Articles tagged as

Constitution

“It’s for the Children!” – except when it is all about an adult

Cub ScoutsThe Left’s second most rallying cry (and generally the lie most likely to be rolled out as a club) is “It’s for the children!” as if that is supposed to stop all debate by shaming their opposition (with the undertone of “what, you hate kids?  Don’t much like puppies or Mom’s apple pie either, do you?).  When drawn out of the Progressive quiver, it’s one purpose is to stifle and stop debate, for that is what Progressives want.  In their hands, the intent is to use it like a steamroller. Lots and lots of issues have seen this used over and over – because it works, mostly.  Children are precious – especially when they can be used as pawns.

Except when they get in the way of an adult’s politically correct ideology – which, pretty much, cares not a whit for real youngsters:

A federal civil rights complaint has been filed against the Salt Lake City School Board after a principal booted a Cub Scout pack from an elementary school.

About 30 young boys were told they could no longer meet at Mountain View Elementary School because the Boy Scout’s ban on gay members in leaders conflicted with the school district’s anti-bias policy.

The ban drew the ire of Michael Clara, a school board member and lifetime Boy Scout. Clara filed the federal complaint on behalf of two Latino parents.

“I believe it is an assault on the founding principles of our country for school officials to attempt to exclude a voice no less legitimate than its own from public school participation,” Clara tells me. “A marketplace of ideas devoid of competitive viewpoints engenders an insidious society of conformity, contrary to the fundamental precepts of our Constitution.”

Read more

Small Government best protects the Peoples’ Liberties

I was happy to see, in his letter of March 26th (http://issuu.com/dailysun/docs/lds3-26-13), that Johan Andersen agrees with the historic and current conservative position that humans can be evil and corruptible.  I wonder if he understands the implications of his position.

Our Founding Fathers struggled to create a government that protected peoples’ liberties.  Their focus wasn’t with evil people who slander, beat, rob, rape, and murder.  Knowing that power corrupts even well-intentioned people,  the Founding Fathers’ objective was to protect the liberties of the people from evil/corruptible people who control government power.

Read more

Jeanne Shaheen – Enemy of the Constitution

Yesterday, the US Senate voted on an amendment to “uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty“. While this issue could come up for another vote during the session, this action essentially rejected the UN Gun Ban Treaty – officially called the “Arms Trade Treaty” (ATT) – which was … Read more

So, which do YOU think is the correct philosophy?

US President Ronald Reagan (R-CA): “Government exists to protect us from each other.  Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves?“ NH State Rep. Kris Roberts (D-Keene):  “Government has to protect us from our own stupidity.” One takes the attitude that Citizens are stupid and must be herded … Read more

Hypocrisy…the Duality in ‘Americur

Hypocrisy

Drones in the Middle East, drones on American soil, Libya coup d’etat support, Egypt insurgency weapons support, Syria coup support.

Sounds like the first term of Mephistopheles himself (Dick Cheney), right?

The American Left has no soul.  Period.  Watching some of the reaction to Rand Paul’s filibuster last week, it is now perfectly clear that the Left’s rhetoric and protest about “Bush’s War” was only about Bush and against the Right; it had nothing to do with principle, liberty, or right and wrong.  That’s the problem with the Left – particularly the Far Left – they blindly follow memes (social and political) and they criminally ignore malfeasance from their own team.

Funny thing is, though…

Read more

Government rules by sheer naked force…

Glenn Reynolds, Tennesse law professor, father of Instapundit, interviewed Russ Roberts, an economics professor at George Mason University, recently.  It’s a fairly lengthy (but very interesting) podcast and the talk shifted to discussion of a NY Slimes piece from last year on why the Constitution was really of little value to today’s hipster progressives.  To whet your appetite:

REYNOLDS: Here’s the problem with public officials — because that’s really [Seidman’s] audience — deciding to ignore the Constitution: If you’re the president, if you’re a member of Congress, if you are a TSA agent, the only reason why somebody should listen to what you say, instead of horsewhipping you out of town for your impertinence, is because you exercise power via the Constitution. If the Constitution doesn’t count, you don’t have any legitimate power. You’re a thief, a brigand, an officious busybody, somebody who should be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail for trying to exercise power you don’t possess.

