Category: Culture

Posted on

Colonel Mustard and the Candlestick?

Notorious crime and violence are typically experienced in the midst of war. We are accustomed to seeing images of it in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Syria. Many Americans dealt with it in Vietnam, and Korea and our parents experienced it first-hand during World War II.

Additionally, far too many Americans living in our inner city neighborhoods experience the senseless violence and murder of their children. Shockingly, this can also happen in small, rural communities in the Pacific Northwest.

In Roseburg, Oregon last week, a killer accomplished horrendous evil at Umpqua Community College. The nine victims who died in the massacre ranged in age from 18 to 67, crossing five different generations of friends, family members and loved ones.

The father, Ian Mercer, from California, said that he was unaware his son had firearms,”I had no idea he had any guns. I have no idea that he had any guns whatsoever.” Mercer also said, “And I’m a great believer – you don’t buy guns, don’t buy guns, you don’t buy guns.”

His son, the killer, was not listening.

Worse, this is nothing more than an  attempt to transfer the blame from his son to the firearm. President Obama, always being hungry for warped rhetoric, latched onto that idea like a pigeon gobbling French fries off the sidewalk.

His media hacks and their political allies are focused on the killer’s parental claims that guns are the problem.

This claim is patently absurd.

I’ve owned and used firearms for 50 years and they have yet to kill anyone. The police, sheriff or district attorney would never attempt to lay blame on the weapon. They rightly lay blame on the moral agent, the human being. Their investigation attempts to determine the facts by answering basic questions –  “Who, What, When, Where, Why and How.”

The “Who” question is the most important.

Think about the simple board game “Clue.” Even though we may know it happened in the Billiard Room, with a candlestick, last Wednesday night, and we might have what appears to be a murder, there is no room for indicting the candlestick. The candlestick didn’t do it; it is not “responsible.” If our investigation can’t determine between Colonel Mustard, Mrs. Peacock or Miss Scarlet, then we are stuck. There will never be a criminal indictment without a responsible party.

Guns are not responsible for violence any more than the candlestick. President Obama and his mouthpieces in the media rush to the microphones after a tragedy and repeatedly claim that “We need tougher, better, more stringent gun laws.”  They are simply seeking to use a “crisis” to enact unconstitutional  gun ownership restrictions on law abiding, American citizens.

This is another government intrusion on individual liberty and personal responsibility.

Should federal bureaucrats be your family’s guardians?

There was a time when parents bore the responsibility for seeing that children were well-educated, inculcated with Judeo-Christian values and able to provide for themselves in society. Well-governed families produced well-ordered societies. Thus, the family was, and should be, the guardian of our society’s character and culture.

Parental responsibility included the proper use of firearms and other weapons of self-defense. Chris Kyle and Alvin York were taught firearm usage by their parents. In fact, many of you, who grew up in small rural towns like Roseburg, probably remember that your parents didn’t give a second thought to you going to school with your rifle still inside your rig – on school property no less!

More importantly, parents were responsible for moral training. These timeless values are best taught by parents because they are the stewards who have ultimate responsibility for establishing the next generation. This is the only means for developing individuals capable of decision-making as moral agents in response to the “Who” question, above.

Army Veteran, Chris Mintz, had the moral courage to stand up to the killer. Eyewitnesses report that he told the killer, “You’re not getting past me!”

Undoubtedly, if Chris Mintz, who was shot 7 times, or someone else in the classroom had been armed there would have been less carnage.

“Peace through Strength” was President Reagan’s famous line concerning world conflicts and it also applies to our daily lives.  We know that having a “victim” mentality is unhealthy.

Being unarmed in a gunfight is victim hood!

Suggestions for getting involved.

Get trained – More information about firearms training for yourself, your family and your children.

Get Involved – Friday, Oct. 9th, 9:00 AM, near the Roseburg Airport. Check the Link for details.
Travel to Roseburg, Oregon and stand with local citizens as they reject Obama’s blatant disregard for families in mourning in order to promote his gun-grabbing agenda.

Listen – An interview with Roseburg Beacon Editor.

Posted on

EPA – a Rogue Agency

The EPA’s recent actions prove beyond any doubt that the organization is a rogue agency operating in a capricious and unlawful manner and it ought to be defunded.

Last month’s 3 million gallon spill of toxic mine waste into the Animas River is a perfect example of the EPA’s gross negligence and derogation of the rule of law. The Aug. 5 mine breach, sent millions of gallons of bright yellow, heavy-metal-contaminated water and sediment gushing into the Animas River.

That waste then flowed into the San Juan River, and eventually flowed into New Mexico and poured into Utah’s Lake Powell.

NOT above the Law

The Clean Water Act (CWA) provides that “the discharge of any pollutant by any person shall be unlawful.”

The act also specifies how pollutants can be legally managed via the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NDPES) permitting process. It also defines liability in the strictest sense and there is no requirement to prove intent or causation.

“The discharge of a pollutant” is defined broadly to include “any addition of any pollutant to navigable waters from any point source.” A “pollutant” is defined broadly to include “dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue, sewage, garbage, sewage sludge, munitions, chemical wastes, biological materials, radioactive materials, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt and industrial, municipal and agricultural waste discharged into water . . .”.

Section 1342(a) authorizes the Administrator of the EPA to “issue a permit for the discharge of any pollutant.”  This requires “planning, public notices, filings, and formal approval before activities can be legally pursued.”

