A Prayer for Melody

Melody joined our band, along with her father, in the early Nineties.  She was just a kid then.  She was equal parts sweetness and mischief.  At the time, her parents had sizeable piece of property to accommodate her horse, Injun Joe.  Joe was like his mistress, spirited and not quite tamed when they bought him.  But Melody was persistent in training him; no matter how many times he threw her, she got right back on, until she mastered him.

One time, she invited me to take a ride on Joe.  But her father, knowing the horse’s nature, interceded.  She then giggled and admitted she thought it would be funny to see Joe throw me.   I didn’t think it was very funny or good-natured of her, but I took into consideration that she was about 12 years old at the time.  I wasn’t very much inclined to climb aboard Joe.  I could see for myself that he had a mind to throw me.

With attention, Melody’s manners improved considerably, thanks in large part to his father’s companion, who is a retired teacher.  Still, Melody found ways to get into trouble, especially being an atrractive, comely young lady with long flaxen.  She was the epitome of the Country Girl.  Today, she is a respectable, though still spirited, young woman.

Melody made a beautiful bride on her wedding day.  Her husband was not exactly the perfect groom.  Her father was filled with sorrow.  He felt his daughter was marrying the wrong man and there was nothing he could do about it.  Indeed, he was right.  Within ten months, the marriage was over.  Melody’s ex-husband turned out to be an abusive basement boy who kept Melody locked in their apartment.  It was her in-laws who finally rescued her and so the divorce proceeded.

They had to, and still must keep Melody’s whereabouts a secret.  Suffice it to say, excellent horsewoman that she was (she trained people to ride and boasted of a long list of clients), she went West.   Let us say that she is in “Glenn Beck Country.”

Melody knew how to take a fall when a horse threw her.  However, in a contest between her bicycle and automobile, Melody lost.  She survived, but broke a number of bones, cracked her ribs and I believe her skull, and her liver was punctured.  Her father had to fly west to take care of her, as her mother is not up to the task.

Melody will have the best of care, as her maternal grandparents are wealthy.  Had this happened to any of the rest of us, we would be at the mercy of Obamacare.   Even the best medical care, however, needs the assistance of prayer in a case of such severe injuries.  Her father told one of his friends that he might be back in New Jersey in a day.  Or a week.  Or a month.  Or a year.  Or maybe never.  “Never” is an ominous word coming from Melody’s father.  She’s his only child and, as all parents do I suppose, he dotes on her.

So please say a prayer for Melody, her doctors, her father, her grandparents, and all those who care for Melody and want to see her back in the saddle again soon.

Thank you.

 

Advertisements
Published in: on January 30, 2013 at 8:52 am  Leave a Comment  

Scouting for Boys

No news was more disappointing – not even the re-election of Obama as president, which was expected – than the news that the Boy Scouts of America will be admitting gay scouts and leaders into their ranks.

The Boy Scouts were my heroes.  They held out for so long against the predations of the Progressive agenda.  They weren’t afraid to defend and uphold common moral values.  Every chance I got, I donated to their causes.  I have no doubt that the good Scouts I met and their leaders are just as dismayed by this ruling from their leadership.

Progressives will certainly hail this surrender as a great victory for their minority.  One can only imagine what effect the admission of gays will have on their activities.  Given the proclivities of gay men (and youth), you have to wonder why they want to join the Boy Scouts in the first place.  There can only be one reason:  the same reason girls with painted fingernails sign up for Auto or Woodworking shop in high school – it’s where the boys are.

You can imagine the future Boy Scout badges:  Embroidery, Fashion Design, Make-Up Artistry, Jewelry-Making, Baking, Sewing.  Why don’t they just join the Girl Scouts, or are the Girl Scouts too busy with their Bench Pressing, Auto Mechanics, Deer Hunting, and the venerable Cookie Badges?  Heavens!  We can’t let gay boys into the Girl Scouts (where they’d probably be more at home), but we can thrust them upon the hapless Boy Scouts.

What’s going to happen on the camp-outs?  What normal boy is going to want to share a tent with a homosexual youth?  Yet, if the normal boy refuses, he will be punished for his “bigotry.”  Having two homosexual youths sharing a tent will be just as bad, if not worse.  Scouting will be transformed from a character-building experience into another experiment in sexual permissiveness and debauchery.

