Third verse, same as the second

Reacting to pressure from conservatives over the looming drastic cuts in defense spending as a result of the budget deal from last year, the Obama administration announced a plan late Friday to house American troops inside of U.S. homes without the homeowner’s permission.

“The fact that the problem of funding our national defense is complex can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing,” Obama said, “We  must look at all options available to us to reduce the cost of national defense, and that must include reasonable restrictions on the Third Amendment. If you’re a law-abiding homeowner who has an extra bedroom, you have nothing to worry about. All we are saying is that there are too many homes lying around unused on our streets, and that represents a danger to our country and our way of life.” 

The President bristled at suggestions that he had been silent on national security issues during his four years in office. “We’re not asking people to violate the Third Amendment,” he said, “because the Third Amendment clearly refers to storing troops armed with muskets in a home against the homeowner’s wishes. What we’re asking people to do is engage in a serious conversation on homeowners rights and how those rights affect us all. We’re not restricting your right to own a condo or a small energy-effiecient home, we’re asking all patriotic Americans to do their part.” 

Obama has tasked outgoing Congressman Barney Frank with coming up with a solution, saying, “No one knows what’s important to homeowners like Barney Frank. His leadership in making homeownership what it is today will be crucial in these upcoming weeks as we start a conversation on making homes safer for everyone in the U.S., especially the children.” 

David Gregory and Piers Morgan applauded the President’s initiative, saying it was “common sense,” and Senator Diane Feinstein announced plans to introduce legislation into the Senate next year limiting access to “military-style” high-capacity homes that where not properly registered with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

 
Number of comments: 0 Add comment
December 30th, 2012 by exurbankevin

Three Old Books for the New Year

I’m finding these days that I’m recommending the same three books over and over again to people who want to learn more about the where conservatism is and where it’s going. So without durther afew, here they are. 

  1. The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 by Lawrence Wright. Exhaustively researched well-written, it lays clearly lays out the history of Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood from it’s inception in Greeley, Colorado (no, really), the machinations behind the 9/11 atrocities. 
  2. Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg. Funny, irreverent and compelling, Jonah Goldberg drives a stake through the heart of the “right-wing Nazi” theme by definitively linking the statist elements inside today’s “progressive” movement with their fascist fore-bearers. 
  3. The Forgotten Man by Amity Shales. Turns the history of the Depression on it’s head by bypassing what the press at the time was saying about the New Deal (there were little more than an unpaid propaganda corps for Roosevelt. Why does that sound so familiar…). The book shows the hard economic truth that the New Deal’s machinations prolonged rather than ended the Great Depression and harmed the American economy in nigh-irrepairable ways. 
 
Number of comments: 2 Add comment
December 28th, 2012 by exurbankevin

A step in the right direction

Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne wants school principals to carry on-campus

Horne said he ideally would like to have a trained police officer in every school. But he said the state’s budget constraints make that a financial impossibility.

Conversely, Horne said having a single individual with access to a gun is preferable to letting each teacher be armed, saying having that many weapons at a school could result in students getting hold of one of them. 

First thoughts…

Ok, Jan, here’s your chance

I don’t like the idea of designating a person as the one who’s authorized to protect the children in their care. I think it’d be more effective if you don’t know who’s carrying in any given school, because just as you don’t what a bad guy is planning, bad guys shouldn’t know who’s out there prepared to act against them. I want criminals to be nervous, not students. 

 
Number of comments: 0 Add comment
December 27th, 2012 by exurbankevin

Reagan and Newtown

Not much to disagree with here in Robert X. Cringley’s thoughtful piece on stopping the next Newtown/Aurora/Columnbine before it happens

Today, thanks to the Internet and laws supporting victims’ rights, I can find where convicted sex offenders live in my neighborhood, but I can’t find my local Adam Lanza. And maybe that’s okay and my Adam deserves some privacy. But not only can’t I find him, neither can the local police, local medical officials, or even the FBI. We don’t keep track of these likely threats to our communities when it would be so easy to do so.  It doesn’t even require Big Data, just plain old little data that’s been sitting all along with educators, health care professionals, gun sellers and pharmacists.

That’s what we should do in response to Newtown but instead we’ll now have a big argument about banning guns or putting police in schools. Probably very little will be done to simply identify and treat the hostiles within our society.

We didn’t do it when the wacko was named John Hinckley Jr. and the victim was Ronnie Reagan, himself, and we probably won’t do it now. 

Any lawyer will tell you that a criminal requires motive, means and opportunity. Instead of banning (some) some guns and hoping that infinitesimally small reduction in means will somehow reduce the other two, why not reduce the amount of unstable people in our communities? 

