Gun Facts 6.0 now available

For release July 6, 2011

BURYING THE GUN CONTROL INDUSTRY
Edition 6.0 of Gun Facts, the de facto reference
debunking gun control myths

San Francisco, CA – July 6, 2011: The latest release of Gun Facts,
the de facto reference for debunking gun control misinformation, was
released today.

"After years of uncovered propaganda, the gun control industry has
very little credibility left," said Guy Smith, author of Gun Facts.
"I'm ready to remove the last shreds."

Gun Facts, in continuous publication for over eleven years, is the
primary tool of gun rights activists in over 165 countries around the
globe. The book categorizes misinformation fostered by gun control
groups, lists debunking facts, and provides over 520 detailed
footnotes citing independent sources to substantiate the facts.

"Our social media scanning shows that hundreds of activists each day
use Gun Facts when debating people, dressing-down their congress
critters, or correcting erroneous Op/Eds," said Smith. "That is the
purpose – to provide civil libertarians the tool they need to put
canard-casting gun control propagandists in their place."

Gun Facts' 112 pages are loaded with hard data from criminology,
sociology, constitutional law and other fields. The book's
organization makes looking up gun control fallicies fast and easy, and
thus makes refuting facts instantly available.

"The same social media tools show that gun control advocates give up
when confronted with real information," said Smith. "In over eleven
years only two people have challenged Gun Facts' accuracy, and both
times they got it dead wrong. Sipping good whiskey is the only thing
easier and more enjoyable than swatting gun control advocates with Gun
Facts."

The electronic version of Gun Facts is free to everyone, which is why
it is used around the planet. Gun Facts is available in both English
and Spanish, with other translations planned. A printed version of
Gun Facts is available on Amazon.com for $7.

"My job is to pass information ammo to the troops," said Smith. "They
then rhetorically shoot bulls with hard and fast moving bullets of
fact."

Guy Smith is also the author of Shooting The Bull from Free Thinkers
Media. Shooting The Bull is subtitled "a field guide to identifying
political lies in real-time" and is a modern review of propaganda
analysis. Throughout Shooting The Bull Smith uses the gun control
industry as his "case study and whipping boy."
"I sent a copy of Shooting The Bull to Josh Sugarmann at the Violence
Policy Center, Sarah Brady at the Brady Campaign, and Mayor Michael
Bloomberg, in appreciation for giving me the raw material for Gun
Facts and Shooting The Bull. Not one of them sent a thank you note."

### end ###

Media reources
Author bios, headshots and book cover graphics in high resolution can
be obtained from the Media Resources Page at the Gun Facts web site.
http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-facts-media-resources/

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Gun Facts 6.0 now available

For release July 6, 2011
Contact: Guy Smith — 510-693-4477, guy@GunFacts.info

BURYING THE GUN CONTROL INDUSTRY
Edition 6.0 of Gun Facts, the de facto reference
debunking gun control myths

San Francisco, CA – July 6, 2011: The latest release of Gun Facts,
the de facto reference for debunking gun control misinformation, was
released today.

"After years of uncovered propaganda, the gun control industry has
very little credibility left," said Guy Smith, author of Gun Facts.
"I'm ready to remove the last shreds."

Gun Facts, in continuous publication for over eleven years, is the
primary tool of gun rights activists in over 165 countries around the
globe. The book categorizes misinformation fostered by gun control
groups, lists debunking facts, and provides over 520 detailed
footnotes citing independent sources to substantiate the facts.

"Our social media scanning shows that hundreds of activists each day
use Gun Facts when debating people, dressing-down their congress
critters, or correcting erroneous Op/Eds," said Smith. "That is the
purpose – to provide civil libertarians the tool they need to put
canard-casting gun control propagandists in their place."

Gun Facts' 112 pages are loaded with hard data from criminology,
sociology, constitutional law and other fields. The book's
organization makes looking up gun control fallicies fast and easy, and
thus makes refuting facts instantly available.

"The same social media tools show that gun control advocates give up
when confronted with real information," said Smith. "In over eleven
years only two people have challenged Gun Facts' accuracy, and both
times they got it dead wrong. Sipping good whiskey is the only thing
easier and more enjoyable than swatting gun control advocates with Gun
Facts."

The electronic version of Gun Facts is free to everyone, which is why
it is used around the planet. Gun Facts is available in both English
and Spanish, with other translations planned. A printed version of
Gun Facts is available on Amazon.com for $7.

"My job is to pass information ammo to the troops," said Smith. "They
then rhetorically shoot bulls with hard and fast moving bullets of
fact."

Guy Smith is also the author of Shooting The Bull from Free Thinkers
Media. Shooting The Bull is subtitled "a field guide to identifying
political lies in real-time" and is a modern review of propaganda
analysis. Throughout Shooting The Bull Smith uses the gun control
industry as his "case study and whipping boy."
"I sent a copy of Shooting The Bull to Josh Sugarmann at the Violence
Policy Center, Sarah Brady at the Brady Campaign, and Mayor Michael
Bloomberg, in appreciation for giving me the raw material for Gun
Facts and Shooting The Bull. Not one of them sent a thank you note."

### end ###

Media reources
Author bios, headshots and book cover graphics in high resolution can
be obtained from the Media Resources Page at the Gun Facts web site.
http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-facts-media-resources/

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

[Fwd: News Alert: Somali Man Tied to Militants Was Detained Aboard U.S. Navy Ship for Months]

This sounds a lot like what this admin was complaining about the Bushies
doing and they did not go this far. Pot, meet kettle.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

I Didn't Fight For Your Freedom

May 30, 2011
I Didn't Fight For Your Freedom
Posted by Jude on May 30, 2011 at 08:36

Nope. No freedom being defended here.

So it's Memorial Day, which means that the US is awash with mostly obligatory tributes to military personnel.

I hate this shit.

I didn't fight for your freedoms.  In the six years I was in, I never once defended your right to vote, or to carry a gun, or to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure (that one doesn't really apply anymore, anyway), or any of the other things you enjoy as a citizen of this country.  I just didn't.  Neither did anyone who went to Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Vietnam.  It's all bullshit.  It's a fucking lie that we tell ourselves and each other so that we don't have to think about why we send young men and women to serve, suffer, and die for old men's vainglorious ideas and profit margins.

