Friday, March 12, 2010

Well America, I’m back. RipperBravo6 took a short hiatus from all the fallderall to gather his head, brew some homemade beer and take care of his family. It was a well deserved and well spent rest period, but current events have drawn me back into the world of complaining about our current situation.

What could it be that interrupted my mental nap? Well, it’s the current HealthCare debacle. Congress stands poised (maybe?) to use a little known “reconciliation” clause formerly reserved for budgetary items to unashamedly slip an unwanted Federal takeover of HealthCare industry up our collective skirts.

Wait a minute, doesn’t Congress have some kind of rule for passing laws? It takes a 2/3 majority to pass something. Correct? So there should be enough dissenters to prevent Congress from passing stupid laws, right? Oh no, my fellow Americans. You see, in 1974, Senator Robert Byrd saw the potential for gridlock on certain budgetary items and proposed that Congress have the option to pass budget related items by simple majority. Not a bad idea, if American’s corrupt representatives spent too much time haggling over earmarks and pet projects in a budget, that budget might not be passed. Then we have no money to run the country. Makes sense.

However, the reconciliation option is strictly designed for budgets, not huge over-reaching Federal entitlement programs. In fact, Congress has been, up to this point, smart enough to defer using it on such items as the 1993 Clinton HealthCare plan and attempts to open the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge to drilling by the Bush Administration.

But now, with a Democratic majority in Congress and a President in the White House who is desperate to pass any of his “Progressive Agenda” items it appears that we are poised to have another unwanted, intrusive, costly program forced upon us.

Wait! You mean to say that America doesn’t want HealthCare “reform”? In a Gallup poll conducted March 4-7th off 2010, 48% of Americans surveyed said they wanted their Congressman to vote against HealthCare Reform. Only 45% were in favor. Seems to me that if Congress votes the way it’s constituents want, this is a dead issue.

But alas and alack, there is another issue at work here. See, although this would seem to be an unpopular issue, Senators and Congressmen are “elected” officials. They serve at the mercy of the “public”. So, what does this have to do with anything? Well, it’s all about the earmarks.

You see, instead of earning their $169k salary passing laws beneficial to America, most Congressmen spend their time trying to get reelected. Like most pigs, they are constantly struggling to stay at the trough. No one wants to give up the good life, right? So, Congressmen wrangle to get these earmarks, which are basically Federal dollars that are promised to their home districts. These earmarks allow a Congressman to go home at election time and answer questions with a straight face. When asked “What did you do in Congress to deserve my vote?” they can say “Well, I got a 30 Million dollar commuter rail system built here in Pig’s Knuckle, Arkansas that allowed your retarded cousin Jethro to get a job as a train engineer!”. Sadly enough, this is usually good enough for we selfish, self centered Americans. So, the current occupants of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue are handing out earmarks like Mardi Gras beads to secure the votes of members of Congress. Business as usual.

So, America, be aware that your member of Congress may not be representing your views. They may be wheeling and dealing, trading principles for a chance at reelection. Be aware, and beware! Hold your elected representatives accountable in all this. Call or write and let them know that you will remember what stance they took on this attempt to bankrupt America and drive us into Federal slavery. Let them know that regardless of how much money in earmarks they are able to steal (it’s your tax money after all). You will not forget where they stood come election day!

Saturday, January 2, 2010

My first rant of 2010!

It is with a heavy heart that I slide into 2010. Maybe I am being a tad bit pessimistic, but I don’t see things improving in the new year. 2009 contained an unprecedented amount of turmoil and angst on both a national and international level and it sure seems that the poo-poo train has a good head of steam and will continue to roll for the foreseeable future. Here are a few of the things that are on my radar for the upcoming year, so keep your pecker hard, your powder dry and your preps up to date!

