Can bloggers make a difference?

Sometimes you might think you are just “preaching to the choir” and the people that can make a difference don’t listen no matter what you do.

Then there are other times when you think maybe someone in a position of power is paying attention:

Domain Name   senate.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address   156.33.24.# (U.S. Senate Sergeant at Arms)
ISP   U.S. Senate Sergeant at Arms
Location  
Continent  :  North America
Country  :  United States  (Facts)
State  :  District of Columbia
City  :  Washington
Lat/Long  :  38.9097, -77.0231 (Map)
Distance  :  2,071 miles
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 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1)
Javascript   version 1.3
Monitor  

Resolution  :  1024 x 768
Color Depth  :  16 bits

Time of Visit   Feb 25 2008 7:56:41 am
Last Page View   Feb 25 2008 7:59:25 am
Visit Length   2 minutes 44 seconds
Page Views   2
Referring URL http://www.google.co… state park firearms
Search Engine google.com
Search Words idaho state park firearms
Visit Entry Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/
Visit Exit Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/
Out Click    
Time Zone   UTC-5:00
Visitor’s Time   Feb 25 2008 10:56:41 am
Visit Number   255,384

 

 

Domain Name   senate.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address   156.33.24.# (U.S. Senate Sergeant at Arms)
ISP   U.S. Senate Sergeant at Arms
Location  
Continent  :  North America
Country  :  United States  (Facts)
State  :  District of Columbia
City  :  Washington
Lat/Long  :  38.9097, -77.0231 (Map)
Distance  :  2,071 miles
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; InfoPath.2)
Javascript   version 1.3
Monitor  

Resolution  :  1024 x 768
Color Depth  :  16 bits

Time of Visit   Feb 25 2008 7:23:21 am
Last Page View   Feb 25 2008 7:25:12 am
Visit Length   1 minute 51 seconds
Page Views   2
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/2008/02/22/wooo-hooo-/
Visit Exit Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/2008/02/22/wooo-hooo-/
Out Click   The View From North Central Idaho
https://blog.joehuffman.org/
Time Zone   UTC-5:00
Visitor’s Time   Feb 25 2008 10:23:21 am
Visit Number   255,369

Quote of the day–Megan McArdle

When the government controls your paycheck, your housing, and your ration card, it doesn’t need to put you in jail; you are in jail.

Megan McArdle
February 25, 2008
HOPELESS IN HAVANA
[I fear we are about to learn this lesson first hand.

H/T to Kirby for the email pointing this out.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Pat Paulsen

Assuming that either the left wing or the right wing gained control of the country, it would probably fly around in circles.

Pat Paulsen
[With all due respect to Paulsen I think the more likely result would be a crash. I wish Paulsen were still alive and running for president this year. We could use the comic relief and perhaps even a viable alternative.–Joe]

Anti-gun proposal body slammed

The headline reads, Moore’s Gun Control Proposal Is Shot Down By County Commissioners. But was more than that. It was more like stripped naked, body slammed, machine gunned, and urinated on:

County Commissioner Marie Moore’s proposed ordinance to restrict firearms use in the county was solidly rejected by her colleagues Monday night and she took a tongue-lashing from irate citizens as well.

Vale resident Sam Houser said that Moore’s proposal was a “waste of money and time” and urged that commissioners reprimand her for violating their rules by springing the idea on them without any discussion or public input at a meeting earlier this month.

Commissioners had scheduled  a public hearing on the idea for March 3, but their rejection of the ordinance Monday night ended the need for that.

Moore’s proposal would regulate firearms use near houses and occupied structures, but speaker-after-speaker told commissioners that laws are already on the books that would prosecute anyone who maliciously or careless fires a weapon.

Sheriff Tim Daugherty told commissioners he thought Moore’s proposal was unenforceable and said he didn’t want his deputies wasting their time chasing down and investigating calls that would result if the ordinance passed.

Commissioner Alex Patton, who made the motion to kill Moore’s proposal, said that he had received more than 100 emails and 30 phone calls, and not a single person he heard from is in favor of the idea.