As for the youngest boys, how do boys that young know what they want?  Some of them are said to know already, having an inclination to play with dolls and tea sets rather than footballs and trucks.  They will have nothing in common with their “fellow scouts.”  Why force it?  Boys that age tend to be brutal.  The only result will be unnecessary bullying, suffering by the gay kid, and punishment for the other boys.

Then there’s the problem of gay troop leaders.  Their disingenuous avowals of having no sexual interest in the boys is risible.  The Progressives will immediately point to aberrant heterosexual leaders; the peephole by which the camel will get its nose into the Boy Scout tent.  Most Scout leaders are married men with children of their own and an interest in the boys’ development of character and morals, not single men with aberrant, even if unavoidable, proclivity for their own sex. 

Progressives must have wormed their way high up in the ranks of Boy Scout leadership in order to bring about this transformation of the Scouts’ mission.  Individual troop leaders have been told they will still have authority to determine who may lead and join their particular troop.  But we know how long that will last.

About as long as Obama’s promise not to raise taxes on the Middle Class.  God help the Boy Scouts of America.

 

 

 

Published in: on January 29, 2013 at 8:54 am  Leave a Comment  

Terrorists to Westerners: Get Out of Benghazi

According to The UK Telegraph, Britons and all other westerners were told to leave the Libyan city of Benghazi on Thursday after diplomats received warning of an “imminent” terror threat in the wake of the Algerian hostage siege.

According to Hillary Clinton’s testimony, it was no big deal whether terrorists killed the U.S. Ambassador to Libya or whether it was a mob protesting a stupid, cartoonish film mocking Islam:  four Americans were dead, but, she insisted they were dead and that was all that mattered.  She admitted that they’d been warned.  She didn’t explain why the warning was ignored.  Let us hope this time Westerners take the threat seriously and either ramp up security or go home.  Given our newly-adopted cowardice, the latter is more likely.

Rand Paul corrected her immediately, as she sat there looking like a bored schoolgirl listening to a lecture about bullfrogs ten minutes before the final school bell.  She was going to be outta there as Secretary of State, and when she runs for President nobody will remember or care, except the insignificant Conservatives who were trounced by George Soros’ vote-buying money.

At a production meeting the other night for a public access program, we were wondering which document is more important:  the Declaration of Independence or the U.S. Constitution?  The Constitution, being torn to shreds by Hillary’s boss, may be the law of the land, but with the second coronation of Obama, it would seem the Constitution’s goose is cooked.  Chef Obama is preparing it to serve as a side dish to the Ten Planks of Communism.

We may be back to Square One:  the Declaration of Independence.  If Hillary’s demeanor and attitude is any indication, particularly if she is to be the Queen one day, we may need to brush up on the Declaration.

While the Declaration is not, technically, a legal document; it was a letter serving notice to King George III of England that we’d had quite enough of him, and listed all our grievances.  Those grievances sound familiar in today’s modern light.

“The History of the present King of Great Britain is a History of repeated Injuries and Usurpations, all having in direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over thee States.  To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid World.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public Good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing Importance, unless suspended in their Operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the Tenure of their Offices, and the Amount and payment of their Salaries.

He has erected a Multitude of new Offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their substance.

He has affected to render the Military independent of, and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a Jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our Laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation.

He has excited domestic Insurrection amongst us and has endeavored to bring on the Inhabitants of our Frontiers.

The President of the United States is allowing foreign powers, often of an illegal and violent nature, to dictate our foreign policy.  Hillary has paved the road for a theocracy in the Middle East which cannot and will not adhere to diplomacy.  Our military brass salutes Obama.  Our Media makes certain that the public will not tolerate a shooting war.  Whoever the next Secretary of State, said to be John Kerry, known for his anti-American strength stance will simply finish the job.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon has given the thumbs-up for women to be admitted to the front lines, where chaos is certain to ensue.  In addition to their physical inferiority, women will bring along all the fetters of political correctness to the front lines, and the inevitable confusion of sexuality.  Men who are attracted to these he-women will find themselves mired in sexual harassment charges when they’re needed on the front lines.

What’s more, their activities in Muslim countries would be severely limited.  Any ally might, improbably, admit U.S. forces would insist on the military restricting them women to base and eventually would force our military to leave.

