More democrats opposed to gun control

One battle at a time. We have a lot of work to do with things like property rights, ending the war on some recreational drugs, and Federal regulation of almost everything but we are still winning (or at least not losing) the battle to regain our right to keep and bear arms. Here is more proof from Eugene Oregon:

Other than alienating virtually every rural Democrat, there is no practical reason to ban handguns. We cannot take handguns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens when criminals would still buy them illegally or steal them.

…

Most importantly, gun ownership, including handguns, is the biggest deterrent to a totalitarian government or military coup. If the neoconservatives use the next terrorist attack to set aside more of our rights, we’ll eventually run out of them. I’ll be thankful that our “well regulated [neighborhood citizen] militia” has a “right to bear arms” that is not “infringed.” Those are quotes from the Constitution. I wish gun banners and neocons would read it and love it.

Several years ago when I successfully moved to strike the gun control plank from the Democratic Party of Lane County’s platform, no rural Democrats vocalized support. That wasn’t surprising, because no rural Democrats were present. We certainly have been rectifying that, as our recent gains have illustrated.

This is not to say I agree with the Lane County Democrats on anything else. Here some info off of their website:

On every civil rights issue, Democrats lead the fight. Democrats support expanding opportunities in jobs, health care benefits, and education. We support vigorous enforcement of civil rights laws.

[Heavy sigh] They don’t really understand what a “right” is. Health care is not and cannot be a right. Same with education and jobs. We still have lots of work to do–one battle at a time.

And what did you expect?

No surprise here.

Palestinian Attacks Go on Despite Truce

JERUSALEM Nov 26, 2006 (AP)— Israeli troops withdrew from the Gaza Strip as a last-minute cease-fire deal took hold Sunday morning, but two major Palestinian militant groups, saying they had no intention of stopping their attacks, fired volleys of homemade rockets into Israel.

The ongoing rocket attacks by Hamas and Islamic Jihad tempered hopes for a lasting truce, which was meant to end five months of deadly clashes.

I believe the problem is the mindset of the Muslim civilization. As told by Samuel P. Huntington in The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order they have a different viewpoint on group loyalties than we do in the West. I’ve made a crude chart that attempt to get the concept across:

Huntington describes it as a “U” and an inverted “U”. I have it as more like ‘V’s because I didn’t want to enter in all the data points to get a smooth U. But the point is that when our nations leaders say, “We are going to make peace, stop fighting while we talk” our civilization will obey even if the local groups think the fighting should continue. Muslim civilization doesn’t have that much loyalty to their nation. The local tribe and community has more influence. And on the other end of the scale they have more loyalty to other Muslims than their nation as well.

This also explains why Saddam Hussein picked people from his hometown as his guards and elite army units. He trusted them far more than people from other areas of the country.

Where does that leave us? How can we, or the Israels, negotiate peace? Or even have peace with Muslims? Good questions. I’m not sure it can be done unless we destroy their culture.

Nuking Hillary on Pearl Harbor Day

I first saw it at The Smallest Minority. Then a friend from Microsoft (and Boomershoot) sent me a link to it and said, “This bit of fiction just absolutely scared the living daylights out of me.” I’m pretty sure he is Jewish. [I was wrong] That makes at least a little bit of difference in the context.

It’s a good read. You should read the whole thing.

I responded to my friend in email. What follows is a slightly sanitized version of what I said to my friend.


December 7th, 2008 is a Sunday. I’ll be in Idaho.
 
Snarky remarks aside… Except for the level of detail and the scope it’s nothing I hadn’t already been concerned about. In addition to the financial centers I’m nearly certain Jewish population centers in New York City and Los Angles would be attacked–not just the economic targets. I’ve often figured Microsoft would be a target. It’s too successful, too much of a bad influence (all that music and porn that is available via computers) and too big of a reminder of how unsuccessful Muslims are for them to tolerate it’s continued existence.
 
And of course Israel would get it’s share of “gifts”. And probably England as well.
 
I need to find my book on nuclear warfare and see what sort of damage radius can be expected for warheads the size we are expecting. I think that for a 1 kiloton yield a mile or so is sufficient to have a decent chance of surviving the initial blast. That is not to say it would be something the U.S. could or should just shrug off.
 
On the flip side of that scenario I’m not sure most Muslim leaders and certainly North Korea will be very eager to buy into the expected endgame from that sort of attack.