1 Terrorism and America’s response- The attempted Christmas Day attack by a Yemen based Al- Quaeda splinter group on a Detroit bound airplane could be just the start of our trouble. There are literally hundreds of these small groups all over the world looking to make a name for themselves in the world of Jihad. They are notoriously bad at planning and execution, so we can expect more amateurish attacks like this Nigerian “Boxer Brief Bomber”, who apparently was only able to scorch his own genitals with his faulty PETN bomb. However, like any terrorist group, they will learn from their failures and we can expect their attacks to grow in both sophistication and scale. More puzzling than the attack itself is our government’s response. At first, the incident was downplayed as nothing but a “firecracker”, then it was an :isolated incident” (indicating no international terrorist involvement) and finally, it was revealed that pretty much the entire system designed to preempt terrorist attacks had failed us. This Nigerian, who was on the terror watch list, was issued a visa to visit the US, and was allowed to board a US bound plane, even though we had ample warning form his father and the Nigerian government. Apparently, the CIA was hesitant to publish a warning because they “didn’t have a good picture of him”. Seems to me that a cartoon of that Spy vs Spy guy holding a bomb would have been sufficient since we had other important info such as his name, location and destination. Have we slipped into complacency since it has been almost a decade since we have actually suffered a real attack against the mainland US? Shame on us.

2. A reliance and obsession with technology is making Americans “more stupider”- A slew of new laws prohibiting texting and driving went into effect on New Years Day. While I applaud an attempt to stop a dangerous, selfish and plain stupid practice, I lament the fact that we as Americans have to be told not to do it. Seriously, are we that retarded that we simply cannot recognize that trying to read a 2 inch screen and manipulate a tiny keyboard while hurtling down the road in your 2 ton death machine is unwise? This goes into the file along with “Caution Hot!” warnings on coffee cups, and “Do Not Eat” admonishments on packets of silica gel as yet another indication that we, as a country, have simply chosen not to exercise our common sense. I recently read an article on Fox News about 3 separate couples who followed the directions of their GPS and ended up stuck in a snow bank on Christmas Eve. GD people! Seriously? Do we have that much faith in technology that we won’t take our heads out of the sand and look around? It’s called situational awareness. If you walk around looking at your phone, your Crackberry or your MP3 player, eventually someone is going to notice, crack you on the head with a brick and rob you blind. And you know what? You will deserve it. America, make your New Years Resolution to not use a cell phone in your car. At all! I promise you won’t miss much on Facebook on your 20 minute commute home.

3. America loves a scandal- I know it was exciting when an out of control Britney Spears shaved her head and flashed her clam at America, but this obsession with stars fuck ups has to stop. I think we, as common Americans, love to see someone more successful than us hit a rough patch. The Germans call it Schadenfreude, “shameful joy”. We revel in the comeuppance of our heroes. But is it really front page news that Tiger Woods like to slip his putter into a variety of bags? TMZ is entertaining, but let’s not lose sight of what this is, nothing more than petty gossip. Our national obsession with it is a sickness. Turn off the TV and read your kids a book. And someone remind me why anyone with the last name Kardashian is currently famous.

4. Our government- I want yo to read something:

HONOLULU - President Barack Obama has rejected his first piece of legislation from Congress, a stopgap spending bill that never had to take effect.
The White House on Wednesday said Obama exercised his right to send back to the Congress a temporary appropriations bill that lawmakers passed in case a winter storm about two weeks ago would have prevented them from approving a final measure to fund the Defense Department next year. The Dec. 19 blizzard didn't keep them away from the Capitol and they approved the $626 billion defense spending bill before the previous budget expired.
The White House described the move as a technicality that the president took out of an abundance of caution, and that it was his first veto.

This article was on FoxNews on December 31st. Basically our President vetoed a bill that was for something that was supposed to happen 12 days earlier, but never actually happened. Classic government effectiveness at work. Do you think we will see a veto on the broken HealthCare bill that is going to bankrupt our country? Don’t bet on it America.