 Women may feel they should have the right to serve on the front lines.  But the military doesn’t need them on the front lines and the women would become our own worst enemies.

 

 

Published in: on January 25, 2013 at 8:44 am  Leave a Comment  

Victory for G.I. Janes and Loss for American Women

Women can fight.  Just ask any mother whose child has been scapegoated by a teacher.  Molly Pitcher fought in the Battle of Monmouth during the Revolutionary War, taking her husband’s place when he fell either to injury or the excessive August heat.  She put down her water pitcher – used both to cool the gun barrels before placing the cannonball into the barrel of the cannon as for cooling the soldiers suffering from heat exhaustion – and took her husband’s place loading the cannon.  According to the legend, she was given a Medal of Honor by Gen. George Washington.

Many wives followed their husbands to the encampments.  Some women cut their hair and put on uniforms, serving on ships as well as in the field.  They served as bravely and humbly as any man.  But that was the old America that we’re told is out of fashion.

Yesterday, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced that the Pentagon is lifting its ban on women serving in combat positions.  Some combat positions will be open to women sometime this year; more elite positions such as the Navy SEALs may take until 2016.

Lolita Baldor, of the Associated Press, notes that “Women comprise about 14 percent of the 1.4 million active U.S. military personnel.  More than 280,000 women have been sent to Iraq, Afghanistan, or to jobs in neighboring nations in support of the wars.  Of the more than 6,600 killed, 152 were women .”

That is a deceiving statistic, since the women are serving in support positions and women are banned from serving below the brigade level.  In other words, they’re generally not on the front lines, in the line of fire as the men are.  It is not because they’re better fighters.  The Pentagon is looking at estimate of 230,000 female soldiers.  The number of fatalities will certainly rise with the number of women enlisted as infantry soldiers.  Their chances of being kidnapped by Muslim fanatics will be greater as well.

Progressives have been seeking to enlist women in the military for generations.  They cite countries like Israel, where women are subject to the military draft, just as the men are.  Watching news footage of women reporting to duty during an air raid, they didn’t look too happy about it or particularly fit for the mission.

Lifting the ban on women in combat opens the possibility for women being drafted into the military, just as American men are required to enlist.  Patriotism is the last thing on the minds of Progressive politicians and their propagandist Media.  They’re thinking of the casualty lists filled with the names of mothers and the orphaned children they’ll inevitably leave behind.  Just as the Media orchestrated the Viet Nam War, manipulating public opinion against a war that was difficult to understand without the real truth, enlisting women in combat positions will be one more nail in America’s defense coffin.

Women are said to be more of a liability in the Army and more particularly the Navy than the Pentagon or the Media is willing to admit.  Women’s groups claim they’re willing to abide by the same standards for men.  But that’s what they said about being admitted into police forces and fire departments.  The women couldn’t meet the physical standards, they sued to get them lowered, and the result is the men are short-handed on more able bodies.  We do need women in the police force, especially for investigations, and the gun is a great equalizer.  However, great numbers of women in the military suggests great numbers of casualties.

We’ve just taken one more step towards the surrender of our great nation.

 

Published in: on January 24, 2013 at 8:45 am  Leave a Comment  

Royal Balls

If memory serves, second inaugurations are generally not treated with the same sense of pomp, circumstance, and balls as a president’s first inauguration.  According to one study, 60 percent of Americans watched the inauguration – still a substantial number.  But the authorities moved the Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday back a full week, from Jan. 15 so that his birthday would coincide with Obama’s inauguration.  This gave many of Obama’s welfare and low-income supporters to celebrate both “holidays” from personal responsibility and collectively celebrate their “New America.”

Meanwhile the Nephew is getting married today, in a brief, town hall ceremony.  For this couple, a civil ceremony is appropriate.  She is a Chinese citizen, of no particular religious beliefs.  Her family is 10,000 miles away, and divorced.  His parents are also divorced, although they’ll both be at the ceremony, with ex sister-in-law standing in as the mother-de-facto of the bride, helping her prepare for the brief ceremony.  She bought the bride’s bouquet and I presume other bride-like artifacts.  Thank goodness my brother’s ex knows about these things.

