Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Empty your pockets meme

This has been floating around and I am posting it now after seeing it on Home on the Range, the ever so wonderful blog of Brigid.

The idea is to "empty your pockets" and take a picture of the things you carry on a daily basis. Not all of the things I carry on a daily basis actually fit in my pockets so this is a psuedo-accurate picture.

Starting at the top and moving clockwise:
My wallet
A Columbia River Knife and Tool N.E.C.K Knife (which I do not wear around my neck).
Car/House keys
Tactical Flashlight (120 lumens, striking front)
Smith and Wesson S.W.A.T Knife (this thing is heavy and bulky, but is the only one that I have not broken. The clips on all of my other knives tend to break off or the blades become loose and never stay tight when I tighten them. This is a quality knife I picked up for 30 bucks.)
Spitfire Pepper Spray
My phone is not present because I used it to take the picture.

I also always have a first aid kit in one of two places. It is either in the car on a daily basis but there are a lot of time when I have a backpack with me that I keep this first aid kit.

Some will notice that a gun is not among the things I carry on a daily basis. It is only because I do not have the money to buy one at this time so I do not have one to carry. Hopefully this picture will change soon to include one.

Okay folks, empty out your pockets and post your own!

Friday, January 23, 2009

A Pledge to be a Servant to Our President

I am sure some of you have seen this video, but I am so appalled that I am posting it here. I was instructed to go directly to about 3:50 so I will instruct you to do the same. I did watch some of the video and all in all it is a good idea, except the part where they say that they Pledge to be a Servant to our President, Barack Obama.

This, to me, is disgusting. I have never, not now, nor will I ever, while I still take a breath, Pledge allegiance and servitude to a Government or a Government official. A Pledge of Servitude and Allegiance to a Government is a thing of Monarchs, it is what serfs and slaves do, and I would rather die than be a slave.

Growing up and going to Catholic School we did Pledge Allegiance to something and that was the flag. Every morning I would say the words that mean so much to free men and women, and if followed will help to keep men and women free.
I Pledge Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, One Nation Under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.

There is importance in those words, and if looked at carefully it will show exactly where my Allegiance lies. You see I am servant of, and aligned with Old Glory and everything she represents. No matter what tyranny's the Government may impose, the Flag still stands for freedom and is a reminder of the blood of patriot's who died defending her. I pledge my allegiance to the Republic, the idea of a nation of free men and women, where our say is the highest law of the land, and not the say of a dictator, a President, a Monarch. My allegiance and service go to America, not the government whom represents America. America is about exercising our God given rights, laid out in the Constitution and defended by Patriots. Without America there would be no government, but without a government, America would still stand. My service and allegiance goes to my fellow American, because I believe that everyone should take care of themselves, their families, but also take care of their fellow man, IF THEY CAN AND WITHOUT THE FORCE OF GOVERNMENT. Yes I believe in stewardship, but stewardship by Government force is slavery. And finally my allegiance and service goes to God, the creator of the World, who bestows upon me my right to freedom, to life, liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Understand that a Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, to this country, to your fellow American is not an entitlement to anything. You are entitled to what you work for, nothing more, nothing less. That is also what America means and if remembered will keep us a Republic and not a socialist society. I never made that Pledge expecting anything in return, I made that Pledge out of a sense of Pride of Country, out of a sense of Honor because I am lucky enough to be born a free American, out of a sense of strong Integrity and Duty to patriotically do what I can to make sure the promises that lie in the meaning of the Flag and America, are passed down to the next generation.

Had my choice for President won the election I would not have Pledge Allegiance and Service to him either, and he would not have stood for anyone doing anything of the sort.

Some people will say that our military Pledge to carry out the word of the President, and yes this is true, and Government officials do the same and I understand this, but if the President told the military to enslave the American people, it is my belief that many of the men and women serving will not follow those orders. Some will, because they do not know better, but many will not. The men and women in the armed forces pledge to carry out their job, as instructed by their employer, just I do when I work for someone, but if that employer tells me to lie, cheat, steal, shred valuable documents, I am out of there, and that is the difference.

Where does your allegiance lie? Do you love America, and everything it represents, or do you love a man? Are you a Patriot or a traitor? Are you proud of America, motivated to serve by Her, or are you motivated to act only because a certain person leads a country? Know where your loyalties lie, I know where mine lie.


