Category Archives: Politics

Quote of the day—Ron Paul

Posted on by


My hope is that the recent hearing will further expose the ATF’s and Attorney General Eric Holder’s assaults on law-abiding gun owners, and more people will start questioning the need for unconstitutional agencies like the ATF that exist solely to infringe on American citizens’ God-given right to keep and bear arms.


Ron Paul
June 21, 2011
Rep. Ron Paul slams Obama over gun scandal, Second Amendment
[This is a little weak. The words “right to keep and bear arms” should be replaced with “rights”.


At least that would be a good start. Calls for tar and feathers would gain further support from me.—Joe]

Idaho Senator Arrested

Posted on by

Seems he got drunk and took someone else’s vehicle out for a joyride, “looking for The Promised Land”.  That would be an unsuccessful joyride, I’d expect.  I guess if he’d driven his own vehicle into, say, a river and killed his date, he’d be OK.  As it is, he’ll probably be fired.  I wonder if he keeps his pension after this.

Project ‘Fast And Furious Gun Restrictions’

Posted on by

The more I see on this scandal with the BATFE, the more it stinks.  Here are several issues I have, in no particular order.  To me they’re obvious quirks in the story that aren’t being discussed.  If someone knows of these being brought up and addressed, please do share;


The Old Media are actually covering this to some extent.  They don’t cover anything unless it in some way promotes the leftist cause.  They’re actually being critical of the BATFE, but wait.  The “problem” is being spun as one of too few restrictions.  BATFE is bad, not because they’re idiots or self-serving thugs looking for more funding, or outright criminals or tyrants, but because they didn’t stop gun purchases.  Keep an eye on this.


Very large purchases of guns were supposedly “allowed” to take place.  We’re being asked to believe that Mexican criminals purchased up to dozens of guns at a time, on several occasions.  First; if these were real straw purchases wherein there was a genuine worry about secrecy, they’d take place in dibs and dabs, so as not to attract attention.  Second; why would powerful Mexican cartels with international influence be interested in paying hundreds of dollars more, per gun, in the U.S. compared to getting them at global street prices?  Even the cartels would know about our background check system at gun stores, yet these purchases supposedly took place at gun dealerships, where they would know that such large purchases would attract immediate attention.  But they did it anyway?  Too many stinky points.  I say the purchases were engineered, either by, or in close cooperation with, BATFE, and not simply “allowed”, as we’re being asked to believe.


We’re told that hundreds of these guns were found at crime scenes (I think I heard the number 800 dropped the other night).  What?  Really?  Hundreds?  That’s an awful lot of clumsy, absent-minded, criminals, isn’t it?  Leaving their guns, so painstakingly straw-purchased at inflated prices at U.S. retail dealerships, behind at crime scenes to be found in very short order by our super heroes?  Stinky, stinky, stinky.


A big government operation, not to shut down Mexican cartels, not to investigate corruption in Mexico that’s threatening people in the U.S., not to revisit the effects of our War On Drugs, but instead to draw attention to how our evil gun rights in the U.S. lead to death and destruction in other countries.


These issues aren’t being brought up in the press or by the Congressional “investigations”.  Nope.  Instead it’s all about; “You bastards! Why didn’t you guys stop gun sales?”  All this after Obama promised anti gun rights groups he’d be doing something for them “…under the radar“.


I think the indignation we’re hearing from the press and from Congress is all feigned.  Good Cop, Bad Cop.


My younger brother and I put together a list of socialist tenets many years ago.  It’s been lost to computer upgrades and internet evolution, but one of those tenets was; “When restrictions on freedom produce disastrous results, freedom is to blame and the solution is more restrictions.”  Look for it in this case.  It’ll happen, I guarantee.  It’s in the DNA of it.

This Public Servant Bit Needs More Discussion

Posted on by

This is an addendum to the post below.


As stated; as a public employee, as a public servant, your job, your individual tasks, your pay and the very existence of the department for which you work, exists purely at our (The People’s) pleasure.  It is our prerogative to alter this relationship, to dismiss you, or to eliminate your department entirely, at a whim.


As a public servant, you have no “right” whatsoever to a particular salary, or to a particular job, etc.  If we decide we must lower your pay or dismiss you altogether, your proper response would be something like; “I understand.  Thank you for the opportunity to have served you.”  At that point you are free to go your own way and prove your worth in the marketplace as you see fit.  May you live long and prosper.