If those are the rules, Did the EPA:

  • thoroughly document their plans and processes? – NO;
  • issue public notices for hearings? – NO;
  • complete the proper permit filings? – NO;
  • receive formal approval before legally pursuing their activities? – NO.

Investigation Started

Senior Policy Analyst, Paul Driessen, writes, “The evidence strongly suggests that EPA never studied or calculated anything, had no operations plan vetted and approved by state officials or mining experts, was not trying to install a pipe – and was grossly careless and negligent.”  The full extent of the EPA’s illegal activities will require a thorough investigation.

To that end, two US House members, Rob Bishop and Jason Chaffetz submitted requests for all documents related to the EPA’s work at the Gold King Mine, including all photographs and videos of the work at the mine, the spill and damaged areas.

However, “asking for” and actually “getting” all of the documents are two very different things. The public has seen this many times before. What are the possible responses?

  • Another server crash or hard-drive failure.
  • Missing data due to illegal and unknown private email accounts. If Congress doesn’t know what they are looking for, how will they know when its not included?
  • Straight-out refusal or simple non-compliance is the easiest response to imagine.

The power hungry bureaucrats at the EPA already have tremendous power and yet they crave even more. Those who have made it to the top of the EPA food chain have more than just big offices and leather chairs. They know the funding games and they use new regulatory schemes and political hypocrisy to fill their marbled hallways with costly reasons to exist.

Why does the EPA exist?

All 50 states and all US Territories have their own agencies dedicated to environmental protection within their jurisdictional boundaries. State governments are the proper home for this authority.  After all, the 10th Amendment says “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Our natural environment is a regional phenomena at best. Rivers have local origins and flow through natural watersheds. Even large river systems like the Colorado or Mississippi span only a handful of the contiguous states. The forests here in Eastern Oregon are different from those in Oregon’s coastal ranges. Alabama’s hardwood forests don’t have spotted owls, barred owls, or marbled murrelets and the Oregon coast has never been a home for the Florida manatee.

Let me ask the question again, why does the EPA exist?
Answer: Control

Control – pure and simple.

Control over money, power and people. Control over every business, and entity within the reach of federal authority. Control over everything, literally everything. Every carrot, every raisin, every electronic part, every tree, every drop of water. It also includes all land use, water use, banking, science, international trade, technology, education, healthcare, and every product used in each of these broad categories.

The EPA’s control always masquerades under the banner of “protecting communities” and “keeping the region’s air, land, and water healthy.” These semantically pleasant appeals hide the fact that the EPA uses massive public relations efforts staffed with thousands of federal workers to leverage and push public sentiment toward their false, yet appealing, goals. The net result is government creating winners and losers (solar v. coal), awarding subsidies or sanctions (wind v. oil) and granting permits or denying allotments (fish v. farms).

All of these efforts force individuals and businesses to either abide or face fines and retribution. The end result is the wholesale  loss of individual liberty and the ultimate surrender of one’s freedoms in exchange for a meager state of permanent dependence. Clarence B. Carson summarizes the entrenched preoccupation that government has in promoting itself:

“Politicians have acquired a vested interest in moving the United States toward socialism, Not only does it provide them with prestige and power, but it helps them get elected to office. Politicians run for office on the basis of benefits, favors, subsidies, exemptions, grants;” and so forth which they will provide for the electorate. Notice how this impels us toward more and more governmental activity, for the man who would continue to be elected should promise ever greater benefits to his constituency.”

The government is that instrument which the people have delegated certain enumerated powers with an implied authority to use force. The underlying reality is the handful of men who are in control are the ones who have the force.

It turns out, it is not our Congress. It is the bureaucrat.

Is Congress Powerless?

No, Congress is not powerless, but they do lack courage.

Our current Republican Congress is providing full funding for the new rulers, the statists – those who promote the power and authority of government over and above the rights of the individual.

This is rule by bureaucrats, not representative government. The population now serves the bureaucracy. We are todays servants. The bureaucrats are not public servants, we are, and we serve at their whim.

This new oligarchy is visible in the sheer increase in numbers and obvious power of bureaucrats. They are the ones who assert their wills over us, by way of vaguely worded laws, “executive power,” disparate interpretations and by turning the police and courts into instruments of their will.

It’s time to get back to basics. It means throwing Republicans out of office if they talk tough but act like wandering school boys when the time for firmness arises. It means throwing Democrats out of office if they continually promote Socialism and the destruction of the American traditions – free-enterprise, individual liberty and personal responsibility.

We need to focus on our Constitutional government, complete with its limits, its freedoms, and our ability to regain our national birthright – Life, Liberty, property and our own individual pursuits.

Otherwise these rogue agencies will turn our nation into a kaleidoscopic mess of bad policies, poisoned rivers, burnt watersheds and incredibly harmful economic and environmental results.

Posted on

Does Size Matter?

“From the moment of conception, the unborn has a human nature. That he cannot yet speak, reason, or perform personal acts means only that he cannot yet function to the degree we can, not that he lacks the essential nature that makes those functions possible in the first place.” 

— Scott Klusendorf, The Case for Life

Information about Planned Parenthood’s business model is landing fast and furious. The Center for Medical Progress, has released multiple exposés that deserve some thoughtful attention.

Consider the implications of the above quote regarding our innate humanness and the implications that this has for cherishing human life – regardless of race, nationality, skin color, size, capacity, or eye-color. His statement draws on obvious, self-evident, and common-sense truths that shatter the pro-choice/pro-abortion rhetoric.

