Category Archives: Politics

Quote of the day–Lyle @ UltiMAK

Posted on by

Health care is a right the same as guns are a right. You have the right to provide it, or to purchase it as you are able, and government should have no role in the matter except as protector of your rights.

I know that wasn’t the framework of the question however. Honestly put, the question would have been, “Do you believe free healthcare, paid by someone else under threats from the government, is your right?”

But liberty isn’t even on the table for discussion in this election. How can we be bothered with such abstractions as liberty when we’re worried about the crisis-of-the-day, and who is going to take care of us and keep us all safe, happy and warm?


Lyle @ UltiMAK
October 8, 2008
In the comments.
[We have a long way to go. Sometimes it takes Lyle and others to put it in proper perspective.–Joe]

Did he really say that?

Posted on by

From a random link I clicked on:



One moment struck me as particularly unfortunate for McCain: When Tom Brokaw asked whether health care was a privilege, a responsibility or a right. McCain said it was a responsibility, but left unclear whose responsibility it might be. Obama said he believed it should be a right…


Did Obama really say health care should be a right?


Wow! And I thought he was supposed to be a constitutional scholar. Anyone that passed their high school government class should give Obama a failing grade for even being on the city council or the local school board for getting that one item so wrong. As a U.S. Senator he should be tried for attempted treason.

Obama’s motivation for gun control

Posted on by

Howard Nemerov gives us some info on possible motivation for Obama’s support for gun control:

In politics, it is often difficult to determine why a person supports a policy. Fortunately, numbers speak louder than words: In this case, follow the money to understand Obama’s support of registration.

One of Obama’s biggest donors is the law firm of Skadden, Arps, Meagher and Flom, LLP, which contributed $340,264 to his presidential campaign as of September 2, 2008.[12] Skadden, Arps represents the inventors of a “firearm safety system,” patent number 6499243, which adds a biometric activator that links a gun to one owner. The “Summary of the Invention” section of the patent application notes:

The safety system further makes use of a person’s fingerprint data, which is a unique personal property that is highly suitable for tracking and control.[13] [Emphasis added]

Sidley Austin LLP has contributed $350,302 to Obama.[14] Sidley Austin represents the inventors of the “Gun identification kit,” patent number 7380706. This invention provides a way for every gun to have a spent cartidge case made available for entry into a ballistic “fingerprint” database. Of course, such a database is useful only if all firearms are entered into it:

Because the vast majority of publicly owned firearms have not been used in the commission of a crime, they will not show up in [such a] database. It would therefore be desirable to provide a means for increasing the number of firearms for which…information and data is available.

The inventors’ solution to this? Pass a law mandating that every gun is registered (serial number matched with shell casing and owner data, all permanently recorded):

One means of populating [such a] database would be to mandate that ballistic information be obtained and entered into the database for all firearms.[15]

$350,000 for supporting gun licensing? Sounds like motive to me. Why else would Obama be so cagey on guns? We know it’s not about making people safer because no one has been able to answer Just One Question.

So, when Obama says he “won’t take your guns” keep in mind he didn’t say he wouldn’t register them. See Nemorov’s post for more about the wisdom of that. Obama says Chicago is different from Cheyenne. See my post on community policy for a response to that.

Quote of the day–John Stuart Mill

Posted on by

If all mankind were of one opinion, and one man held the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one man than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.


John Stuart Mill
On Liberty
[This is sometimes attributed to Thomas Jefferson. I believe this to be an error. Regardless it is apparent that Obama does not subscribe to this philosophy and McCain is not much better. They are both scumbags so this year I will probably be voting for Sarah.–Joe]

More on Palin as a hottie

Posted on by

I don’t know if this will help or her chances of getting elected (vice) President but my guess is it will help:



US Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has caught the eye of Hollywood – as the subject of a movie definitely not for kids.


A major Los Angeles porn studio is on the hunt for a Palin look-alike to play the mother-of-five politician in an adult film.