Tuesday, January 20, 2009

The White House Blog

You will now notice on my sidebar, there is a new blog roll dedicated solely for the purpose of The White House Blog. Why have I done this? Although I am not an Obama supporter, the White House website claims that the blog will be able to give quick updates on policies, votes, and what is going on with the President. I believe this to be fairly revolutionary for politics, and if it does what it says it is going to do, it will help with transparency. The entire White House website (whitehouse.gov) has been changed and it does look like a pretty nice website and has President Obama's upcoming agenda. It will be a useful tool for those of us who challenge him and for those who are supporters of the President.

With that being said, the new blog roll will sit just above my normal blog roll and updates can be readily found there.


Is dissent still patriotic?

A friend from high school reminded of the fact that during the Bush administration the Democrats touted the slogan about dissent being patriotic. Now that Obama is being elected and people such as myself are opposed to Obama, those same democrats are crying foul.

I agree, dissent is patriotic, our Founding Fathers thought the same, as a a matter of fact I believe that Thomas Jefferson was the one who said dissent is patriotic. With that being said, I will continue to dissent when I do not like something. Dissension is patriotic, even if it is your candidate that people do not agree with.

Monday, January 19, 2009

This is why Israel should never agree to a cease-fire.

12 hours after Hamas agrees to a uni-lateral cease-fire they also announce that they will keep smuggling weapons because according to a Hamas spokesperson
Do what you like, but manufacturing holy weapons is our goal

Bringing arms into Gaza is not smuggling. The natural situation would be for all Arab and Muslim countries, along with the rest of the free world, to officially allow weapons into the Strip... Meanwhile, we believe it is our right to bring arms in any way we see fit

And this, my friends, is why Israel should continue to send troops into the Gaza Strip and drop bombs onto Hamas targets. Hamas will continue to smuggle weapons and when they have an adequate supply they will launch more attacks on Israeli civilian targets.

The problem with agreeing to a cease fire is two fold in this situation, first, a diplomatic solution can never be found with a terrorist group, and second, the only side agreeing to a diplomatic situation is the side that is governed by law. In this case, the only side that will stick to the cease-fire is Israel, and Israel will pay for it dearly, unless they take military action.


Hallelujah! Bush commutes sentences of former US Border Patrol Agents!

In a final move of his presidency, President Bush has commuted the sentences of two Border Patrol Agents who were convicted of shooting a Mexican Drug Dealer. Many of you know that the crime they were charged with was impossible, because of the technicality of the crime, and many of us were hoping that President Bush would offer clemency to these two men. It looks as if these men will be able to now see their families and have their freedom. Bush did not offer a pardon, because he believes that the verdict was fair. I believe that the verdict was horse shit, and that had it been the DEA who shot this drug smuggler it would have been a victory for the War on Drugs. Anyway I'll step off the soapbox and let you read the whole article here.

Bush commutes sentences of former US border agents
Jan 19 02:09 PM US/Eastern
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - In his final acts of clemency, President George W. Bush on Monday commuted the prison sentences of two former U.S. Border Patrol agents whose convictions for shooting a Mexican drug dealer ignited fierce debate about illegal immigration.

Bush's decision to commute the sentences of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, who tried to cover up the shooting, was welcomed by both Republican and Democratic members of Congress. They had long argued that the agents were merely doing their jobs, defending the American border against criminals. They also maintained that the more than 10-year prison sentences the pair was given were too harsh.

Rancor over their convictions, sentencing and firings has simmered ever since the shooting occurred in 2005.

Ramos and Compean became a rallying point among conservatives and on talk shows where their supporters called them heroes. Nearly the entire bipartisan congressional delegation from Texas and other lawmakers from both sides of the political aisle pleaded with Bush to grant them clemency.

Bush didn't pardon the men for their crimes, but decided instead to commute their prison sentences because he believed they were excessive and that they had already suffered the loss of their jobs, freedom and reputations, a senior administration official said.

The action by the president, who believes the border agents received fair trials and that the verdicts were just, does not diminish the seriousness of their crimes, the official said.

Compean and Ramos, who have served about two years of their sentences, are expected to be released from prison within the next two months.

They were convicted of shooting admitted drug smuggler Osvaldo Aldrete Davila in the buttocks as he fled across the Rio Grande, away from an abandoned van load of marijuana. The border agents argued during their trials that they believed the smuggler was armed and that they shot him in self defense. The prosecutor in the case said there was no evidence linking the smuggler to the van of marijuana. The prosecutor also said the border agents didn't report the shooting and tampered with evidence by picking up several spent shell casings.

The agents were fired after their convictions on several charges, including assault with a dangerous weapon and with serious bodily injury, violation of civil rights and obstruction of justice. All their convictions, except obstruction of justice, were upheld on appeal.