If you decide, on the other hand, to get hostile about it and start in with the name-calling and the threats, what can We The People conclude about the relationship we’ve had with you?  Look at me when I’m talking to you!


In private practice, a servant that gets hostile with the home owner will probably result in the police being called in on a domestic disturbance.  At the very best it would result in an unflattering reference when you apply for another job.  This is OUR house.  If the hostility continues and becomes threatening, what are we to do?  If the police aren’t able to help us get you public servants under control, well then, what?  What are we left with for options in that case?  You aren’t going to get your way, let me just put it like that.  Not for long, I can tell you.  This is OUR country.

Quote of the day—Dennis R. King

Posted on by

If government is the solution; Then it is highly probable that government created the problem in the first place.

Dennis R. King
2004
[Dennis is my cousin. Until yesterday it probably had been close to 20 years since I had seen him. He had framed this and put it on the wall of his home. I thought it qualified as QOTD material. Living in California with all the examples to chose from he talked at length about how messed up the government is. Frequently the rants extended to the Federal Government and Washington State government where his brother lives. I had a very pleasant visit.—Joe]

Exposing Leftists

Posted on by

College students are asked to sign a petition to impose Affirmative Action upon the basketball team (for diversity), to redistribute GPA points, ban conservative talk radio, etc.  Good stuff.  Enjoy.


What I took away was the students’ apparent total lack of ability, or preparation, for these discussions, meaning that high schools and universities aren’t encouraging such critical thinking at all.  I believe my son, who just graduated from high school, could give these petitioners a resounding talkin’ to.


HT to Glen Beck

And You Thought FEMA was All About Helping People

Posted on by

Admit it– somewhere in the recesses of your mind, you thought there were only the best of intentions behind the creation of FEMA.


Little Grasshopper; I’ve been trying to get this across for some time now.  I know it’s extremely difficult, but you have to try harder to grasp this pebble from my hand.  People with good intentions want YOU TO BE STRONG ALL ON YOUR OWN.  In the harder times, when you fall down and get seriously hurt, they want YOUR LOCAL COMMUNITY TO BE STRONG ALL ON ITS OWN.  In the hardest of times they want YOUR REGION TO BE STRONG ALL ON ITS OWN.  If the end of the world seems to be upon you, they want EVERY INDIVIDUAL TO BE AS INDEPENDANTLY STRONG AS POSSIBLE.  Only then can Mankind face the biggest challenges and come out strong.


Creating a system that operated through coercion, funded coercively, which by its nature weakens charities and weaken individuals in favor of centralized power, is not the result of good intentions.  It is the result of hatred.  I know it’s extremely difficult, Little Grasshopper.  I know there are all those assertions of warmth and light and compassion, but those are deep, deep lies, all the more the egregious because of their mockery of love and compassion.


What evidence will it take to convince you?

Quote of the day—Candice Hoeppner

Posted on by

The long-gun registry is a massive Liberal policy failure and it needs to end. It makes no sense to force law-abiding individuals with firearms’ licences to register their long guns. It makes no sense to believe the registry will prevent a gun crime taking place.

Candice Hoeppner
Conservative MP
June 10, 2011
Gun registry Time to scrap it
[The problem is that liberals don’t judge their policies by the facts. They judge them by their intentions. It is as if intentions are all that matter. The “war on poverty” intended to improve the lives of the of the least “fortunate” in society but created many more “poverty stricken” people than it “lifted up”. Gun control was intended to prevent and/or fight violent crime but it enables more violent criminals to work in victim disarmament zones.

Because of their insistent on only considering intent and not results they report numbers that only reflect their views. One of the most blatant is their reporting of the “success” of the Brady Act requiring background checks. They report the total number of people prevented from purchasing a firearm. They do not report the number of people denied a firearm who should have been allowed. They do not report that violent crime rates did not improve as a result of the background checks.

