No man can bring out of the Presidency the reputation which carries him into it.
Thomas Jefferson
[I wonder what Jefferson would have said about someone who, essentially, had no reputation going into the Presidency.–Joe]
No man can bring out of the Presidency the reputation which carries him into it.
Thomas Jefferson
[I wonder what Jefferson would have said about someone who, essentially, had no reputation going into the Presidency.–Joe]
THE PEOPLE: The people is a beast of muddy brain that knows not its own strength.
Tommaso Campanella
[This could relate to many things in the present day. I’m thinking of what the people did a couple months ago and of which everyone will soon learn the unintended consequences of their muddied brain actions.–Joe]
Yesterday Barb and I went on drive. This Thursday Barb has a class in Bellingham so we drove up there ahead of time to make sure she can find it without difficulty during morning traffic. It was a nice day and it was a pleasant drive and we got a chance to talk about a bunch of stuff rather than sitting at our respective desks with our hobbies.
Just prior to leaving we stopped at Joe’s Sports, Outdoor, and More (no relation). I was looking for some .45 ACP brass so I can reload for my Gun Blog 45. Midway is out of stock. The shelf with the brass was nearly empty with only a couple bags with some 7mm brass hanging from a hook. The powder and primer shelves were nearly empty as well. Hmmm…
On the way back from Bellingham we stopped at Kesselring Gun Shop in Burlington. The parking lot was FULL. And this is on the same weekend that WAC had their big show in Puyallup! I found a narrow spot to park between a building and a pickup that was parked such that it was blocking a private road. We went inside to find the store was packed. Every aisle was crowded. There was just barely enough room to move between all the people. I found the brass I was looking for at a reasonable price (considering), paid for it and we left.
One has to wonder if we had put that much money and effort into defeating Obama in November would we have succeeded? Being reactive seldom is better than proactive but that just isn’t the way human nature works. And the money gun owners are spending on firearms, ammo, and accessories could have gone into the election process and ended up in the hands of mainstream media who are one of our worst enemies and instead of into tools of freedom in our own hands.
In a functioning market, vendors producing superior products would take share from vendors producing inferior products. Today that’s simply not possible because the cost of the most effective channel for distribution, shipping as the default browser with new computers, for everyone except the OS vendor is prohibitively high.
Asa Dotzler
Mozilla’s director of community development
January 17, 2009
competition is good (see also EU: Microsoft ‘shields’ IE from competition — Web too important to let one company dominate browser market, says Opera CEO)
[Taking this quote out of context is a bit unfair and he does address some of the issues I have concerns about. But the bottom line is there is much more to the story. “Superior products”, in his mind, is defined differently than the market has defined it. And unless there is government inference (or other application of force in the market place) then the “superior product” has, in fact, dominated the marketplace. The (relatively) free market has defined “superior product” in such a way that ease of distribution has played a major factor. In order words Microsoft is competing in the distribution channel and the market has spoken and said, “The Microsoft distribution channel is better.”
That Microsoft exploited their superior distribution channel and the customers responded favorably to this offering is not justification for some government thugs (the EU) to declare MS a law breaker and demand fines or that they offer free access of that distribution channel to their competition. Those competitors need to build their own distribution channel and compete in that market. Until they successfully do that they have a big hole in their offering because the distribution channel is part of the feature set.
Microsoft management will, almost for certain, be more “responsible to the stockholders” than I would. If it were up to me I would be strongly inclined to tell the EU they can write their own damn software. MS would refuse to allow any of their software be used in any EU country until the EU thugs making these decisions are all in prison or selling pencils and apples on the street corners to see what the free market is really all about.
Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft but I am not in a position of management and my opinion in no way reflects that of my employer.–Joe]
A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.
2009 Montana Legislature
HOUSE BILL NO. 246
[I also like the part where it directs the Montana attorney general to “defend in full” any “Montana citizen whom the government of the United States attempts to prosecute” for violation of federal law concerning a firearm manufactured and retained within Montana. It also provides this protection for firearms with bores up to 1.5 inches (38.1mm) in diameter.–Joe]
I normally enjoy listening to the Michael Medved radio show. A couple of months ago, he was arguing with a conservative caller. The caller was tired of the Republicans “compromising” and “reaching across the aisle”, rather than standing up for the basic principles of this country. The caller suggested (rightly in my opinion) that it’s time to get the RINO bums out of the party.
Medved was incredulous; “How do you grow the party by making it smaller?” He was absolutely convinced that getting rid of the left-wing Republicans was a sure path to defeat.
Hence the problem.
Hence the defeat in the last election.