The successful actress would earn $2535 to $3800 for the role, according to online advertisements posted on the Los Angeles webpage of sales and social networking site Craig’s List.


“Looking for a Sarah Palin look-alike for an adult film to be shot in next 10 days,” the advertisement said.


It’s time for me to dig up the interview I did of a porn actress I posted on Usenet several years ago. I’ll try to post that this weekend sometime.


H/T to my Aussie friend.


Update: Via Sebastian here is the Craig’s Listing.

Selling a product with sex

Posted on by

These pictures are via an email from Johnathan on an email list I’m on:



Some people on the left are complaining that Sarah Palin supporters are shallow and all enthused with her because she is good looking. I’m sure that has something to do with it. But her views on most topics are a big boost as well. Still it is hard to defend against the assertion if she were not so hot that she wouldn’t have gotten picked.


But one has to wonder why the Democrats are so upset by it. Weren’t they smart enough to know that sex sells? I can hardly believe that. After all wasn’t that one of Bill Clinton’s appeal to a lot of women voters? And if the democrats thought the male voter who thinks with the head between his legs was an important demographic they should have chosen a woman–after all they have lots of politically experienced women on their side to choose from. Here are some examples:







So what’s is there for them to complain about?


Oh, now I see. They would still be stuck with the same problem–trying to sell an inferior product at a higher price.


Further evidence of the inferiority of the left will be supplied next weekend at the Gun Blogger Rendezvous in the form of pictures of Ashley Varner from the NRA who will be attending–another reason for gun bloggers and readers to attend. She knows her stuff and it’s not just because the male brain turns to mush when in her presence.

Abortion rights versus gun rights–What media bias?

Posted on by

As Lyle pointed out the other day some interesting comparisons can be made between the way the left deals with abortion versus guns. Here is another example:



McCain and Obama on the issues


ABORTION


McCain: Opposes abortion rights…
Obama: Favors abortion rights.


GUN CONTROL


McCain: Voted against ban on assault-type weapons but in favor of requiring background checks at gun shows. Voted to shield gun-makers and dealers from civil suits. “I believe the Second Amendment ought to be preserved — which means no gun control.”


Obama: Voted to leave gun-makers and dealers open to suit. Also, as Illinois state lawmaker, supported ban on all forms of semiautomatic weapons and tighter state restrictions generally on firearms.


Notice that even the title puts a positive spin on the repression of gun owners. It’s about “gun control”, not “guns”, not “gun rights”, not “the Second Amendment”, not “gun ownership”. Who wouldn’t be opposed to “uncontrolled guns”? Therefore the opposite of uncontrolled guns, or gun control, must be a good thing.


Compare the handling of guns versus abortion. Obama favors a right. McCain opposes a right.


What media bias?

He Forgot the Hate Factor

Posted on by

Walter E. Williams has an excellent piece entitled Destroying Liberty in which he accurately describes the process that leads ordinary Americans to support destructive legislation.



But if you were to ask, say, the average senior citizen whether Social Security, Medicare and prescription drug subsidies should be continued, he would probably answer yes. The same would be true if you asked a college professor whether higher education should continue to be subsidized, or a farmer or a dairyman whether their products should be subsidized, or a manufacturer whether there should be tariffs and quotas on foreign products that compete with his product. The problem with congressmen producing favors and privileges to all interest groups is that it creates what none of us wants: massive control, numerous dictates and micromanagement of our lives.


