Via Insy comes this gem:
Klavan on culture
Worth the 5 minutes time.
Send it on to any budding liberal college graduate you may know.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Something to think about while selecting the right tree....
Politicians should fear armed insurrection by the people they are supposed to represent. Seriously. They should fear that when they return home, the populace that elected them to be their representative will be waiting for them, demanding answers as to why they are not representing the interests of those that elected them.
They should be in fear that the crowds will overwhelm their meager protection and lynch them.
But luckily for them, we are well behaved serfs and we don't do that.
Yet.
But someday soon there will come a time when we all have a decision to make.
Sisal? Manila? Nylon? Polypropylene?
All have their advantages.
I'm just sayin'
They should be in fear that the crowds will overwhelm their meager protection and lynch them.
But luckily for them, we are well behaved serfs and we don't do that.
Yet.
But someday soon there will come a time when we all have a decision to make.
Sisal? Manila? Nylon? Polypropylene?
All have their advantages.
I'm just sayin'
So I have the opinion, after reading up a bit on the prospective new Supreme, Ms. Sotomayor, that she is hand picked not because she is a liberal judge (although that is indeed what she is, and that is a part of her charm to the Obama Administation) but because she is an anti second amendment judge. Mr. Obama will find it hard to get legislation passed that is anti-gun both due to campaign promises and due to the fact that many democrats are now fully aware as to how important this issue is to their constituents (wanna get defeated? go for another AWB!). But she can be his backdoor attack on the 2nd ammendment. More than that, she can make lasting changes to the precedents used in the arguing of future attacks on our 2nd amendment.
While it may well be that nothing will change except that she will replace Souter (who is more or less anti 2nd anyway), it may well be that she will do more damage than he might have, as he was, at least, somewhat fair minded and morally honest. One cannot say the same about Ms. Sotomayor.
For more, go HERE
As for Ms. Sotomayor, we can only pray for a miracle.....
While it may well be that nothing will change except that she will replace Souter (who is more or less anti 2nd anyway), it may well be that she will do more damage than he might have, as he was, at least, somewhat fair minded and morally honest. One cannot say the same about Ms. Sotomayor.
For more, go HERE
As for Ms. Sotomayor, we can only pray for a miracle.....
Friday, May 29, 2009
Because he asked.....
I forward to you, a post from AD.
You decide what to do with it. Donate, or not, the choice is yours. Buy a cookbook or not. Your choice. But read (and follow the links) and decide, please.
Thank you.
You decide what to do with it. Donate, or not, the choice is yours. Buy a cookbook or not. Your choice. But read (and follow the links) and decide, please.
Thank you.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT
We have commentary from the advice goddess:
"There are no ugly women, only lazy ones."
it's true enough....
"There are no ugly women, only lazy ones."
it's true enough....
SO I am reading about Judge Sotomayor and her pros and cons. I haven't had enough time to research her record, and so I will reserve judgment regarding her fitness as a Supreme Court Justice based on her judicial past.
I am, however disappointed in the response from the supposedly intelligent left and the media. A justice who has a "compelling personal story" and who "brings a Latina perspective to the bench" isn't, in my opinion, a good thing. A judge, especially a SUPREME, should be able to put aside race, gender, and religious heritage, and make a ruling on the evidence before him/her, and the law as written, or based on the constitution. To bring anything else to the bench is to do the position, and ultimately, the country and it's citizens a disservice. No one is above having biases. No judge is perfect, and all are human enough to let their biases affect their decisions. But a wise person who has attained a position in the supreme court should have the intelligence to put those aside as much as possible. Sotomayor has indeed told us that while she will try, her experiences as a Latina growing up will color her decisions. While I think it is admirable to admit this, it automatically negates her as a choice. I say this admitting that I could not (for may reasons) be a supreme court justice. I am too biased, and could not put those opinions aside to make the decisions as justice should. (plus I am not an attorney). But for a potential justice to freely admit that she will be biased is to remove yourself from the selection process.
I admire her honesty. I would hope that she is not confirmed.
But I am, admittedly, biased.
ETA:
More HERE
BTW: this is the oath that she will take....Can she uphold it? (emphasis mine)
"I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as (title) under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."
Can she follow that oath, if she is to use her experiences as a Latina growing up in her job as a justice of the SUPREME COURT OF THE US?