“It’s not right for Lincoln County,” he said, rejecting Moore’s contention that a public hearing should be held before a final decision was made.

Commissioner Jim Klein said that it was “unfortunate that this ordinance got as far as it did” and said it is “an ordinance that we don’t need in this county.”

Moore retorted that a woman was killed in Maine in 1989 by a stray bullet.

Commissioner Bruce Carlton then weighed in and said that life has risks and it’s not government’s place to remove every hazard from daily life” unless we want what he called a “vanilla world.”

Patton then sealed the fate of the ordinance by saying that common sense can’t be put in an ordinance.

The audience applauded much to Moore’s chagrin.

Chairman Tom Anderson said that he believed we have laws already in place to cover the issues that concerned Moore, and urged residents to be responsible in their use of firearms.

Earlier, Denver resident Jamie Barnes who has complained about what he calls a nuisance puppy mill on Petite Lane, said there were three accidental shootings in the county last year and 177 dog bites with one fatality.

He said that it seems to him that gun owners are more responsible than puppy mill owners.

“I am more afraid that my daughter will be attacked by a dog than shot,” he said.

Only one citizen spoke in favor of Moore’s proposal, noting that he and his wife were working in their garden when “bullets whizzed overhead.”

Patton’s motion to kill the gun control measure passed 4-1, with only Moore in dissent.

I love the “spirited defense” the North Carolina anti-gun bigot put up, “Moore retorted that a woman was killed in Maine in 1989 by a stray bullet.”

Works for me

I have to reluctantly agree with Kim on this one.

More evidence for global warming

Barb says the joke is getting old. I still think it is funny. Maybe I’m just slow on some things.

In any case there is more evidence of global warming climate change:

Are the world’s ice caps melting because of climate change, or are the reports just a lot of scare mongering by the advocates of the global warming theory?

Scare mongering appears to be the case, according to reports from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that reveal that almost all the allegedly “lost” ice has come back. A NOAA report shows that ice levels which had shrunk from 5 million square miles in January 2007 to just 1.5 million square miles in October, are almost back to their original levels.

Moreover, a Feb. 18 report in the London Daily Express showed that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than usual, challenging the global warming crusaders and buttressing arguments of skeptics who deny that the world is undergoing global warming.

The Daily express recalls the photograph of polar bears clinging on to a melting iceberg which has been widely hailed as proof of the need to fight climate change and has been used by former Vice President Al Gore during his “Inconvenient Truth” lectures about mankind’s alleged impact on the global climate.

Gore fails to mention that the photograph was taken in the month of August when melting is normal. Or that the polar bear population has soared in recent years.

As winter roars in across the Northern Hemisphere, Mother Nature seems to have joined the ranks of the skeptics.

As the Express notes, scientists are saying the northern Hemisphere has endured its coldest winter in decades, adding that snow cover across the area is at its greatest since 1966. The newspaper cites the one exception — Western Europe, which had, until the weekend when temperatures plunged to as low as -10 C in some places, been basking in unseasonably warm weather.

Around the world, vast areas have been buried under some of the heaviest snowfalls in decades. Central and southern China, the United States, and Canada were hit hard by snowstorms. In China, snowfall was so heavy that over 100,000 houses collapsed under the weight of snow.

Jerusalem, Damascus, Amman, and northern Saudi Arabia report the heaviest falls in years and below-zero temperatures. In Afghanistan, snow and freezing weather killed 120 people. Even Baghdad had a snowstorm, the first in the memory of most residents.

As people continue to push for restrictions on human activities to prevent global warming climate change you know it has to be they have an agenda other than what they claim it is. It is my belief its about desire for government control rather than freedom. Freedom is too scary for most people.

It’s not about preventing crime

A terrible crime is committed so government officials want to Do SomethingTM to prevent it from happening again. Never mind that prior restraint is supposedly illegal. Never mind that what they propose is illegal and a felony. They admit, in virtually the same breath they used to push their proposals, that their proposals won’t work:

But after the news conference, state Sen. John Cullerton, a Chicago Democrat and longtime gun control advocate, acknowledged they would not have prevented the NIU shootings. Authorities have said the NIU gunman legally obtained the weapons he used.