I passed through Burlington, WI on Saturday to visit their annual chocolate festival.  Who could say no to that, right?  Well, while there (this being Wisconsin), I got myself a beer.  To do so, you had to put up with the shitty metal cover band in the beer tent.  There's a 45-year-old lead singer acting a fool--pouring beer on his own goddamned head, making dumb-ass sexist remarks, saying stupid shit about his teen-aged daughter, etc.  Since that wasn't reprehensible enough, he then proceeded to thank all the veterans in the crowd, specifically pointing out one man whose--well, I'll just quote this asshole.

I wanna thank all of our veterans for what they do for us.  Every guy in the band, our fathers were all in the military.  My dad was in Korea!  This guy right here in front--his son is in Iraq right now.  He's over there FIGHTIN' FOR OUR RIGHT TO PARTY!

I wanted to rush the stage and strangle that fuck with a microphone cord.

It's all bullshit, folks.  We don't do anything for anyone's freedom.  The military hasn't actually deployed en masse to defend your freedom in a long, long time.  Unless you call rich people fucking over the world's poor and powerless a form of freedom.  As you may have guessed, I don't.  It's bullshit.  And it needs to stop.

I don't mind honoring sacrifice, but the military doesn't have a monopoly on that, now does it?  I also don't mind remembering military dead and wounded.  But we do it all wrong.  We just fetishize the suffering (like good Catholics, no?) without wondering why it ever happened in the first place.  Remembrance and memorial, it would seem, also involve reflection and assessment.  Just because someone died or was wounded doesn't automatically validate how he or she came to be in that state.  We send our young people overseas to be bored, pull duty, sometimes get shot at, and occasionally get hit.  Then we never ask why they're over there in the first fucking place, because doing so, apparently, does them a disservice.  What kind of jack shit is that?

A real Memorial Day would involve commitments to cease sacrifices that don't actually, you know, do anything in the name of freedom.  Losing your legs so that Chevron can see higher profit margins is not noble.  It's a god damned shame.  Dying in the service of defense contractors doesn't bestow sainthood on the deceased.  It just means that a life got snuffed out for no good reason.  Reflexive military worship is a cancer on society.  Unscrupulous people use it to justify their actions and avoid any criticism.  That shit makes the act of asking why we should send young people to absorb bullets and get blown to pieces into some kind of subversion and/or sedition.  How fucking ridiculous is that?  Wondering if someone's death was worth the cost doesn't dishonor the person.  I don't know how we've confused evaluating the motives and actions of leaders with spitting on corpses, but we have.  And until we can untangle those things, we're just well and truly fucked when it comes to international affairs.

So this Memorial Day, take a minute to actually reflect on the acts and deeds of people in uniform.  But that involves critical thought instead of blind acceptance of the rightness of our leaders' actions.  Honor the dead and care for the living, but don't think that people in uniform today are actually standing between you and tyranny.

Remember that.


http://bit.ly/rdbuNs

[Fwd: News Alert: Obama Calls Congressional Leaders to White House Thursday for Deficit Talks]

Let's see the spending cuts first and then we will talk about the tax
increases. If you don't come up with the spending cuts, no tax
increases. Been screwed by the Dems too many times on that one already
with their promising spending cuts but they never seem to show up. Do I
trust the President? Never. I don't trust most of them but this one I
don't trust at all. He has lied to the country all too many times for
me to trust him.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

This is just plain despicable

http://a4cgr.wordpress.com/2011/07/05/11-328/

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Obama using your private emails to get re-elected

Obama using your private emails to get re-elected Harold | July 5, 2011 at 4:04 pm | Categories: Corruption, Criminal Activity, Elections/Voting, Executive, Internet, Privacy Rights, Progressives, Propaganda | URL: http://wp.me/pmtmV-6bI

Judi McLeod, CFP 7/5/2011 Even if you loathe what he stands for (abortion)—and does not stand for (America)—your personal emails are now carrying bold-faced advertisements for the re-election of President Barack Obama, aka Barry Soetoro. It's out of we the people's hands now.  While you are busy struggling to survive in the current economy, Obama [...]

Read more of this post

Add a comment to this post

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Express yourself. Start a blog.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Pics and toons 7/5/11 (3)

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Pics and toons 7/5/11 (1)

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Our Upside-Down World

July5th
Our Upside-Down World
Thomas Woods

A regular theme of this site is that we are taught to treat the political class with reverence, while dismissing the voluntary sector as wicked, grasping, contemptible, corrupt, etc. Quite a con job the political class has brainwashed us ­ ever since we were educated in their own schools ­ into believing.

I'm not sure I have ever seen this point driven home as poignantly and effectively as Jeff Tucker does in this piece. Please don't pass this one by.

http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/our-upside-down-world/

xxx

Show Love to the Merchant Class
Monday, July 04, 2011
by Jeffrey A. Tucker

People can be downright nasty to store clerks and stores. It's their right: a feature of the market is that you don't have to trade with anyone in particular. And yet, it still troubles me when people are so dismissive of attempts at entrepreneurship. Why not refrain from buying and walk away? Why hurl invective or behave in a rude way?

In the sports store the other day, I heard customers muttering that this glove is too expensive, this tennis racket is too tightly strung, this shoe is too gaudy, this exercise equipment is not all it says, and that the store should carry this brand of ball, not that one. Most people are happy, else the place could not be in business, but other people (again, rightly) just assume that it is their right to dislike, refuse, cut down, put down, and generally dismiss any merchant with a wave of their hand.

Compare to the scene at airport security. This same class of citizen marches in lockstep, permits himself or herself to be subjected to invasive searches, holds the tongue even when subjected to barking orders from the TSA, and even allows property to be confiscated from personal bags. No one dares utter a word of protest or even complaint for fear of landing in the slammer. The goal is just to get to the other side of the government barrier, where the mini utopia of airport commerce awaits to serve us in a real way ­ and that hamburger and beer had better be served up immediately, else we will demand our rights!

We are masters of the universe as customers and as compliant as lambs when acting as citizens. And perhaps that's easy to understand. The government has a gun pointing at our heads. The merchant is trying to persuade us to part with our money in exchange for goods and services. One won't take no for an answer; the other sees no as just part of daily life.