I am, however disappointed in the response from the supposedly intelligent left and the media. A justice who has a "compelling personal story" and who "brings a Latina perspective to the bench" isn't, in my opinion, a good thing. A judge, especially a SUPREME, should be able to put aside race, gender, and religious heritage, and make a ruling on the evidence before him/her, and the law as written, or based on the constitution. To bring anything else to the bench is to do the position, and ultimately, the country and it's citizens a disservice. No one is above having biases. No judge is perfect, and all are human enough to let their biases affect their decisions. But a wise person who has attained a position in the supreme court should have the intelligence to put those aside as much as possible. Sotomayor has indeed told us that while she will try, her experiences as a Latina growing up will color her decisions. While I think it is admirable to admit this, it automatically negates her as a choice. I say this admitting that I could not (for may reasons) be a supreme court justice. I am too biased, and could not put those opinions aside to make the decisions as justice should. (plus I am not an attorney). But for a potential justice to freely admit that she will be biased is to remove yourself from the selection process.
I admire her honesty. I would hope that she is not confirmed.
But I am, admittedly, biased.
ETA:
More HERE
BTW: this is the oath that she will take....Can she uphold it? (emphasis mine)
"I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as (title) under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."
Can she follow that oath, if she is to use her experiences as a Latina growing up in her job as a justice of the SUPREME COURT OF THE US?
Monday, May 25, 2009
Today isn't about babecues with friends
"We cherish too, the Poppy red
That grows on fields where valor led,
It seems to signal to the skies
That blood of heroes never dies. "
"In Flanders Fields,"
Moina Michael
The history HERE
Think about it.
ETA: AD gets it. He says it better than I can.
That grows on fields where valor led,
It seems to signal to the skies
That blood of heroes never dies. "
"In Flanders Fields,"
Moina Michael
The history HERE
Think about it.
ETA: AD gets it. He says it better than I can.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
.jpg)
Friday, May 22, 2009
Let's remember
The reason for this holiday weekend.
Lets all take a moment to close our eyes and, at the least, say thank you to the men and women who gave their lives for the country. Without them, we might be speaking German, or Japanese. We might not have the country that we have now.
To those who made the sacrifice, and their families. I give you my heartfelt thanks.
And, should you encounter one this weekend; say "thanks" to a soldier too.
Lets all take a moment to close our eyes and, at the least, say thank you to the men and women who gave their lives for the country. Without them, we might be speaking German, or Japanese. We might not have the country that we have now.
To those who made the sacrifice, and their families. I give you my heartfelt thanks.
And, should you encounter one this weekend; say "thanks" to a soldier too.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
More than just words...
"If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." -- Winston Churchill
Thought for the day
Sometimes I think 'ole RAH was prescient or something...
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.
-Professor Bernardo de la Paz, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress - Robert A. Heinlein (1907-1988)
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.
-Professor Bernardo de la Paz, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress - Robert A. Heinlein (1907-1988)
good gunleather
Found a guy from Circle M Saddlery and Gunleather a few gun shows back. Just got my custom made in the waistband 1911 magazine holster today. It is EXACTLY what I requested. Exactly. Much better than the one I got from Tucker guleather. Well made, finished, and quality leather. I am impressed, since I had to make a drawing explaining what I wanted. No one has an in the waistband mag holder with a back that protects the body from the edges of the magazine.
And I got it in 3 weeks!
I figure, if I need to use my compact 1911, I might need more than 6+1, so I now have and additional 8 for when the real fun starts. If 14 rounds of .45ACP will nto drastically change the situation, then either I am not doing my part, or I picked the wrong day to not sleep late.
I would HIGHLY reccomend this custom leather manufacturer!
And I got it in 3 weeks!
I figure, if I need to use my compact 1911, I might need more than 6+1, so I now have and additional 8 for when the real fun starts. If 14 rounds of .45ACP will nto drastically change the situation, then either I am not doing my part, or I picked the wrong day to not sleep late.
I would HIGHLY reccomend this custom leather manufacturer!
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Monday, May 18, 2009
Jackbooted thugs
This should anger each and every one of us who reads this. You should see red, and you should wonder why this is allowed. This should make your blood boil and make you want to surround the local ATFe and police station and shout for justice.
"WALLINGFORD - A usually quiet mobile home park was shaken Friday morning when about 15 officers from the U.S. bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and local police descended on one of their neighbor's homes with force."They had their guns drawn and were surrounding the house," said Jennifer Monroe of Hosford Bridge Road. "These weren't small guns, they were machine guns. It wasn't normal." "
Go HERE for more.