If they know their proposal would not have prevented the crime then it’s obvious their proposal is intended for the stated purpose. It’s about something else. What is that something else? I can’t say for certain. In fact it may be they don’t even know. The question these bigots need to be asked, “Since you know this proposal won’t prevent such crimes, what’s the real reason you advocate more restrictions on firearms?”

ATF job description

Kevin Cullen is from Boston so it’s no surprise he doesn’t have a clue about guns:

So, some cow chip-kickin’ senator from Louisiana doesn’t want Mike Sullivan, the US attorney in Boston, to become head of the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms because Sullivan wants to make it harder for people to get guns.

Um, isn’t that what the head of the ATF is supposed to do?

Let me spell it out for you Mr. Cullen, you’re from Boston so I understand the concepts are difficult for you.

The head of the ATF, just like all other government officials are required to uphold the constitution. Until such time as the Bill of Rights is declared null and void it is the NOT the job of the head of the ATF to make it harder for people to get guns. In fact the “Head of the ATF” should be actually be the CEO of a convenience store by the same name (actually you should tack the ‘E’ on to the end of it but I’m not going to complain if that market is handled by a separate chain that specializes).

The middle ground at Hillary’s gun summit

As pointed out by others (and here) Hillary wants a gun summit:

“I believe we really should have a summit where everybody comes together on all sides of this issue,” Clinton said. “Let’s figure out how we can be consistent with the Second Amendment, which I wholeheartedly support, and do more to keep people safe.

“I think we can do that, but it’s going to require us all to maybe give a little and understand the point of view of the other people,” she said. “That’s something I would do as President to really bring people together.”

I’m all for reaching a middle ground. In fact I have given this a lot of thought in the past and already determined what the middle ground looks like. Just adopt my position and everyone will save a lot of time and energy.

And even if my reasonable compromise isn’t acceptable do not forget Sean’s valuable insight.

Quote of the day–Chairman Mao Tse-Tung

Communism is at once a complete system of proletarian ideology and a new social system. It is different from any other ideological and social system, and is the most complete, progressive, revolutionary and rational system in human history. The ideological and social system of feudalism has a place only in the museum of history. The ideological and social system of capitalism has also become a museum piece in one part of the world (in the Soviet Union), while in other countries it resembles “a dying person who is sinking fast, like the sun setting beyond the western hills”, and will soon be relegated to the museum. The communist ideological and social system alone is full of youth and vitality, sweeping the world with the momentum of an avalanche and the force of a thunderbolt.

Chairman Mao Tse-Tung
Little Red Book
“On New Democracy” (January 1940), Selected Works,  Vol. II, pp. 360-61.
[I ran across this book in the Paper Source store in Bellevue, Washington yesterday. A very weird place to find it. I was interested in reading it but didn’t want to spend money that would benefit some communist so I found the book on-line. I need to read the Communist Manifesto sometime too. So much of Marx and other communist philosophy infiltrates our politics and even everyday thinking it would help to be able to identify it and point out the errors more readily. As you can see from the quote above their predictions and proclamations have less that stellar accuracy.–Joe]

Obama and Hillary

Both SayUncle and Sebastian are feeling happy to see “Obama Slaps Hillary Silly in VA” but note that rationally that feeling doesn’t make much sense.

Admittedly, even if you drop the title of “The First Woman President of the United States of America” this image is pretty frightening:

But which would you rather have in office? Someone who 40% of the population thought was a power mad megalomaniac without morals or someone who would attempt to implement the same laws and tyranny but 80% of the population thought was, deep down, a “nice guy”?

If those were the only two choices I had I would vote for the megalomaniac because it would be easier to motivate the opposition and throw them and their collaborators out the next election. And if the next elections “didn’t happen” a lot more people would have been preparing for the revolution.

Basically its a choice between being forced to distribute either a poison that tastes sweet or one that tastes extremely bitter. Go with the bitter tasting because fewer people will take a lethal dose.