Read more

NH .223 Day of Resistance — Commentary

Saturday afternoon about 400 patriots met at the New Hampshire Capital to show their support for, and commitment to defending, the Second Amendment to the US Constitution:  “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Many attendees, as an expression of their rights as law abiding American and New Hampshire Citizens, brought their weapons with them.  If one listened to liberals, one would think that all these weapons, perhaps 300 of them, were broken because not a single person was murdered or injured or even threatened.

The fact is that the front of New Hampshire Capital was probably one of the safest places in the nation Saturday between noon and 2 PM.  Of course, you are most likely safer in any place at any time in New Hampshire than in almost any other place in the nation, and our respect for the Second Amendment and our New Hampshire Constitution are certainly significant reasons for that.

One of the disturbing things we learned this afternoon is that New Hampshire Democrats are trying to restrict our Constitutionally guaranteed rights to bear arms.  Democrats  have submitted several bills to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens and impact their ability to protect themselves and their families.

Read more

I,________, do solemnly swear, that I will bear faith and true allegiance to the ‘Guidelines?’

Law outside the lines or guidelinesHas ignorance reared its ugly head again in the New Hampshire Legislature   Yeah, yeah, more times per day than we could count with all those people there.  Actually, I’m referring to Debra DeSimone, Rockingham 14 who seems to have a questionable view of her relationship to the constitution. According to Ms. De Simone, the constitution is really just a guideline and we have House Rep George Lambert (Hills – 44) to thank for sharing that news with us.

From Facebook.

“House quote of the day “the constitution is a guideline” not a requirement. – and yes she said “I swore to uphold the guideline” if it is just a guideline, how will it’s protections actually defend you…”

And an inch is just a guideline when building a house.  So what if you are off a few inches or bits of inches here and there.  A foot here, a yard there.  (as long as it doesn’t fall down while you’re standing next to it, right?)

Read more

Live Blogging – .223 Day of Resistance State House, Concord NH 12 noon – 2pm

.223 Day of Resistance HeaderTomorrow is  the .223 Day of Resistance – tens of thousands will be gathering all over the nation at hundreds of rallies.  Here in the Live Free or Die State, we have two.  One at LibertyFest in Nashua, our will be in Concord on the steps of the State House.  This is a “Valley Forge” event and we will gather regardless of any snowy weather.  Join us!   Weather permitting for the electronics, we’ll be streaming live here from the ‘Grok.  Details:

Masters of Ceremony – Jeff Chidester & Susan Olsen     Invocation – Father Christian Tutor     National Anthem – Honorable Jane Cormier

Speakers:  Honorable Pam Tucker,Mike Rogers (GraniteGrok), Honorable Dan Dumaine,  Dianne Bitter (Conservative Activist), Skip Murphy (GraniteGrok), Honorable Al Baldasaro, Jack Kimball
Time and crowd permitting, door prizes courtesy of Riley’s Sportshop.  Sound system courtesy of Jeff Chidester.  Video and live-streaming courtesy of GraniteGrok.
Live Streaming:

Progressives – just make it too expensive for the ordinary guy to own a gun: a de facto confiscation

A typical handgun in the typical gun store can be had from $300 to $900 (and of course, can go WAY higher).  Until the Progressives started on their current ‘don’t waste the Sandy Hook crisis” jeremiad to disarm the populace (even as they admit their gun grabs would NOT have stopped any of the recent mass killings), the cost of an AR (you know, the kind of semiautomatic rifle with cosmetics that cause pansie Democrats to have to change their shorts often) would be in the $1 – $2,000 range.  The incremental costs are mostly just the ammo and range time.

Well, not only have NY State Legislative Democrats (with a few Republicans on par with “useful idiots”) already stuck it to their gun owners already, but are about to pile on with more:

The latest bill, introduced in the New York State Assembly by Democrat Assemblyman Felix Ortiz, seeks to force all gun owners to purchase at least $1 million in liability insurance to cover any damages caused by firearms. It would be a mandatory requirement for anyone who owns a gun, as those who refuse to comply within 30 days would have their firearms confiscated.

“Any person in this state who shall own a firearm shall, prior to such ownership, obtain and continuously maintain a policy of liability insurance in an amount not less than one million dollars specifically covering any damages resulting from any negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person,” the bill, S2353, states.

“Failure to maintain such insurance shall result in the immediate revocation of such owner’s registration, license and any other privilege to own such firearm,” the bill adds.