I would expect that within a couple days Iran would have a soft green glow that would last for decades. If not from U.S. “sharing of the love” then from Israel suddenly becoming less inhibited in expressing their feelings toward Muslim extremists. I would expect many Muslim “Holy Cities” would become just “Holes”.

North Korea geography would have some sudden changes that would require some changes in maps-should someone decide to put on their NBC (Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical) suits and visit. 
 
I certainly regard Muslim extremists as an extremely serious threat–more so than North Korea. Watch the trailer for Obsession, The Movie. There are so many parallels between Nazi Germany and Muslims today that one has to be blind, ignorant, or stupid not to see what’s going to happen if we don’t take violent action and follow through on it. Unfortunately we don’t have any good options available to us. I see it as either the long slow road something along the lines of what George Bush attempted, and the Democrats sabotaged, or wholesale genocide. We don’t yet have the moral justification, and certainly not the political will, for genocide. But after we get nuked we may.

It will be ironic. The Democrats all demanding/promising peace and getting swept into office on that force of that idea. Then they deliver the peace of the grave for both us and our enemies.

Government health care

The people that voted “blue” because of the promise of government supplied health care should be careful what they ask for. They might get it.

Katherine Murphy, spokeswoman for the Patients Association, said the huge budget deficits faced by some NHS trusts – estimated to be over £1 billion – together with the Government’s obsession with targets, was leaving some hospitals with no option but to treat patients of the opposite sex together.

…

‘The Government’s pledge to get rid of mixed sex wards is yet another one of Tony Blair’s broken promises,’ Mrs Murphy said.

‘We’ve seen more and more calls to our patient helpline from distressed women in particular who are being forced to share rooms with men.

…

Last month a review of 153 acute trusts in England revealed that, in some hospitals, two in three patients are still being having to share a room with a member of the opposite sex.

…

‘Allowing trusts to simply put curtains up between patients makes no difference to them whatsoever,’ Mrs Murphy added.

‘It makes a mockery of the Government’s targets and is simply a token gesture that is failing to get to the root of the problem.’

In 1997, the Government set its first target for closing such wards by 1999. But in January 2000 this was revised to 2002.

It was then moved again, to April 2004 – but even this target has now been missed.

Tory health minister Stephen O’Brien said: ‘What further proof do we need of the value of a promise from this Labour Government than their record on mixed sex wards.

‘Four years ago they said they would get rid of mixed sex wards, but four years on the increasing evidence shows the situation is getting worse not better.

‘Financial deficits, caused by the Government’s mismanagement of the NHS, is now leading to less trusts taking the decision to close mixed sex wards.’

And do you really want the government having ready access files on your medical records? What if those “evil homophobic Republicans” could easily find everyone that was gay? Or if the unethical Democrats exposed the Republican candidates (or their daughters or girl-friends) who had abortions when they where a teenager?

Almost lost in the article is the £1 billion deficit (not debt) of the National Health Service. Government health care is not only more expensive than private health care (ask any health care professional how much time they spend dealing with government paperwork) it’s lower quality. Pay more, get less, and leaves you vulnerable to government abuse? You know it has to be the brain child of the loony left.

Update: I forgot to mention that Government Health Care fails my Jews In the Attic Test.

Quote of the day–Elwyn Brooks White

Democracy is the recurrent suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half of the time.

Elwyn Brooks White
(1899 – 1985)
New Yorker, July 3, 1944
[White wrote both Stuart Little, published in 1945, and Charlotte’s Web, published in 1952. People with children will recognize these books. He was also the author of The Elements of Style Illustrated–professional writers will instantly recognize this title.–Joe]

He has a point

Friday night Ry posted:

My position is that the formation of the Libertarian Party did more to destroy freedom in the United States (and therefore, the world) than any event since.

He and I talked about it at time lunch on Friday. I find it hard to disagree with his reasoning. But it’s a little hard to know for certain because you can’t rerun the experiment to see how it would have turned out had the Libertarian Party not been formed.

The only reasonable argument I can make against his position is that the L-Party has articulated and presented a viewpoint that perhaps would have been even more muddled and lost than it is now.