I have no issue with the police (or ATFe) executing a search warrant. Nor do I know all the details in this case. Perhaps the Boyntons have broken a law (I really don't know). What I do know, and what I find both objectionable and disturbing, is that the authorities executing the search warrant need to handle things like this in a different manner. Breaking down doors in the early morning hours (or at any time, really) for a simple search warrant rather than knocking on the door and asking is a bit of overkill.
WHY?
Why not knock on the door and show the search warrant, and ask for permission? Why force your way into a home and trash it? (I'm not going to discuss the fact that the officers had to request cooperation from the searchee to open the safes and the fact that the searchee cooperated. (under similar situations, I might not be as cooperative...).
Knocking down someones door at 6 am is not a good idea when there are reasonable alternatives. The door to someone who is, to all reasonable expectations, a law abiding citizen. Someone inside my home at 6 am uninvited is subject to harm. It would not be a good idea for police or other authorities to enter my home with a battering ram at any time. I would hate to harm an officer who thinks he is doing his/her job, and I would most likely end up shot, or dead.
The increased use of such tactics is disturbing, and the fact that we as people and citizens act instead like subjects disturbs me more. Why do we allow it? Are we that sheeplike? Where is the outcry for the authorities to use other tactics or methods? Was there reason to knock down door at 6 am? Was there a reason that they felt that they couldn't just knock on the door an execute the search warrant? Was there a valid reason to destroy property and to trash the house? I realize that there are situations that call for such tactics (like drug house raids) but to use them in a situation like this, on the home of a decent, law abiding citizen is just wrong.
Perhaps they needed the practice and thought that this would be a good search with which to get some. I don't know. But someone needs to answer these questions. Someone in the ATFe needs to explain why these tactics were used, rather than a simple knock on the door. Just because there are guns in the house is not a good enough answer. Guns by themselves do not pose a danger to police executing a search warrant UNLESS they use tactics described in the article. Nor should the regard for the officers safety just because is is the easiest way for the officers to secure the scene quickly take precedence over civil and property rights. Property rights, the right to be secure in your own home (that pesky constitution again) and just plain decency should take precedence unless there is a clear and present danger to the officers known before the warrant is executed.
This is a slippery slope here. If we allow this, then we are subjects.
All the officers on the scene, local LEO and the ATFe officers should be held accountable. The ATFe for their actions, and the local LEO for allowing it without justification. Local LEO allowed (and cooperated with) the ATFe agents to break into a house with no justification. None. They are as culpable here as the ATFe agents. THEY ALLOWED A CRIME TO BE COMMITTED. Warrant or no warrant, they allowed someones home to be broken into. The judge who signed the no knock warrant (if one exists) should also be held accountable.
Someone needs to go to jail for this action. Were I to break down his door, I'd be charged with a crime. Why not the officers and agents?
Knocking on my door is the best way. Failing to knock will place all of us in danger.
BTW, this shows how useless a gun locked in the safe is for home defense. It couldn't be used to defend the home. It was, really as useless as a paperweight would be.
I don't have that handicap.
Officers: KNOCK (gently is best!) on my door. Wait for me to open it. I will cooperate, and there is no need to place yourselves in mortal danger to execute a legal warrant.
Other methods may not have the outcome that we all want to see.
Just a thought.
ETA: A friend sent me this quote from Aleksandr Solzhenitzyn from The Gulag Archepalego:
"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? . . ."
Things that make ya go "HMMMMM".
I'm just sayin'.
"WALLINGFORD - A usually quiet mobile home park was shaken Friday morning when about 15 officers from the U.S. bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and local police descended on one of their neighbor's homes with force."They had their guns drawn and were surrounding the house," said Jennifer Monroe of Hosford Bridge Road. "These weren't small guns, they were machine guns. It wasn't normal." "
Go HERE for more.
I have no issue with the police (or ATFe) executing a search warrant. Nor do I know all the details in this case. Perhaps the Boyntons have broken a law (I really don't know). What I do know, and what I find both objectionable and disturbing, is that the authorities executing the search warrant need to handle things like this in a different manner. Breaking down doors in the early morning hours (or at any time, really) for a simple search warrant rather than knocking on the door and asking is a bit of overkill.
WHY?
Why not knock on the door and show the search warrant, and ask for permission? Why force your way into a home and trash it? (I'm not going to discuss the fact that the officers had to request cooperation from the searchee to open the safes and the fact that the searchee cooperated. (under similar situations, I might not be as cooperative...).
Knocking down someones door at 6 am is not a good idea when there are reasonable alternatives. The door to someone who is, to all reasonable expectations, a law abiding citizen. Someone inside my home at 6 am uninvited is subject to harm. It would not be a good idea for police or other authorities to enter my home with a battering ram at any time. I would hate to harm an officer who thinks he is doing his/her job, and I would most likely end up shot, or dead.