Still, we should be more conscious of the difference, and appreciate what it means. The class of people who have chosen the path of persuasion over coercion are deserving of our gratitude even when we don't buy from them. The merchant class is that which makes everything possible in our lives: our homes, our food, our medical care, our clothing, our air conditioning, our computers, our music listening ­ absolutely everything that makes daily life tolerable and joyful.

We are too often tempted to think that the gas station, the drug store, the restaurant, the fast-food franchise, and the mommy-owned cupcake bakery are just a given part of the structure of our world. They are not. The decision to open a business is absolutely wrenching because the risk of failure is so high. The future is unknown in either a macroeconomic sense (will the economy collapse with falling incomes?) or a microeconomic sense (maybe no one really wants to buy my stuff). Often it involves cashing out retirement savings or being in hock to the banks. No matter what the business plan, it is scary.

And it's not only about money. You end up buying lots of capital equipment that is not easily converted to other uses or sold at anywhere near the price you bought it at. Custom chairs, tables, signs, and other decorations are all a pure waste if the business doesn't work. Then there is the issue of people. You have to hire employees and they must get paid long before the point of profitability arrives ­ if it ever does. You are suddenly responsible for them.

You call yourself "boss," but you know the truth. You are responsible but not really the boss. The bosses are the consumers whose fickle ways can make or break your new livelihood. You are completely at their mercy.

Then there is the issue of marketing. You believe in your product, but you can't do it all yourself. You have to hire others to push, market, and sell. It is necessarily true that these people you hire are not as strong in their belief in your good or service as you are. They must be a "salesperson" of fame ­ someone hired to be excited and interested in the craft but who is most often more interested in other things.

Never underestimate the problem of inventory, which requires daily entrepreneurial judgments. If you are selling plywood, for example, and your first month's sales are far beyond your expectations, your battles have just begun. You must make a judgment about next month's inventory. Buy too much and you squander all your profits. Buy too little and you lose customers who never come back. Your guesses must be close to correct all the time. But you have no crystal ball. And this problem never goes away: whether you succeed or fail, you never know whether more success or failure is around the corner.

Then there's the competition. Anyone is free to copy and replicate your successes. The more you succeed, the more you inspire imitators who are pleased to do exactly what you do but somehow manage to do it at a lower price. This means that you must constantly stay on your toes and innovate. At the same time, you have to constantly watch your back. A bad day of sales could mean nothing or it could mean everything. It could be a bump on the road to glory or the foreshadowing of disaster. There's no way to know for sure.

The forces of competition in a dynamic market are constantly working to take away your future successes. For the currently successful business, the market system amounts to a giant conspiracy to reduce your profits to zero. The only way to fight back is to serve others with ever more attention to excellence.

And yet, no matter how much your plans work out, there is nothing you can really count on for the future. Any day, any hour, it could all dry up. The consumers could go away. The fashions could change. The tastes of the spending class could shift. You are utterly and completely dependent on the subjective whims of everyone else. No matter how much determination you have, in the end you just can't control what others think or do. This is as true of the lemonade stand as it is of Amazon.com. No matter how big you get, no amount of money can buy a reliable fortune-teller.

Why does anyone do it? Why does anyone become a merchant and an entrepreneur? The usual rap is that people are in it for the money. But there is no bucket of money to grab. The money may or may not be there. And when it is there, it usually ends up being poured back into the business itself in order to stay on top. So why do people do it? It has to do with the dream of success, the hope of making a difference, the living out of a vocation, the fulfillment of an ambition to serve and make a difference. This is what drives the entrepreneur.

And how do we repay them? We snarl and sneer, refuse to buy, criticize at the slightest misstep, and otherwise refuse to give them credit for anything at all. We call them greedy and dismiss their pleas to buy as craven marketing. The state hectors these people with regulations, taxes, mandates, and impositions far greater than the rest of us experience, and yet people call for ever more.

Clearly, the merchant class is treated now as it was in the ancient world: as lowly and unfit. And yet here's the truth: the merchant class is the class that brings us all the things we love the most. We depend on them, and they depend on us.

People living in the age of the Leviathan state often feel powerless to do anything about the state of the world. I would suggest that one way to fight against the takeover of society by the state and its minions is to show a greater appreciation of their opposite. We should show love to the merchant class. We should begin by intellectually appreciating what they do for us. We should go further to actually say to the merchants how highly we regard their vocation.

Managing our affections is one way to fight back. Show love to the things and the people who are doing what is best for society and are providing a model for others to follow. The model and ideal of the kind of peaceful and prosperous society we want to live in might be as close as the convenience store right down the street.



Jeffrey Tucker is the editor of Mises.org and author of It's a Jetsons World: Private Miracles and Public Crimes and Bourbon for Breakfast: Living Outside the Statist Quo.

http://mises.org/daily/5426/Show-Love-to-the-Merchant-Class

The Slavery of Politics

Carpe Libertatem
Tuesday, July 5
The Slavery of Politics
July 05, 2011
by R.K. Blacksher

There are few things more frustrating than engaging in a discussion with a Constitutionalist. It is a very depressing spectacle to observe people who are often very rational descend into the most vulgar style of starry-eyed hero worship when discussing the Founding Fathers and their divine governing document.
 
Lysander Spooner effectively eviscerated the Constitution in 1870. When engaging in discussions with Constitutionalists, I will often quote Spooner's statement that the Constitution "has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." This is a simple yet powerful indictment. The logic here is unassailable, and indeed Constitutionalists typically do not even attempt to refute Spooner's logic. Instead, they fall back on the argument that the problem lies not in the Constitution but in the people who have been elected to administer and uphold it.
 
This argument highlights a very interesting parallel between Constitutionalists and communists. While members of both groups would likely be loath to admit it, Constitutionalists and communists are united by a shared delusion: the belief that their preferred system would work wonderfully if only "the right people" were in charge.
 
The problem is that within the confines of any system of domination and exploitation, "the right people" simply do not exist.
 

Domination in a Democratic Society
 
Human beings, like other social animals, have a natural tendency to form dominance hierarchies. As a species capable of high levels of cognition, humans have developed some rather ingenious ways of dominating each other.
 