With the new acts of clemency, Bush has granted a total of 189 pardons and 11 commutations.

That's fewer than half as many as Presidents Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan issued during their two-term tenures. Bush technically has until noon on Tuesday when President-elect Barack Obama is sworn into office to exercise his executive pardon authority, but presidential advisers said no more were forthcoming.

The president had made most of his pardon decisions on low-profile cases, but his batch in December created controversy.

Isaac Robert Toussie of Brooklyn, N.Y, convicted of making false statements to the Department of Housing and Urban Development and of mail fraud, was among 19 people Bush pardoned just before Christmas. But after learning in news reports that Toussie's father had donated tens of thousands of dollars to the Republican Party a few months ago, as well as other information, the president reversed his decision on Toussie's case.

The White House said the decision to revoke the pardon—a step unheard of in recent memory—was based on information about the extent and nature of Toussie's prior criminal offenses, and that neither the White House counsel's office nor the president had been aware of a political contribution by Toussie's father and wanted to avoid creating an appearance of impropriety.

In an earlier high-profile official act of forgiveness, Bush saved Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, from serving prison time in the case of the 2003 leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity. Libby was convicted of perjury and obstructing justice. Bush could still grant him a full pardon, although Libby has not applied for one.

Bush's batches of pardons, however, have never included any well-known convicts like junk bond dealer Michael Milken, who sought a pardon on securities fraud charges, or two politicians convicted of public corruption—former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif., and four-term Democratic Louisiana Gov. Edwin W. Edwards—who wanted Bush to shorten their prison terms.

Clinton issued a total of 457 in eight years in office. Bush's father, George H. W. Bush, issued 77 in four years. Reagan issued 406 in eight years, and President Carter issued 563 in four years. Since World War II, the largest number of pardons and commutations—2,031—came from President Truman, who served 82 days short of eight years.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


Barack Obama, Abraham Lincoln, and the Truth

I, like all of you, have heard it many times. Pundits drawing comparisons between Obama and Lincoln, cartoonists drawing pictures of Lincoln celebrating Obama's election, and salesmen putting the images of the two on everything imaginable. Somewhere in the back of my mind, I thought to myself, I was people knew American History, I wish people knew the real Lincoln, I wish people would have gone to college with me.

While in college I took an American History class, which focused mainly on the birth and formation of America, up through Lincoln and perhaps a little further. The professor was Dr. Margaret Mulrooney and she was not only the hardest professor I ever had, but she was also the best, teaching me more in those 4 months than I had ever learned in all of my years of schooling. That fact alone is sad for the state of the American education system but also a feather in Dr. Mulrooney's hat.

One of the things I remember from that class, mostly because it made my eyes go wide, my heart beat a little faster, my jaw drop, was when Dr. Mulrooney told us that Abraham Lincoln did not care if the slaves were free, nor did his Emancipation Proclomation actually free the slaves. Come again, Doc? You see in elementary school, and junior high, and high school, I learned two things about Abraham Lincoln; the first is that he freed the slaves, and the second is that he was killed by John Wilkes Booth. In the spirit of Dr. Mulrooney's no bullshit, gloves off approach to American History she told us that she would not sugar coat history, she would tell us the truth as laid out by historians and that is what she did. So what did she teach me about Abraham Lincoln?

First she taught me that Abraham Lincoln, like most politicians, did what was necessary to keep his political stronghold. He did not care whether or not slaves were free men and women, but because the Emancipation Proclamation was beneficial to him, he signed it. Had that document not been beneficial, slavery would have continued on for an unknown amount of time. The second thing she taught me was that the Emancipation Proclamation did not actually free the slaves. Abraham Lincoln was the President of the Union, and while the Emancipation Proclamation set slaves free in most Union states, it did not set them free in much of the South. The fact is that Abraham Lincoln could not enforce his Proclamation in the deep South and slavery continued to endure in the areas not immediately bordering the Union territories.

Naturally when I heard the comparisons after Obama won the election I was a bit uneasy about all of the parallels being drawn between him and Lincoln, I knew something just was not right, and then as the days passed I slowly remembered my American History class and I realized that at least half of America is not wrong about American History, but they have no idea about the real American History.

At any rate, my diatribe here does not stand alone. The Miami Herald is running an article about this and can be found here. It is short but worth the read and I highly encourage it. Here is an excerpt to whet your appetite:
Abraham Lincoln did not believe in the equality of black people. He did, however -- and this was no minor distinction in his era -- believe in their humanity. He also abhorred slavery. But he was willing to countenance it if doing so would have vindicated his primary goal: to save the Union.