The increased use of such tactics is disturbing, and the fact that we as people and citizens act instead like subjects disturbs me more. Why do we allow it? Are we that sheeplike? Where is the outcry for the authorities to use other tactics or methods? Was there reason to knock down door at 6 am? Was there a reason that they felt that they couldn't just knock on the door an execute the search warrant? Was there a valid reason to destroy property and to trash the house? I realize that there are situations that call for such tactics (like drug house raids) but to use them in a situation like this, on the home of a decent, law abiding citizen is just wrong.
Perhaps they needed the practice and thought that this would be a good search with which to get some. I don't know. But someone needs to answer these questions. Someone in the ATFe needs to explain why these tactics were used, rather than a simple knock on the door. Just because there are guns in the house is not a good enough answer. Guns by themselves do not pose a danger to police executing a search warrant UNLESS they use tactics described in the article. Nor should the regard for the officers safety just because is is the easiest way for the officers to secure the scene quickly take precedence over civil and property rights. Property rights, the right to be secure in your own home (that pesky constitution again) and just plain decency should take precedence unless there is a clear and present danger to the officers known before the warrant is executed.
This is a slippery slope here. If we allow this, then we are subjects.
All the officers on the scene, local LEO and the ATFe officers should be held accountable. The ATFe for their actions, and the local LEO for allowing it without justification. Local LEO allowed (and cooperated with) the ATFe agents to break into a house with no justification. None. They are as culpable here as the ATFe agents. THEY ALLOWED A CRIME TO BE COMMITTED. Warrant or no warrant, they allowed someones home to be broken into. The judge who signed the no knock warrant (if one exists) should also be held accountable.
Someone needs to go to jail for this action. Were I to break down his door, I'd be charged with a crime. Why not the officers and agents?
Knocking on my door is the best way. Failing to knock will place all of us in danger.
BTW, this shows how useless a gun locked in the safe is for home defense. It couldn't be used to defend the home. It was, really as useless as a paperweight would be.
I don't have that handicap.
Officers: KNOCK (gently is best!) on my door. Wait for me to open it. I will cooperate, and there is no need to place yourselves in mortal danger to execute a legal warrant.
Other methods may not have the outcome that we all want to see.
Just a thought.
ETA: A friend sent me this quote from Aleksandr Solzhenitzyn from The Gulag Archepalego:
"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? . . ."
Things that make ya go "HMMMMM".
I'm just sayin'.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Armed Forces Day
I was at a gun show all weekend, and for some reason the scheduled post didn't, but lets not forget armed forces day was on Saturday.
Thank any serviceman you see this wwek.
Thank them for the fact that you are reading this in englis. Thank them that you can read this blog that has opinions different from the current administration.
Thank them for the fact that you can enjoy the freedom that you have.
Or just say thank you.
Thank any serviceman you see this wwek.
Thank them for the fact that you are reading this in englis. Thank them that you can read this blog that has opinions different from the current administration.
Thank them for the fact that you can enjoy the freedom that you have.
Or just say thank you.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Real definition of torture
It ain't what the media and the DNC has made it out to be. Teasing, taunting, embarassment, shame, or even waterboarding.
THIS lady would like to tell what real torture is like.....
But the media doesn't cover stuff like that, "cause it won't fit their agenda.
THIS lady would like to tell what real torture is like.....
But the media doesn't cover stuff like that, "cause it won't fit their agenda.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Read THIS to find out what the senate is considering.......
That rope is looking better all the time.
A tax on soda pop (to pay for health care) that they are gonna shove down our throats.
A "sin" tax on sugary drinks. First booze, then tobacco, now soda pop.
Then salty foods, then fatty foods (and ice cream!), then anything that they feel is bad for you...
Screw them, trying to make the world safe for everyone. Let us make our own decision.
And I have a question: If I have a rum and Coke, is that double taxation????
That rope is looking better all the time.
A tax on soda pop (to pay for health care) that they are gonna shove down our throats.
A "sin" tax on sugary drinks. First booze, then tobacco, now soda pop.
Then salty foods, then fatty foods (and ice cream!), then anything that they feel is bad for you...
Screw them, trying to make the world safe for everyone. Let us make our own decision.
And I have a question: If I have a rum and Coke, is that double taxation????
Fear
I just talked to my Dad (who actually reads this blog) and he pointed out that some of my posts are somewhat inflammatory. (I mean them to be, btw).