A royal wedding would have been most impractical.  We relatives on the groom’s side couldn’t make a midday, weekday ceremony, either, although my very kind employers have allowed me to leave early.  However, it behooves me to get in early to my job (especially since it’s only a part-time job and I need the money) since I’ll be leaving early.

My brother wants me to take photos of the happy occasion, however brief it may be.  I thought he understood we all had to work, but as my supervisor was quite understanding (he’s only been married about a year himself) I was able to help, much to the (surprising) joy of The Nephew.

Here, I must abridge so I can get to work early, hence the abbreviated posting.  I also have to get a new memory card for my camera on the way to work, as my old one has gone missing.

I told The Nephew I quite approved of the simple, civil ceremony.  Too many couples pay outrageous sums for royal weddings, only to pay even more outrageous sums for a divorce ten or twenty years later.  Since both their parents are divorced, it’s understandable why they wanted an understated ceremony.  What a waste of money.

Just like the presidential inaugural balls.

 

 

 

 

Published in: on January 23, 2013 at 8:07 am  Leave a Comment  

Old School Gun Ownership

Last night’s Tea Party meeting was unusual in number and demographics.  The room was filled to capacity – over 100 attendees, of all ages, many of them young, and most of them men.  The subject?  Gun control legislation.

The speaker was Anthony Colandro, CEO of Guns for Hire Training Institute.  Colandro is a Master Fire Arms Instructor and NRA Master Training Counselor, with multiple certifications in firearms safety and use.  Guns for Hire offers courses for police, military, corporate security and private citizens in the safe use of firearms.

In case you think we were all crazy, the co-founder of our Tea Party is a licensed psychologist.  I always said we were quite fortunate in having such a person as our leader; when the Media calls us crazy, Right Wing extremists, we have it on his considered authority that we are not.

Colandro said that since Obama’s re-election, his business has been (if you’ll excuse the expression) “booming.”  He has seven schools throughout New Jersey and is about to open an eighth.  Clearly, Obama considers armed opponents a danger to his monarchy and will do everything possible to either gut the Second Amendment or make it useless by limiting the number of rounds a legal gun owner can use to defend themselves. 

The suggested seven-round limit (imposed already by New York State) would be of little use against an armed intruder.  Trying to shoot a target in the head for an inexperienced gun owner with only seven bullets would be worse than useless.  Colandro says that shooting someone in a harmless place is another of those exercises in futility; as long as the perpetrator is in motion, the victim is in danger.

He placed a good deal of blame on our modern video game culture, citing such games as “Call of Duty” and “Doom” as virtual training guides of armed, psychotic killers.  Players receive a reward for killing as many people as they can and if they find they’re losing, they have the option of shooting themselves and ending the game.  Thanks also is due to Hollywood and its decades of senselessly violent movies (in the Eighties, I was fired from my job as a newspaper movie reviewer for criticizing these films; the theater owners were complaining).

Students and the public in general have been indoctrinated since the mid-Sixties to fear guns and violence, even though of the 11,000 gun crimes committed per year (as opposed to the 40,000 automobile deaths), the majority are committed by criminals with unregistered guns.

Colandro blamed the political assassinations (the Kennedy brothers and MLKjr) for the onslaught of gun regulations.  Some of us look to another event, though; the University of Texas Clock Tower shooting in 1966.  Get the date right, people.  It was 1966.  I was only seven years old but I remember it distinctly.  People weren’t frightened by planned assassinations, whose targets were very deliberately selected; it was the notion of a mass shooting of unsuspecting people that frightened the public and gave the Communists in American the impetus to begin disarming the citizens of the United States, in preparation for their eventual takeover.

It was not always this way.  One older Tea Party member recounted his membership in his high school’s Sportsman’s Club.  The club’s adviser was a member of a statewide Sportsman’s Club organization and a certified firearms instructor.  The teacher decided he wanted to make a gun safety film, using his students.

That day, the students were given permission to bring their 12-gauge shotguns to school, with live ammunition, in preparation for the class trip to a nearby farm, where they would do the filming.  They performed various safety maneuvers, such as dismantling their guns in order to climb through fences.  That was 1954, he told the audience.  Can you imagine students being allowed to bring their guns to school today, he asked?  Students cannot even mention guns in school without being expelled.