In essence, there is no moral dividing line between a fetus and a new-born. Certainly, there are developmental differences, but those are differences of degree, not kind. In the same way, a grade-school boy is different from a college athlete only in respect to growth and development but not in any other meaningful way.

The logic for this view of human-life is known as the SLED Defense for Life. SLED represents an acronym for four logical arguments based upon Size, Level of development, Environment and Degree of dependency.

Here’s a summary –
Size

Does size matter in our moral assessment of human beings? Are larger people more valuable than smaller people? Since men are usually larger than women are women less valuable?

Obviously not.

What about embryos? They are smaller than newborns and newborns smaller than adults, but does that matter?

Men, teens, girls, or babies are not granted their inherent, self-evident, unalienable rights based on our consideration of their size or potential.

Actually, we should all be thankful that people are not graded for size, shape or color like Grade AA poultry eggs. Our internal moral compass informs us rightly that size doesn’t equal value.

Level of development

Does level of development matter in assessing our stature as humans?
Embryos and fetuses are less developed than you and I. Yet,  a two-year old is also less developed than a full grown man or woman. Is this where the pro-choice movement wants our nation to stand?

Are we willing to say that athletes have more worth or value than those who are less developed. Do bodybuilders have more worth than those who are handicapped or have not yet reached their full developmental potential?

Maybe it’s not just physical. Maybe this category should include mental capacity, also. For instance, embryos have no sense of self awareness. Would that make a difference? Does a six-day old baby have self-awareness?   What about those who lack the immediate capacity for performing normal mental functions, as do the comatose, the sleeping, and those with Alzheimer’s Disease.

Environment

Your location has no bearing on your humanness. Whether you are in the local elementary school or the county jail your value as a human being is not weighed differently. The same holds true for you while in bed verses your stature at the office. You may look more frumpy in one place over the other, but your stature as a human does not change.

If this is true, how can someone claim that there is a significant difference between the nature of the “unborn” and the “born?”  The ultimate nature of this being is still that of a human.

Degree of Dependency

Diane and I have a new granddaughter. Her name is Adelay Joy. She is about 6 weeks old and weighs in near 10 pounds. But, her size and weight are irrelevant, watching her is the thing that is really inspiring.

There are so many beautiful things, so many simple things, about her life. Her utter dependence on her Mom and Dad, even though she was born in a different state, to a different birth-mother and birth-father. It is incredible to realize that this little girl has not yet grown into a full, trusting awareness of her parents.

Instead, she is simply helpless and entirely dependent. There is no difference between this baby and the “fetus” that she was a mere 3 months ago. She was, and still is, completely dependent on someone else to provide for her life and sustenance.

Then, there is the sheer wonder of design. The whole gamut is quite intricate. From suckling, cooing, stretching, blinking, yawning, and kicking you can see all of her motor skills developing with artistic grandeur through her own cute and unrefined ways.

Humans differ immensely with respect to gifts, talents, preferences, and accomplishments. Yet, they all share in equal value as part of humanity. Humans are valuable because we are created in God’s image, “God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”

Our nations founders clearly echoed these sentiments in our Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

No human being, regardless of size, level of development, race, gender, or place of residence, should be excluded from the moral community of human persons. In other words, the pro-life view of humanity is inclusive, indeed wide open, to all, especially those that are small, vulnerable and defenseless.

Photos courtesy of: http://heatherwagnerphotography.com/blog/

Updated from original article on Roe v. Wade…

Posted on

Power and Privilege

Executive Focus

President Obama has both eyes focused on completing his “fundamental transformation” of America. As a statist, he believes in the power and authority of the government to regulate and control every aspect of our lives.

Even Alexander Hamilton, an ardent proponent of federal control, recognized the pitfalls of power concentrated  in government.

 “The instruments by which it must act are either the authority of the laws or force. If the first be destroyed, the last must be substituted; and where this becomes the ordinary instrument of government, there is an end to liberty!

Hamilton continues by describing the exact events that we are witnessing in today’s Washington, D.C. He writes, “Those, therefore, who preach doctrines, or set examples which undermine or subvert the authority of the laws, lead us from freedom to slavery.”  This should remind you of the President’s efforts for executive amnesty, the EPA’s waters of the US or the administration’s purposeful destruction of America’s coal industry.

Unfortunately, only a handful of our so-called “representatives” in Congress are showing even a smidgen of the courage needed to withstand this statist onslaught.

For example, this summer Obama added more abuses under the Antiquities Act of 1906. The Antiquities Act was designed to allow U.S. presidents a swift method for protecting, “historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest” on federal lands.

Obama has single-handedly designated over 260 million acres of land under his warped interpretation of what should be “preserved.”  The federal government exercises jurisdictional responsibility for roughly 635-640 million acres, or 28% of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the United States and over 54% of the 12 western states. This means Obama has moved nearly one-third of that total acreage into this unique “wilderness” category. No drilling, no mining, no harvesting, no grazing, no fossil hunting or swimming with the kids without the appropriate paperwork from your federal overlords.

The amount of land moved by these Antiquities abuses is nearly four times the size of the sate of Oregon.  It should be obvious that this federal land-grab effort will not serve the public good and is an ideological bent that will ultimately destroy, not preserve our land.

The executive office should be stopped by one of the other co-equal authorities at the federal level, namely, Congress. Yet, if history is our guide, the judiciary will support these schemes and Congress will fund them.