As I have said before, they are either unwilling or unable to distinguish between their hypothesis and their conclusions. If Canada is able to undo the much hated long gun registry via the political process it will be something of a miracle. Outside of the U.S. it is extremely rare for repressive gun laws to be repealed without violence.—Joe]

Quote of the day—fabian_solutions

Posted on by

History is on the side of progress, on the side of socialism.

fabian_solutions
June 12, 2011
Comment to American Way: Sarah Palin email frenzy backfires on her media antagonists.
[I think someone needs their anti-psychotic drugs adjusted.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Sarah Brady

Posted on by

Michael Barnes’ stature and experience with important national and international political issues made him the inevitable choice to lead Handgun Control and the Center at this critical time. As we work towards the next generation of sensible gun laws, we need a leader with vision, with understanding and with the courage to take on the gun lobby. Michael Barnes is that leader, and I am overjoyed to welcome him to our crusade.

Sarah Brady
February 3, 2000
HANDGUN CONTROL, CENTER TO PREVENT HANDGUN VIOLENCE NAME FORMER CONGRESSMAN MICHAEL BARNES NEW CEO
[And how is that crusade working out for you Ms. Brady? And what would that “next generation of sensible gun laws” be?

I know what the pro-gun people were working on in 2000. We were working on advancing shall-issue concealed carry laws. We are almost done with that and now we are working on our “next generation of sensible gun laws”—Constitutional Carry.

My advice to the Brady Campaign is to give it up. The Constitution is on our side, the courts are on our side, and the people are on our side. Handgun Control Inc. is dead and no matter what you rename it the organization belongs in the disgraceful anti-freedom dustbin of history like the KKK, the Communist Workers Party, and American Nazi Party.—Joe]

Quote of the day—LiberalActivist

Posted on by

Murder was pretty much nonexistent until the righties came along.

LiberalActivist
June 6, 2011
Forum post on the topic, “Your stance on gun control…”
[I’m not really surprised at the existence of lies and absurd claims by liberals anymore. But those lies reach depths that do amaze me. Another example from this same guy, “Republicans were pro-slavery during the Civil War while the Democrats were anti-slavery. Just remember that.” I guess he doesn’t remember and is unable to look up the political party of President Lincoln.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Lyle@UltiMAK

Posted on by

It never ceases to amaze me that so many can get so upset over something so innocuous as simply leaving people alone.

Lyle@UltiMAK
May 31, 2011
Comment to Quote of the day—Dave Workman.
[Yeah. Amazing isn’t it? But yet it happens over so many things like homosexuality, skin color, what (if any) religious beliefs you observe, and how many rounds of ammo your gun holds. Why should there even need to be constitutional protection for something so innocuous?—Joe]

Quote of the day—Stephan P. Halbrook

Posted on by

A year after passage, the Civil Rights Act was the subject of a report from President Grant to Congress which stated that parts of the South were under the control of Ku Klux Klans, the objects of which were “to deprive colored citizens of the right to bear arms and of the right to a free ballot ….” In debate on a bill to expand civil rights protection, Senator John Scott explained how Klansmen seized the firearms of their victims before lynching them. But Senator Pratt observed that the Klansman “fears the gun” of a man in his “humble fortress.” The Klan targeted the black who would “tell his fellow blacks of their legal rights, as for instance their right to carry arms and defend their persons and homes.”

In sum, the Civil Rights Act of 1871 was understood to provide a remedy to persons who were deprived of the right to carry firearms for self defense. This is such a case.

Stephan P. Halbrook
May 25, 2011
AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF CONGRESS OF RACIAL EQUALITY, INC., IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANTS AND IN SUPPORT OF REVERSAL
EDWARD PERUTA, et at., Plaintiffs-Appellants v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, et at., Defendants-Appellees
[Via David Hardy.

The right to keep and bear arms is a civil right. The first laws in this country to deprive people of this specific enumerated right were specifically intended to keep slaves, and sometimes more generally all “people of color”, from possessing firearms. When governments expand the prohibitions to include nearly all people what they are implicitly saying is the people in general should be treated as slaves with the upside down relationship of the public servants being treated as the masters.

This arrogance of public servants cannot be tolerated. Sometimes servants need to be reminded of their position in life. This is one of those times.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Dave Workman

Posted on by

Wisconsin would not be in its present situation had it not been for anti-gun former Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat. He twice vetoed concealed carry legislation that had been supported by most people on both sides of the issue that would have included permits. His actions have resulted in something of a civil rights backlash, with many gun owners now pushing for full carry rights without a permit. It’s essentially payback for Doyle and a handful of Democrats who refused to override his vetoes. If Wisconsin’s Legislature adopts constitutional carry, the blame, or credit depending upon one’s perspective, lies at Doyle’s feet and nobody else’s. He had two chances to be “reasonable,” as the gun control crowd always puts it, and he blew them both.