Learn your history, and make sure there are no frills attached.


Friday, January 16, 2009

"Pardon" me?

Remember back 8 or some odd years ago when Bill Clinton made some questionable pardons, one of the most controversial being Marc Rich, and the second being the terrorist organization known as FALN. Everyone said that there was nothing that could be done, that it did not matter because Clinton was leaving office and it would never affect him. Now fast forward to Friday January 16, 2009, 10:03am EST, the Light Bearer has long since nominated a man named Eric Holder to be Attorney, and now the confirmation hearing is under way. Now I have been watching the proceedings off and on, and the one thing that keeps coming up is the fact that Holder had the last and only word on approving the pardon of Marc Rich and brokered the deal with Switzerland to meet these ends.

During questioning yesterday, Sen. Arlen Specter asked Holder about his involvement in the pardons. Holder said that he knew that Rick was a corrupt fugitive but that he did not know the extent of the crimes that Rich had committed. Today people testified on Holder's behalf, and Fmr. FBI Director Louis Freeh said that Holder was also unaware of the full extent of the crimes.

What about FALN? Surely Holder had to know about the terrorist group named FALN, the same group who was responsible for more than 120 bombings on American soil between 1974 and 1983. Eric Holder was the one who recommended, in fact he was the architect, of the clemency of 16 of the FALN terrorists. Yesterday Eric Holder denied much knowledge about what FALN had done, including the video tapes of FALN making bombs and the threat of the life of and the judge who convicted the terrorists. This much we do know about this situation, the terrorists did not ask for clemency, and in fact they did not want it, these terrorists were unrepentant. Eric Holder did not speak with the families of the victims of these attacks to try to understand what happened either. Eric Holder released 16 terrorists from prison to be free in American society.

Why than would we want Eric Holder as Attorney General, when he pardons notorious criminals, and on his admission, does not know much about the cases or the crimes committed by these people? Do we really think that it is wise to have an Attorney General with a track record of pardoning terrorists when we have other terrorists currently in our custody?

I am sorry Mr. Holder, but you are unfit to be the Attorney General of the United States. You pardoned 16 terrorists and claimed ignorance of their crimes and yet we are supposed to believe you can successfully carry out the duties of Attorney General? I do not believe so.

Thursday, January 15, 2009

Is Change really change, if everything is the same?

H/T to Instapundit for the video.

So if I say something is different, but it is exactly the same, and the kool-aid drinking masses are either too stupid to recognize that it is the same, or are willing to believe blindly, than does it mean that it is actually different? A Rose by any other name is still a rose, likewise the Clinton administration by any other name is...the Obama administration......change we can count on eh?

Pay close attention to the title's of the people as they change from what their nominations are under Obama and what those title's used to be.

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Obama, Is your staff full of stupid monkey's? (Not a rhetorical question)

Alright, I just want to point something out, Obama is paying a staff of people to vet folks to be his nominee for certain jobs. With that being said, the first snag Obama ran into was the fact that he nominated Arne Duncan as Secretary of Education. Arne Duncan happened to also be the superintendent of the Chicago public schools, yes the very same Chicago that has some of the worst schools in the country. Okay fine, I understand Obama, you want to grab some people from Chicago, you do not want to be seen as a sell out, remember where you came from and all of that.

A few days later we here about Bill Richardson having to drop out as Obama's nominee because Richardson is the subject of Federal Investigation involving contracts awarded in his state. Okay wipe the egg off your face, do some damage control, and move forward.

Now today we find out that Timothy Geithner, Barack Obama's nominee for Treasury Secretary, had not paid his taxes for 4 years and that the IRS alerted Geithner of this fact. Let me repeat that, the Treasury Secretary nominee failed to pay his taxes. Now do not get me wrong, I think the income tax is a load of horse shit, but if you are going to be the one shoveling that shit than you sure as hell better make sure you can keep your boots clean.

I mean holy crap Obama, what the hell are you paying your staff to do if not vet these fine folks you are nominating? Are your monkey's not even trained? Do you really believe that your followers are so blind, have imbibed so much of that kool-aid of yours, that they will not question why 2 of your nominee's are being touched by questionable actions? I guess not, because folks do not seem to care. Just remember one thing, I have said it before and I will say it now, I do not believe for one minute that a politician from Chicago can not be touched by corruption, including you. After all you said you had no contact with Blago, even though there is that picture of you and him together.

This is going to be a bumpy four years folks, hold on because the ride will get bumpier as the shit piles up.