Legislative Focus

It appears Congress is too busy looking for campaign contributions, quick legislative fixes that solve nothing, and finding enough money to fund all of the initiatives in the president’s budget. This Republican controlled Congress is complicit in funding unconstitutional executive policies, such as, Obamacare, Amnesty, the FCC and it’s takeover of the Internet, EPA’s destructive programs, the renegade operatives in the IRS, NSA, BOR, and the list goes on. Based on their voting records, it also appears that most members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats, don’t care about the Constitution’s original intentions.

Founders’ Focus

Our Nation’s primary founding document, The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America, identifies the reason that governments exist. The reason is simple. Governments are formed among men for the sole purpose of securing the unalienable Rights of everyone. These Rights are granted to man by his Creator, not government. These rights are obvious, self evident and identified as “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”.

The next sentence in the Declaration of Independence identifies two other Rights which are seldom referenced.

  • “the Right of the People to alter or abolish” any government which fails in its effort to secure these first rights.
  • the Right “to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness”

Notice, this power doesn’t belong to the President. It does not belong to the Executive, Legislative, or Judicial branches of government. It belongs to “the people” and we have these rights because God gave this authority to you and I.

President Obama doe not have the right to fundamentally transform the United States. Neither does Congress, nor does the Supreme Court.

These “rights” belong to the American people. We must not allow Congress to destroy our God-given Rights.

House of Representatives’ Focus

If the Republican controlled House disagrees with the absurd monument designations of federal land for historical purposes (Executive), or the EPA’s burdensome Power Plan (Legislative), or the recent Same-Sex Marriage fiasco (Judicial), why is the House funding the President’s artful designs for accomplishing these “fundamental transformations?”

The answer is as plain as the growth of the federal budget. They have become enamored with their own power and privilege. Alexis de Tocqueville described this destructive tendency in the mid-1830’s:

“[T]he sovereign power extends its arms over the entire society;
it covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated, minute, and uniform rules,
which the most original minds and the most vigorous souls
cannot break through to go beyond the crowd;
it does not break wills, but it softens them, bends them and directs them;
it rarely forces action, but it constantly opposes your acting;
it does not destroy, it prevents birth;
it does not tyrannize, it hinders, it represses, it enervates, it extinguishes, it stupefies, and
finally it reduces each nation to being nothing more than
a flock of timid and industrious animals,
of which the government is the shepherd.“

Baa, Baa, Baaa

A Better Focus

Give your support to candidates who believe in open, accountable and limited government, the Constitution and the rule of law, and policies that promote the liberty and prosperity of all Americans – The House Freedom Caucus

See how your legislators rank in FreedomWorks Senate Scorecard, FreedomWorks House Scorecard; the New American Index; the Conservative Review; or Heritage Action’s Scorecard.

Posted on

Call me “Gramps!”

… and call Diane, “Granny”!

Please allow us to introduce our 1st Grandchild –  “Adelay Joy”

Our daughter, and her husband are blessed with the successful adoption of an adorable baby girl.  Once again, our lives will be filled with the love and laughter that these little ones bring.

For your viewing pleasure…  Here are some pictures from our refrigerator, bulletin board, and cell-phone background images:

Thanks for your indulgence and I hope these pictures bring a smile to your face…

Blessings from Dennis & Diane

Posted on

Judicial “Putsch”

It turns out the Supreme Court has two buckets for holding ideas. One bucket holds the ideas they like and the other the things they don’t like. However, the two buckets aren’t labeled ‘Likes’ and ‘Dis-likes.’ Oddly enough, one bucket is labeled ‘Constitutional’ and the other is labeled ‘Unconstitutional.’

Can you guess which bucket carries which label?

In our nation’s past, the Supreme Court relied on evidence, facts and relevant testimony to determine how any piece of legislation might appropriately fit within its constitutional boundaries.

In the Federalist No. 45, James Madison wrote, “The powers delegated by the proposed constitution of the federal government, are few and defined.”

The next sentence follows, “Those which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite.” He then adds, “The powers reserved to the several states, will extend to all the objects, which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people; and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the state.”

Well, the Constitution hasn’t changed.

In fact, since the Bill of Rights can be rightfully considered part of the original Constitution there have only been 15 additional changes or Amendments.  There is no constitutional authority for the the federal government to intervene in the natural, universal and historic definition of marriage.

The Supreme Court came to a wrong opinion with regard to the constitutional facts of the case. The Constitution specifically leaves the ordinary affairs, concerns for life, liberty, and property to the people and their own desires for local governance.

If the Supreme Court can ignore facts and written history can you and I follow their example?  What will happen to our Constitutional rights? Can they also be ignored?

Does this mean restraints on Congressional action no longer apply?  The preamble to the Bill of Rights explains the States’ desire to prevent misconstruction or abuse of federal powers with further restrictive clauses such as:

  • “Congress shall make no law…” (1st Amendment),
  • “This right shall not be infringed” (2nd Amendment),
  • or, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated” (4th Amendment)

Can Congress, like the Supreme Court and President, ignore these clear restrictions?

The precedent has been set but not by this Court alone:

  1. Under the guise of economic stability the Federal Reserve has created trillions from thin air;

  2. using security as their shield, Congress routinely searches all of our personal effects, without warrant;

  3. hiding behind the facade of compassion the President modifies immigration policy using his cell phone;

  4. and, the Supreme Court has used equality to execute their ruse.

 

What opinions will the Court foist upon us next week?  Maybe, 2 + 2 = 5.