As David Barton pointed out on Glenn Beck’s evening program, in the America of olde, every citizen was required to have firearms in order to protect themselves and gun safety and shooting were part of the school curriculum.

Today our society is so indoctrinated into the dangers of gun violence, inured as they are with the horrors of exaggerated gun violence on TV and in the movies, and now in the news, that the Sportsman’s Club of 1954 would be unthinkable today.  Even the speaker, Mr. Colandro, was surprised into speechlessness, although some of the older man’s contemporaries whispered of how they used to bring their guns to school.

Since the gun regulations went into effect, gun violence has increased, not decreased.  Ordinary citizens are like sheep among the wolves, fearful of protecting themselves (you cannot even travel with your firearm in your trunk on the way to the gun range; it’s a three-year prison term in this state) and uncertain of how well the police can protect them.  Even police officers are being sued for using their firearms.

Guns are the great equalizer, the saying goes.  Obama and the Progressive Elites do not want an “equal” society.  They want subjects, not free citizens.  The NRA was created in order to bring about legislation that would allow the former black slaves to own firearms.  Anyone who cannot defend themselves is a slave, whether they know it or not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Published in: on January 22, 2013 at 9:11 am  Leave a Comment  

Second Immaculation Day for Obama

 

It was a day we had hoped we would never see: a second Inauguration Day for Obama. Not only is there now a second inauguration, but an Inauguration Day Part II, as Inauguration Day fell on a Sunday. By law, he has to take the oath on the 20th of January, which he did in a quiet ceremony.  But to accommodate his adoring, freeloading public, he will take the oath again today, accompanied by marching bands, a host of media cheerleaders, and expensive inaugural balls.

At his last inaugural such luminaries as Yasir Arafat were present.  So we must endure listening to him lie – for the third time – that he will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, even as he delivers more Executive Orders and appoints more Progressive judges to tear it to pieces.

By coincidence, this is also the designated Martin Luther King Jr. Birthday, a federal holiday.  Even though the man was born on January 15th, and it would have been more appropriate to celebrate the Monday holiday on the 14th of January, only one day before his actual birthday, the federal government waved its magic wand to make sure his birthday was celebrate on the second inauguration of our first black, and Communist, president.

A column, called Black Voices, on the Huffing Post website, notes that MLK had another initiative – economic, as well as social, justice.  Initially, LBJ was considered a hero by blacks, along with King, for making basic civil rights possible for black people, like being able to drink out of a public water fountain or sit at a lunch counter, for crying out loud.  No problem with King there.  But he felt that not enough was being done to eradicate poverty, despite Johnson’s proclaimed, “War on Poverty.”  King and the Progressives felt money being “wasted” on Vietnam should have been spent on the inner cities.

“Frustrated,” HP’s Jannell Ross writes, “King began criticizing the Johnson administration and the Vietnam War. That March, he officially launched The Poor People’s Campaign. Around the same time, King demanded $30 million for anti-poverty programs and 500,000 affordable housing units and began making plans for civil disobedience in Washington.

“The Poor People’s Campaign failed to excite some of King’s oldest allies– people who had been with him during the bus boycotts in Montgomery, Ala., and the demonstrations that followed the bombing of Birmingham, Ala.’s, 16th Street Baptist Church, which killed four little girls. Even some who had allowed their children to protest Birmingham’s segregated lunch counters and face down Bull Connor, fire hoses and police dogs, weren’t so sure.”

“’At the time, blacks tended to view [President Lyndon] Johnson in the same historical frame that they saw Lincoln,’” said Lawrence Eldridge, a religious scholar and historian who wrote the 2011 book “Chronicles of a Two-Front War: Civil Rights and Vietnam in the African American Press.” ‘Sometimes they elevated him above Lincoln because his contributions –- the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act — had been so enormous and, of course, current.’”

“But for King, commitment to reducing inequality meant speaking publicly about Johnson’s shifting priorities, and challenging private landlords and city governments that shortchanged poor communities with lower-quality services like trash pickup, building inspections and street-cleaning.

“King was also a vocal an advocate of government policies that would increase employment and of laws mandating that employers pay living wages. He utterly opposed ‘right to work’ laws.”

King’s economic justice campaign was downplayed by the Media and denied by Progressives, who insisted King was not a Communist.  King’s adversaries have insisted that in his last days he, indeed, had taken such a turn and Ross tells us, was planning civil disobedience demonstrations.  But by that time, he’d been assassinated and become a revered, martyred figure whose legacy one dared not question.