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

New Bill HR 45, is a threat to gun owners

Today's article at the Gun Rights Examiner has an article called Qualifying Firearms, where it discusses a bill introduced in the House last week. The Bill is H.R.45 or Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009, which was introduced by Rep. Bobby Rush (D-IL).

This bill is an obvious threat to your gun rights, and as stated in the Gun Rights Examiner, it is a Declaration of War against gun owners and the Constitution. I'll say here what I said over at the Examiner about this bill, but make sure you read the article over there to get the whole story.
If it is war they want, than it is war we must give them. All members of gun rights groups need to contact those organizations and pressure them to start speaking out against Holder, because he will be the Attorney General and if you think we are going to get any approval from him, we are wrong. That means no approval, no guns, no self defense, and rising violent crime rates.

More importantly we must bombard the our reps with letters, phone calls, and emails. It is not hard to fire off an email every day, or to pick up the phone every day. It is also not hard to send a letter. Type one up print out a bunch of copies, hand sign them, yes hand sign them ALL, and mail one a day. If everyone mails one letter a day for a few days the offices will be flooded with mail, they will know that folks are paying attention.

Obviously if this bill passes it will be challenged as Unconstitutional, but the idea is to not let this get passed. The last thing we need is Eric Holder calling the shots and determining who will get guns, because it will not be us.

This law could make most of us felons if we do not comply with the law, and you can only push a patriot so far before they begin to push back.

If it is a war they want, it is a war they shall get.

Monday, January 12, 2009

Bob Barr, you disgust me sir

Bob Barr, you are a libertarian for the love of God. You are supposed to espouse freedom and promote people who do the same, and yet you send a letter to the House Judiciary Committee supporting Eric Holder as Attornery General (letter can be found here). The part that really made me want to vomit, was when you said this:

However, I never had any reason to question his personal and professional integrity, or his deep understanding of and commitment to our Constitution and especially the Bill of Rights… to serve the interests of all of the American people and not just those of the President they serve…

Come again Bob? You mean the same understanding and commitment to the Constitution and Bill of Rights that caused him to right an amicus brief in support of Washington DC violating the Second Amendment rights of the residents who live there?

Come on Bob you can not honestly believe that Holder is going to uphold the Constitution, we already know he hates the 2nd Amendment, and our Founding Fathers have made it clear what the 2nd Amendment means, and that without all of our other rights can be taken away.

Bob I used to have some ounce of respect for you, even though you supported the Patriot Act, but now I see that you are no different than the likes of Obama and his socialist cohort. You, Bob Barr, are a weasel and a scum bag.

Samuel Adams expressed my feelings best when he addressed the First Continental Congress in 1774:
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; may your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.

Bob, I hope that posterity may forget that you called yourself an American. Indeed, go from us in peace, but remember this when you are drowning under the weight of your chains, liberty will never throw a chain upon you, liberty can never be chained.

Hamas brainwashes children, uses them as human shields.

H/T to Double Tapper for the video. He is being called up on active duty. He is a service man of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF). May God be with him and his fellow country men as they rain hell down upon those terrorist scum bags and send them to an early meeting with their creator.

If anyone wants to know why so many Palestinian civilians are dying, it is because Hamas is using them as human shields. This includes children! And as the world protests in outrage against the Jews and Israel, few are outraged at the fact that Hamas is brainwashing Palestinian children to hate, and is using them as human shields. Where the fuck is your outrage now; United Nations? UNICEF? EU? Any numbers of countries who have condemned Israel?; where is your outrage?

IDF, may you shoot straight and true, one shot one kill, send them straight to hell.

You had better bet your ass I am glad I am an infidel*


Infidel patch sold by One Source Tactical

Thursday, January 8, 2009

What if it happened in America?

At this point we know that I support Israel defending itself. I support anyone defending themselves really. I Supported the country of Georgia when Russia invaded them as well.

With all of this pressure coming from around the world, and especially in Amerca, I pose this question...what if it was happening in America? Watch the video.

The Obama, Blagojevich connection

Remember when Barack Obama said he never had any personal contact with Gov. Blagojevich? He is apparently using the literal sense of the word personal contact, as he is not exactly touching Blago.

In case some can not see what I am talking about. Barack and Michelle Obama can be seen on Blagojevich's right (viewers left).

Perhaps Obama should remember whom he poses for photos with before saying he never had contact with that person.