I say you can in fact grow the party by making it smaller. If the Republican leadership would grow a pair, define what it means to be a Republican (and what it doesn’t mean) millions of Americans would have a real alternative to the Democrats. We’d finally have a reason to vote.
I say you could get rid of nearly every Republican in Congress tomorrow, thereby “making the party smaller” by a couple hundred, and in so doing grow the party by millions of new, enthusiastic voters if there were some real Americans to take their place in the Republican Party.
Two landslides, Mr. Medved. It can’t be repeated enough. Reagan won two landslides. Two landslides, and the people (Reagan Democrats included) were chanting, “Four more years!” He didn’t do it by showing how Leftist he could be. He did it by simply explaining the American principles and by sticking to them. He didn’t do it by appeasing the media pundits. He did it by laughing at them, and correcting them. He did it by taking a stand on real principles as a leader. He wasn’t born into it– he learned his way into it. There is a lot of learning to do today.
I have not heard one Republican talk like Reagan (for more than a sentence or two) since Reagan. I’m not talking about Reagan’s style– it was his understanding and love of this country’s founding principles. Apparently some people want us to think it was his slick style. I never though he was that slick. I just think he was one of very few people who understood, and that it was his understanding of the basic principles that gave him the ability to articulate them. That cannot be faked. We’ll know. Republicans try to fake it all the time. Look at Schwarzenegger talk out of both sides of his mouth- and he doesn’t even know he’s doing it. It’s just a shtick for him. Fake. This fakery has come to define the Republican Party. The Democrats at least are consistent in their adherence to socialist theories and their willingness to fight to get them implemented. Republicans have no such consistency.
Fakes.
I submit that the American voters are starving for someone, even just one man or one woman, who can demonstrate an understanding of the basic principles and a willingness to fight for them.
Fighting for this country’s principles means defeating the Left (leftist Democrats and leftist Republicans) not “reaching out” to them. Let them reach out to us. Let the lefties prove their willingness to cut programs, to reduce others, to meaningfully cut taxes and lift restrictions on industry and trade. Let that be the new measure of “bipartisanship”, of “compromise”, of “pragmatism” and all that rot. Let the Democrats run a conservative candidate as “the one who can win” because he/she “reaches across the aisle”.
Until I see this new Republican leader, I’m not donating and I am not voting Republican. Fool me once, fool me twice, fool me thrice. At some point back there I got bored. We tried that with the two Bushes, and they, predictably, tried to outdo FDR on socialist spending. We tried it on Dole and we tried it again with McLame. Time and again we’ve been told that the “perfect candidate just isn’t here” with us, and that we should bite the bullet and vote for this or that confused, deer-in-the-headlights, apologetic, stumbling, fumbling, frightened, self-contradictory mush-mouth– the one who proclaims the virtues of a free market in the first half of a sentence, and declares a new entitlement program in the second half of the same sentence. That sort of garbage is giving conservatism a very, very bad name. If that’s the best we have to offer, we’ve already lost. I’m done with these RINOs.
They’ve made the party smaller (by my one vote at least). They can continue doing what they’re doing (trying to co-opt Democrat, i.e. socialist, policies) or they can get rid of the poison-pills, the dead-weight RINOs, and adopt the warrior spirit, once and for all declare war on socialism, laugh at the journalists (Reagan was quite good at that) uphold the virtues of capitalism (and mean it for once) and grow the party by millions.
And I can hear it all right now; “Lyle, don’t you understand how much we have to lose? Don’t you understand what you’re saying? We can’t just hand it all over to the Democrats!”
We’re ceding ground to the Left no matter who’s in office. Lately it’s been a choice between more socialism, faster, and more socialism, slower. It’s a choice between two arsonists– one who will burn down your house a little at a time, and another who will burn it all down at once. Do I really care? Maybe in the latter scenario I’ll be quicker to call the fire department. Frog-in-the-pot theory says faster is better, given those two choices alone.
We may continue blaming the third party voters, keep voting for those “lesser of two evil” Republicans, never again hold the Republicans accountable for their astonishingly lame actions, and things will never change– we’ll get more of the sad sack of crap we’ve been getting. Or we can demand some real principles and some real fight from the Republican leadership. Those are our two choices.
Update Jan 08/09; Regarding comments, I find this article quite relevant to the issue.
While Barack Obama has been urging citizens not to stock up on weapons because they mistrust him, other anti-gunners are a tad more candid, seeing in the new administration an opportunity to disarm Americans. The Brady Campaign, the day after the election, was demanding the adoption of what it duplicitously calls “common sense gun laws.” Similarly, John Rosenthal, co-founder of Stop Handgun Violence, gleefully wrote in the Boston Globe: “With the historic election of Barack Obama, the nation finally has an opportunity to enact sensible national gun control policy.”
