look at what Stalin, Pol Pot, and communist China did.
It may be that it “won’t happen here”. It may be the government of the collective will put the “intellectuals” in positions of power and that when the shooting starts it will be individualists who first occupy the mass graves. But when the shooting stops it will be because the individualists ran out of collectivist “intellectuals” as targets. Not because we ran out of ammo or individuals.—Joe]
North Carolina Democrat Governor Beverly Perdue gave us a rare moment of honesty as she called for a suspension of elections in order to Get Things Done.
Hat tip to the guy filling in for Michael Savage today.
This confirms, once again, my definition of “Divisiveness” in the language of the left– “Speaking ill of or disagreeing with socialists or socialism.” She didn’t use the “D” word, but used “partisan bickering” instead, which is the same thing. When they win an election, it is the beauty of democracy in action– the will of the people expressing itself in the best of ways. When they lose, democracy itself is under attack. Things can’t get done due to political posturing and gridlock, the American People are throwing a temper tantrum, etc., etc.
The assumption is always the same with communists– the stupid little people don’t know what’s good for them. They don’t appreciate all the great things we smarter and better people could do if only they’d stop asserting their will and submit to ours. In its naked form, it is a cult of mass destruction.
The mindset is nothing new of course. What’s unique is the blatant honesty in Governor Perdue’s statement. It’s very, very rare for a socialist to say something so direct in public in an official capacity They very much love hiding in complexity and have said exactly so. This only shows us that they’re beginning to feel comfortable, and that tells us something. It means things are getting more dangerous, but I suppose that anyone who’s been paying attention already knew that.
We’re now being told it was all a little joke. Reading the quote I don’t see it as a joke. I see it as a trial balloon. Leftists can get away with that.
Not only are you stripping the right of the local municipalities to protect safety but you’re also asking them to adhere to gun laws at the state level that don’t even exist.
Brian Malte
Director of mobilization for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
September 27, 2011
Lawyer keeps local gun laws in his sights—Lawsuits against Evansville and Hammond demand communities comply with state measure
[“Protect safety”? “Adhere to gun laws that don’t exit”? What in the world does that even mean?
I suppose it’s possible the reporter had the crap for brains and messed up the quote but I doubt it because the quotes from the other people in the article weren’t just word salads. It could have been deliberate maliciousness by the reporter but usually the bias is against gun owners.
It’s true that we are sometimes our worst enemy but it may be more so for our opponents. We don’t always act as a team and give conflicting messages to the public and the politicians. We have people that sometimes say things that which, while true, can be exploited by our opponents. They have crap for brains and it shows.—Joe]
I’m determined because there’s too much at stake. The alternative I think is an approach to government that would fundamentally cripple America in meeting the challenges of the 21st Century and that’s not the kind of society that I want to bequeath to Malia and Sasha, and your children and your grandchildren.
President Obama
What President Obama saying to his donors
September 25, 2011
[What President Obama isn’t directly saying is that the U.S. Constitution is crippling his vision of a utopian society.
And while I say that’s a good thing the battle has mostly been lost. I fear the majority of people in this country will have to learn the lessons of socialism and perhaps even communism for themselves.
—Joe]
It leaves me somewhat dumbfounded in a way, and yet it’s thoroughly normal and predictable. What leaves me dumbfounded is that fact that it is so normal and predictable.
“Where’s Waldo” was one title that occurred to me, but there is no Waldo.
I have a challenge for you. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to find one thing that Rick Perry actually said in this ad;
Just one meaningful statement– one example of what he’s done to further some goal or other in the past, one guiding principle, one thing that would suggest what he actually wants to do as president. Anything. I only watched it twice, but I don’t think you can do it. Right now as far as I can tell, this ad is recycled from an old Obama ad. As I said in comments over on Uncle’s blog, it was probably produced by the same people, who did Bush’s and Clinton’s ads.
And yet there are people who really love this ad, and that is the rub. Are we as a society capable of thinking critically anymore, or is it simply over and done for us?
We need to able to watch something like this, looking, probing, asking ourselves; “Where’s the meaning. Where’s the substance? What’s actually being said here? Anything?” It should be automatic – you’re waiting for something to be said.
Now I don’t want to hear about Perry. For all I know he’s the greatest defender of liberty the world has ever seen, but if so he would tell us in his very own words. However, there is nothing here that would tell us one way or the other, and the fact that he can’t actually say something in his own ad already tells me he’s not my man. Don’t defend him. If he were the leader we need, he would never allow an ad like this to be produced in his name. If he comes out tomorrow and tells us it was done against his wishes, and that those responsible for it have been fired, I might change my mind, but not before. When ads like this one are soundly ridiculed in the public arena, by all sides, that’s when I’ll know we’ve made progress, yet we are nowhere near that now.
He did say that the greatest deeds are reserved for future generations, but like all the other statements, that one has no substance. No indication of what he thinks is a great deed, but the strangest part about that statement is that it makes no reference to current generations. What about us? Why can’t we be doing any of the greatest deeds? Why are they reserved for someone else, and who is in charge of reserving deeds these days, and why? Who appointed this new “Deed Tsar”? See; you can go crazy trying to infer meaning where there is none.