Convincing the Court they got their summation problem wrong might be harder than you think. Especially if the facts, theories and principles of mathematics are left out of the discussion.  If we disagree with the Court, it is only because we have a different view of the real world.  After all, in a 1992 abortion case Justice Kennedy’s opinion included, “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”

Was their ruling simply one of life’s mysteries?

Justice Scalia, in his dissenting view notes, the people have been robbed, “of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.”

Like Scalia, I too am astounded by, “the hubris reflected in today’s judicial Putsch.”  In his closing, Scalia lets his arrow fly straight at the heart of the matter,

“The world does not expect logic and precision in poetry or inspirational pop- philosophy; it demands them in the law. The stuff contained in today’s opinion has to diminish this Court’s reputation for clear thinking and sober analysis.”

America needs help from more people like you and I. People who believe in self-governance, freedom and liberty within our Constitutionally ordered government.

By Liberty, I do not mean a state of licentiousness, where our culture subverts order and  breeds a defiance of rules.  I mean, rather, a well ordered government which is limited by a set of specifically enumerated powers.

The Bill of Rights was a beautiful extension of the Constitution where the founders admitted the possibility of government growth and usurpation. These restraints were designed to protect men’s rights from the designs of those who are “more remarkable for their ambition and cunning, than their patriotism.”

*   putsch : noun
1. a plotted revolt or attempt to overthrow a government, especially one that depends upon suddenness and speed.

Posted on

Oregon’s Gun Grabbers Strain Reality

Oregon’s Gun Grabbers Strain Reality

The most insidious part of  Oregon’s SB 941 is that it is designed to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. Illegal or criminal gun transfers and/or purchases are not happening amongst law-abiding citizens. This is disingenuous and farcical at best and down right evil at its worst.

Call or write these folks to tell them “NO on SB 941”

“NO on SB 941”

Rep Paul Evans 503-986-1420 Rep.PaulEvans@state.or.us
Rep Brent Barton 503-986-1440 Rep.BrentBarton@state.or.us
Rep Deborah Boone 503-986-1432 Rep.DeborahBoone@state.or.us
Rep Brian Clem 503-986-1421 Rep.BrianClem@state.or.us
Rep Betty Komp 503-986-1422 Rep.BettyKomp@state.or.us
Rep Caddy McKeown 503-986-1409 Rep.CaddyMcKeown@state.or.us

In the “Screwtape Letters,” C.S. Lewis has Uncle Screwtape say,

“I live in the Managerial Age, in a world of ‘Admin’ …  The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid ‘dens of crime’ that Dickens loved to paint. It is not done even in concentration camps and labor camps.  But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice.”

Oregon’s Democratic-led legislature appears to be made of the same sort of quiet men and women. Those, who have the same white collars and skirts, who have smooth-shaven body parts (based on their gender preference) and who will not need to raise their voices, while they take away our liberties.

Crossing the Lines throughout History

Matt Bracken warns us with his recent article at Western Rifle Shooters:

Q_openI am telling you now that disastrous unintended consequences will happen if Congress passes new laws banning presently legal firearms. To make it very easy to remember, and in the spirit of our beloved Department of Homeland Security’s old color-coded security threat levels, let me spell out three lines of demarcation.

The Yellow Line:

The yellow warning line will be crossed with national gun registration laws, including laws forbidding private gun sales without government permission. When that law passes, millions of Americans will feel that they have been pushed directly to the edge of the abyss above the mass graves of history. Defenders of the Second Amendment know what happened in Turkey, the USSR, Germany, China, and other nations that fell under totalitarian rule: in every case a necessary preliminary step on the road to genocide was national gun registration, followed by confiscation. The Jewish survivors of the Nazi Holocaust say, “Never again!” And so do we.

The Red Line:

The red line will be crossed with the passage of laws mandating that currently owned weapons, ammunition magazines, and ammunition quantities above a certain number must be turned in to authorities or destroyed, and thereafter their simple possession will be a felony. At that point, the nation will be on a hair trigger, with a thousand flaring matches nearing a thousand primed cannon fuses aimed directly at the next Fort Sumter.

The Dead Line:

The next line requires a bit of history to explain. In some primitive Civil War POW camps, where lack of funding or logistical constraints did not allow the construction of proper fences, a knee-high continuous railing of wooden slats encircled the prison grounds. Guards with rifles were positioned at the corners and in crude towers. If a prisoner so much as stepped over the narrow plank, he was shot dead without warning, obviating the need for a real fence to contain him. Hence the term “dead line.” Cross the line and people die, right now.

And this is what liberal utopians must understand: after passing the yellow line with national gun registration and transfer requirements, and the red line by making possession of currently legal firearms felonious, the dead line will be breached with the first SWAT raids upon citizens suspected of owning legal firearms made illegal by the new gun control laws. People will die resisting confiscation, in large numbers.

Confiscation crosses the dead line, make no mistake about it.

So this essay is really for you, Mr. Security Agent, because it won’t be elite Manhattan or Malibu liberals or Ivy League professors or politicians or columnists who will be ordered to strap on the sweat-stained body armor and enforce the new gun control laws at gunpoint. No, that grim task will fall to you.

