Quote of the Day – Say Uncle (8/3/2012)

The real outrage in this is that two elected officials threatened the president under color of law for expressing his views. That’s what you should be mad about. I’ll continue my boycott of Chicago and MA.

Say UncleChick Fellatio
August 3, 2012


[The other day Popehat posted a link on twitter and I had the urge to comment but let it subside.  My main contention with the linked content was this though:

Don’t you dare say that you’re just supporting Dan Cathy’s freedom of speech and religious expression. While there may be some of you who actually do care about the First Amendment working for everyone, I would like to know where you were when:

At which point he goes into a list of places that have been boycotted for their views one way or another.  I have to disagree and here’s why.

I, like most American’s, only become involved when I feel that something affects me.  I didn’t see the LGBT community come and participate with the Starbucks buycott for example.  I’m sure there was overlap as I know that Gay Cynic probably participated but as a whole the groups are not tied together at the hip.  I would in general do my best to support someone, but I will not expend energy in going out of my way as I will with places who forbid concealed carry for example.

What has happened here is that a large number of people are supporting Chick-Fil-A, not because of the owners stance on Gay marriage.  That is an entirely separate debate and my position can be summed thusly:

The state has no business being involved in marriage.  As for the legal rights provided by marriage between partners, who cares if they’re both male or female.  Everyone deserves the same legal rights and it is no one’s business to judge anyone else for their choices.

Moving on though this situation was aggravated by two political individuals.  Namely the mayors of Chicago and Boston.  These two individuals attempted to use the force of state to punish a company and its owner for voicing their opinion.  While I disagree with that opinion, they had every right to say it without the threat or use of force from government.  That is the problem, these politicians were using government to silence speech.  It wasn’t a separate part of the public attempting to shame the company for their opinion, it was the state.  The fact that they were using government to influence or control speech is a blatant violation of the first amendment and is worthy of note because what is to stop either of them saying I cannot conduct business because of my outspoken support of the second amendment?  It doesn’t have to even be about the second amendment though, it could be anything they disagree with.

I am by no means the only one with this view as well.  This is very much a free speech issue because the state should not be allowed to disallow businesses from operation based on the opinions and speech of their owners or employees.

I live in Washington and there is no Chick-Fil-A out here.  Overall I probably wouldn’t go if there was, but given the behavior of a few tyrannical politician’s I would give patronage just to show my support.  That’s exactly what those politicians did by doing that.  They drove people to patronize that business merely because the government was intimidating them. -B]

SSCC #378–The FBI

So, this is actually a kind of old incident but given new information I feel like classifying it as a state sponsored criminal.  Who is this criminal,  Major Nidal Hasan, the man animal responsible for the Fort Hood shooting.

Since I’m sure most of you are familiar with the shooting I won’t reiterate details.  What is interesting is the following:

A top FBI official testified today that Ft. Hood shooter Army Major Nidal Hasan should have been interviewed by FBI and Defense Department investigators before the deadly shooting based on reports from a field office about the major’s activities

Gee, you think it would have been a good idea to interview him there sparky.  Tell me why didn’t you interview him given you state the following:

“I am concerned that there were warning signs, and that with more aggressive investigation, there is a chance that this incident could have been prevented.  I am further concerned that the reason for less-aggressive investigation may have been political sensitivities in the Washington Field Office, and maybe even the FBI’s own investigating guidelines,” Wolf said in his opening statement at the hearing.

So let me get this straight, you ignored him and let him walk on by because of Political Correctness.  Did I understand that right there sparky?  Here’s the thing, you guys are more than happy to brew up your own terrorist cells, arm them, and then use the material to scare the public.  If you don’t understand what I’m talking about, watch this, I don’t feel like digging up every associate link.

As horrible as this sounds, and it is purely conjecture, what’s to say you all didn’t just look the other way to increase panic and fear, thus causing the American people to want to surrender more freedom and liberty thus giving you more power.  Seriously, someone explain to me how this could be allowed to pass purely under the guise of “Political Correctness?”

At best this was negligence, except this had to be willful.  People knowingly did nothing and the worst part of it all is the man still hasn’t be tried and many are still claiming this was not an act of terrorism.  Evidently the DHS has now released a new requirement that to qualify as a terrorist you must be a white Caucasian male, since you know they run in screaming “Allah Akbar” while shooting at every Christian in the joint.

Seriously, how is it the American public can allow the government and American media to look the other way and play down exactly what happened that day?  How is the American people can believe this was anything but an act of terrorism.  I know many don’t, but they sit idly by and do nothing while this administration plays the PC game to get this terrorist off the hook.  All the while the DHS redefines terrorist’s so broadly myself along with many others fit the description with not a stretch of their definition which doesn’t even relate to the actual definition of terrorist and terrorism.  Yet a man who obviously committed an act of terrorism and had ties to known terrorists under the traditional definition was just suffering PTSD.  Doesn’t that just seem a little wrong?