Not so. We already have such a “policy.” It is called the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
William P. Hoar
January 7, 2008
Skepticism About Second Amendment Support
[There have been lots of people that have used various versions of that last paragraph but that doesn’t diminish the correctness or the effectiveness of it.–Joe]
If there is a coming offensive against gun owners Alan Korwin has some of the likely details of their war plans. There is some scary stuff in there:
Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.” Note that Obama’s pick for this office (Eric Holder, confirmation hearing set for Jan. 15) wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home.
In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.”
In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.
..
If these near-total bans aren’t enough, the most dangerous part may be the phrase “pistol grip” because: “The term ‘pistol grip’ means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” In other words, any semi-auto long gun with a grip (that’s ALL semi-auto long guns) would be banned under the existing proposal. It’s not clear what they hope to achieve by deceptively banning guns with grips instead of just calling to ban the guns — even an idjit can tell it’s the same thing.
I didn’t cover here all the magazine bans, transfer bans, dealer record-keeping and centralized reporting, and a host of nuisance details — there will be time enough for that when the new lists are released soon: “As soon as President-elect Obama is inaugurated and the 111th Congress is sworn in,” according to Ms. Brady. Congress is set to be sworn in on Jan. 6, Inauguration Day is Jan. 20.
If they really are making war plans to engage us then we need to make our plans and prepare as well. I’m still debating what to work on first.
I could just be parnoid but this search for Mothers Against Violence In America founder Pam Eakes (I last met and did battle with her nine years ago) by someone in the U.S. House of Representatives could be someone looking for support in a coming offensive:
| Domain Name | house.gov ? (U.S. Government) | |||||||||||||||||||
| IP Address | 143.231.249.# (Information Systems, U.S. House of Representatives) | |||||||||||||||||||
| ISP | Information Systems, U.S. House of Representatives | |||||||||||||||||||
| Location |
| |||||||||||||||||||
| Language | English (U.S.) en-us | |||||||||||||||||||
| Operating System | Microsoft WinXP | |||||||||||||||||||
| Browser | Internet Explorer 7.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Javascript | version 1.3 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Monitor |
| |||||||||||||||||||
| Time of Visit | Jan 6 2009 5:49:37 am | |||||||||||||||||||
| Last Page View | Jan 6 2009 5:49:37 am | |||||||||||||||||||
| Visit Length | 0 seconds | |||||||||||||||||||
| Page Views | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Referring URL | http://www.google.co…ence pam eakes email | |||||||||||||||||||
| Search Engine | google.com | |||||||||||||||||||
| Search Words | mavia mothers against violence pam eakes email | |||||||||||||||||||
| Visit Entry Page | https://blog.joehuffman.org/2006/06/ | |||||||||||||||||||
| Visit Exit Page | https://blog.joehuffman.org/2006/06/ | |||||||||||||||||||
| Out Click | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Time Zone | UTC-5:00 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Visitor’s Time | Jan 6 2009 8:49:37 am | |||||||||||||||||||
| Visit Number | 414,892 |
Politicians, and government in general, are world economic meddlers and obstacles. They interfere with business, slow its progress, regulate its advances, tax its earnings and generally make it harder for business to thrive, saddling it with red tape, trade barriers, obstacles to entry, and eating out its substance.
Alan Korwin
December 2, 2008
Politicians Aren’t Businessmen
[Very few people will understand this once Obama has been crowned. Unless his $775 Billion stimulus plan is about cutting taxes by billions rather than spending billions he is going to fail to improve the economy. Most people believe more rather than less government is the solution to their problems. If Obama says it even if it is all lies and jest people hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest.–Joe]
The most important single central fact about a free market is that no exchange takes place unless both parties benefit.
Milton Friedman
[As opposed to a government run market where exchanges take place at the point of a gun.–Joe]
Look at their literature. About all they say is ‘guns are bad, they kill children and other living things.’ Look at their website. It clearly posits gun ownership as a social evil. He can say what he wants; I like Dennis, and I’ve never had a negative interaction with anybody with his group, but sorry, that’s a bunch of crap. His dream is dead; the idea of prohibition is dead. They need to tell their constituents to find something else to do with their lives, go be productive members of society, stop attacking our individual rights.
Alan Gura
From Gun Control On Trial, page 114.