He said that I come close to crossing the line, and wonders if someday "they" are gonna come haul me off. Could be that that will happen. I doubt it, but it could.
So much for free speech.....My parents fear the government enough to worry about my safety. Is this freedom? I appreciate the fact that they worry about me, but the fact that they worry about my freedom and well being due to this insignificant blog and the subjects and opinions that I post make me wonder if this country still has freedom of speech.
I love my country, I do NOT trust my government at all. But I am saddened that my parents fear for my safety. I am saddened because this is in effect, fear that the constitution will be discarded. A fear that jackbooted thugs will haul their son off in the middle of the night because of an opinion.
A free man does not fear his government. A slave fears his master. Tyrants are feared. A subject fears his ruler.
I fear many things. But I do not fear that "they" will take me away. If "they" should decide to do so, so be it (if there are enough of them, they will). I will fight the best I know how. But I do not fear. I do know that some might find themselves or their cohorts a wee bit ventilated perforated damaged during my arrest.
But I am saddened that my parents (who are at least partially responsible for my attitudes and values), who taught me love of country and appreciation that I was born a US citizen, now fear for my safety from some government official because of a bit of published opinion.
I am sad for them and sad for the country. I am sorrowful that it has come to the point that they fear their government. What has this country come to? Why have we let it become so? Why have we done nothing to change it? Why do we allow it?
Would our founding fathers be proud of what we have let this country become?
I think not.
Via Western Rifle Shooters Association:
I am reminded of the cannibal paradox. The paradox is that there are a lot of people in starvation scenarios who turn to cannibalism and starve anyways. They starve because the cannibalism taboo is so strong that they wait too long and are past the point of no return before they do what they need to survive. There is [also] a point of no return when it comes to revolution.
He said that I come close to crossing the line, and wonders if someday "they" are gonna come haul me off. Could be that that will happen. I doubt it, but it could.
So much for free speech.....My parents fear the government enough to worry about my safety. Is this freedom? I appreciate the fact that they worry about me, but the fact that they worry about my freedom and well being due to this insignificant blog and the subjects and opinions that I post make me wonder if this country still has freedom of speech.
I love my country, I do NOT trust my government at all. But I am saddened that my parents fear for my safety. I am saddened because this is in effect, fear that the constitution will be discarded. A fear that jackbooted thugs will haul their son off in the middle of the night because of an opinion.
A free man does not fear his government. A slave fears his master. Tyrants are feared. A subject fears his ruler.
I fear many things. But I do not fear that "they" will take me away. If "they" should decide to do so, so be it (if there are enough of them, they will). I will fight the best I know how. But I do not fear. I do know that some might find themselves or their cohorts a wee bit ventilated perforated damaged during my arrest.
But I am saddened that my parents (who are at least partially responsible for my attitudes and values), who taught me love of country and appreciation that I was born a US citizen, now fear for my safety from some government official because of a bit of published opinion.
I am sad for them and sad for the country. I am sorrowful that it has come to the point that they fear their government. What has this country come to? Why have we let it become so? Why have we done nothing to change it? Why do we allow it?
Would our founding fathers be proud of what we have let this country become?
I think not.
Via Western Rifle Shooters Association:
I am reminded of the cannibal paradox. The paradox is that there are a lot of people in starvation scenarios who turn to cannibalism and starve anyways. They starve because the cannibalism taboo is so strong that they wait too long and are past the point of no return before they do what they need to survive. There is [also] a point of no return when it comes to revolution.
Via Instapundit comes this gem from England.
Note to self: Be more quiet next time lest the cops show up at the door and disturb my frolic.
I mean, Jesus H. Christ. Where will it end? I have wanted to crucify several neighbors over the years who played their stereo too loudly or ran a Harley outside my window at 4 AM, but if they are that loud at THAT, I ask them if they eat a special diet or if they take special vitamins or if there is a book that I need to read......But call the cops? I doubt that they would do anything, and the officers would take forever to stop laughing.
No wonder England is circling the rim.
Note to self: Be more quiet next time lest the cops show up at the door and disturb my frolic.
I mean, Jesus H. Christ. Where will it end? I have wanted to crucify several neighbors over the years who played their stereo too loudly or ran a Harley outside my window at 4 AM, but if they are that loud at THAT, I ask them if they eat a special diet or if they take special vitamins or if there is a book that I need to read......But call the cops? I doubt that they would do anything, and the officers would take forever to stop laughing.
No wonder England is circling the rim.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)