The reason this happened is obvious, the state willfully allowed it to happen for political capital.  He was a state sponsored terrorist that they allowed to complete his plan to reign terror on American soil.  Every person associated with allowing him to walk free should be hung for treason along with him.  Someone should have blown the whistle, even if it meant the end of your career.  Just because it hurts, doesn’t mean it isn’t the right thing to do.

I hate sounding like a conspiracy theorist, but seriously this is just too damn stupid.  The long complicated plot is trying to believe that political correctness allowed this to happen as opposed to people willfully looking the other way in an effort to gain more power.

State Sponsored Criminal and Terrorist 277: Major Nidal Hasan

Because real terrorism isn’t terrorism, it’s the result of PTSD, and all those libertarians that just want the nanny state to leave them the hell alone, they’re the real terrorists.

A Guide to Exercising a Right…

Emily Miller gives us a nicely detailed guide on what it takes to exercise a Constitutionally guaranteed right in our nations capital.  Here’s a nice excerpt, I would highly suggest reading the whole thing.

I’ve been writing this guide bit by bit from the day in Oct. 2011 when I first went to the District’s firearm registration office and said, “I want a gun.” Back then, I expected it to take a few weeks and cost $60 to have a firearm at home. I was off by a few months and $375.  Also, I believed that documenting the process for the newspaper would mean a few stories about long lines and frustrating bureaucrats. I was far off the mark.

When I started, there were 17 steps to getting a legal gun in Washington. However, as my series exposed the particularly burdensome requirements to gun ownership, the city council moved to remove some of those barriers. Now  there are 12 steps that take much less time and the cost has decreased by $262.

Even with the improvements I still say its way too much.  Especially considering one should be allowed to vote without showing ID, but look at the barriers to gun ownership.

These barriers are numerous and the biggest is a financial hurdle that many may not be able to overcome.  Imagine adding a $125 transfer fee plus an extra $48 dollars in asking the police department for permission to own a firearm.

Not to mention the additional 10 day waiting period which does nothing but make sure that someone who may legally own a firearm isn’t able to purchase one when they really need it.

Name one single other right that has these types of bars against their exercise.  There is no waiting period on free speech.  If someone says something bad about you, you are not prohibited from writing about them for 10 days while your blog registration application comes through.  You are not required to pay a fee to the state for the permission to create a blog or computer, or network connection to run your blog.  You are allowed to write freely in defense of your character.

Contrast that to firearms where an abusive-ex can threaten you, and you are now stuck waiting for 10 days.  You have a pile of fees to pay both to a monopolistic FFL and the police department for the permission to have an effective tool of self-defense.  A right guaranteed by the US Constitution and stated as applying to the individual in the McDonald decision is subject to fees and limitations of its exercise.  The consequences in this latter case though can be lethal for the person whose rights are being violated.

Instead of allowing free exercise, they create a maze of bureaucracy to be followed, which does nothing but ease the government in their efforts to infringe a right while appearing to allow for free exercise.

If your laws need a guide in order explain to people how to exercise a right, there is something grossly wrong with the design of the system.  It is obviously designed and engineered with the intent of stopping people from exercising that right.  The politicians and people responsible should be run up on 18.242.

I applaud Emily Miller for her efforts in correcting this wrong.  While she has made considerable advancement as can be seen, there is still a long way to go.  I doubly appreciate that she created that wonderful guide to aid others through the bureaucratic nightmare that are D.C.’s gun laws.

Independence Day 2012 Part II

So Sebastian said the following on Monday.

I think it’s the right of every American to celebrate our nation’s independence by blowing up a small chunk of it.

At which point I started laughing because honestly not everyone can effectively blow up a chunk of America.  The good news is, I am capable and have resources to do exactly that.  Not only do I have resources though, but the method of detonation provides a method of celebration endorsed by John Adams himself.

However, it must be said, please do not attempt to recreate any of this.  I am trained and experienced in mixing and handling explosives.  Just watch Caleb’s PSA.  Where ever he says “Gun”, replace it with “Guns or Explosives”.  

So without further ado, I give you the 4th of July, Boomershoot style.

I’m sure Mr. Adams would have approved.

As a note, it seems Sebastian knows this, but I still think my graphical display helps spread the joy.

*Sorry for the delayed post, Murphy hates me.  YouTube was constantly quitting mid-download.  I finally achieved success using IE.  I left to go to a BBQ and my computer went to sleep.  Thus it finally went up a day late.

Independence Day (2012)

Every year for the past couple years I have done a decent Independence day post.  It was never really intended to be an ongoing theme.  I will say that I love this day, mainly because I love the fact we sent a formalized letter to Bastard King George saying we can, and have the right to tell him to go screw himself.