5. Our dirty government- Did you know that the gentleman currently nominated to head the TSA admitted to using an FBI database to check up on his exwifes new boyfriend? Of course not, you have been watching TMZ all this week. Dirty politicians have taken power in our fair country and they have put out a welcome sign for every schister, malcontent and power abuser out there. We are getting fucked over here people!

So, what can we do? Well, barring armed insurrection, not too damn much. We should use our power as voters to punish everyone in Washington DC who is not looking after our interests. We should start paying attention to the world around us, lest we be “overtaken by events”. We should realize that we as Americans have a sacred trust to leave our children a better country that the one we inherited. And we should fuckin’ hang up and drive!

Have a safe and happy New Year.

Monday, December 21, 2009

Politics as usual

Business as usual in the cesspool that is our nation’s capitol. Apparently since not everyone has caved to the pressure mounted by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to vote in favor of the Health Care debacle, they have resorted to bribery to get the support they need.
While Sen. Ben Nelson got a particularly juicy concession -- permanent and full federal aid for his state's expanded Medicaid population -- in the health care bill, support from a slew of other senators likewise came with its price.
Apparently Senator Nelson has forgotten that his actions will have repercussions for the rest of America. He will stroke his constituents and guarantee his reelection to the ruin of the rest of the country. No matter that this bill will bankrupt the American Middle Class to provide Health Care to those who are leeching off the system anyway. More entitlement for the “Do Nothings” in our country.

Sen. Ben Nelson's hardly the only lawmaker extracting sweetheart deals out of the health care reform bill.
While the Nebraska Democrat got a particularly juicy concession in exchange for a "yes" vote on the 10-year, $871 billion package -- permanent and full federal aid for his state's expanded Medicaid population -- support from a slew of other senators likewise came with a price.
Western states got more money for hospitals that serve Medicare patients. Louisiana got up to $300 million in Medicaid benefits. The list goes on.
Senate Republicans lined up Saturday to decry the latest deal targeted toward Nebraska, which was decried as the "cornhusker kickback."
"Votes have been bought," Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said.
But Senate Democrats said the payoffs are nothing unusual, and in fact typical.

I find that last statement to be the most disturbing thing to come out of Congress since Charles Rangel. Fucking business as usual in that giant toilet on the Potomac.

"People fight for their own states. That's the nature of a democracy," Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said on "Fox News Sunday," defending Nelson against withering attacks from the GOP.
Stupid cunt. We fought a Civil War so we could be the “United” States. The nature of democracy is doing the will of the people. All the people. Not just the ones who vote for you. Politicians have a sacred trust to preserve the Union. To keep our entire country afloat. But no, get your fucking snout in the trough Klobuchar and just worry about yourself.

"This is just part of the normal legislative process," said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

I have no doubt that this is a normal part of the legislative process in corrupt 3rd world ass-hat dictatorships, like the one Harry Reid wants to make America into.
As a measure of just how typical they are, a slew of payoffs and concessions have been struck over the past several months.
-- Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., won between $100 million and $300 million in additional federal aid for her state's Medicaid population. The deal, secured before she cast her critical vote in favor of bringing the health bill to the floor, was immediately dubbed the "Louisiana Purchase," though the actual Louisiana Purchase was considerably cheaper.
-- Vermont and Massachusetts got $1.2 billion in Medicaid money -- a change that was described as a correction to the current system which exempts those two states because they have robust health care systems. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders also boasted Saturday that he requested and won an investment worth between $10 and $14 billion for community health centers.
-- Western states secured higher federal reimbursement rates for doctors and hospitals that serve Medicare patients. The provision covers the low-population "frontier" states and applies to Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming -- the latter two states are both represented by two Republicans, but ended up as beneficiaries anyway since they qualify. The legislative language defines frontier states as states where at least 50 percent of the counties have fewer than six people per square mile. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, defended the "special deal," telling "Fox News Sunday" that those five states were getting an increase in reimbursements because they get the lowest amount in the country. "That doesn't offend me at all," he said. "It's in fact, fair."
-- Florida, New York and Pennsylvania -- where five of six senators are Democrats -- will have their seniors' Medicare Advantage benefits protected, even as the program sees massive cuts elsewhere.
-- Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., reportedly secured expanded Medicare coverage for victims of asbestos exposure in a mine in Libby, Mont.
-- One unknown state is receiving $100 million for a "health care facility" affiliated with an academic health center at a university that contains the state's only "public academic medical and dental school." It's unclear for which state that language was written.
-- Nebraska's Nelson won permanent federal aid for his state's expanded Medicaid population, a benefit worth up to $100 million over 10 years. Other states get the federal aid for three years, but Nebraska's benefit is indefinite. His state also got an exemption for nonprofit insurance companies from a health insurance company tax. Many believe this was targeted at Mutual of Omaha, but senior Democratic aides would not confirm that.