With respect to various forms of social organization, a type of path dependence seems to exist. The way in which a society chooses its leaders will determine the type of people who rise to the top of that society. A society that chooses its rulers based on the principle of "might makes right" will come to be dominated by the most physically strong members of society. A hereditary monarchy will be dominated by members of the royal family.
 
Many libertarian-minded individuals have written insightfully about the types of leaders who rise to the top in democratic societies. Since democratic leaders acquire power by convincing a majority of voters to support them, they must find some way to cobble together a coalition large enough to win an election. This is most easily done by appealing to people's worst instincts. As F.A. Hayek wrote, "If we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and 'common' instincts and tastes prevail."
 
Hans Hoppe was even more explicit when he wrote, "The selection of government rulers by means of popular elections makes it practically impossible that any good or harmless person could ever rise to the top. Prime ministers and presidents are selected for their proven efficiency as morally uninhibited demagogues."
 
While Lord Acton was certainly correct when he observed that power corrupts, that is really only part of the story. It is equally true that corrupt people tend to be the ones who seek power in the first place. The siren song of the State is irresistible to someone with an overdeveloped libido dominandi. Thus, there is an inverse relationship between how much an individual wants power and how much he can be trusted to exercise his power in a prudent and responsible manner.
 
(Note: Lest Constitutionalists object that America is a republic and not a democracy, I hasten to add that these observations also apply to the leaders in a representative republic.)
 
No one would be surprised if a society organized around the principle of "might makes right" came to be dominated by the most physically strong members of society. Similarly, no one would be surprised to find that political power in a hereditary monarchy always seems to be wielded by members of the same family.
 
Why, then, are people surprised when societies in which leaders are chosen by democratic elections come to be dominated by liars, demagogues, and sociopaths? Why do so many people, from Constitutionalists to progressives to some libertarians, seem to think all of their problems can be solved by "throwing out the bums" and electing "the right people"?

The answer, I think, lies in another characteristic of democracy: its ingenious system of propaganda.
 

Democratic Propaganda
 
Democracy is somewhat unique among systems of domination and control in that it often successfully convinces the victims of domination to be enthusiastically complicit in their own enslavement. Convincing average people to become invested in the political process is perhaps the most ingenious mode of control ever developed by the ruling class. Under feudalism and monarchism, the ruling class was generally only able to control people's physical bodies. Democratic propaganda, by convincing people that they are the government, gives the ruling class a way to control people's minds.
 
The ruling class wants people to think that voting, civic engagement, political activism, and all of that other claptrap are very important. This is why cable news pundits, ruling class propagandists that they are, spend the vast majority of their time to covering politics. This is why presidential elections now last for two years. That is why nearly every news story, regardless of whether or not it has anything to do with politics, is endlessly analyzed for its political implications. As many people have noted, one of the hallmarks of a totalitarian society is the politicization of everything.
 
As people devote more and more of their time to politics, people begin to believe that they have a vested interest in preserving the existing architecture of power and exploitation. People begin to falsely believe that their fates are inextricably intertwined with the fates of their rulers. And that is precisely what the rulers want.
 
Democratic propagandists try to get the members of the exploited class to sanction the sociopathy of the ruling class by, in essence, trying to turn the members of the exploited class into sociopaths.
 
People cannot free themselves if they do not believe they are enslaved. People need to stop trying to free themselves through politics and start trying to free themselves from politics.

http://www.strike-the-root.com/slavery-of-politics

Lies, As Usual

Lies, As Usual
by Joseph Sobran

December 30, 1999

Bernard Shaw's play The Devil's Disciple ends with an ironic exchange between two British officers who have just realized that Britain is about to lose her American colonies because of a flukish oversight by the British cabinet.

Flabbergasted, the obtuse Major Swindon asks: "But what will history say?" General Burgoyne replies suavely: "History, sir, will tell lies, as usual."

Americans, ever earnest about what "history" says, can't bear to believe that some of their "great" presidents have been evil men. So it was probably inevitable that the aging historian-courtier Arthur Schlesinger Jr. should observe the end of the twentieth century by naming Franklin D. Roosevelt "Person of the Century."

Like all those whose lips are still attached to FDR's backside, Professor Schlesinger neglects to mention that FDR's own lips were attached to Joe Stalin's backside. In a near-miracle of distortion, he even manages to give the totally false impression that Roosevelt had something against Stalin.

Demurring from Time magazine's choice of Albert Einstein as P of the C, Schlesinger asks: "But would science conceivably have flourished had Roosevelt not secured free society against ... external enemies? Where would Einstein be if Hitler and Stalin had triumphed?" (In Moscow, no doubt – but that's another story.)

Sixty years ago, Schlesinger goes on, democracy was "besieged by Nazism, Communism, and Japanese militarism." In that dark hour, "no person was more vital to the survival and success of the free state than FDR.... He strengthened democracy from without by leading the grand coalition that defeated the grim forces of atrocity and horror.... He labored to awaken the nation from its isolationist slumber and led us to understand the mortal threat posed by foreign dictators." Schlesinger even gives FDR indirect credit for the eventual fall of Communism.

At this point, a familiar eight-letter synonym for bovine ordure irresistibly suggests itself. Roosevelt did denounce "dictators," but not necessarily all of them. He made one important exception.

Franklin Roosevelt loved "Uncle Joe" Stalin, as he affectionately nicknamed him, as ardently as he hated Hitler. In his first year in office, just after Stalin had deliberately starved millions of Ukrainians, FDR gave the Soviet Union the diplomatic recognition it craved. He fatuously praised Stalin's constitution for guaranteeing religious freedom. He ignored Stalin's purges, excused his show trials, and forgave his aggression against five countries adjacent to Russia. He extended Lend-Lease aid to the Soviets before the United States actually went to war. Toward the end of the war, he was willing to give Stalin a free hand in Poland, where the war had begun with a joint German-Soviet invasion. Almost incredibly, he called the Communist butcher "a Christian gentleman."

Stalin never had a better friend than FDR. And bear in mind that Roosevelt befriended him when he had already slaughtered far more people – and in peacetime! – than Hitler ever would in wartime. FDR's jaunty callousness was a perfect match for Stalin's jovial cruelty.