Wednesday, January 7, 2009

No business telling Israel what to do

Yesterday, 06 January 2009, Israeli mortars struck a UN school and brought outrage from around the world, as it had killed some children and civilians. Hamas claims that the school was being used as shelter by civilians, while Israel claims that Hamas is using human shields, and sending mortars from the school itself. Israel merely fired back, hitting the school. France and Egypt jointly called for a ceasefire, along with talks of how to keep rockets out of the hands of Hamas. Meanwhile the Bush Administration also called for an immediate ceasefire, and President-Elect Barack Obama said that the civilian deaths are a source of deep concern.

I do not mean to sound cold hearted here, but does it really matter what we say? I mean think about it, if a terrorist group begins lobbing rockets at America, are we going to sit by? Are we going to listen to the worlds pleas for a ceasefire. America is already fighting an unpopular war, a war that a large majority of the world has called to end. Yet we still fight that war because we were attacked by a terrorist organization, on our own soil, killing thousands of innocent civilians. Our decision was to take the fight to them, and yes civilians have died.

American, nor the rest of the world, has any business telling Israel they must enact a ceasefire. We can have an opinion, but in the end Israel must do what it can to protect its' people from the terrorist organization Hamas. I do not like war, I do not like violence, but I also know that sometimes violence in necessary in the defense of life.

I believe very much that Hamas is using human shields, I also believe that children are dying, but Hamas is inflating those numbers, some of those women and children are trained as terrorists, and while Israel is accused of killing those people, it is Hamas who took their lives away. Israel, do what you must to defend your people.

Children trained by Hamas

Monday, January 5, 2009

Obama and the new Assault Weapon Ban

Word on the street is that Obama could be moving more quickly than anticipated on making some anti-gun, anti-second amendment legislation. Ahab at Call Me Ahab tipped me off and Michael Bane has the whole scoop on The Michael Bane Blog.

Excerpt from Michael Bane (click link above for full story):
Sources from Washington are telling me that President-Elect Obama may move forward on an Assault Weapons/Magazine Capacity Ban ASAP — maybe as soon as later this January.


The breakup of America

As I trudged through the blogosphere this morning I came across some Russian guy predicting the breakup of America by 2010. I suppose under Obama anything is possible, but I doubt that America will breakup, at least not in the way that the Russian fellow predicts. He was nice enough to include a map which is below.

Okay, let me make a few comments here. First and foremost, it is highly unlikely that most Americans will come under the influence of another country. We love our freedom too much to allow someone else to take them away. Secondly, there is no reason to think that these sections of the country could not exist on their own and develop trade with the other sections. The "blue" section will probably have some of the best trade options with the rest of the world since Houston boasts some of the biggest air and sea ports.

Moving on to the sections themselves. The section labeled Atlantic America may apparently join the European Union. Perhaps Massachusetts, New York, and DC would join the EU, but the rest of those states love their guns way too much. New Hampshire's state constitution still gives them the right to secede, does this guy really think a state that would leave that in their constitution, would turn around and join the EU? Pennsylvania also has one of the highest populations of hunters and gun owners, joining the EU would not even be an option. Vermont is too libertarian, so we will not even entertain that idea, and our friends south of the Mason Dixon would never be referred to as a European, or worse, a Frenchie.

Then we have the Texas Republic, which will supposedly join Mexico or be under Mexican influence. Yes folks, Texas is the same state that is home to the Minute Men, a volunteer group of people who patrol the border. This state is also the reason we have the Motto "Come and Take It". Like I said before, Houston has some of the biggest sea and air ports, and there is no reason to believe that the Gulf States, and thus the states bordering them, would not thrive. Texas also reserves the right to secede in their Constitution and there are actual groups set up in the state of Texas who are ready to make this happen should that ever need to happen. Instead, the country of Mexico should be more worried that the Texas Republic will take over.

Heading to the North we have the Central-North American Republic, which will join or be influenced by Canada. At first these states may not have a problem joining Canada, after all, out of all of those options Canada would be my choice as well. However, once those states realize that socialized medicine sucks, and that Canada has some pretty strict gun laws, those states will problem join the Texas Republic. Colorado and Kansas are already close enough to Texas to make a clean get away, and I think Montana, Wyoming, N. Dakota, S. Dakota and Nebraska would quickly follow, after all they have some of the best hunting in the country and where there is hunting there are gun owners, and where there are gun owners there is no room for Canada. The 8 states left of the Central-North American Republic are a toss-up, after all we never really know what Ohio is going to do, and Canada will probably give Wisconsin back once they realize that the CFL will have to play the Green Bay Packers.