Better make sure the wool stays over they eyes of America. As long as we have Big Macs, Reality TV, TMZ and our fucking I-Pod earphones stuck in our ears, we can pretend that this fine, strong, wonderful country is not falling to pieces around us. Don’t look up from your smart phones America, you might be too shocked to post on Facebook.

Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman didn't extract any payoffs for Connecticut. Rather, he succeeded in stripping the government-run insurance plan from the Senate health bill, along with a proposed expansion of Medicare that he recently said he opposes.
Fox News' Trish Turner contributed to this report.

Monday, December 7, 2009

We have a new Douchebag of the Month!!!!!

Ahhh, Harry Reid, Nevada Senator, Liberal Fucktard, and now, another honor. Hello Harry. RipperBravo6 wishes to congratulate you. You have reached a level of douchebaggery that no one on our list of douchebags has reach heretofar. You are the current, appointed, annointed, sainted KING of all douchebags. You make Osama Bin Laden, AIDS, cancer and forced sodomy all seem appealing.
You see folks, In my estimation, a line has been crossed. The line? Professional Decorum. I know, saying "Senator" and "Professional Decorum" in the same sentence is like saying "Cuddly" and "Serial Killer" together. But I think that in a nest of vile, selfish, crooked vipers, Harry Reid stands head and (no) shoulders about the rest of the snakes. To compare dissent against the rampant and uncontrolled $pendfest known as "Health Care Reform" to dissent against ending slavery in Nineteenth Century America is simply reprehensible.

From FOXNews-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid took his GOP-blasting rhetoric to a new level Monday, comparing Republicans who oppose health care reform to lawmakers who clung to the institution of slavery more than a century ago.
The Nevada Democrat, in a sweeping set of accusations on the Senate floor, also compared health care foes to those who opposed women's suffrage and the civil rights movement -- even though it was Sen. Strom Thurmond, then a Democrat, who unsuccessfully tried to filibuster the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and it was Republicans who led the charge against slavery.
Senate Republicans on Monday called Reid's comments "offensive" and "unbelievable."
But Reid argued that Republicans are using the same stalling tactics employed in the pre-Civil War era.
"Instead of joining us on the right side of history, all the Republicans can come up with is, 'slow down, stop everything, let's start over.' If you think you've heard these same excuses before, you're right," Reid said Monday. "When this country belatedly recognized the wrongs of slavery, there were those who dug in their heels and said 'slow down, it's too early, things aren't bad enough.'"
He continued: "When women spoke up for the right to speak up, they wanted to vote, some insisted they simply, slow down, there will be a better day to do that, today isn't quite right.
"When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today."
That seemed to be a reference to Thurmond's famous 1957 filibuster -- the late senator switched parties several years later.
Reid's office stood by the remarks, with spokesman Jim Manley saying Republicans have "done nothing but obstruct health care" in the Senate.
"Today's feigned outrage is nothing but a ploy to distract from the fact they have no plan to lower the cost of health care, stop insurance company abuses or protect Medicare," Manley said.
But Republicans said they were genuinely appalled. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said Reid's remarks were over the top.
"That is extremely offensive," he told Fox News. "It's language that should never be used, never be used. ... Those days are not here now."
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who on the Senate floor read from this article and asked that it be placed in the record, called on Reid to return to the floor and, if not apologize, at least explain what he meant.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., suggested Reid was starting to "crack" under the pressure of the health care reform debate.
"I think it's beneath the dignity of the majority leader," Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., said. "I personally am insulted."