Contrary to liberal mythology, Roosevelt's friendship with Stalin wasn't just a necessity forced on him by war. It was something he freely chose when he had a choice, and it went far beyond any strategic need, beyond mere "appeasement." He chose to help Stalin from a position of superior strength – long before his indulgence could be ascribed to age and illness. At least Neville Chamberlain never idealized Hitler as "Uncle Adolf." Next to Roosevelt, Vidkun Quisling was a paragon of honor.

Joe McCarthy's famous postwar rampage against Communists in government missed the point. Soviet agents like Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White were only doing on a smaller scale what FDR was doing on a gigantic one. No wonder commies thrived in the Roosevelt administration and the Manhattan Project. Can anyone really believe that Roosevelt would have begrudged a few secrets to Uncle Joe?

Roosevelt trusted Stalin, a fact of which Stalin took full advantage – rather like a spoiled child who steals from a doting grandparent. Never one to accept as a gift what he could steal with his own hands, Stalin's shameless exploitation of his benefactor marks him as, among other things, Ingrate of the Century.

Yes, "history" – or at least one historian – is telling lies, as usual. But do they have to be such whoppers?

Sobran's Reactionary Utopian archives. Watch Sobran's last TV appearance on YouTube. Learn how to get a tape of his last speech during the FGF Tribute to Joe Sobran in December 2009. To subscribe to or renew the FGF E-Package, or support the writings of Joe Sobran, please send a tax-deductible donation to the: Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation, P.O. Box 1383, Vienna, VA 22183 or subscribe online.

It's Official: Obama's Stinkulus Package Was the Most Expensive Pile of Crap in History

It's Official: Obama's Stinkulus Package Was the Most Expensive Pile of Crap in History doctorbulldog | 5 July, 2011 at 11:54 am | Categories: politics | URL: http://wp.me/p1NPg-7ep

 Yeah, just like everything the little commie Obama does, it's freakin' historic:

Obama's Economists: 'Stimulus' Has Cost $278,000 per Job
The stimulus is now causing the economy to shed jobs.
Jeffrey H. Anderson - The Weekly Standard

When the Obama administration releases a report on the Friday before a long weekend, it's clearly not trying to draw attention to the report's contents. Sure enough, the "Seventh Quarterly Report" on the economic impact of the "stimulus," released on Friday, July 1, provides further evidence that President Obama's economic "stimulus" did very little, if anything, to stimulate the economy, and a whole lot to stimulate the debt.

The report was written by the White House's Council of Economic Advisors, a group of three economists who were all handpicked by Obama, and it chronicles the alleged success of the "stimulus" in adding or saving jobs. The council reports that, using "mainstream estimates of economic multipliers for the effects of fiscal stimulus" (which it describes as a "natural way to estimate the effects of" the legislation), the "stimulus" has added or saved just under 2.4 million jobs — whether private or public — at a cost (to date) of $666 billion. That's a cost to taxpayers of $278,000 per job.

In other words, the government could simply have cut a $100,000 check to everyone whose employment was allegedly made possible by the "stimulus," and taxpayers would have come out $427 billion ahead.

Furthermore, the council reports that, as of two quarters ago, the "stimulus" had added or saved just under 2.7 million jobs — or 288,000 more than it has now.  In other words, over the past six months, the economy would have added or saved more jobs without the "stimulus" than it has with it. In comparison to how things would otherwise have been, the "stimulus" has been working in reverse over the past six months, causing the economy to shed jobs.

Add a comment to this post

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Publish text, photos, music, and videos by email using our Post by Email feature.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: There is No First Amendment Without a Second Amendment.

Thanks.....very well written and I appreciate the reorientation into reality.

 

S

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Mark <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:

Read this....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

For wiki it is surprisingly accurate.

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Sharon Fuentes <oneforentropy@gmail.com> wrote:

Mark was it that or so that we could call up a militia?  Do you know which of the Federalist papers dicuss this issue?  It seems some 20+yrs ago in poli-sci we discussed this in context of a Federalist paper.  But old  age stress and a lot crap has diluted my memory.

 

 

 

Thanks

S

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:50 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:

Remember.... the Second amendment is in place not so we can repel
invaders whether home or national border... it is there so we can
protect ourselves from our own government.