But as long as you are an honorable agent of the people while an employee of the government, and as long as you honor your oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, then you will encounter no problems at all with gun owners. Why? Because you will refuse to take part in gun confiscation raids. Period. End of sentence, end of paragraph.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is the leading American law enforcement agency, at least in terms of its long history and high prestige. Dear Mr. Security Agent, please consider that F.B.I. also stands for Fidelity, Bravery, and Integrity. Soon, your fidelity to your solemnly sworn oath may be severely tested. It will take a lot of bravery to make your personal integrity a higher calling than following illegitimate orders, simply to maintain your steady paycheck and benefits.

On the other hand, if you no longer resemble the upstanding and honorable federal agents I have known in the past, if that whole oath-to-the-Constitution shtick was a big fat joke to you and you would accept a transfer to the old Soviet KGB or East German Stasi for a ten percent pay raise…then we are definitely going to have a problem. So that oath you swore really matters, one way or the other, and so does your personal sense of honor.

Dear Mr. Security Agent, let me spell it out. If you find yourself in the sub-basement of an annex to a secret intelligence center on the far end of town, waterboarding citizens into revealing the locations of suspected “illegal caches” of firearms, ammunition or ammunition magazines that were legally owned in 2012, then know this one simple fact: tens of millions of Americans will most surely consider you a betrayer of your sworn oath and a traitor to your country.

And so, if you find yourself silently dismounting a covert SWAT vehicle at zero-dark-thirty, dressed all in body armor, counting down to the time-coordinated explosion of battering rams and flash-bang grenades, on a raid against a sleeping household intended to result in the confiscation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition magazines that were legal to own in 2012, millions of Americans who also swore an oath to defend the Constitution will consider you their domestic enemy, and they will resist you with force of arms. Just as the soldiers of King George were resisted on another notable gun confiscation raid on April 19, 1775. It used to be called “The Shot Heard ’Round the World.”

You may consider the sentiments expressed above to be absurd, hyperbolic, dangerous, ridiculous, or simply wrong-headed. But please understand that tens of millions of Americans feel this way to their cores, and they will not be disarmed without a fight. Well-meaning but naive liberals should understand the certain-to-follow consequences of new gun control laws intended to disarm their fellow citizens in the name of “public safety.” LEOs and FLEAs should understand the dire consequences of participating in gun confiscation raids, in direct violation of their sworn oaths to uphold the Constitution, including the Second Amendment.

The unintended consequences of this misguided utopian fool’s crusade to ban guns would include a second civil war as agonizingly painful as the first one, if not more so, since there would be no front lines and no safe areas for anybody, anywhere. Every sane American wants to prevent such a calamitous outcome as a “dirty civil war” on United States soil.

But know this: those tens of millions will never be quietly disarmed and then later forced at government gunpoint Q_closeonto history’s next boxcars. If boxcars and detention camps are to be in America’s future, then you, Mr. Security Agent, will have to disarm them the hard way first. Not Piers Morgan, not Michael Moore, not Rosie O’Donnell, not Dianne Feinstein, not Chuck Schumer.

Original Post by: Matt Bracken was born and raised in Baltimore, and graduated from the University of Virginia and Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL Training in 1979.

 

Posted on

Wonderful Satire – Travel back to the trials of life in 1903

Rare Original Letter from 1903

Originally Posted on April 10, 2015 by Dani

(Seeing as how this column (5 reasons marriage doesn’t work anymore) has become quite popular lately, I thought it was fitting to share this similar concern from a distressed gentleman in 1903, written to the New-York Tribune in a fit of distress.)

(Not really, this is my satire. But you get it… don’t you?)   –  Dani

 

Dear Sirs,

I am writing to this esteemed publication because I have a serious concern about the future of our cities, indeed the very fabric of our great nation. It is my belief, as a gentleman of New York and an established member of society, that marriage can no longer be the sanctuary and happy haven it once was, in our new industrial age.

What is the hindrance to domestic bliss, you ask? I shall give you five reasons. The first, my dear sirs, it is nothing less than Henry Ford’s cursed invention, the automobile.

No more can gay parties of young people ride out for a day of fox-hunting or horsemanship, and so become engaged to a worthy partner of their choosing. No longer to docile ladies and comfortable gentlemen engage in Sunday drives in small buggies, just the right size for appropriate closeness to one’s spouse.

No! No! Today we zoom about in these infernal machines, so loud we cannot engage in civilized conversation and so dirty that our driving-clothes are reproachably sullied after a short outing, requiring much more time and energy spent on the laundry. No lady, no matter how beautiful, can be made to look desirable in those hideous goggles, and we daily see young people dashing about with hair askew and windblown, quite the opposite of the order and decency that makes for healthy matrimony. The automobile is so corrupting our morals and meddling with our society that I fear within 20 years young people will not wish to marry at all, but will live listless lives of unproductive excitement-chasing, all in the pursuit of speed and thrills.

Which brings me to my second point. Young men, rather than donning a sharp waistcoat and boots to meet ladies of repute, are now walking about in whatever dismal jacket they see fit, without so much as a proper hat to appear respectable. It’s no wonder the young ladies are so unwilling to become tied down to one of these scamps – indeed, my esteemed neighbor, Mrs. Winston, informed me last evening that her niece neglected to become engaged until the eve of her 28th birthday, because of lack of suitable mates. I’d wager she finally found herself a fellow with a clean waistcoat, but I fear for her fair, younger sisters.

So, this leads me directly into point three. I married my own bride when I was only just 20 years old, fresh from university, with a steady income from my family’s estate and pockets full of dreams, all set to marry a young lady my parents approved of. Why on God’s glorious Earth are these young ladies and gentlemen not doing the same? Why not marry, set up house, bring forth lovely children and make your families proud? I will go back to my first point, that the automobile has much to do with this, although I also fear that we have been too lax with our youngsters and indulged their whims for too long. Our country shall suffer without these blessed young marriages, I’ll tell you.