And it may not come to one of them being elected. As some have said, we want Hillary to win the nomination because she has less chance of being elected than Obama. Go Hillary! Then get lost.

We got their attention

Mike Brown and I have been talking about this bill for months. He wrote it and I helped with the website and blog. Last week it was introduced. It appears we have got someone’s attention.

From the University of Idaho:


From: asui@uidaho.edu
To: students-list@uidaho.edu
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:24:23 -0800
Subject: Senate Bill 1381 Allowing students with concealed weapons permits to campus

Dear Vandal,

In case you have not heard, the Idaho State Senate is considering Senate
Bill 1381.  If this bill passes, it will allow individuals with concealed
weapons permits to carry their firearms on campus after notifying proper
university authorities.  Because this bill has the potential to affect every
student at the university the ASUI has decided to put together a discussion
panel where students can learn more, ask questions, and state their stance
on this piece of legislation.  This is a great opportunity to engage in the
political process.  After the panel, you will have an opportunity to write
letters to state legislators supporting or opposing SB 1381.

Here is a link to the actual bill text:
http://www3.state.id.us/oasis/S1381.html

What: Senate Bill 1381 Allowing students with concealed weapons permits to
carry firearms on campus
Where: Renfrew Hall Room 111
When: Wed. Feb 13th, 2008 from 4:00-5:30 PM

 

 

ASUI and the ASUI Center for Volunteerism and Social Action

Quote of the day–Benjamin Franklin

Laws too gentle are seldom obeyed; too severe, seldom executed.

Benjamin Franklin

Unintended consequences strike again

From the Washington Post, Studies Say Clearing Land for Biofuels Will Aid Warming:

One study — written by a group of researchers from Princeton University, Woods Hole Research Center and Iowa State University along with an agriculture consultant — concluded that over 30 years, use of traditional corn-based ethanol would produce twice as much greenhouse gas emissions as regular gasoline. Another analysis, written by a Nature Conservancy scientist along with University of Minnesota researchers, found that converting rainforests, peatlands, savannas or grasslands in Southeast Asia and Latin America to produce biofuels will increase global warming pollution for decades, if not centuries.

Also in the same article:

There is an urgent need for policy that ensures biofuels are not produced on productive forest, grassland or cropland.

Oh, so you expect you can just start growing corn or some other high energy crop on a bare, wind swept rock?

And finally this:

This is a good way of showing where we are, not where we’re going to be,” said Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who is chairman of a House global warming panel and who helped write the energy legislation. Noting that the measure set benchmarks requiring any new ethanol plants to produce a fuel that is 20 percent more efficient than gasoline, and even more stringent standards for advanced biofuels,

I have a sneaking suspicious they misspelled that guys name. I’m thinking it should be Malarkey.

Ethanol has less energy content that gasoline. Unless they can produce something other than ethanol from the biomass the end result is they are doing the equivalent of legislating PI is equal to 3.00.

I’m laughing all the way to the bank.

Quote of the day–James Russell Lowell

Democracy gives every man the right to be his own oppressor.

James Russell Lowell
[Which is why we were supposed to have a Republic with a constitution which enumerated limited powers to the government and with guaranteed rights to the people. Unfortunately people found out they could ignore the constitution without consequences and we now have something much closer to a democracy with all the adverse effects.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Karl Marx

The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.

Karl Marx
[Just because Marx happened to be right about this year’s election doesn’t mean he had even a glimmer of a solution to the problem. Super Tuesday wasn’t.–Joe]

Spectacle

I took notes during Bush’s Big Speech the other day, but I’m only now reporting on it. The wheelbarrows full of cash that I regularly get from the NRA for parroting their extremist (pro-Liberty) politics aren’t nearly enough to keep me interested in blogging on other subjects in a timely manner.

I did not count the number of applause lines (most of those clapping probably weren’t listening anyway. They only notice that the nodding drunk sitting next to them is clapping for something, so they follow along). I did count the number of times Dubya used certain terms. Thankfully, he went light on his usual equating of democracy with Liberty– that’s always bugged the hell out of me. Not that I think he’s figured anything out– he just had other things to say, namely that he buys fully into the man-made “Global Climate Change” racket. Smartly, he avoided using the term “Global Warming” favoring the more universal “Climate Change” instead.