[First off I would like to +1 Gura’s experience with the gun grabbers. All of the paid and even volunteer staff of the gun-grabber organizations that I have talked to have been nice people. I believe they were sincere and truly had no wish for anything other than the well-being of innocent people. They may not have been very smart or very well informed but their intentions, however misguided, always seemed to be congruent with mine–the protection of innocent life. They just had a problem with data collection and processing.
But on to my main reason for the quote.
I love the last sentence of Gura’s. Gura was referring to the Brady Campaign (and Dennis Henigan) but it could just as well apply to 98% of our politicians. Especially this year–the year of the coronation of the Light Bringer. It’s going to be rough times ahead for freedom and individual rights. We don’t have enough Alan Gura’s and friendly courts to protect us. If only we could enforce a declaration such as Gura’s.–Joe]
If you wants to get elected president, you’se got to think up some memoraboble homily so’s school kids can be pestered into memorizin’ it, even if they don’t know what it means.
Walt Kelly
The Pogo Party
[Apparently, with todays public education, the memorization task has been simplified to remembering just two words; “hope” and “change”.–Joe]
ATF Special Agent in Charge Jim Needles explains “Weapons of Choice” for the Mexican drug cartels.

ATF Special Agent in Charge Jim Needles
See also this news story built around the video interview above.
“Weapons of choice” include semi-auto FN FALs (a popular sport and hunting rifle), AK-47’s, and 1911 style handguns. It appears the news reporters also visited a gun shop and took pictures of AR-15’s as well.
The demonization of ordinary firearms for the next “assault weapon” ban is picking up steam with the help of the ATF.
I have come to the conclusion that politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians.
Charles De Gaulle
[Okay… but what is the alternative? Anarchy? I just don’t see a better alternative.–Joe]
This reading of the Bill of Rights is potentially a very dangerous thing.
The government is not likely to take kindly to direct threats to its powers — which the Bill of Rights specifically represents — especially as it is held in hand by an angered people. The very idea that the people would take it upon themselves to examine government’s abuses, usurpations of powers, abuses of authority, and contraventions of the very Bill that is meant to constrain government actions, is inflammatory.
At what point do the people, oppressed and incensed by the abuses of government, act directly to limit and yes punish those responsible? When are “public servants,” feigning to guard us against infringements, brought to justice?
Alan Korwin
December 23, 2008
Bill of Rights Day
[Read the whole thing. Especially the part about heads on pikes.–Joe]
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under Communism, it’s just the opposite.
John Kenneth Galbraith
[While true this overlooks the net result of the people living under the two different systems. Under capitalism there exists a wider disparity between the richest and the poorest. But the poorest of the poor is no worse off than if they were living under a communist regime. And the average person is far, far better off living in a capitalist system. But many people don’t make it this far in the logic chain. Their is a strong tendency to stop after reaching the point about there being a wide disparity between the richest and poorest. As near as I can determine their is a belief that this is “not fair”. Pointing out to them that “life is not fair” does not remedy the situation. Apparently there is some deep seated belief that things can be made to be “fair”. I think the problem must be attacked at a lower level–that is the definition of “fair”. It is not “fair” that the government should take (at the point of a gun) the property and/or services of one and give it to another. That “unfairness” can only be reduced by reducing the size of government and the taxes paid.
I’m reminded of this quote by Phil who posted about Arianna Huffington saying Capitalism should be as dead as Communism. I’m tempted to say something comparing the status the brains of both Huffington and Marx but most people should be able to draw the obvious conclusion without me leading them there.–Joe]
I swear that they must have an IQ limit to enter public office these days or something.
Phil @ Random Nuclear Strikes
December 19, 2008
I’d say “He’s giving it to them”
[I think of it as politics being the free market at work. If someone has any brains and/or integrity they avoid politics. The effect is the same however.–Joe]
Son James picked me up at work a little after 1700 and we drove down the street to Ry‘s office to get that critical third person so we could drive in the car pool lane on highway 520 into Seattle.
Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels has proposed a rule that would ban firearms from nearly all city property. This is despite the State Attorney General telling him that he clearly does not have the authority to do so. Last night there was a public hearing to give Mayor Nickels feedback on his proposal. There were nearly 200 people in attendance. At most 20 or 30 of them were in favor of the proposal. I and numerous others found it extremely telling that Mayor Nickels was not in attendance.
Ry took pictures and has his own comments on the meeting. See also the Seattle PI (best) and the Seattle Times articles.
As soon as we walked in we were offered a button that identified us as opposed to the rule–as if our Boomershoot coats and my Para USA shirt weren’t enough:

Supplied by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms this was good thinking on their part. I really appreciate their professional contribution.