Point four follows in equally dismal observations: that more young men are ceasing to farm and breathe the healthful country air, but are instead hanging about in dirty cities, with uncivilized work. What gentleman runs factories, I ask you? Not a genuine one, as all the real gentlemen are growing food and families in the broad countryside of our lovely nation. Time in cities will not serve our young people well, I tell you, as they will age into minds as cramped as a Harlem tenement. Do not even conscience the thought of the young ladies they shall find in such places – all immigrants and servant-girls and ladies of ill-repute, to be sure.

Which brings me to my last and final point, indeed the most grievous one of all to me – that our young ladies and gentlemen can hardly be called such anymore, as the old names and old crests mean nothing to today’s youth. Why, just the other day I was purchasing goods at Mrs. Parris’ shop and a young fellow had never heard of my family name. I tell you, this might be America but my grandfather is from good English stock and his lands and titles ought to mean something. Young people nowadays should have some respect for the old ways and the old country, even if we are in the new world.

For these five points and many more, I regret to say that I fear marriage is done for, dear sirs. I hope that we may yet rescue it, but only if we burn every automobile and industrial building to the ground. With modern contrivances I just simply cannot see how anyone can remain in a happy union, and so I shall retire to the country with my dear wife and wait out the end of my days in despair for my beloved children, who have been so led astray by that damnable Henry Ford and his ilk, inventing needless contraptions and ruining our society.

Sincerely, the Honorable Mr. Alastair Jenkins, Esq.

View the original post here and give this girl a nice “Thank you” for a job well done!

Posted on

Today’s MUST DO

Today, I have a MUST DO for you (and your posterity…)

I want to recommend a book that is a literal gold mine of history, ideas and strategies for Conservatives.

The book is TAKEOVER by Richard A. Viguerie.

Viguerie’s style and story-telling is entertaining and informative. He provides great insight into the political machinery that is enamored with using the utopian ideals from a failed progressive platform to harm today’s Constitutional Conservatives. And, all within the Republican party.

Reading the book will be the easy part.  Restoring America to its founding principles, those of self-governance, free-markets and individual liberty, will not be as easy.

For right now, let’s not get bogged down in the seemingly impossible but concentrate on the do-able and get the book!

While you read, enjoy the knowledge, wit, wisdom and history that Viguerie presents. In the end you will see the value of simply remaining true to your common-sense desire for freedom. The ideas we carry concerning liberty are not complex. They are simple, self-evident and part of our American heritage. Clarence B. Carson, a historical economist, writes in his book, The American Tradition:

“That the central American tradition was erected around the goal of liberty is manifest in the great documents of our history. It was explicitly stated in the Declaration of Independence and implied in the structure of government provided for in the Constitution of 1787. Liberty was declared to be the object of the Massachusetts Body of Liberties of 1641, and was undoubtedly the purpose of the first ten amendments to the Constitution.”

Therefore, it will be worth your while to get a copy of TAKEOVER and contemplate the ideas and associated actions that will be necessary to restore our American tradition of individual liberty.

Jenny Beth Martin, the co-founder and President of Tea Party Patriots, wrote the Forward which I will share here:

Q_openThere is a bitter political civil war taking place that will determine whether America remains a constitutional republic. It is a timeless struggle between those who have power and those who desire to be free. The modern version of this struggle is not between Democrats and Republicans, but within the Republican Party itself.

This civil war began over one hundred years ago and not with the rise of the Tea Party movement in 2009.

It is a civil war between limited-government, constitutional conservatives and the progressive, establishment wing of the GOP. And make no mistake: the establishment wing of the Republican Party is progressive, and has been ever since conservatives stymied Teddy Roosevelt’s attempt to reclaim the Republican presidential nomination in 1912 and make progressivism the governing philosophy of the Republican Party.

In the years since 1912, this civil war has been playing out, and for the majority of that time, from the Taft-Eisenhower campaign of 1952 to the Tea Party’s battles to nominate and elect limited government constitutional conservatives in 2010 and 2012, Richard Viguerie has been in the thick of the battle.

Richard’s objective in writing this book is to provide a plan for conservatives to win this civil war based on the lessons he has learned—from both success and failure—in over fifty years of being active in the conservative movement at the national level.

It is a plan for constitutional conservatives to take over the GOP so that we may restore the liberty and opportunity that the Founders intended and protect that great document, the United States Constitution.

The millions of Americans who are drawn to the Tea Party movement understand that progressives in both the Democratic and Republican Parties have usurped power and overrun the Constitution. The Obama administration is the most extreme example of progressive rule, but the road to where we are today was built with the willing participation of establishment Republicans.

James Madison foresaw the likelihood of this civil war, although not within a political party, in Federalist No. 44, where he wrote, “In the last resort a remedy must be obtained from the people who can, by the election of more faithful representatives, annul the acts of the usurpers.”

Madison’s “remedy” must play out within the Republican Party since the Democratic Party has been completely taken over by progressives whose policies cannot succeed without ignoring and violating the Constitution.

In TAKEOVER Richard shows us that the ballot box of the Republican primaries is where we must begin to fulfill Madison’s remedy of electing “more faithful representatives.”