In any case it’s sobering to think about and it causes me to wonder about other applications of the same thinking. What of Gun Owners of America, The Second Amendment Foundation, Citizens Committee for the Right To Keep and Bear Arms, and JPFO? There I think the case is less clear. One can be a member of not just one but any and all of the organizations. With a political party your candidate either wins or loses. There is no middle ground or somewhat diminished influence when your most favored candidate looses a battle for political office.

Quote of the day–Bernard Rosenberg

MAN: A biodegradable but nonrecyclable animal blessed with opposable thumbs capable of grasping at straws.

Bernard Rosenberg

Another Normal Day in Israel

From my friend in Israel this morning:

Friends:

Breaking news is that in the morning’s barrage of Kassam rockets on the northern Negev towns (it is a regular going-to-school-time event) there were killed and wounded. So far the count is 3 rockets overnight and 8 rockets this morning .

Today is, “What you may not have heard on CNN or FOX News.”

Today’s word is “Insanity.”

Three separate parts of the same terrorist organization, Fatah, declared open season on anything and everything American because the USA vetoed the “UN resolution condemning Israel for the Massacre in Beit Hanun.” If they were not firing rockets into Israel there would be no fire returned from Israel. Fatah is the PLO Chairman’s group. They are the ones being armed and trained at breakneck pace by the USA as well as being armed and supplied with ammo for the AKs and M16 they are receiving from Egypt, Jordan and even Israel (Israel’s leadership is no better than anyone else’s) with America’s blessing, if not at America’s behest.

The Iranian President just announced he is willing to talk to the USA (if the USA behaves correctly), but in the “fine print” of his speech Ahmadinejad proudly proclaimed he will have his nuclear fuel production ready by Spring. Someone in the West better start a countdown that ends before Iran’s countdown ends.

Enormous amounts of arms (more advanced and of enhanced ability) are pouring into the Gaza Strip. That what happens when you let the “policing” to someone other than yourself, in this case the Egyptians. Now our leaders are taking it one step further. There are discussions to further open (full-time) the Rafah Crossing (Egypt-Gaza). This continuing US State Department brainchild would have the PLO Presidential Guard (you may know them as Force 17, exceptionally good at conducting terrorist operation) deployed to secure the border crossing. That is like putting the drug deal[er]s in charge of the security at the border crossing between Mexico and San Diego.

I worry about my kids getting hurt on the way to school– from traffic, fights, strangers, and such.  I have a hard time wrapping my mind around the fact that some people worry about getting hit by rockets every single day.  I wonder what happens to the American intellectuals (the Leftists and journalists who want us to believe they have a monopoly on compassion, and another on understanding) when they hear about these things.  No, they can’t mention it, can’t even think about it, if it doesn’t further their political goals.

Why intellectuals still support socialism

A good read. Some excerpts:

This also leads to the phenomenon that academics don’t know much about how markets work, since they have so little experience with them, living as they do in their subsidized ivory towers and protected by academic tenure. As Joseph Schumpeter explained in Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, it is “the absence of direct responsibility for practical affairs” that distinguishes the academic intellectual from others “who wield the power of the spoken and the written word.” This absence of direct responsibility leads to a corresponding absence of first-hand knowledge of practical affairs.

…we must realize first that academics receive many direct benefits from the welfare state, and that these benefits have increased over time.

Excluding student financial aid, public universities receive about 50 percent of their funding from federal and state governments, dwarfing the 18 percent they receive from tuition and fees. Even “private” universities like Stanford or Harvard receive around 20 percent of their budgets from federal grants and contracts.[4]  If you include student financial aid, that figure rises to almost 50 percent. According to the US Department of Education, about a third of all students at public, 4-year colleges and universities, and half the students at private colleges and universities, receive financial aid from the federal government.

In this sense, the most dramatic example of “corporate welfare” in the US is the GI Bill, which subsidized the academic sector, bloating it far beyond the level the market would have provided. The GI Bill, signed by President Roosevelt in 1944 to send returning soldiers to colleges and universities, cost taxpayers $14.5 billion between 1944 and 1956.[5]  Federal spending on the latest version, the Montgomery GI Bill, is projected at $3.2 billion in 2006 alone.

…

The current crises in higher education and the media are probably good things, in the long run, if they force a rethinking of educational and intellectual goals and objectives, and take power away from the establishment institutions. Then, and only then, we may see a rebirth of genuine scholarship, communication, and education.