As a quick rundown, here’s the posts I’ve done on independence and liberty over the past couple years.

I love this day, more specifically I love the history of it and the significance of it.  When else in history did someone formalize a letter like that telling them, and rightfully so, to go piss up a rope.  There are a lot of people who attempt to trivialize or even discredit both the people who achieved independence as well as the history surrounding it.

There were a lot of things that happened just right, and even more importantly many of the right people with the right attitudes were in a position to make things happen.

So today, celebrate the fact that a bunch of men took a risk upon themselves, pledging their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to give you the opportunities you have today.  Many probably wouldn’t be interested in spending the time learning the details surrounding it.  My wife used to be one of those, however I have converted her to enjoying history instead of hating and despising it.  I love learning history much the same as I love learning about anything.  I’m glad I’m not the only one with that view of learning.

I don’t feel like giving a history lesson today.  Instead all I ask is at some point if you haven’t watched it before, watch the John Adams miniseries.  It provides a good window for those who aren’t as apt to pick up a book or just generally enjoy history.

So a thank you to the obnoxious and disliked Mr. Adams.

Look forward to Part II later today.

Ear Worm Wednesday–7/4/2012

Considering today is the day America recognizes as having declared their independence.  When in truth we merely formalized the letterIndependence was actually declared two days earlier.

I think I’m just going to have to post this every year.

Quote of the Day – Brion McClanahan (7/2/2012)

In the words of Madison, “Where a majority are united by a common sentiment, and have an opportunity, the rights of the minor party become insecure” – in other words, the founders wanted checks against the tyranny of the majority.  That was why the Founders wanted a republic of separated powers.  While the government was to “be derived from the great body of society, not from an inconsiderable portion or a favored class of it,” the Constitution included a system of indirect appointments, including the Supreme Court, the Electoral College System, and originally, the United States Senate, whose members were appointed by their respective state legislatures.

Brion McClanahan – The Politically Incorrect Guide to The Founding Fathers, pg. 10


[Seriously this book started off fantastically and has so far continue to be more of the same.  I knew I would enjoy it, not just by its title, but by the fact on the first page of chapter one he says,

Please repeat: the United States is not a democracy and was never intended to be a democracy.

The fact we are a republic is one of my personal pet-peeves and I find it nothing more than an expression of ignorance when someone claims we are a democracy.  Further it is disappointing to see further attempts to destroy the checks and balances placed within the system, that exist for the express purpose of protecting the minority, and removing them so that the majority may have their way no matter the cost.

Last week Justice Roberts dealt another blow to checks and balances.  Initially some viewed it as a strategic view and on some level it made sense if you hadn’t really had time to think about it yet.  The more time that passed though the more it just didn’t make sense, but I thought I was maybe just being cynical.  Then today, someone a lot wiser and snarkier said something that illustrated my concern and thoughts weren’t because I was crazy but far from it.

The fact is for the past 225 years, the Supreme Court acted as an extra check for when political powers get out of control.  Now we supposedly are required to suffer the consequences of our political choices?

Why should the few suffer for the choices of the many?  The whole point of our representative form of government was to stop that exact problem from ever happening.  The whole point was that every part would restrain the other, that includes the government restraining the “will of the majority.”

The republic is slowly drifting toward a democracy.  As we all know a democracy is merely two wolves and a sheep getting together to decide who’s for dinner.  Guess who’s the sheep. Where’s the damn gulch? -B]

 

SSCC #360 – Houston

The officers didn’t see it that way. Shortly after she took up her post, a squad car pulled up to Miss Plummer and an officer grabbed her backpack off her shoulder and began rifling through it.

Then, he handcuffed her and told her she was under arrested for felony obstruction of justice and that she would spent three to five years in jail, at minimum.

So what did this woman do to attract the attention of an officer in such a way to make him so aggravated, quite simple really.

Then, she said, she turned around and wrote ‘Speed Trap!!’ in large letters on a piece of grocery bag to warn oncoming traffic.

Never mess with cops who are generating revenue or otherwise engaging in tax collection penalty collection.  For you see in this day in age, and in all honesty, a penalty is really a tax on something other people disagree with.

Speed, pay an extra tax.  Want to smoke weed, pay an extra tax.  Want to set off explosives, pay an extra tax.  Want a suppressor or SBR, pay and extra tax.  It is possible to continue, however that is unnecessary.  It is well known that the concept of “mens rea” is under attack and the proliferation of victimless crimes.  Each of which could be ruled just the same a penalty tax.

State Sponsored Criminal #360: Officer John Doe

Because a citizen daring to alert her fellow citizens about officers rounding up “sinners” is a bad thing, they can’t let people dare do that, it would cause chaos. 

*I meant for this to go up on Monday but the scheduling failed for what ever reason.