Time is running out, and if we fail in this task, our children, grandchildren—our posterity—will never know the America for which millions have sacrificed their labor, capital, lives, and limbs. Unless the Republican Party fulfills its promise and becomes the constitutional alternative to the progressives, I fear the “American experiment” is over.

The rise of the Tea Party citizenry and the election of young, principled constitutionalists to the Congress and in state legislatures is a sign that this war is about to turn, and in TAKEOVER Richard Viguerie gives us a road map to make it turn in our favor.

Where we are now is the culmination of decades of struggle, which is why the younger people in our movement especially must know what has worked and what has failed up until now.

It is to the younger generation, who has the most “skin in the game,” that TAKEOVER is addressed. Those who join us in this civil war are fulfilling an obligation to our children, grandchildren, and generations yet to be born that I dare say is no less consequential than that of the Founders.

Q_closeThe goal of Richard Viguerie’s TAKEOVER is for limited-government constitutional conservatives to take over the Republican Party and govern America in 2017. I urge you to read the book, follow the plan, and get in the fight today.

 

Screenshot_2167

 

Forward was originally published at ConservativeHQ and can be read here: Permalink

Posted on

Last Night’s Pizza-box and your 2nd Amendment Rights

Over-Stepping the Boundary Line

The anti-Federalists recognized the dangers of arbitrary,  capricious or whimsical actions by a nation’s ruling class. The anti-Federalists also understood that it didn’t matter if the ruling class was comprised of an individual like our US President, or a monarch like King George III. They knew danger could also arise from oligarchies, or democracies when  government oversteps it’s boundaries.

Over-stepping occurs constantly because of Republican traitors and Democratic idealists. The Democrats love big government and they are simply following their natural ideological bent.

Republican platforms at the national, state and county levels all oppose big government (cf., Ending Groundhog Republicanism). Although Republican statists claim they are against big government they rarely vote against big government. It turns out to be a convenient campaign ploy to retain votes from their conservative base.

The Republican elites in Washington, DC know all too well how to use their positions to threaten industries, extort corporate contributions, or legislate market disruptions that bring rewards to certain beneficiaries.

My words here are well chosen. You may think of treason as “acting to overthrow one’s government.” There is another definition which I intend. It is, “the betrayal of a trust or confidence, or a breach of faith.”

You and I have been betrayed

The Republican ruling class has placed their bets on a house of cards. They have wagered our children’s futures for their rewards today. They have immunity from ObamaCare. Do you? They hinder your job prospects while opening the field for themselves and their friends. They create factions among us and set contradictory and unattainable priorities.  This not only confuses citizens, it confuses markets.

Businesses need accurate information for making sound and efficient use of their resources. Are production capacities at optimal levels? Should the product mix be modified to take advantage of changing circumstances, supplies, or increases in market demand? No business can make an informed decision when the market is distorted by government intervention. There are false incentives, unwarranted subsidies, cheap money and limited access to natural resources. Each of which negatively and artificially impacts business decisions.

These contradictory and unattainable priorities confuse and hobble working people in our communities. Their unattainable priorities  are really false promises. Pennsylvania’s anti-federalist delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1776 recognized this. They identified the political maneuvering behind these false claims which were, “exciting [the Federalists] hopes of greater advantages from the expected plan than even the best government on earth could produce….”

anti-Federalist Proposals

The anti-federalists also documented their dissent for the proposed Constitution because it did not include a provision for the right to bear arms.  Their desire was to include wording which would guarantee no future jurisdictions could subvert this natural right for personal and family defense.

“That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game; and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up: and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to and be governed by the civil powers.”

In particular, notice the phrase “and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them”.

You and I have been told the 2nd Amendment covers this and protects our right to bear arms.  You may even believe that it’s language is complete. You may be of the opinion that the phrase in our 2nd amendment which reads “shall not be infringed” is as good as gold.

Yet, our 2nd Amendment right is the right most often infringed. Our Democratic led Oregon state legislature is intent on infringing this right daily during the current legislative session.

Additionally, Constitutional Amendments can be repealed. The 18th Amendment (Prohibition) was repealed by the 21st Amendment.

What defense is there for stopping devious, disingenuous  or corrupt men after they gain office?

First, arm yourselves with facts.

Did your Republican representative vote for the $1.1 trillion CR/Omnibus budget? This improvident legislation fully funded Pres. Obama’s scheme to “fundamentally transform America.” Obama received his needed wink and nod from two weak-kneed RINO’s,  Speaker Boehner and Rep. Walden. Those two RINO votes made the difference as it passed 214 to 212 on its initial journey through the House.

The only legislative restraint on Obama’s takeover of one-sixth of the US economy (healthcare), his executive amnesty plans and the EPA’s unprecedented assault against America’s natural resource sector was funding. Not any longer – the House fully funded all of Obama’s initiatives.

Our Turn Now

Use your knowledge and power in your local elections. Your proximity gives you more power in the local arena. Use it or lose it – vote for Liberty.  Elect conservative men and women to your County Commissioner positions. Encourage your County Commissioners to support the 2nd Amendment by passing legislation prohibiting the funding of activities which violate your inherent rights.

Elect true conservatives at every level of local government (even the County Dog Catcher if that position is an elected office.)

Elect true conservatives in all State and National races, whether House or Senate.

If your representative violated your trust, just throw ‘em out,  along with last night’s pizza-box.

Recommended Books…

Screenshot_2163Screenshot_2167Screenshot_2166Screenshot_2165Screenshot_2164