This is Harry Reid, and by his lead, the rest of the Democrats in Congress saying "Get on the bus or under it". The Democrats have decided they have their moment in History, and all be damned who dare stand against their agenda. This is not what America should stand for, and this is not what America should put up with. When one party decides that it is right, and no discussion, debate or deliberation is needed, that amounts to totalitarianism. With a Democratic Congress and Democrat in the White House, the Liberal Left has determined they will simply ram through Social Engineering, Entitlement Programs, and Spend Heavy Policies. It's bad enough they won't listen to their peers in Congress, but they have also turned a deaf ear to a large part of America. Ask King George how that turned out. I say this to every member of Congress...Beware, you do not act with impunity. You cannot hide from the righteous indignation of The People.

Sunday, November 29, 2009

The Declaration of Independance

Have you ever taken a moment to read our country’s Declaration of Independence? Great words put together by great men, and more than apropos to our current situation. If more Americans were familiar with their own history and less interested in Jon and Kate’s divorce drama, they would know and understand that our forefathers have left us an option for change in America that to this point has gone unused. Here it is folks, with a few comments from myself for clarity:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

The framers are explaining why they are taking such a drastic and dangerous step towards independence. They are not just usurping the rule of the King of England, but eschewing the entire population of Great Britian. They are drawing a line and saying to the world; “Yes, we have sprung from the same lineage as the people of Britian, however, we have changed, and to allow us to continue to grow as a people, we must sever the ties that bind us to that Empire.” This being such a huge step, they will now explain why they are taking it.

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

The framers now state that it should be obvious (self-evident) to everyone that we (Americans) are the equal of any group of citizens in the world,a nd furthermore, we have some rights, God given, that no one should be able to take away from us. Those are the right not to be killed arbitrarily by a foreign power, the right to our freedom, both as individuals and as a country, and the right to live our lives in a way that brings us happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

Because we have, and need to retain these rights, we form governments. These governments function and rule because we, the people, consent to be governed by the. It is a symbiotic relationship, but the framers are clear to show that a government that does not serve the will of the people is, in fact, no government at all.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

They go on to say that when a government no longer meets is simple charter to protect life, preserve liberty and allow the pursuit of happiness the people have the right to get rid of it, and to form a new government, based on the form that they see most fit. A simple reminder to both Kings and politicians that nothing they do is above censure, and that if they choose to no longer serve the will of the people, they can, and should be replaced.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

The framers remind us that changing governments is not a decision to be taken lightly. In fact, they tell us a well known truth; man is more likely to continue to suffer evil than to take the risk of change.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

However, every group has it’s breaking point. And when man has suffered long enough, he can, AND SHOULD, throw off the yoke of oppression and build something new. They remind us that not only is this our right, it is, in fact, our duty.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. 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 these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

Now, they will lay out the case against the King of England:

— 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 refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

— He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

— He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

— He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

— He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

— He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

— 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 kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

— 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:

— For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

— For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

— For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

— For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

— For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

— For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

— For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

— For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

— For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

— He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

— He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

— He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

— He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

— He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

Wow, King George was quite a tool.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

They want to remind us again that they do not take sedition and mutiny lightly. The framers wanted to world to know that they tried their best to affect a change without these drastic measure, but their attempts were heartily rebuffed.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

This section is an indictment of the British government as well as the King. The framers wanted everyone to know that they held no personal grudge against the British people, but because of their continued support of a despotic tyrant, they were just as culpable as the King himself. They do extend an olive branch here and remind Britian that once the war is over, we have such common bonds that assuredly we will remain friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

And that’s it. This final section states the obvious, in an offcial manner. We are now agreed that the ties that bind are severed. We are our own country. Now it is official policy; we shall all surely “hang together” if we fail in our endeavors.