Obama will take the oath of office on both Lincoln’s and King’s Bibles. 

 “The prudent, penniless beginner in the world, labors for wages awhile, saves a surplus with which to buy or land, for himself; then labors on his own account another while, and at length hires another new beginner to help him. This, say its advocates, is free labor—the just and generous, and prosperous system, which opens the way for all—gives hope to all, and energy, and progress, and improvement of condition to all.”

 “No country can sustain, in idleness, more than a small percentage of its numbers. The great majority must labor at something productive.”   Abraham Lincoln

 “The good and just society is neither the thesis of capitalism nor the antithesis of communism, but a socially conscious democracy which reconciles the truths of individualism and collectivism.”

 “And one day we must ask the question, Why are there forty million poor people in America? And when you begin to ask that question, you are raising questions about the economic system, about a broader distribution of wealth. When you ask that question, you begin to question the capitalistic economy. And I’m simply saying that more and more, we’ve got to begin to ask questions about the whole society.”

“We must develop a program that will drive the nation to a guaranteed annual income. Now, early in this century this proposal would have been greeted with ridicule and denunciation, as destructive of initiative and responsibility. At that time economic status was considered the measure of the individual’s ability and talents.  And, in the thinking of that day, the absence of worldly goods indicated a want of industrious habits and moral fiber. We’ve come a long way in our understanding of human motivation and of the blind operation of our economic system. Now we realize that dislocations in the market operations of our economy and the prevalence of discrimination thrust people into idleness and bind them in constant or frequent unemployment against their will. Today the poor are less often dismissed, I hope, from our consciences by being branded as inferior or incompetent. We also know that no matter how dynamically the economy develops and expands, it does not eliminate all poverty.”

 “The problem indicates that our emphasis must be twofold. We must create full employment or we must create incomes. People must be made consumers by one method or the other. Once they are placed in this position we need to be concerned that the potential of the individual is not wasted. New forms of work that enhance the social good will have to be devised for those for whom traditional jobs are not available.”  Martin Luther King, Jr.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Published in: on January 21, 2013 at 8:43 am  Leave a Comment  

Our Rights Are In Obama’s Sites

First, allow me to apologize, readers, for my recent absence.  Even though I got the flu shot at the end of September of last year, I still came down with the flu, albeit a milder form of influenza.  I’ve had had the flu before and this was nothing like the bone-rattling chills I’ve had in the past, the aching muscles, or the mind-boggling headaches.  The fatigue was still there, and the constantly running nose.  Hate to think what it would have been like if I hadn’t gotten the shot.

During this time, Obama passed no less than 23 Executive Orders regulating the ownership of guns.  They are listed on Michelle Malkin’s website:  23 Executive Actions