Why this is important to gun rights advocates in the Pacific Northwest should be obvious. Washington has one of the strongest state constitutional right-to-bear-arms provisions in the nation. Open carry has been legal here since before statehood, as noted yesterday. CPLs were not required until 1933. We can carry right now in the Capitol and legislative office buildings, a fact that gives gun prohibitionists heartburn. A growing contingent of Evergreen State gun owners think we ought to return to the “good old days” and point to Alaska, Arizona (which has a state constitutional provision identical to Washington’s) and Vermont as examples of properly minimal gun regulation.

If Wisconsin adopts, right out of the gate, a constitutional carry measure where no concealed carry provision existed previously, then 2012’s legislative session in Olympia just might see the same proposal. In an election year, that could create a degree of political discomfort for lawmakers who do not care to rile this state’s activist gun owners.

Dave Workman
May 26, 2011
WI panel OKs gun bill; columnist shows bankruptcy of anti-CCW mindset
[The repression of a group over a long period of time spawns resentment. This resentment can result in a demand for “justice” that far exceeds the original modest requests. For many decades gun owners have been treated as second and third class citizens instead of first class as have those that exercised other specific enumerated rights such as freedom of speech.

Those that lament our recent successes in our regaining the recognition of our rights should celebrate that we found success in the courts and the legislatures rather than through our method of last of resort. I suspect we were far closer to the breaking point than the other side realized. Hence our gains are far more modest than they really should be but there is the benefit of the gains being obtained without the shedding of blood. For that both sides can and should celebrate that the system is working.—Joe]

Today We Mark The End of The World…

Posted on by

…of end-of-the-world cults.  Yes I know– wishful thinking.  End-of-the-world cults are as old as history, and they’ll just keep right on coming and going, no matter how many times they’re proven wrong (much like socialism and jihad).  Eventually of course the world will end.  All Things Must Pass.  Then one of these cults will probably be proven right after all.  That’ll show us.


This should be a course of study in high school – “Introduction to End of The World Cults.”  Students could get involved by forming into groups within the class and starting their own end of the world models and doctrines.  I’m trying not to be too flippant because this is a very serious subject.


Religious and political leaders, or leader wannabes, and most hippies, find that people desperately want to believe in something that makes them extra special.  It is easy to convince people that they are part of a special group.  A group that has super duper important information, and that the rest of us will rue the day if we don’t take heed of it and recognize that group as The One, and so on.  It’s usually all about power.  Raw power and nothing else.  Algore and the Global Cooling, I mean Warming Now/Global Cooling Now/Oh What the Hell; Climate change cult is one of thousands of examples.  Most churches practice some variant of it also, and it always works on someone.  No matter what.  Since people can’t bear the thought that they’ve been duped to such a deep level– that they’ve been so, so very foolish.  They’ll do anything to explain it away somehow, to avoid the profound sense of embarrassment and shame.


That’s when the bullied become the bullies.  The cycle repeats.


I know, I know.  Trust me.  I’ve felt The Spirit too, I know exactly what you cultists are going through.  I was young and impressionable.  I deeply wanted to believe in something that would relieve me of my doubts, confusion, self-loathing or whatever it was.  And then there was that need to “fit in”.  That’s when they get you.  It’s a form of hypnotism, and it works on you because you want it.


It’s never going away, but you don’t have to participate in it.  When you let go of that garbage– that baggage people have used to control you, and live a life guided by principles, none of it can touch you.

The entire world is a battlefield

Posted on by

This may be reading too much into a few words but it bears watching. From Salon.com, “How many Americans are targeted for assassination?”:



Dozens of Americans have joined terrorist groups and are posing a threat to the United States and its interests abroad, the president’s most senior adviser on counterterrorism and homeland security said Thursday. . . . “There are, in my mind, dozens of U.S. persons who are in different parts of the world, and they are very concerning to us,” said John O. Brennan, deputy White House national security adviser for homeland security and counterterrorism. . . .


“If a person is a U.S. citizen, and he is on the battlefield in Afghanistan or Iraq trying to attack our troops, he will face the full brunt of the U.S. military response,” Mr. Brennan said. “If an American person or citizen is in a Yemen or in a Pakistan or in Somalia or another place, and they are trying to carry out attacks against U.S. interests, they also will face the full brunt of a U.S. response. And it can take many forms.”