Read more

Ways that Progressives are bound & determined to get rid of guns – including a visit to your home

Molon Labe - AR-15Well, it is well known that the Left is going bat crazy in trying to rid the American populace of any guns that are of any consequence in defiance of the real purpose of the Second Amendment – defense against a tyrannical govt.  Much has been made that the Founders could not have foreseen modern sporting rifles (aka “the scary looking guns that have Progressives changing their panties often”), so we should be limited to muzzle loading muskets.  I thought this observation is truer to the real intent “to have comparable arms to the modern British soldier” – kinda puts that snarky musket comment in different light, eh?

Any ways, we’ve seen all kinds of machinations around the theme of “Progressives don’t trust ordinary law abiding citizens with cool looking guns” whose main technological capability, being semi-automatic, is well over a 100 years old. We’ve seen the list of banned guns, we’ve seen the list of approved guns.  We’ve seen the craziness of the number of rounds in a magazine (where 30 rounds for an AR is the STANDARD size, not a high capacity size) to limit them as low as 3 (and NY has made it 7 for any firearm taking a detachable magazine).  Cosmetic stuff too – shrouds, foregrips, variable stocks, thumbhole stocks; stuff that have no different in making the basic technology “more lethal”. Gun registries – either legally (as in NY) or de facto (at the national level).

But there have been other stuff proposed that are less well known – but just as useful in removing the ability for lawful citizens to exercise their Second Amendment Rights to contemporary and well known & distributed firearms. So, lets review a few of the more flagrant ones.

From US Senator Diane Feinstein’s S.150 – “To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes”.

Read more

Obama’s SOTU:“They deserve a vote,”

“They deserve a vote,” he intoned during the obligatory gun control portion of his speech. “They deserve a vote,” he repeated, just in case you missed it the first time. “Gabby Giffords deserves a vote. The families of Newtown deserve a vote. The families of Aurora deserve a vote. The families of Oak Creek and Tucson and Blacksburg and the countless other communities ripped open by gun violence – they deserve a simple vote.”

(H/T: RightWingNews)

A State of the Union address?  Nay, Narcissist-in-Chief Obama turned it into a political agenda rally. I remembered another time when such politcking was that crass – I tweeted a bit during the State of the Union address this past Tuesday and this is what I said as Obama talked deserving a vote:

He just turned SOTU into the gun equivalent of the Wellstone funeral. Disgusting.

US Senator Paul Wellstone (D-MN) was one of the most Liberal folks in the Senate at the time of his death (plane crash just before the elections of 2002).

Read more

Will New Hampshire Democrats Vote for Indefinite Detention?

indefinite detention without due processIt’s not every day that you get the opportunity to discover whether or not your elected officials are more interested in government power over the people or in using their own authority in the defense of liberty.  But HB399, the New Hampshire Liberty Act, may provide us with a window into the heart of those currently serving.

HB399 seeks to prohibit federal enforcement of indefinite detention without due process.  This should seem like a no-brainer.  No matter who happens to be in the majority, no one should ever want their leaders–no matter how unlikely–to have the power to sweep people up in the dark of night and detain them without due process, for as long as they like.

Or are New Hampshire Democrats OK with that?

Read more

Maybe the start of a Revolution? Pushback against the faux “freedom” of Progressivism?

This paragraph from Tim’s post on Zero Hedge really caught my eye:

There is no other culture on earth that has the capacity, like Americans currently do, to defeat centralists, defend individual liberty, and end the pursuit of total global power in this lifetime. We are the first and last line. If freedom is undone here, it is undone everywhere for generations to come. This is our responsibility. This is our providence. There can be no complacency. There can be no compromise. There can be no fear. It ends on this ground. One way, or another….

Indeed; if not me, who?  Ronald Reagan’s statement on freedom comes to mind:

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.

My answer to that is simply read what I write here – I (and the other Groksters) do fight in the arena of ideas every day here at the ‘Grok.  That said, there is no doubt that another incipient pushback beginning against Progressively driven Government that is, more and more, shoving itself into all aspects of our lives.  This morning I learned that Cheaper Than Dirt, Templar Custom, and EFI all have effectively said “if your civilians can’t buy our products, your government can’t either”.