And last, but certainly not least is what the Russian Professor refers to as The Californian Republic. The very name strikes fear in my heart, as California is really no better than a foreign communist government. Fittingly, the map says that the Californian Republic will go to China or be under Chinese influence. I do believe that the state of California will go to China, after all California law and Chinese law is not that distinct, but I think the other 6 states will quickly distance themselves, joining the growing Texas Republic. The Loss of California is not really a huge loss, after all we would no longer have to worry about the rubbish that comes out of the CA 9th Circuit Court.

I have not yet addressed Hawaii or Alaska. The map says Hawaii will probably be lost to Japan or China. That is a likely assumption, but I would much rather have it go to Japan than China, at least if it goes to Japan I would be more willing to visit. It also says that Alaska will go to Russia, which could also be likely. Canada and Russia will probably fight over it, but I think both countries should be more worried about Sarah Palin and her hunting rifle. Hunters usually hunt in packs and where there is one moose slaying bad ass there will be many more.

All in all my America looks much different, with a definite 36 states staying, 8 states being in a toss up between Canada and the New American break up, and a definitive loss of 6 states, but really, did we need those states any way. We would all be better off without California, the Kennedy's in Massachusetts, and of course Washington DC.

Sorry Russian Professor, we do not break up as easily as a communist Russian empire.

Sunday, January 4, 2009

Brady Campaign promotes gun violence

The Brady Campaign is an organization that is supposedly fighting gun violence. When they say fight gun violence they mean that they will support every piece of legislation to disarm the American public, and even propose legislation of their own. In the course of my blog reading* this morning I came across some very interesting pieces of information. There is a correlation between the Brady Campaign state rankings on gun control and the number of homicides in that state, unfortunately it is not the correlation that the Brady Campaign was looking for. First let me explain how the rankings work, essentially states that have less strict gun control laws, also known as states that do not violate the rights of their, have bad rankings from the Brady Campaign, while states that are very restrictive are ranked high on the Brady Campaign list.

With that being said this is what was brought to my attention. The Brady Campaign has ranked North Dakota 44th out the 50 states, giving them 4 out of 100 points. That would mean that according to the Brady Campaign, North Dakota is over run by gun slinging vigilantes, with blood flowing freely in the streets. However according to the KXMB and ND Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, the murder rate for 2008 is a whooping 2, and of those 2 people exactly zero were murdered with guns. Those two individuals murdered were done o with knives.

It gets much more interesting however. The Brady Campaign has also ranked the state of California number 1 out of 50, giving it 79 out of 100 points. This means that California is a safe haven of peace and love. Neighbor helps neighbor, and you have no need to fear being murdered in this hallowed ground of Brady Campaign Paradise. Except that is not even close to the truth, in fact, according to All Headline News, San Francisco ended 2008 with 98 homicides.

So let me get something straight, the Brady Campaign's best ranked states have the highest murder rates, while the worst ranked states have the lowest murder rates. It would appear to me that while the Brady Campaign claims to prevent gun violence, they actually promote gun violence and murder. It would appear that the Brady Campaign actually promotes gun violence, and if the plan is to make every state like California, than the Brady Campaign appears to be in full support of violence and murder.

Way to go Brady Campaign, you further prove the point that legally armed citizens actually decrease murder rates, while your utopia of gun control gets a whole mess of people killed, yeah...way to go.

Saturday, January 3, 2009

Is the world pro-terrorist; pro-Hamas?

I have been quickly some headlines from around the globe and I have noticed that there is considerable outrage over Israel defending itself from Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip. The following headlines are leading me to believe that the world, or perhaps just main stream media outlets, are pro-terror:

Pro-Palestinian protesters march on CNN headquarters
France condemns Israel land offensive in Gaza
Syria sends aid to Gaza
European protesters urge end to attacks on Gaza

and this small quotation from Mona Charen of National Review Online
Just for a lark, I decided to google “international condemnations of Hamas” this morning. You can guess what came up, right? Naturally, searching for condemnations of Hamas, one finds only international condemnations of Israel. An Australian report noted that the “British Foreign Secretary David Miliband is calling for an urgent ceasefire, while Russia’s Foreign Minister says he’s told his Israeli counterpart to urgently halt the military action.” The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, “strongly condemned Israel’s disproportionate use of force,” as did Brazil. Indonesia called on all countries to “sever all forms of diplomatic and business ties with Israel.” French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who currently holds the rotating chair of the European Union, did call upon Hamas to halt its rocket attacks but also censured Israel’s “disproportionate response.”

It seems that the world at large is very quick to condemn the Israeli's for defending themselves against the terrorist organization Hamas, yet these same people are not so quick to come to the defense of Israel when Hamas is murdering the innocent in Israel. It is my belief that Israel is within its rights to continue its offensive against Hamas. People blame Israel for the death of civilians in the Gaza Strip, but I blame Hamas.