 
Number of comments: 0 Add comment
December 27th, 2012 by exurbankevin

Get in front of it, Jan

Jan, 

First off, belated congratulations on using SB 1070, a bill that sat on your desk unsigned for three days, as a way to catapult yourself into the national conservative spotlight. 

But Jan, you need to step it up. You vetoed discrete carry on campus, but you need to re-think that. Rick Perry is stealing your thunder, and you need to steal it back. 

Texas Gov. Rick Perry expressed support for allowing school districts to determine whether teachers can carry concealed handguns in class, which at least one Texas district already permits.

“In the state of Texas, if you go through the process, have been trained, and you are a handgun-licensed individual, you should be able to carry a gun anywhere in the state,” Perry told the NE Tarrant County Tea Party Monday evening, according to ABC News affiliate WFAA-TV in Dallas-Fort Worth.

 You used Russell Pearce’s SB 1070 bill to launch your national political career. Why not use another of his ideas (campus carry and public building carry) to get back into the spotlight and become the conservative heroine that the rest of the country thinks you are? 

 
Number of comments: 0 Add comment
December 24th, 2012 by exurbankevin

Taking Our Guns

…yes, that’s what the Left wants.

Need proof?  If you can bear it, go to the Daily Kos and read this admission.

Need more proof?  Governor Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) is talking about “confiscating” being an option.

The refrain that is being heard is a call to ban those scary, black “assault rifles” and other arms that look like they came from a military arsenal.  The calls are for “reasonable restrictions” on the purchase and ownership of these arms, meaning anybody who stands in opposition to these moves is…unreasonable.  The Main Stream Media (MSM) will repeat the usual talking points about how the Founders never envisioned “automatic” weapons being in the hands of common citizens and how one does not need an “assault rifle” to go hunting.  Inanimate objects like firearms will be vilified along with the owners of them, all because a crazy kid used an AR-15 to kill a bunch of people in Connecticut.

Addressing mental illness, gun-free zones, alienated youth, and extant firearms laws won’t be on the agenda.

If the last decade or so has shown anything, its that the mask is off the Democrat Party, the MSM, education/academia, the entertainment industry, and the chattering classes.  The truth is, these are institutions run by hard-core leftists who have an agenda to take away our Constitutional freedoms along with increasing amounts of our wealth.  Their vision of a society run of a cadre of high-educated and “enlightened” people runs counter to both American traditions and human history.  Free people with arms to protect themselves (both against individual and State aggression) are a threat to this vision.  As we see now, the Left will do whatever it takes to disarm the public and discredit those who are law-abiding gun owners.

For the gun-grabbers, they will never let a crisis go to waste.

HT to HotAir on this.

 
Number of comments: 0 Add comment
December 23rd, 2012 by exurbandoug

New tone for Newtown

Remind me again how we’re supposed to play all nice and such when people start with “crazy”, “decadent” and “depraved” and then go downhill from there? 

I think a Fisking is called for! 

LaPierre: “Politicians pass laws for Gun-Free School Zones. They issue press releases bragging about them. They post signs advertising them. And in so doing, they tell every insane killer in America that schools are their safest place to inflict maximum mayhem with minimum risk.”

Reality: LaPierre’s logic ironically follows that of the video games he elsewhere condemns: that evil killers are simply looking to maximize their body-count. If that were true, and if “Gun-Free School Zones” were the best way to accomplish this mission, we would actually have seen a lotmore school shootings than we have.

Fun Fact: Every single mass shooting since 1950 has happened in a “gun free zone”, except Tucson, where Gabby Giffords waved off her Sheriff’s detail and went it alone. And the first armed responder to the horror? A CCW holder, with his gun. And Ft Hood? Soldiers can’t carry guns on a base unless they’re MP’s.Thank you, President Clinton

LaPierre: “And here’s another dirty little truth that the media try their best to conceal: There exists in this country a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells, and sows, violence against its own people. Through vicious, violent video games with names like Bulletstorm,Grand Theft AutoMortal Kombat and Splatterhouse.”

Reality: Let’s see how much media attention Quentin Tarantino’s forthcoming, and reportedly violent, Django Unchained receives, and then maybe reassess the claim that the media try to conceal violent video games, movies, and the like. 

Fun Fact: Well let’s start off with the star of said movie saying that yeah, it is a little over the top. And then let’s move on to longtime Taratino favorite Samuel L. Jackson NOT blaming guns or movies for this outrage. Mission, as they say, accomplished. 

LaPierre: “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”

Reality: This might be the most accurate thing LaPierre said. Contra other conservatives, who have urged children to bum-rush the adult carrying the semi-automatic, this is in most cases true—it’s why Secret Service agents are, indeed, armed. 