Quote of the day–Gore Vidal

Apparently, a democracy is a place where numerous elections are held at great cost without issues and with interchangeable candidates.

Gore Vidal
In A View from the Diner’s Club (1991)
Gods and Greens
Observer (London, Aug. 27, 1989)

Quote of the day–Ambrose Bierce

Honorable: Afflicted with an impediment in one’s reach.  In legislative bodies, it is customary to mention all members as honorable; as, “the honorable gentleman is a scurvy cur.”

Ambrose Bierce
The Devil’s Dictionary

Quote of the day–William O. Douglas

At the constitutional level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections.

William O. Douglas
[A lawyer recently told me something very similar. But it was perhaps a bit more cynical–or was it simply more truthful?–Joe]

In a Nut Shell

I think this is the most accurate statement I’ve found since the election:

The Republicans lost, and the Democrats won, for the same reason — they distanced themselves from their base.

Quote of the day–Groucho Marx

Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and then applying the wrong remedies.

Groucho Marx
[I expect we will be seeing a lot more of this soon.–Joe]

Reaping the benefits of socialism

The main thrust of this article is something completely different but what really caught my eye was this:

Russia loses around 700,000 people each year – about 0.5 per cent of its total population – to emigration, disease and alcoholism.

It would appear that the “benefits” of socialism last for quite some time after the system has collapsed. One would hope that people not try another “experiment” such as that ever again. What is it? Something like 100 million dead in the last century that can be attributed to socialism and communism? And if the above numbers are correct and characteristic of what happens when socialism collapses one may even make a prediction.  And that prediction would be that the implementation of a “workers paradise” means the complete death of that society. It may be that the only escape from the death throes of that type of disaster is for some other culture to salvage the remnants and rebuild it in a completely different image.

But one could always hope people could learn from the failure of others. But that hope would only reveal that I’m an optimist even in the face of irrefutable evidence to the contrary. I do have irrefutable evidence that people don’t learn from the failures of others–there are still people that vote for the Socialists Democrats in our country.

Quote of the day–John Quincy Adams

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.

John Quincy Adams

Quote of the day–W. C. Fields

Hell, I never vote for anybody, I always vote against.

W. C. Fields

Quote of the day–Karl Hess

Your vote isn’t a bet on who’s going to win the election. It’s a statement of who you are.

Karl Hess
Fundraising Letter written on behalf of the Libertarian Party, November 1990.

Taking rights

Interesting point of view. He (or she) says the Democrats are too moderate. The Democrats have abandoned the left.

A truly left party would call for universal health care. It’s criminal to live in the richest country in the world and have 46 million people – 15 percent of the population – without health care. The last time Democrats controlled the executive branch, the Welfare to Work program passed. This bill created a slave class, eliminated union jobs and didn’t help anyone get off welfare.

…

Democrats merely represent a different sector of the elite. Most people are oblivious because elections focus on marginal issues. It’s no wonder that rich people have seen their wealth explode while working peoples’ wages have stagnated. What’s the moral? Don’t get involved in petty democratic politics. Forget the Young Democrats. Get involved in activism that matters, which is mostly activism that works outside the system. Remember, rights are not given; they are taken.

So what rights do they suggest should be taken? A “right” to health care? A “right” to a job? And what activism “outside the system” do they endorse? It’s interesting to speculate. Whatever the answers are I’m certain the “rights” and activism they support are not the same as mine.

Another sign

Amendment II Democrats:

Today, Amendment II Democrats pledges itself to helping take back America from the Republican Party and giving it back to the people. We will settle for nothing less than a Democratic House and Senate in 2006. And, at the same time, there is a golden opportunity for pro-RKBA Democrats to dramatically change firearms policy within the Democratic Party itself from the ground up. All we have to do is join together, stand up on our hind legs, and exercise our First Amendment rights if we want any hope of affecting real change within the party of Jefferson, Kennedy, and F.D. Roosevelt.

Can anyone name a U.S. political party that openly says, “We are opposed to the people having the right to keep and bear arms.”? Certainly there are individual politicians that work to subvert it and are openly for gun control. But they don’t dare make it a party platform.

We are making progress. We just need to drive the remaining bigots into political extinction. Once the gun issue is under control we can working on the next greatest threat to our freedom. My vote probably would be to set our sights on the war on some drugs or the income tax.