I saw many familiar faces, Alan Gottlieb and Joe Waldron (who testified) from CCRKBA, Gay Cynic (who also testified), Boyd Kneeland (Boyd does an amazing amount of volunteer work on this topic), and Michael Thyng (frequent Boomershoot attendee).
We signed in at the door as either in favor or opposed to the proposed rule and indicated whether we wanted to speak. I indicated I wanted to speak and was one of the last speakers. We were each given 90 seconds which was strictly enforced. They called our names and alternated between pro and anti-gun speakers. They ran out of anti-gun speakers long before pro-gun activists. To see the entire meeting watch for the video here later today or tomorrow (Update: video is here).
Based on previous testimony and further thought I modified my testimony some what I had planned. I ran out of time and dropped the last paragraph from the following which I composed while at the meeting using One Note on my Windows Mobile Pocket PC. It didn’t matter much because several others had already called out Nickels behavior as violating WA State law which qualified him for a misdemeanor conviction.
As usual when public speaking I left at least 20 I.Q. points in my chair when I stood up to speak and I’m sure my voice raised at least one octave. Picture from Ry.
My name is Joe Huffman and I am from Kirkland.
I represent myself and my 22 year old daughter. We both have concealed pistol licenses and carry a pistol wherever we can legally do so.
I find it very telling the people providing the number of dollars spent and people injured do not tell us how many of those people were legally shot by the police or a private citizen defending innocent life. By this omission they imply guns are only used for evil.
I’m shocked that a city that prides itself on tolerance would engage in such Jim Crow like tactics to discriminate against gun owners. I’m certain the mayor and his staff cannot answer just one question which should have been their first step before going down this path. That question is, “Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?”
With such clear guidance from the State Attorney General the mayor has a tremendous amount of gall to push forward with such an attack on an essential civic right. If his plan were to ban the presence of Christian crosses, the star of David, or burqa from city facilities there would be a public outcry that would be heard worldwide and calls would be made for his resignation if not his arrest. And the same outcry should be made for this encroachment upon a specific enumerated right guaranteed by both the Washington State Constitution and the U.S. Bill of Rights.
I’m not a lawyer but it appears to me that such egregious behavior warrants investigation by Federal Prosecutors into the possibility of prosecution under 18 USC 242, the statute covering the deprivation of rights under the color of law.
I was very pleased there were numerous non-stereotypical gun owners testified in opposition. I think there were three self identified gay men. Several women testified including one that identified herself as a gun carrying tree-hugger, another that identified herself as a rape victim, and another that said she had spent the last several months working on the Obama campaign. Their point in identifying as such was that Nickels was pissing off people that would normally support him.
As the meeting closed the moderator informed us we can continue to leave comments until January 21st.
After the meeting several people I did not recognized came up to me and identified themselves as blog readers and thanked me for testifying. I was surprised, “What? People actually read what I have to say?” You guys know that only encourages me to further pollute the bit-stream with noise, right?
After we left the meeting Ry and I had a burger at Dairy Queen and did an after action review. Our conclusion was that since the Mayor did not attend the meeting our input was irrelevant to him. He was merely going through the formality of the process. The eight people from the city listening (see Ry’s post for more) were probably sent by him for appearances and to allow us to feel good about “doing something” in opposition to the Mayor’s attempted power grab. The only thing that will stop him is a lawsuit which I’m sure will be waiting for the City when they implement the rule.
Hence I concluded the primary result of the meeting was we got buttons.
Update: Video of the meeting is here.
First, when you hit a home run, quit; even though you have 90 seconds, you don’t have to fill it all. Several speakers hit home runs, waited for the applause to die down, and finished with a pop fly. Don’t be that guy (or girl).
Secondly, be on topic; the topic tonight was “Seattle ban on firearms on Seattle-owned property”. I don’t care what you think the queers are doing to the soil, keep to the point.
Thirdly, if you have nothing to say, don’t say it. Who got the first big applause of the night? The guy who said “Everything I was going to say has been said, so I’ll not bore you”. Be that guy.
Fourthly, practice. You don’t have to memorize your speech; you should, though, read it aloud a few times. Use a clock and see if you’re in the ballpark for the time allotted.
Lastly, if you are a god damn idiot, stay at home… Several of the speakers went right out in front of God and everybody and confirmed that they were idiots. The three I’m thinking of (one pro, two con) I knew were god damn idiots as soon as I saw them step to the mic.
Ry Jones
December 15, 2008
On public speaking from our visit to the Seattle City Hall meeting where Mayor Nickels sought public comment on his illegal proposal to ban firearms from city property. Pictures here.
[I’ll have more on the meeting later.–Joe]