On Jul 3, 8:33 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> **
>     <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/author/stungunsandmace/> There
> is No First Amendment Without a Second
> Amendment.<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/there-is-no-first-a...>
> *Steve <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/author/stungunsandmace/>* |
> July 3, 2011 at 4:27 am | Tags: Alan
> Caruba<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=alan-caruba>,
> Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and
> Explosives<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=bureau-of-alcohol-tobacco...>,
> Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear
> Arms<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=citizens-committee-for-th...>,
> Michael Bloomberg<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=michael-bloomberg>,
> Obama administration<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=obama-administration>,
> Second Amendment
> Foundation<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=second-amendment-foundation>,
> Second Amendment to the United States
> Constitution<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=second-amendment-to-the-u...>,
> United States <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=united-states> |
> Categories: Constitution <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=29050>,
> crime <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=34945349>, Idiot Law
> Makers <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=57323845>, Second
> Amendment <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=102988>, Tea
> Party<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=34918731>| URL:http://wp.me/pKuKY-7VU
>
>  <http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/gunflash.gif>
>
> Like AMEX, Don 't Leave Home Without It.
>
> *A very timely reminder of just how and where we came from. And the
> Consequences of ever giving up your second amendment right. Happy 4th Of
> July, It's up to us to have many more.  ~Steve~*
>
> *Reposted From Tea Party Nation.*
>
> http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blog/show?id=3355873%3ABlogPos...
>
> Posted by Alan Caruba<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/profile/AlanCaruba>on
> July 2, 2011 at 5:00pm
>
> Send Message <http://l/> View Alan Caruba's
> blog<http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blog/list?user=wo5vy0y6lr5s>
>
> By Alan Caruba
>
> When we celebrate the Fourth of July<http://www.history.com/topics/july-4th>,
> let's keep in mind that the first
> Americans<http://www.history.com/topics/states>won their independence
> from England with the force of arms. It was, in fact,
> a British effort in 1775 to confiscate military arms they believed were
> stored in Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts that sparked the war.
>
> The Founding Fathers were so aware of the need for an armed citizenry that,
> after ensuring freedom of religion, speech, press and the right to
> peacefully assemble in the First Amendment, the Second guaranteed their
> right to bear arms.
>
> Wherever authoritarian regimes were established in the last century, they
> took away this right and then proceeded to kill those deemed enemies of the
> state.
>
> At this point in American history, the Obama
> administration<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/obama-administration>constitutes
> a threat to the Constitution in general and the Second
> Amendment<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Co...>in
> particular.
> *More than 80,000,000 Americans are gun owners.*
>
> Two of the organizations that have been fighting to protect these rights are
> the Second Amendment
> Foundation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_Foundation>(SAF)
> and the Citizens
> Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear
> Arms<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Committee_for_the_Right_to_Keep...>(CCRKBA),
> both led by Alan M. Gottlieb. Three quarters of the SAF budget is
> devoted to defending rights pertaining to the ownership of guns and to carry
> them for self-defense.
>
> In March, the Huffington Post had an article titled "Obama Looking for Ways
> Around Congress on Gun
> Policy"<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/15/obama-gun-laws-congress_n_83...>by
> Sam Stein. "Faced with a Congress hostile to even slight restrictions
> of
> Second Amendment rights, the Obama administration is exploring potential
> changes to gun laws that can be secured strictly through executive action,
> administration officials, say."
>
> *Since then we have learned of a U.S. Alcohol, Tobacco and
> Firearms<http://www.atf.gov/>program, Fast and Furious, that actually
> facilitated the sale and transfer
> of guns to Mexico. How demented is that?*
>
> In May in my home state of New Jersey the SAF won a decision against
> officials for the deprivation of civil rights under the color of law when
> they had ruled that an applicant for a concealed carry permit had not
> demonstrated a "justifiable need" for it. In point of fact, the applicant,
> Philip Muller, had been kidnapped by members of a motorcycle gang who
> threatened to kill him. They had, however, grabbed the wrong man.
>
> Despite support by local and state police, action on his application was
> delayed for six months. Morris County Superior Court Judge David Ironson
> issued a directive that a permit should be granted. The case is still
> on-going with other plaintiffs that include a part-time sheriff's deputy, an
> applicant who carries large amounts of cash in his private business, and a
> civilian employee of the FBI with legitimate concerns of an attack from a
> radical Islamic group.
>
> Currently nearly thirty such cases have either been brought or joined by SAF
> to stop abuses of this most fundamental right of American citizens ranging
> from bans on interstate handgun sales, New York Mayor Michael
> Bloomberg<http://www.biography.com/articles/Michael-Bloomberg-16466704>'s
> imposition of a $340 fee for a permit to keep a handgun in one's home, and a
> Chicago ban on gun ranges open to the public. These cases cost between
> $60,000 and $80,000 each!
>
> *The greatest single threat to gun ownership right now is a United Nations
> "Small Arms Treaty" falsely identified as an "international arms control
> treaty" allegedly to fight terrorism."*
>
> "In reality," says Gottlieb, it is "a massive, global gun control scheme.
> It's a sham. It's a fraud." If the U.S., under the Obama administration and
> with the consent of the Senate, were to sign on to this treaty, it would
> nullify the Second Amendment.
>
> Suffice to say that the Obama administration wants to have the power to
> increase federal fees on guns and ammunition, to ban guns that are imported,
> to extend the waiting periods for permits, to ban the use of guns on all
> government property, and even to make it illegal if you own a gun and smoke!
>
> Americans do not have to "justify" gun ownership. It is guaranteed by the
> Second Amendment. The reality is that enemies of this fundamental rights
> continue to wage an assault on it.
>
> For information about SAF visithttp://www.saf.org/and CCRKBA athttp://www.ccrkba.org/.
>
> © Alan Caruba, 2011
>
> Add a comment to this
> post<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/there-is-no-first-a...>
>
>   [image: WordPress]
>
> WordPress.com <http://wordpress.com/> | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
> Manage Subscriptions<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> Unsubscribe<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> Express
> yourself. Start a blog. <http://wordpress.com/signup/?ref=email>
>
> *Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:*http://subscribe.wordpress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Fax Fantasy

Do you recall the remake of the movie, The Fly, done back in the
eighties? The script followed the attempts of a scientist to transmit
life forms via a pod type fax machine. Just for giggles, let's
fantasize that this technology became widely available. What actions
and consequences might we expect were this to become reality?

Ø Al Gore would immediately claim credit for the invention.

Ø Homeland Security would mandate that no one could fax themselves
while wearing shoes

Ø The federal government would require the completion of 27 pages of
forms prior to each faxing.

Ø Congress would immediately vote themselves a pay raise.

Ø The DMV would petition the state for additional funding to offset
the loss of revenue due to reduced vehicle purchases.

Ø Al Sharpton would decry that faxing somehow is discriminatory and
demand that 80% of all production jobs be given to folks classified as
minorities.

Ø GM would announce a new technology that will reduce the Watts per
hour usage and their product would be readily available by 2024. They
would call this new pod, The BOLT!

Ø A senator in Montana would add a provision to the defense budget
that would allocate 1.4 billion dollars to build, staff and maintain a
pod-processing center. This would be sufficient to handle the 112
individuals who entered the state during the prior year.

Ø Comcast, Cox and Verizon would all claim proprietary rights to the
transmission process and ask congress to exclude any competition.

Ø Congress would vote themselves another pay raise.

Ø Every city, county and state would implement a new tax on faxing.

Ø The senator from the great state of Washington would decry the lack
of airplane sales and request a federal subsidy so that Boeing could
continue to be profitable while producing absolutely nothing.

Ø Congress would allocate another 27 billion dollars to the postal
service

Ø A new cabinet level department would be established to monitor and
regulate faxing. An initial budget of 2.8 trillion dollars would be
required.

Ø Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, Congress will pass a 2700
page document into law stating that 3 of every 10 receiving pads be
designated as handicap only.

Ø McDonalds will be found guilty in a civil trial after an individual
claimed to have burned themselves with a hot beverage while being
faxed.