Fun Fact: Hey, that’s why I carry a gun, too! Go figure! And I can shoot right up there with Federal Air Marshals. So great, we all sorta-support the main idea behind LaPierre’s “insane” comments. The NRA: A uniter, not a divider! 

LaPierre: “With all the foreign aid, with all the money in the federal budget, we can’t afford to put a police officer in every school?”

Reality: LaPierre’s actually right about this, too. There has been absolutely no pressure, at all, to cut down on the amount of money the federal government presently spends, least of all from people like NRA board member Grover Norquist. 

Fun Fact: Did I wake up in some kind of parallel dimension where the left is fiscally conservative all of a sudden, just because the NRA comes up with a good idea? 

LaPierre: “But what if, when Adam Lanza started shooting his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School last Friday, he had been confronted by qualified, armed security? Will you at least admit it’s possible that 26 innocent lives might have been spared? Is that so abhorrent to you that you would rather continue to risk the alternative?”

Reality: It’s possible. It’s also possible that that qualified, armed security would have been the second fatality of the day (the first was Lanza’s mother, who, as we know, owned guns). It’s also possible that the qualified, armed security, in the heat of the moment and firing at close quarters, would have shot the wrong people—much like New York’s Finest during the Empire State Building shooting earlier this year. So, in sum: Yes, it’s possible, but it’s not probable, and there is probably a better alternative to discouraging future mass shootings. 

Fun Fact: Who defines “possible” versus “probable” here? Yes, there is always the possibility of a stray round going into an innocent bystander, but one thing we know with absolute certainty is that a gunman stops every time they run into someone with the will and means to stop them. 

LaPierre: “I call on Congress today to act immediately, to appropriate whatever is necessary to put armed police officers in every school—and to do it now, to make sure that blanket of safety is in place when our children return to school in January.”

Reality: Putting hundreds of thousands of guns in hundreds of thousands of new hands would require careful vetting to make sure that none of those hundreds of thousands of guns fall into the wrong hands. So clearly we should do that as hastily as possible.

 Fun Fact: Hey, let’s let the BATFE take care of vetting who should and should not get guns. Or you know, not

LaPierre: “We need to have every single school in America immediately deploy a protection program proven to work—and by that I mean armed security.”

Reality: Where is the proof that armed security is the optimal protection program, or even that it works at all? 

Fun Fact: Because every single mass shooting ends when and only when the shooter is confronted by people willing to stop them that’s why.

Every. Single one. Seems to me that having someone there with the will and means to stop these crazies in their tracks is the way to go, rather than disarming the innocent and hoping it doesn’t happen again.

 

 
Number of comments: 1 Add comment
December 21st, 2012 by exurbankevin

The Moronic Convergence

Just a thought:

Modern statist liberalism sprung from the B.S. that Rousseau talked about, where man in his “natural state” is without sin and it’s the corrupting influence of civilization and industrialization that makes him do bad things. Given that load of  hooey as a starting point, is it any wonder why modern liberals think that plastic guns and industrial-looking rifles are somehow more “evil” than guns with wooden stocks? The modern firearm is even more alien to them than a more traditional weapon because it’s a product of the modern industrial society that they loath so much. 

It always amazes me that people who would recoil at the thought of judging a person by their color or outside appearance have no problems with judging a firearm by its color and outward appearance. 

 
Number of comments: 0 Add comment
December 21st, 2012 by exurbankevin

No Hope, No Change

From Hope and Change to more of the same.  As Powerline points out, this is the case both with drone strikes and climate change.  Despite a lot of rhetoric dating back to 2008, the current President is continuing on with the policies of the last President.  That is to say, all the environmentalist talk about carbon taxes, the Kyoto Agreement, and other utopian proposals are on a road to nowhere.  Not that many people are shedding tears over this development mind you.

At the end of 2012 here we are.  Perhaps the more things change, the more they stay the same.  Maybe some of the Bush policies weren’t so far out of the mainstream after all, given President Obama’s continuation of them.  Stealth bipartaisanship, emergent reality, wise policy, call it what you will but it represents continuing the course set last decade.  Good, bad, or indifferent this is the reality behind the curtain.

Winning?

 
Number of comments: 0 Add comment
December 21st, 2012 by exurbandoug

Yep, it’s true, the left wants your guns

And here’s proof. 

That reliably insane bastion of liberal thought, The Nation, tweeted this out a minute or so ago: 

A link that led to this page

THEY WANT TO DENY YOU ACCESS TO YOUR GUNS, PEOPLE, IT”S AS CLEAR AS DAY NOW!!!!

🙂 

In all seriousness, get involved. Get your wallet out. This fight is too important to lose. 

 
Number of comments: 0 Add comment
December 20th, 2012 by exurbankevin