Read the whole thing.  Superb as it is, he missed the hate factor.  There are a significant number of Americans who have been taught to hate the very things that make this country a success.  They hate the very idea of corporations for example.  The term “free enterprise” makes their blood boil.  The sight of a nice home, on a nice lot, with the American flag flying makes them want to spit.  They have a hateful name for it; “McMansion”.  They would tend to agree with Obama when he says with contempt that some Americans are clinging to guns and religion (the first two amendments in the Bill of Rights).  I suppose deriding Americans who “cling” to property rights, free speech, the right to a fair trial by jury, etc., will come next.  When FDR was pushing his Raw Deal back in the ’30s and ’40s, there was a famous (to me) quote, and I paraphrase; “For the first time, the rich are going to feel the same pain that the poor have felt.”  Spread the misery.  If I’m suffering, angry, and unhappy, then by damn, if I can’t do anything else, I will make you suffer, make you angry, and make you just as miserable as I.  That seems to be the mentality.  It’s far easier to tear down someone else’s house than to build one of your own.


Now we’re faced with the possibility that one of these America haters is going to be elected president.

Another NRA ad against Obama

Posted on by

A retired law enforcement officer explains why voting for Obama is a bad idea.

Quote of the day–Jacob Sullivan

Posted on by

What will Obama cling to when voters question his commitment to the Second Amendment?


Jacob Sullivan
September 23, 2008
Revenge of the Bitter Gun Owners
[Obama pissed off the wrong people with his “clinging” remark. Gun owners are probably more inclined than any other group to be one issue voters. And what is incredibly telling to me is that Obama could neutralize all the skepticism of his “support for the Second Amendment” by saying he as President would veto any anti-gun legislation that came to his desk. He could easily win the election by continuing his current plan and then repeatedly and convincingly saying that one sentence. But he hasn’t. He wants to cling to the possibility of further restricting our civil rights.–Joe]

Sarah Palin buttons

Posted on by

Daughter Xenia sent me these links:



I like the last two best:


Kevin Baker on hate

Posted on by

Kevin wraps his mind around why the left, and to a lesser extent the right, has so much hate and shares the result via quotes as is his style.


Very good stuff and I highly recommend it. It explains so much.

The Financial Crisis for Dummies

Posted on by

The shorter and even simpler version is, “You can’t fool the free market forever even if the politicians think they can. The laws of economics can no more be changed than the laws of physics. Obama and other Democrats were the biggest contributors. Vote for McCain.” Set to music:





H/T to George for the email with the link.


Update: The video was pulled and via Kevin I found the replacement.

Quote of the day–Roberta X

Posted on by

… I don’t see the real world playing out like the last few chapters of Atlas Shrugged. We’re a bit short of Galts and Gulches an’ Midas Mulligan’s been in a Federal pen for a good long while now, accused of “redlining.”


Roberta X
Meanwhile, Back At The Launch
[Atlas Shrugged is a great book but there are lots of deviations from reality. It does have some wonderful points to make but as a plan for restoring our country’s freedom it obviously won’t work. Economic collapse may be required but an organized strike by the truly intellectual to force that just isn’t going to happen.–Joe]

Headlines for Obama

Posted on by

Barack What First Amendment Obama has sent threatening letters to new agencies in Pennsylvania and Ohio demanding they not run NRA advertisements. This act should be immediate disqualification of him as a candidate on at least two different levels. One is the obvious disrespect he has for the First Amendment (as well as the Second). The other is the crass stupidity. In addition to this being the Internet age where everyone can upload or download almost any video they want in a manner that is virtually impossible to block outside of a hard core police state this makes a news story out of the NRA ads. Which means TV stations are likely to start showing the ads for free!


As Dave Hardy said people will want to see what they are forbidden to see. A psychology prof lecturing about advertising once did a quick survey in his class about signs that were effective in getting the students to spend their money on a product. He was somewhat surprised to find one of the most compelling signs was “Under 17 not admitted without parent or guardian.” Has Obama never learned that people buy and read banned books (get your button here) because they are banned? The same thing applies with guns, ammo, and accessories.


Just think of the headlines (the following are copyright exempt) this act of stupidity will enable:



  • Obama Campaign Running Scared (NRA web page headline)
  • What Obama doesn’t want you to know
  • See the video Obama wants censored!
  • Obama attempts to ban free speech!
  • Obama jumps the gun and goes for the First first
  • Obama imposing “reasonable restrictions” on human rights
  • What’s next? Restrictions on the right to trial by jury?