Ø Now that vehicle travel is substantially reduced, DOT will begin a
massive effort to fix the highways

Ø Al Gore will produce a documentary showing that fax transmissions
increase the methane output of cattle and will eventually lead to the
melting of the sun

Ø Congress will respond by voting themselves a pay raise

Ø The democrats will claim their party has enabled this new technology
while blaming the past presidency for delaying implementation

Ø The law firm of Count, Damonay and Suesomore will file a class
action lawsuit against Exxon on behalf of all shareholders who lost
money due to insufficient notice of impending bankruptcy.

Ø Congressional Democrats will propose renaming Reagan National
airport the Obama pod-processing center

Ø Barney Frank will deliver a nine-hour speech on the house floor
demanding an 80% tax surcharge on all employees working in pod
production. This will offset ever-increasing unemployment benefits.

Ø Congress will hold six months of closed-door meetings to address the
new immigration procedures. At conclusion of committee, nothing will
be done.

Ø Following a rigorous two and a half hour day, the president will
announce a six-week vacation for his family.

Ø The federal government will announce that private ownership of a pod
is not protected by the constitution and will require a one-month wait
and background check.

Ø Homeland Security will announce a "No FAX' list.

Ø And, of course, congress will vote themselves another pay raise!

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Interesting story of the breaking of the Nazi codes at Bletchley Park during WW II

http://ct.zdnet.com/clicks?t=896678638-d462aed909ea497499d687edebabffdf-bf&brand=ZDNET&s=5

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Well worth reading if you ever considered cloud computing services for storage

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/7-cloud-services-compared-how-much-control-do-you-give-up/3518?tag=nl.e539

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: The Real Meaning of the Fourth of July

.....as to them shall seem most likely
 to effect their safety and happiness.

This means that if they want Sharia in their land... if they want stoning and beheading they have the right to institute it. They have the right to have a dictator until they find it no longer useful. They have the right to rebel. It does not give anyone from outside the right to impose a different system. 

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 7:17 AM, GregfromBoston <greg.vincent@yahoo.com> wrote:

I think thats the whole point of the treatise.

That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Not jobs power or white marble offices; not birth right, philosohpy or
ideology.

THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.

The great experiment.  The jazz.



On Jul 4, 1:05 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gee MJ,
>
> This little treatise completely ignores the explanation and conditions
> for all men to be equal ie:
>
> That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men,
> deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That
> whenever any form of government becomes destructive to 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.
>
> On Jul 4, 10:15 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "The Declaration of Independence upended that age-old notion of rights. All men -- not just Americans -- have been endowed by God and nature, not government, with fundamental and unalienable rights. Governments are called into existence by the people -- and exist at their pleasure -- for one purpose: to protect the exercise of these inherent rights."The Real Meaning of the Fourth of JulybyJacob G. Hornberger, July 4, 2008
> > Contrary to popular myth, the men who signed the Declaration of Independence were not great Americans. Instead, they were great Englishmen. In fact, they were as much English citizens as Americans today are American citizens. It s easy to forget that the revolutionaries in 1776 were people who took up arms against their own government.
> > So how is it that these men are considered patriots? Well, the truth is that their government didn t consider them patriots at all. Their government considered them to be bad guys -- traitors, all of whom deserved to be hanged for treason.
> > Most of us consider the signers of the Declaration of Independence to be patriots because of their courage in taking a stand against the wrongdoing and tyranny of their own government, even risking their lives in the process.
> > Yet not even the patriotism and courage of these English citizens constitutes the foremost significance of the Fourth of July, any more than the military victory over their government s forces at Yorktown does.
> > Instead, the real significance of the Fourth of July lies in the expression of what is undoubtedly the most revolutionary political declaration in history: that man s rights are inherent, God-given, and natural and, thus, do not come from government.
> > Throughout history, people have believed that their rights come from government. Such being the case, people haven t objected whenever government officials infringed upon their rights. Since rights were considered to be government-bestowed privileges, the thinking went, why shouldn t government officials have the power to regulate or suspend such privileges at will?
> > The Declaration of Independence upended that age-old notion of rights. All men -- not just Americans -- have been endowed by God and nature, not government, with fundamental and unalienable rights. Governments are called into existence by the people -- and exist at their pleasure -- for one purpose: to protect the exercise of these inherent rights.
> > What happens if a government that people have established becomes a destroyer, rather than a protector, of their rights? The Declaration provides the answer: It is the right of the people to alter or even abolish their government and establish new government whose purpose is the protection, not the destruction, of people s rights and freedoms.
> > The Constitution and the Bill of Rights must be construed in light of that revolutionary statement of rights in the Declaration of Independence. The American people used the Constitution to bring the federal government into existence but also, simultaneously, they used that document to limit the government s powers to those expressly enumerated in the Constitution. With the Constitution, people limited the powers of their own government in a formal, structured way, with the aim of protecting their rights and freedoms from being infringed upon by that same government.
> > Why did Americans deem it desirable and necessary to limit the powers of the federal government? Because they feared the possibility that their new government would become like their former government against which they had had to take up arms. While they recognized the necessity for government -- as a means to protect their rights -- they also recognized that the federal government was the greatest threat to their rights. By severely limiting the powers of the federal government to those enumerated within the Constitution, the Framers intended to encase the federal government within a straitjacket.
> > Even that was not sufficient for the American people, however. As a condition for approving the Constitution, they demanded passage of the Bill of Rights, which emphasized two deeply held beliefs: (1) that the federal government, not some foreign entity, constitutes the greatest threat to the rights and liberties of the American people; and (2) that the enumeration of specific rights and liberties, both substantive and procedural, would better ensure their protection from federal infringement.
> > On the Fourth of July we celebrate the patriotism and courage of those English revolutionaries who were willing to pledge their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor in defense of the most revolutionary declaration of rights in history -- that man s rights come from God and nature, not from government.http://www.fff.org/comment/com0807b.asp- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: There is No First Amendment Without a Second Amendment.

Read this....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

For wiki it is surprisingly accurate.

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Sharon Fuentes <oneforentropy@gmail.com> wrote:

Mark was it that or so that we could call up a militia?  Do you know which of the Federalist papers dicuss this issue?  It seems some 20+yrs ago in poli-sci we discussed this in context of a Federalist paper.  But old  age stress and a lot crap has diluted my memory.

 

 

 

Thanks

S

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:50 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:

Remember.... the Second amendment is in place not so we can repel
invaders whether home or national border... it is there so we can
protect ourselves from our own government.