See also Congress Proposes Bill to Allow Worldwide War … Including INSIDE the U.S.


It’s may be important to note that exercise certain, perhaps any, rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights could cause you to be considered a “low level terrorist” and the DOJ, FBI, and JTTF will consider it justification to be watching you.


Via email from former co-worker Chet.

Do all socialists have this much money?

Posted on by

One has to wonder where socialists get all their money and why doesn’t everyone have as much wealth as this guy in all socialists societies? [/sarcasm]

Mr Strauss-Kahn secured his release from Rikers Island prison as it was announced a grand jury had voted to have him prosecuted for the alleged sexual attack of a 32-year-old maid in his hotel room.

In a hearing at New York supreme court, Judge Michael Obus said he would allow the 62-year-old former head of the IMF out of jail despite the fact there was a “serious risk” he would try to flee.

He warned Mr Strauss-Kahn, who was arrested at JFK airport on a flight about to take off for Paris, that the consequences would be serious “if there is the slightest problem with your compliance”.

…

He must move into an apartment in Manhattan rented by his wife, and “will be monitored 24 hours, seven days a week, electronically and by at least one armed guard”, the judge said.

He will pay $1 million (£600,000) upfront, provide a guarantee for a further $5 million (£3 million), and cover the expense of his own security, which was estimated at $200,000 (£120,000) a week and include an armed guard at all times.

Logical Contradiction

Posted on by

NRCC Chairman, Pete Sessions, just sent out a letter.  First sentence;



While House Republicans are working hard to return our country to economic prosperity and strengthen and secure Medicare…


Let me see if can put this into perspective.  While House Republicans are working hard to run our economy for us (because we’re too stupid and/or evil to do it ourselves) and to try, once again, to make socialism viable.  ETS; Or are they working hard to free the economy so it can work, AND trying to make socialism viable?  They don’t say.  That’s about how I read it.

Critical Pedagogy Hits Home

Posted on by

There’s been some talk about it lately and it’s been in the news, but it’s also been in your home town school for some time.  Here is a history paper, handed out in my son’s history class, complete with syntax errors, inexplicable asterisks, bad grammar, omitted words, and miss-numbering.  The kids were told to memorize it.  Keep in mind the title of the piece – “U.S. History”  This is all American.  Everything below is what made/makes us tick;



U.S. History
Philosophies — Foreign and Domestic


“What Made/Makes Us Tick”


1. Capitalism – Pure*** vs. Regulated


An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.


OK, right there; no mention of property rights, the acknowledgement and protection of which result in capitalism.  “Corporately owned” IS privately owned, but they must make a distinction.



Pure capitalism over time results in poverty, worker abuse, environmental destruction, a two class social structure, and governmental control by the wealthy.  All economic, political and social norms were control directly ad indirectly by the wealthy.  Even the presentation of religious views were seen through the eyes of the capitalistic values.(2-


Karl Marx would be giddy with pride seeing what our public schools are teaching my kids today.  There’s so much wrong with that one paragraph I don’t know where to begin.  For one thing, “governmental control by the wealthy” defines a corrupt government.  The acknowledgement and protection of property rights, which defines capitalism, does not lead to governmental control by the wealthy.  That’s a contradiction in terms, but you’re not supposed to notice.  Corrupt politicians lead to governmental control by the wealthy, and for that they should be arrested.



Regulated Capitalism – has produced our nation.  Government regulates what industry can do within limits.  Environmental impact (air quality), worker safety, fair pay, fair trade, and business dealings are regulated by law.


The Fascisti would certainly approve of that statement, and they were committed Marxists.  Notice throughout this whole piece that there is no mention of human rights, or of America’s founding principles.  That would blow the whole thing though, wouldn’t it?



2. Expansionism


The belief that the nation must grow to acquire natural resources, new areas of trade, and living space. (Safety Value Theory – Turner Thesis)


3. Manifest Destiny (New Manifest Destiny)***


— Similar to Expansionism.  This was the belief that God had pre-determined (destined) the United States to expand.  It was an outgrowth of the Puritan ethic [God rewards those who work hard and live an exemplary life.]  The term eventually meant that the U.S. would eventually control the land from coast to coast.  This belief system motivated the “Western Movement.”  The acquisition of land and the displacement of Native Americans became justified in part by this belief system.  The Mexican War, the Southwest land, Northwest Territory, and Alaska are also acquired with belief system as the driving force for America to expand.