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Gun Free Military Bases are killing our Soldiers

I found this editorial on and had to post it. I agree 100% with the author that Gun-Free zones provide nothing more than a safe, target rich environment where psychopaths can take their time and choose their victims at will. I salute the bravery of the soldiers and civilians at Ft. Hood, but it is time we allowed Americans to defend themselves!

From Foxnews- Shouldn't an army base be the last place where a terrorist should be able to shoot at people uninterrupted for 10 minutes? After all, an army base is filled with soldiers who carry guns, right? Unfortunately, that is not the case. Beginning in March 1993, under the Clinton administration, the army forbids military personnel from carrying their own personal firearms and mandates that "a credible and specific threat against [Department of the Army] personnel [exist] in that region" before military personnel "may be authorized to carry firearms for personal protection." Indeed, most military bases have relatively few military police as they are in heavy demand to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The unarmed soldiers could do little more than cower as Major Nidal Malik Hasan stood on a desk and shot down into the cubicles in which his victims were trapped. Some behaved heroically, such as private first class Marquest Smith who repeatedly risked his life removing five soldiers and a civilian from the carnage. But, being unarmed, these soldiers were unable to stop Hasan's attack.

The wife of one of the soldiers shot at Ft. Hood understood this all too well. Mandy Foster's husband had been shot but was fortunate enough not to be seriously injured. In an interview on CNN on Monday night, Mrs. Foster was asked by anchor John Roberts how she felt about her husband "still scheduled for deployment in January" to Afghanistan. Ms. Foster responded: "At least he's safe there and he can fire back, right?" -- It is hard to believe that we don't trust soldiers with guns on an army base when we trust these very same men in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, most of CNN's listeners probably didn't understand the rules that Ms. Foster was referring to.

The law-abiding, not the criminals, are the ones who obey the ban on guns. Instead of making areas safe for victims, the bans make it safe for the criminal. Hasan not only violated the army's ban on carrying a gun, he also apparently violated the rules that require soldiers to register privately owned guns at the post.

Research shows that allowing individuals to defend themselves dramatically reduces the rates of multiple victim public shootings. Even if attacks still occur, having civilians with permitted concealed handguns limits the damage. A major factor in determining how many people are harmed by these killers is the amount of time that elapses between when the attack starts and someone is able to arrive on the scene with a gun. Ten minutes must have seemed like an eternity to those trapped in the attack at Ft. Hood. All the multiple victim public shootings in the U.S. -- in which more than three people have been killed -- have all occurred in places where concealed handguns have been banned.

For several days now, some in the media and various gun control groups have focused on a so-called "cop killer" gun that Hasan used. The five-seven is a conventional semi-automatic pistol. In fact, the bullets that it fires are relatively small, only being in the .22 caliber class. Unlike rifles, even higher caliber handguns don't fire publicly available ammunition at sufficient velocity to penetrate a police officer's vest. There is a special type of handgun ammunition that can penetrate some types of body armor, but under federal law it is not legal to manufacture or import that ammunition for sale to the public.

For the safety of our soldiers and citizens, we hope that this simple fact about the Ft. Hood attack and the role that gun-free zones played in allowing yet another multiple victim public shooting becomes part of the news coverage itself. The political debate about guns would be quite different if even once in a while a news story clearly explained that there has been another multiple victim public shooting in a gun-free zone.

John R. Lott, Jr. is a contributor. He is an economist and author of "More Guns, Less Crime."

Monday, November 9, 2009

The boys.

Here they are, my camping partners in crime. Radiant in Tiger Stripes is Bertram Buck, the dashing fellow in East German Rain Pattern is Uncle Al, and the one with the hot dog, well, that's "Puppy", the worlds smartest guard dog. In the words of Bertram Buck;
"This can be fun, but it ain't a game."
Keep that in mind folks.