On Jul 3, 8:33 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> **
>     <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/author/stungunsandmace/> There
> is No First Amendment Without a Second
> Amendment.<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/there-is-no-first-a...>
> *Steve <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/author/stungunsandmace/>* |
> July 3, 2011 at 4:27 am | Tags: Alan
> Caruba<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=alan-caruba>,
> Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and
> Explosives<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=bureau-of-alcohol-tobacco...>,
> Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear
> Arms<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=citizens-committee-for-th...>,
> Michael Bloomberg<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=michael-bloomberg>,
> Obama administration<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=obama-administration>,
> Second Amendment
> Foundation<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=second-amendment-foundation>,
> Second Amendment to the United States
> Constitution<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=second-amendment-to-the-u...>,
> United States <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=united-states> |
> Categories: Constitution <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=29050>,
> crime <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=34945349>, Idiot Law
> Makers <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=57323845>, Second
> Amendment <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=102988>, Tea
> Party<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=34918731>| URL:http://wp.me/pKuKY-7VU
>
>  <http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/gunflash.gif>
>
> Like AMEX, Don 't Leave Home Without It.
>
> *A very timely reminder of just how and where we came from. And the
> Consequences of ever giving up your second amendment right. Happy 4th Of
> July, It's up to us to have many more.  ~Steve~*
>
> *Reposted From Tea Party Nation.*
>
> http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blog/show?id=3355873%3ABlogPos...
>
> Posted by Alan Caruba<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/profile/AlanCaruba>on
> July 2, 2011 at 5:00pm
>
> Send Message <http://l/> View Alan Caruba's
> blog<http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blog/list?user=wo5vy0y6lr5s>
>
> By Alan Caruba
>
> When we celebrate the Fourth of July<http://www.history.com/topics/july-4th>,
> let's keep in mind that the first
> Americans<http://www.history.com/topics/states>won their independence
> from England with the force of arms. It was, in fact,
> a British effort in 1775 to confiscate military arms they believed were
> stored in Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts that sparked the war.
>
> The Founding Fathers were so aware of the need for an armed citizenry that,
> after ensuring freedom of religion, speech, press and the right to
> peacefully assemble in the First Amendment, the Second guaranteed their
> right to bear arms.
>
> Wherever authoritarian regimes were established in the last century, they
> took away this right and then proceeded to kill those deemed enemies of the
> state.
>
> At this point in American history, the Obama
> administration<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/obama-administration>constitutes
> a threat to the Constitution in general and the Second
> Amendment<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Co...>in
> particular.
> *More than 80,000,000 Americans are gun owners.*
>
> Two of the organizations that have been fighting to protect these rights are
> the Second Amendment
> Foundation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_Foundation>(SAF)
> and the Citizens
> Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear
> Arms<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Committee_for_the_Right_to_Keep...>(CCRKBA),
> both led by Alan M. Gottlieb. Three quarters of the SAF budget is
> devoted to defending rights pertaining to the ownership of guns and to carry
> them for self-defense.
>
> In March, the Huffington Post had an article titled "Obama Looking for Ways
> Around Congress on Gun
> Policy"<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/15/obama-gun-laws-congress_n_83...>by
> Sam Stein. "Faced with a Congress hostile to even slight restrictions
> of
> Second Amendment rights, the Obama administration is exploring potential
> changes to gun laws that can be secured strictly through executive action,
> administration officials, say."
>
> *Since then we have learned of a U.S. Alcohol, Tobacco and
> Firearms<http://www.atf.gov/>program, Fast and Furious, that actually
> facilitated the sale and transfer
> of guns to Mexico. How demented is that?*
>
> In May in my home state of New Jersey the SAF won a decision against
> officials for the deprivation of civil rights under the color of law when
> they had ruled that an applicant for a concealed carry permit had not
> demonstrated a "justifiable need" for it. In point of fact, the applicant,
> Philip Muller, had been kidnapped by members of a motorcycle gang who
> threatened to kill him. They had, however, grabbed the wrong man.
>
> Despite support by local and state police, action on his application was
> delayed for six months. Morris County Superior Court Judge David Ironson
> issued a directive that a permit should be granted. The case is still
> on-going with other plaintiffs that include a part-time sheriff's deputy, an
> applicant who carries large amounts of cash in his private business, and a
> civilian employee of the FBI with legitimate concerns of an attack from a
> radical Islamic group.
>
> Currently nearly thirty such cases have either been brought or joined by SAF
> to stop abuses of this most fundamental right of American citizens ranging
> from bans on interstate handgun sales, New York Mayor Michael
> Bloomberg<http://www.biography.com/articles/Michael-Bloomberg-16466704>'s
> imposition of a $340 fee for a permit to keep a handgun in one's home, and a
> Chicago ban on gun ranges open to the public. These cases cost between
> $60,000 and $80,000 each!
>
> *The greatest single threat to gun ownership right now is a United Nations
> "Small Arms Treaty" falsely identified as an "international arms control
> treaty" allegedly to fight terrorism."*
>
> "In reality," says Gottlieb, it is "a massive, global gun control scheme.
> It's a sham. It's a fraud." If the U.S., under the Obama administration and
> with the consent of the Senate, were to sign on to this treaty, it would
> nullify the Second Amendment.
>
> Suffice to say that the Obama administration wants to have the power to
> increase federal fees on guns and ammunition, to ban guns that are imported,
> to extend the waiting periods for permits, to ban the use of guns on all
> government property, and even to make it illegal if you own a gun and smoke!
>
> Americans do not have to "justify" gun ownership. It is guaranteed by the
> Second Amendment. The reality is that enemies of this fundamental rights
> continue to wage an assault on it.
>
> For information about SAF visithttp://www.saf.org/and CCRKBA athttp://www.ccrkba.org/.
>
> © Alan Caruba, 2011
>
> Add a comment to this
> post<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/there-is-no-first-a...>
>
>   [image: WordPress]
>
> WordPress.com <http://wordpress.com/> | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
> Manage Subscriptions<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> Unsubscribe<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=5d39acfd19218362d540a3fc3dc3315d&...>|
> Express
> yourself. Start a blog. <http://wordpress.com/signup/?ref=email>
>
> *Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:*http://subscribe.wordpress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.