Read more

A use of the Fifth Amendment to protect the Second

Commerce Claws the rest of the Constitution?US Senator Diane Feinstein and NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo have infamously said that they would be fine with an outright confiscation of citizens firearms.  We do see talk of Government officials, via either official or de facto gun registration databases, coming to demand peoples’s guns.  Some have mentioned voluntary gun buybacks (which I would be fine with from the owners standpoint (not so much using my tax money to do so, however).  Some, however have declared that such should be mandatory.  Which then triggers the Fifth Amendment:

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Already there is talk that the NY SAFE gun ban may well be unconstitutional as it mandates that gun owners must get rid of their arms and standard capacity magazines (no, they are NOT high capacity magazines with 10-15 rounds for a handgun and 30 rounds for a modern sporting rifle as those have been sold for years for time and in the millions for quantity of sales). In essence, to this non-lawyer (oh, Grokster Tim?  Weigh in here if you can!), it seem that the State is “taking” a person’s personal property away without recompense (and in fact, declaring them to be a felon).  So would simply paying the owners $50 a pop for mags sufficient?  Hmmm, Lars Larson, a talk show host that I listen to in the early evenings if I am out and about has an interesting theory that simply paying for them is insufficient to satisfy the Fifth (and thus, protecting the Second):

Read more

The real differences between Republicans and Democrats – Tyranny #2

I stumbled on this post over at PowerLine – where they had abstracted an entire post by David Horowitz: “How Republicans can win” that talks about the severe differences in how Conservatives / Republicans view life vs how Progressive / Democrats do.  Since Horowitz was heavily involved in the New Left in the sixties, he knows intimately how they think and how they act – and why they are starting to take the rest of us to the political cleaners in their religious zealotry in marching with Obama to “fundamentely transforming America.”  For this is no “this way is better / no, that way is” battle we face – as Progressives truly believe that they are in a political Civil War to beat and overthrow the Founders / Constitution vision of Liberty and Freedom in which WE get to decide for ourselves and replace it with the Progressive brand of socialism / “social justice” in which Government will provide for all our needs (er, but never mention the “strings chains attached” to allow that to happen).  I have abstracted a few paragraphs that point the major differences (emphasis mine):

…The Democratic Party has been moving steadily to the left since the McGovern campaign of 1972. It is now a party led by socialists and progressives who are convinced that their policies are paving the way to a “better world.”

This vision of moral and social progress has profound consequences for the way Democrats conduct their political battles. Unlike Republicans, Democrats are not in politics just to fix government and solve problems. They are secular missionaries who want to “change society.” Their goal is a new order of society— “social justice.” They think of themselves as social redeemers, people who are going to change the world. It is the belief in a redemptive future that accounts for their passion, and their furious personal assaults on those who stand in their way. When he was president, Bill Clinton once told Dick Morris he had “to understand that Bob Dole” – a moderate Republican – “is evil.” It is the same missionary zeal that allows Democrats to justify a campaign ad accusing a decent man like Mitt Romney of causing the death of a female cancer victim.

This should set the table.  Take Zandra Rice-Hawkins, Exec Dir. for Granite State Progress for instance (yes, a major Progressive parachuted in with the Colorado Model supported by major Progressive $$ – no native Live Free or Die in her!).

Read more

Differences between an “assault weapon” and a shotgun

A Minnesota resident created a video letter to his Congresman and Senators (see the link below).  The video demonstrates the differences between the affects of a shotgun and what are incorrectly being called assault weapons.  It is clear that some of our elected representatives do not know about guns, live in a complete fantasyland, or they just don’t care about the safety of people who can’t afford to hire their own security or have it provided for them like the President, Senators, Congressmen, other government officials, and other prominent people.

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/02/video-letter-constituent-educates-his-elected-representatives-on-shotguns-ar-15s/

The vdieo shows the affects of these weapons when used by trained people in essentially a pressure free situation.  This is a lot different from when somone needs to try to protect themself and their family or others from criminals.  At that time you need to factor in suprise, fear, perhaps screaming children, dialing 911, trying to escape an attacker, and perhaps having to dodge bullets being fired at you.  All these things will affect someone’s ability to ensure that they, their family members and / or other innocent people survive.

Read more

Pull!

H/T The Looking Spoon

Hmm…here’s a thought.

From one of my little old lady friends who winters in Arizona…

Share to...
BufferCopyFlipboardHacker NewsLineLinkedInMastodonMessengerMixPinterestPrintRedditSMSTelegramTumblrVKWhatsAppXing