  1. Issue a Presidential memorandum requiring federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.  Which federal agencies?  What data?
  2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act,  that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.  So much for patient privacy and the Hyppocratic Oath.  The danger here is not that the doctors or states will withhold information, but the patients will.
  3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.  If the background system is so great, why would the states need incentives to share the information? 
  4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.  Criminals and the mentally ill are the first people, already covered, on the list.  Criminals get their guns illegally.  The mentally ill will probably steal or improvise what they need.  So who are the “dangerous people” the government doesn’t want slipping through the cracks?  Gun advocates object to this particular piece of fiat, claiming that having a mentally unstable person in their household shouldn’t prevent them from having a gun.  This is an argument defenders of the Constitution and gun advocates will have trouble making to the general public in light of the Newtown shooting; Adam Lanza was crazy, but it was his mother who owned the guns and taught him to shoot them. 
  5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.  This rule begs the question:  Why was the gun seized in the first place?  If the individual is innocent of a crime, what else would the government being doing but trying to find an excuse not to return the gun?  If the individual is guilty of a crime unrelated to the ownership of a gun, if they’re in jail they’re not going to need it, but the government still shouldn’t have the right to seize it.  As for returning guns to convicted criminals, can you say “Fast and Furious?” 
  6. Publish a letter from the ATF to federally-licensed gun dealers providing “guidance” on how to run background checks for private sellers.  This is gun dealers being forced to do the ATF’s dirty work on privately-owned guns purchased before licensing laws were in effect. 
  7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.  Is he kidding? 
  8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes. (Consumer Product Safety Commission).  Yes, let’s make it even harder for legal owners of guns to use their weapons in self-defense.  Guns (at least in my state) already must be kept in a locked case, with the ammunition in some other location.  How much safer can you get?  The gun safe sure did the gun owner who was robbed when the idiot posted a map of all gun-owners in the New York City area a lot of good, didn’t it? 
  9. Issue a Presidential memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.  Does this mean that if you sold a gun and whoever bought it in the future committed a crime with it, or even just committed a crime while owning it, the former owner can be held liable for damages?  In the future, criminals will be issued ballots, but not bullets. 
  10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.  No need to make the DOJ go to all that time and trouble; just get hold of the guy who made the gun owners’ map. 
  11. Nominate an ATF director.  Clint Eastwood. 
  12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.  Law enforcement doesn’t know how to deal with an active shooter?  Just ask any big corporation or the U.S. Postal Service; they’ve had active shooter plans in place for years now.  
  13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.  The way we’ve maximized enforcement efforts to prevent drug violence and prosecute drug crimes?  “Gun violence” and “gun crimes” have been with us for a long time.  Obama basically wants to make it an act of crime to own a gun.  Period. 
  14. Issue a Presidential memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.  In other words, declare the Founding Fathers insane. 
  15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.  The guns themselves, inasmuch as they are guns, operate “safely” for the most part.  From a technological standpoint, the only thing the private sector could do to make guns “safer”, from Obama’s standpoint, is to make them more difficult to operate. 
  16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors from asking patients about guns in their homes.  That doesn’t mean the patients must or will answer. 
  17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.  This merely broadens the scope of what can be considered a threat of violence, such as, “I wanted to kill my kids this morning when they wouldn’t get up for school” or “I really hate people who cut me off in traffic.” 
  18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.  That is, to hire more “unionized” school resource officers. 
  19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship, and institutions of higher education.  The U.S. Postal Service already has one, which has been followed by corporations everywhere for decades. 
  20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.  Make sure no one on Medicaid legally owns a gun. 
  21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.  Redistributing the wealth would not have prevented Sandy Hook. 
  22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.  Or the shooting in Aurora, Colo.  Or the shooting at the University of Texas in 1966, the first modern-day massacre. 
  23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.  Let the lunatics run the asylum.

 Remember when you didn’t have to wear seatbelts?  You do now.  Frankly, having witnessed two accidents in which the driver’s – and sole occupants – were not wearing seatbelts, I highly recommend wearing the devices.  The first driver’s head went through the windshield.  Initially, he survived, but wound up suffering mental and emotional injuries until his death about 15 years later.  The second driver’s head went through the passenger window – I watched as he was bounced all around his vehicle.  I never learned what his ultimate fate was.

If Obama were sincerely interested in our safety, the banning of these “assault weapons” might be understandable.  But these directives, the potential legislation or regulations, have no hope of preventing gun-related crimes.  The weapon most often used in crimes is the baseball bat.  Does Obama recommend limiting the number of baseballs issued to Little Leaguers (the government, is, in fact, about to ban the metal bat, which is responsible for some Little League deaths)?

Far from being concerned about the number of mental cases bandying automatic weapons, they are a nightmare come true for Progressives looking to limit even more American freedom.  These mentally ill criminals create the necessary crises for Progress to expand government powers.  They were set free decades ago to carry out this insane mission and so, in time, make America safe for Communism.

A people that cannot defend themselves against tyranny are not free.  One politician – it may have been New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo – harped about defying duly-elected politicians and their bureaucrats.  When we have criminals and illegal aliens voting in American elections, we are a truly corrupt society.  Disarming legal citizens will only make the corruption complete.

 

 

 

 

Published in: on January 19, 2013 at 5:41 pm  Leave a Comment  

A Drop in the Blue Acres Bucket

Yesterday, a New Jersey Senate committee discussed instituting a tax on water on Garden State property owners.  According to the Daily Record of Morristown, proposed bill S-8113 would establish a water use fee to support Green Acres, Blue Acres, and the historic and farmland preservation programs.