He used the term “Liberty” eight times, which is eight times more than your average Democrat would use it in a whole career of public speaking. “Freedom” was used fully ten times, but then, a Marxist will speak of “freeing” us from corporate tyranny, and such. Bush used the term in the correct sense pretty much every time, which is odd considering that he was at the same time adamant in his assertion that the path to technological progress starts with government subsidy and proceeds from there to more government subsidy, where it finally arrives at a level that qualifies for a whole big bunch of more government subsidy.

“Bipartisan” was used twice, and in the Left-Speak sense only. He was referring to the “no child’s behind left alone” act and something thoroughly vague about “entitlement solutions”, which brought the most brilliantly unenthusiastic, apathetic, if not contemptuous, applause imaginable. Quite impressive. Throughout the speech, this wasn’t the sort of disingenuously enthusiastic applause you gave at the Kremlin, or during one of Saddam’s speeches in the hope that you wouldn’t be taken out and shot a moment later. No, this was true, unguided, unmotivated, wandering, bored, limp, listless, hollow, comfortable apathy, the depths of which are seldom seen in the faces of ordinary men– some of the scarce honesty seen that night.

The word “victory” was not used– too “divisive” to speak of American victory I suppose. He did mention “defeating” the enemy in the War On An Emotion 4 times, so there’s that.

One of his genuine moments was when he was honoring the servicemen and servicewomen, and their families. This is in sharp contrast to our last president, who saw these people as a means to his self aggrandizement. There was some genuine applause there too, and they deserved more.

“Purpose” was used twice, but without defining the particular “purpose” he had in mind, if any. It’s a potentially nice word. Marx and Lenin had a “purpose” though, too.

Bizarrely, he used the “O” bomb (Oath) once. That could come back to bite him– he indicated that he may have been aware of the meaning and purpose of the Oath of Office, so any violations must hereafter be considered willful, and any tolerance of the violations of others must be considered complicit.

“Unity” was never used. Good choice that. Who wants to be “unified” with one’s enemies? Likewise, he only said “change” once and in reference to his course in Iraq– not in the Change to More Socialism sense use by the Left. That was for us to infer from his many calls for subsidy and restriction.

Our president promised one executive order– a requirement that all earmarks be debated in the open, and voted on, outside of committees. That’s a teeny weeny start– sort of like a starter’s pistol that was never loaded and just goes “click”. Congress is now spending three trillion of our dollars per year, as opposed to the 2.2 trillion they spent when Bush took office (That’s now a hair under 10 thousand dollars from every man, woman and child in this country, per year, or 40 thousand for a family of four, and rising fast. That’s more than the total incomes of most working people around the world). I’ll clap a few times when I see that total number drop for eight years in a row. Until then, republicans are to be seen as a slower path to pure socialism, compared to the faster path offered by Dems.

Watching Pelosi chewing something in the background was a little funny, and a little sickening (I felt I was back in jr. high school all over again, and I didn’t like it the first time). Watching the Congresscritters on the floor was amusing and instructive. When Bush said something about terrorist surveillance, the floor was split perfectly down the middle– Dems sitting and Repubs standing. Same when he mentioned tax relief– no Democrat would ever even USE the term, much less recognize it when a Republican uses it. If anything, “tax relief” to a democrat would be relieving people of their money by taxing them. Republicans recognize that when tax rates drop, we get more productive and they get more of our money to spend. Democrats hate productivity altogether.

I liked the part where he told anyone who thinks their taxes should be higher that the IRS accepts checks and money orders (maybe he never heard of cashier’s checks, which are good for much higher amounts). So send it in, bitches, and shut yer yaps!

When Bush called for up or down votes on court appointments, the Dems sat down. Yeah– screw the Constitution if it means we can’t have what we want. Who’s gonna do anything about it?