Nearly every country that ever existed has practiced some version of Manifest Destiny or Expansionism.  The American government did some terrible things to the Indians.  The innuendo I get from this is that there are wrongs remaining to be righted, which is actually being said elsewhere, complete with the “R” word (revolution) in the above linked video, as part of a school curriculum.



4.  Whiteman’s Burden – Anglo Saxonism***  The term is taken from a poem by Rudyard Kipling in which he states is was “the white man’s burden” to colonize the other nations for their benefit.  In practice it was the belief that:


God had chosen the Anglo-Saxon race to colonize the “less fortunate” peoples of the world.  In so doing they were to bring them education, the Christian faith, a Puritan work ethic, capitalism, health care, and the other “benefits” of our culture.


Ah, so America really IS racist!  Crap!



5.  Imperialism***


–,The control of one nation over another nation or territory for the purposes of acquiring natural resources, trade, and/or military advantage.  This is the core of U.S. expansion.  The acquisition of Hawaii, Cuba, and the Philippines are examples of imperialism.


Notice how they slipped trade in there, like trading with people in another nation amounts to Imperialism.  We bastards!  Those poor victims!



6.  Rugged Individualism


— The belief that individuals are to provide for their own needs without the help of others.  “I can do it myself.”  This was the pioneer spirit and the belief of the nation in the 1800s.  It worked against the average person during the latter part of the Industrial Revolution as corporations controlled the variables of life.  Working harder did not mean greater rewards for the worker.  It meant greater profits for the corporation.


The ideal of self sufficiency worked against the average person, eh?  So you’d be better off relying on others.  Notice too the repeated use of the word “worker”.  “Workers of the World Unite” then, I guess.  There are those evil corporations again, and the use of “profits” as an epithet.



7.  Social Darwinism


— Applying the theory of Darwinism, survival of the fittest, to political and social life.  The strong must survive to benefit the entire nation.  No sympathy for the weak, (poor, workers).  Laws and social customs were for the benefit of the fittest (rich, industrialist, upper crust of society).  When you combine the philosophies of Social Darwinism with imperialism, and Manifest Destiny., the world created was a tough one for the average person.


The Nazis were Social Darwinists, or I would say “Socialist Darwinists”.  Let’s be clear.



8.  Humanitarianism


— the belief that mankind should help others just because they can.  “Social Gospel” of the latter 1800s.


“Just because they can”, mind you.  Not because it’s the right thing to do.  Not because there are rich people who are, you know, actually human.



9.  Liberty/Freedom/Self-determination*


These fundamental beliefs began to take on a new meaning for many of society as the end of the century approached.  The empathy to “occupied countries” overseas and to the oppressed at home gains attention of a wider spectrum of society in the late 1800s.


Again no mention of rights, rights protection, or founding principles.  Instead it’s all up for grabs, depending on prevailing theories.



9. AMERICAN IMPERIALISM


It is easier to define American Imperialism by contrasting it with Imperialism.


Imperialism is centered on Social Darwinism, Manifest Destiny, and White Man’s Burden.


There were never, ever, anywhere, any non-white Imperialists then.  You racist, you.



American Imperialism tempers those beliefs with humanitarianism and the beliefs of self-determination, freedom and liberty.  Our present foreign and domestic policies are motivated by this belief.


There you have it.  We’re an Imperialist nation.  Damn us all to hell.


This history lesson is a self-contradictory and confused jumble of omissions, lies, half truths and truths.  Would Karl Marx strongly disagree with any of it?

Quote of the day—George Orwell

Posted on by

That rifle on the wall of the labourer’s cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.

George Orwell
[I slightly disagree. It is a symbol of the ultimate power residing in the hands of the general population rather than solely in the hands of the despot or the well connected. Those that seek and exercise power to their own advantage will always exist and will always take advantage of those that are less powerful. But the rifle on the wall creates limits such that truly epic injustice is unlikely to occur because of the fear by the powerful and their thugs that their reign of terror will be ended by a bullet. And if it does occur the rifle guarantees it will not long continue.—Joe]