Someone this out of touch with human nature and the Bill of Rights has no place in American politics.


Update: Barack Enlightened Leader Obama also has local law enforcement pledged to come down on certain anti-Obama ads. This reminds me a lot of the early days of Adolf Hitler. Only here we have these rights specifically enumerated and Obama is, in essence, saying, “Bill of Rights? We don’t need no stinking Bill of Rights!”


Update2: It’s not just Obama! The Democratic Party is trying to suppress free speech. But that is to be expected I guess. It was one of the most liberal Republications and a liberal that brought us McCain-Feingold. Repression of economic and political freedom–it’s what liberals do.

Quote of the day–David Hardy

Posted on by

When will people learn? Upon hearing “you should not be allowed to see this,” every real American feels a Pavlovian urge to see it at once, even if it’s a Sanskrit manual on chariot repair.


David Hardy
September 25, 2008
Obama campaign tries to get stations to refuse NRA ads
[Apparently Obama is trying to get an early start on gutting the First Amendment. Apparently just signalling his attitude on the Second Amendment wasn’t enough. It’s obvious that he and his followers think of him as the Great Leader but one would think he could control himself until he seized power. Could it be that he just can’t help himself?–Joe]

Journalists on fact checkers

Posted on by

Via an email from Simon–Political Fact-Check Sites Proliferate, But Can They Break Through the Muck?


I think the answer is, they could, but they won’t because most fact checkers don’t know what facts are and freely substitute opinions. See the Heinlein quote for assistance in determining the difference.

Quote of the day–Dann Dalton

Posted on by

It’s the public school system. Let’s be honest, it’s full of liberal loons.


Dann Dalton
September 23, 2008
Fifth Grader Suspended for Wearing Anti-Obama Shirt


[H/T to Say Uncle and David Codrea.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Piet Hein

Posted on by

The Arithmetic of Cooperation:
When you’re adding up committees
There’s a useful rule of thumb:
That talents make a difference,
And follies make a sum.


Piet Hein
[Does this remind you of banking regulation committees?–Joe]

What’s So Great About America?

Posted on by

At this time– this very day when Congress is plotting the final stroke in yet another, years-in-the-making, offensive against capitalism, Bill whittle has brought our attention to his doctorate level thesis on American exceptionalism.  It’s called, Trinity (part 1).



If you believe, as I do, that wealth can be manufactured out of thin air, then there is no limit to the amount of wealth you can amass. And since you are creating it out of thin air, there is no moral onus on making money – you work hard to create it and have stolen from no one. There is an expression for this: you earned it.


Indeed, since charity depends on excess wealth, excess capacity, the more you make for yourself the better off everyone else is. You can even throw charity out the window if you are so hard-hearted; the fact remains that you will spend that money to get the things you want, and the more you have the more you can spend. That money goes to other people. This interchange is called “the economy”, and rich societies are rich because they understand in their bones the centerpiece of Capitalist thinking: Wealth can be created from thin air by human ingenuity and hard work.


Now people on the left have, in their guts, a revulsion towards the rich and the wealthy, because whenever they see wealth they naturally assume that it was stolen…


So true, Doctor Whittle.


If any of you haven’t read Bill’s piece, you’ve missed out.  We know at least 99% of politicians have never read anything like it.  Either that or they were unable to understand it and wandered off to catch happy hour down at the watering hole.  Certainly nothing like this is being presented within our public schools.  Ever.


Well, now’s your chance.  It’ll take some time, but you’ll thank Bill for it, I guarantee.


For you lefties out there; don’t bother.  Something like a curse in a foreign language, you won’t understand it but it will upset the hell out of you all the same.  Like when certain people ask me how to do something and I say, with total sincerity, “I’m sure you can figure it out.”  Curse in a foreign language.