If tomorrow Israel stopped defending themselves, and attempted to have a truce with Hamas, no sooner the truce was signed Hamas would launch attacks in Israel. We know this is true because it has already been done. Terrorists have no business running the show, and the outcry of sympathy for this terrorist organization is disgusting.

As a general rule I do not like terrorists, I do not like people who support terrorists, and I really, really like people who send terrorists to their creator, and do so with big guns. That being said, Kudos to Israel for defending itself.

Now before someone calls me a racist, I do not hate Palestinians, as a matter of fact I have some acquaintances who are of Palestinian decent. I never wish any group of people or area of the world to be afflicted by war, but the people in the Gaza Strip must realize that Israel is not attacking the Palestinian people, Israel is attacking the terrorist group that murders innocent people without regard.

There are many reasons why I like Israel. It is largely a land that supports freedom. Israel supports democracy, freedom of religion, women's rights, a free press, and an open economy. On top of that they have some a good gun stance. They arm their teachers in an effort to protect the children in the schools, something I wish America would adopt. It is safe to say that Israel is one of the only Middle Eastern nations to support these things, and it is safe to say that Israel is the only Middle Eastern nation to protect the legal rights, safety and freedom of homosexuals. No, I am not homosexual, and from a religious stand point I do not agree with the homosexual lifestyle, but from a political and freedom standpoint I am in full support of the homosexual lifestyle. The way a nation treats "minorities" says something about that nation, and when a nation is willing to defend every peaceful person within its' borders, that nation is alright in my book.

Once again, Kudos to Israel for defending itself. As an American who supports the right to self defense, the right to be armed, and the belief in freedom, I say that Israel should continue to rain hell down upon the Hamas militants. When peace and freedom can not be won by diplomacy, it must be taken by force, violent and overwhelming force. This is the philosophy of the American Founding Fathers, this is the philosophy of the freedom and peace minded individual.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander

I have heard this saying many times growing up. As a matter of fact I have heard a lot of odd colloquialisms growing up in Pennsylvania Dutch Country, but today this saying about geese and gander seems to ring true.

I am often confused by liberals who call for strong gun control and the abolition of the 2nd Amendment, but then turn around and talk about increased police forces and power. The picture above, taken from http://www.a-human-right.com/, just about sums it up. The reason why the mass public is the same reason why the police have guns. There are bad people who want to do bad things to you. Some of my favorite blog writers can attest to this fact just by the work they do and the experiences they have had.

The difference between the public and the police is that when the shit hits the fan I have to call the police and hope they arrive in time, whereas if I am armed I can instantly defend myself. In some places police response time can range from seconds to agonizingly long minutes, but no matter the response time you must still waste precious seconds fumbling with your phone to call the police, and then you must explain to the 911 operator what is happening, and hope he/she gets it right. And finally police will be dispatched and hopefully they are close enough to arrive in time to save your life, or at least catch the bad guy as he leaves your house. I much prefer the alternative option. Arm yourself, stay in a safe place, and if you have to defend yourself you will know that in a matter of seconds you can expel enough lead to stop the threat. When seconds count, a bullet will always move faster than a police cruiser, or an officer on foot. 911 does have a place in my scenario, you may have time to call them before you have to defend yourself, but if you are sitting in your living room and some guy kicks your door down, explaining the situation to an operator is not an option. 911 will be called after the altercation, even if you do not have to shoot a bad guy, because you will want some sort of report on file, just in case the guy comes back.

Some people will tell me that it is the job of a police officer to protect my life. I call bullshit on that. It is not the job of another to keep me alive. I take responsibility for my life because no one can ensure my protection better than I can. If it is indeed the job of an officer to protect me, than one would be assigned to me, and standing at the ready over my shoulder as I write these words. And if it were the job of an officer to protect my life, than are they legally responsible if someone harms me?

Police officers carrying guns for a reason. They know that a gun may be a necessary tool in order to save their lives. Like gun owners, police officers hope to never have to take another human life with their weapons, but they also know that if they should ever need to protect themselves they have the tools to do so. Ask a police officer to walk around with only pepper spray, or only a pocket knife and they will kindly tell you where to go. Likewise, it is unreasonable to expect law abiding citizens to walk around unarmed, while evil men and women are out there ready to harm you.

So the old saying still stands true, what is good for the goose is indeed good for the gander....especially when there are wolves hungrily circling the flock.