The water tax proposal – 40 cents per thousand gallons of water delivered to a customer – has been bandied about in recent years but hasn’t gotten past the committee stage.  The plan is to raise $150 million annually.  For the average residential water customer in New Jersey, using 80,000 gallons of water per year, the tax would amount to $32 per household.

The money will be used to buy up land and condense people into walkable, stack-and-pack communities.  To wealthier Garden State residents, raised on the mantra of “Save the Earth,” $32 a year seems like a drop in the bucket.  The bill may not have gotten past the Senate committee, but the technology, in the form of Smart water meters is already in place, particularly in Bergen County.  They’ve already flipped the switch and the meter is running; the tax man simply has to tally the bill.

We already pay unseen, regulatory fees on our electricity, on our car insurance, on our gasoline that we’re unaware of and which agencies are not permitted to inform us about.  This isn’t about saving the planet.  Earth is perfectly capable of taking care of herself.  As we saw during Hurricane Sandy, Mother Nature is still more of a danger to Man than Man is to Mother Nature.

Social engineering is about one group of elite humans controlling the rest of us – and making tons of money in the bargain.  Man’s “carbon footprint,” his negative impact on the environment, his “danger” to the planet are all specious arguments designed to convince fools to feel their guilt and surrender their freedom – and wealth – to the “logic” of environmentalism.

Don’t drink the water.  Or the Agenda 21 Kool-Aid.

 

Published in: on January 15, 2013 at 7:59 am  Leave a Comment  

No Gay Adoption in Gay Paree

Gay marriage may be all the rage in San Francisco and in The Village in New York.  But in Paris, the city of lights, 340,000 people held a protest against gay marriage at France’s most iconic symbol, the Eiffel Tower.

The majority of residents in the mostly-Catholic country are not opposed to alternative lifestyles – just alternative marriages. 

According to the Associated Press (AP) and as reported by The Blaze, With their young children in two, hundreds of thousands of people gathered at the Eiffel Tower to protest the French President Francois Hollande’s plan to legalize gay marriage and thus allow same-sex couples to adopt and conceive children.  Polls indicate the majority of French still support legalizing gay marriage but that backing gets more lukewarm when children come into play.

“Paris police estimated the crowd at 340,000, making it one of the largest demonstrations in Paris since an education protest in 1984,” the AP reported.

“’This law is going to lead to a change of civilization that we don’t want,’” said Philippe Javaloyes, a literature teacher who bused in with 300 people. “We have nothing against different ways of living, but we think that a child must grow up with a mother and a father.’”

“Public opposition spearheaded by religious leaders has chipped away at the popularity of Hollande’s plan in recent months. About 52 percent of French favor legalizing gay marriage, according to a survey released Sunday, down from as high as 65 percent in August.”

French civil unions were legalized in 1999. But that law has no provisions for adoption or assisted reproduction.  “Hollande’s Socialist Party has sidestepped the debate on assisted reproduction, promising to examine it in March after party members split on including it in the latest proposal. That hasn’t assuaged the concerns of many in Sunday’s protest, however, who fear it’s only a matter of time.”

Recently, French officials discussed replacing “Mother” and “Father” on national identity cards with Parent 1, Parent 2, and even Parent 3 and Parent 4.  If the French parliament approves the plan, France would become the 12th country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage, and the biggest so far in terms of economic and diplomatic influence.

The Socialists control Parliament, where the bill is expected to be introduced on Tuesday, with a vote following public debate at the end of January.

Harlem Desir, the leader of Hollande’s Socialist Party said, “The right to protest is protected in our country, but the Socialists are determined to give the legal right to marry and adopt to all those who love each other.  This is the first time in decades in our country that the right and the extreme right are coming into the streets together to deny new rights to the French.”

Scientific researchers have studied the phenomenon of children being raised by gay couples and the outcome is not good, with a decided increase in crime, drug abuse, and depression among these children.  All the Socialists give us is their word that these children are happy.

In our haste to appear non-judgmental, Society has become mari complaisant when it comes to moral issues such as gay marriage and more importantly, gay adoption.  C’est autre chose. But it is it a “different thing”?

It’s refreshing to see that the French, well-known for their rebellious, Socialist tendencies, are at heart, bien-pensant.

 

 

Published in: on January 14, 2013 at 8:22 am  Comments (1)