Probably the stupidest thing he said all night (and this is amazingly, stunningly, monumentally stupid, such that historians and psychoanalysts will marvel at this phenomenon for generations to come. It will be in textbooks as a demonstration of the lemming-like nature of human group-think) was that “We” need a “Lawful Way” for foreign workers to “come and support our economy”. Either Bush is a blithering idiot, he hopes we’re all blithering idiots, or I am wrong in believing that the U.S. has always had multiple “Lawful Ways” for foreign workers to come here and support themselves, which, in turn, helps to support the economy. Which is it? WTF? Hello? No one picked up on that, so I’ll have to allow that I may be wrong– maybe this country never has had any means by which people could come here legally to work. And maybe I’m a lemming. Apparently no one knows for sure. Apparently, no one in Congress has ever read one of their own bills– you know, the immigration bills they’ve been passing for the last, oh, 219 F>@*ing years and then forgetting– the ones they pass with zero expectation of enforcement. This is a stupid party wherein people have been overdosing on stupid for so long that they’re addicted to stupid and will apparently get the cold sweats and die if deprived of regular, heavy doses of stupid.

In the end, Bush had used many very nice terms and cute words and phrases (still can’t pronounce nuclear– hasn’t anyone told him? Dude, it’s NUKE, LEE, ERR, OK? Say it!) all carefully contrived to throw a little bone to this and to that disparate interest, as if to satisfy everyone. It didn’t work. It never works. It only shows that he is without solid principle– that every mutually exclusive interest to which he panders (thinking himself clever in the process) will see him correctly as a political push-over, lost, a fake, and a hypocrite, searching nervously for the next buzz-phrase to quell our suspicions– to find the dimmer switch for that light-bulb over our heads and turn it down. In other words, a typical, run-of-the-mill Republican.

But to be a part of the spectacle. That much they have.

Quote of the day–Winston Churchill

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

Winston Churchill
[Applicable today because of the discussion over at Munchkin Wrangler. Via Tam.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Lily Tomlin

Ninety eight percent of the adults in this country are decent, hardworking, honest Americans. It’s the other lousy two percent that get all the publicity. But then, we elected them.

Lily Tomlin
[Politics can be pretty depressing at times.–Joe]

Conversions

Uncle discusses, “How do we win this political gun battle?”, asks for some help, and gets this suggestion. Then Sebastian offers this.

There is some good stuff there but there were a few items left out.

  • Join pro gun groups. The first group you should join is the NRA; even if you think they compromise too much. They are the 800 pound gorilla in the legislative kitchen and just the raw number of members causes the politicians to think twice before cooking up an anti-gun scheme. Other groups serve useful purposes and should be considered as well. Some of them are 501(c)(3) corporations and your donations are tax deductible.
  • Come out of the closet. In the early days of the gay rights movement there was a phrase, “Silence equals death!”. Getting people to come out in the open about being a gun owner helps the anti-gun people realize we aren’t red-necked, knuckle dragging, Neanderthals, who beat their wives, complain about the “coloreds” lusting after our women folk, and whose idea of a good time is shooting our empties while chugging beer from the tailgate of our pickups. It worked for the gays and it can work for us.
  • Closely related to the previous item is to speak up when someone says something hostile about gun ownership. Know your facts, know the anti-gun position fallacies, and don’t be afraid to share them when someone tries to push that failed agenda. Come up with sound-bites and don’t belabor things. People will “turn off” if your viewpoint takes more than about 30 seconds to explain. If you don’t have anything more directly to the point, ask Just One Question.
  • Invite the media to your pro-gun events and put announcements of your events in their “whats happening” section. Most media outlets are starved for material. If you are having a special event invite them to come, watch, and report on it. Write a decent news release (such that they can easily and quickly plagiarize it for their own use) and you increase the odds of attendance and positive coverage considerably. See, for example, Boomershoot coverage.
  • In the end game, which we may just be entering, we need to drive them to political extinction. You don’t get there by saying, “They have a valid point and everyone is entitled to their opinion.” We must make their position as socially uncomfortable as that of the KKK. See this post for how to do that.