South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham stopped by NBC’s Meet The Press (MTP) Sunday morning to discuss U.S. foreign relations with North Korea. In the wake of recent threats made by the North, Graham expressed support for President Obama’s recent flexing of military strength as a warning saying,
“I think the North Koreans are over-playing their hands. And this [President Obama’s] administration’s acted responsibly. I’m glad we’re not doing the ballistic missile test. I’m glad we had the B-2’s in the theater where they could see ‘em.I’m glad we’re telling our allies South Korea and Japan, ‘We literally have your back’ and the North Koreans need to understand if they attack an American interest or an ally of this country, they’re going [to] pay a heavy price.”
When asked by MTP host David Gregory to give his thoughts on American interests in the region where nearly 30,000 US troops are stationed, Graham replied,
“We’re in the middle. I’m glad we’re there with our allies but the big difference to me is the politics in South Korea are changing by the day regarding North Korea. So if there’s some provocation, it won’t be business as usual by South Korea. I could see a major war happening if the North Koreans overplay their hand this time because the public in South Korea, the United States and I think the whole region is fed up with this guy.”
Gregory probed further saying, “But what happens if there is some kind of conflict between the North and South? That becomes a conflict with the United States doesn’t it?”
To this Graham responded, “The North loses and the South wins with our help, that’s what happens.”
On Monday the Colorado Senate passed five of the seven proposed gun bills and its expected that Gov. John Hickenlooper will sign them. Sen. Greg Brophy (R-Wray) said in reference to HB 1224, the bill that would limit magazines to 15 rounds: “I will willfully and purposefully and civilly disobey this law.” I think it is safe to say that Sen. Brophy is not alone even though the penalties for breaking some of these laws include jail time and possibly losing any legal right to ever own a firearm again.
What to do now? Its over, right?
Well, obviously the people of Colorado can vote the tyrants out next time around. There’s also the ballot initiative process; there’s already a petition movement in place to undo HB 1224 by putting it to a vote in the next election if enough signatures can be collected in time (which I don’t think will be a problem). Beyond traditional legal remedies, so far 136 companies that sell and/or manufacture firearms, components, ammunition, or accessories have pledged that they will not sell their products to the police or any government entity that will enforce gun laws which, in their judgement, violates 2nd Amendment rights of the people.
All these efforts should be joined, applauded, and encouraged. Next time you want to buy a gun or accessory, you should buy from a company that is on the list and admonish those who haven’t made the pledge to close the “police loophole” to do so (and also, write a short letter of encouragement to those which have already taken this brave step).
Naomi Wolf—eeeeeeek! I know, I know, but bear with me, please—had a very interesting column in the Guardian about a new independent documentary called Dirty Wars, tracking the use of secret assassins by the US government. It neatly dovetails with the recent release of a DOJ memo outlining the legal case for drone strikes on Americans. Together, the two items reveal that we are living in a very different world, one where the American president has unlimited power to kill anybody, without any sort of legal repercussions whatsoever.
The film Dirty Wars, which premiered at Sundance, can be viewed, as Amy Goodman sees it, as an important narrative of excesses in the global “war on terror”. It is also a record of something scary for those of us at home – and uncovers the biggest story, I would say, in our nation’s contemporary history.
Democratic Representatives Gerry Connolly (VA-11) and Ted Deutch (FL-19) are campaigning to have a gun buyback program added to the fiscal cliff deal:
“Gun buybacks have proven successful in communities across the nation,” Connolly and Deutch said in a “Dear Colleague” to House members. “Adding $200 million to the final compromise on the fiscal cliff could remove as many as 1 million guns from our streets.” Noting that such programs are supported by law enforcement agencies as a valuable resource for reducing gun violence, the two congressmen said including the gun buyback program in any year-end deal “is a simple, immediate step we can take to assure the public we are committed to taking meaningful action.”
Such a program operates under the assumption that the mere presence of guns is the primary cause of fatal gun related incidents. It does nothing to address the actual issue relating to mental instability that leads to such tragedies as Sandy Hook. Blinded by a purely political desire to see the entire citizenry disarmed, the left is incapable of an honest discourse that may lead to proper and effective preventative measures (the right is similarly guilty of this breed of stubbornness).
In addition to a being a workaround of the Second Amendment, Connolly and Deutch view the buyback program as a potential government economic stimulus, stating that “[d]istributing funding to the States to run buyback programs using pre-paid debit cards with a three-month expiration date could provide a jolt to local economies that have stagnated in the wake of the recession and concerns over the fiscal cliff.”
The EPA has been sued in Federal Court by the American Tradition Institute (ATI) for allegedly pumping “…what they termed ‘lethal’ amounts of diesel exhaust, specifically small particulate matter termed ‘PM2.5,’ directly into the lungs of human volunteers who were not properly advised of the risks.” ATI’s Environmental Law Center Director, Dr. David Schnare had this to say:
It is difficult to overstate the atrocity of this research. EPA parked a truck’s exhaust pipe directly beneath an intake pipe on the side of a building. The exhaust was sucked into the pipe, mixed with some additional air and then piped directly into the lungs of the human subjects,
Apparently, the EPA recruited subjects (many of them sick and poor individuals) for the experiments but failed to inform them of the dangers of their participation (the Tuskegee experiments come to mind). Put bluntly: this violates every legal and ethical rule for proper scientific investigation there is.
Steve Milloy over at the Washington Times, penned:
The “Independence” of the Thoroughly Dependent: Modern Scotland’s Welfare Mentality and Proposed Succession in 2014
Scotland holds a very special place in my heart as it always does for anyone who has had the pleasure to travel there. My wife and I lived in Scotland while I was at the University of Glasgow, and our time spent amongst those charming, funny, witty, spirited people will never be forgotten. I still enjoy all things Scottish and look forward to my future visits to that amazing country. It is because of my admiration for both the Scottish people and succession movements in general that I have been closely watching the Scottish independence movement and am eagerly awaiting the upcoming referendum. I’d love to see a truly free Scotland loosened from the socialist, statist, bureaucratic chains of the United Kingdom. I get goosebumps at the very thought.
We all know the fighting spirit of William Wallace who proclaimed that the enemies of Scotland may take their lives but never their freedom. Statism and state-dependency have taken both from today’s Scotland. As shown on the Drudge Report this week, Mrs. Ruth Davidson of the Tory party recently got into hot water by drawing attention to the fact that nine out of ten Scottish households take more from the government than they pay in. In her words they are “living off of the patronage of the state.” This should shame those nine out of ten households, but it won’t. For the European lefty political class, there is no such thing as shame and they have passed this mentality onto their constituents.
Everyone wants to have a bogeyman they can point to and blame all the problems on that. Some say it’s universities. Others say it’s Democrats (while others say Republicans). More than a few lambast unions, whether public or private. There are even some crazies that continually blame Jews (or gays, or immigrants, or…) I generally shy away from these sort of “analyses,” because they are far too simplistic and don’t understand that many things have many causes.
But today, I’m going to do just that, and lay down hard on who I think are truly screwing this country over: our news media.
This year has been utterly disgraceful for them. There has been a litany of failings that I have not witnessed before; perhaps I was too young and didn’t understand, or they really weren’t there. But 2012 seems to be the year that the media has just totally, utterly, dropped the ball across the board, and in doing so they are doing this nation a monumental disservice.
Perhaps the first and most egregious entry was when an NBC news team edited the tape of the 9/11 call of George Zimmerman, in a very deceptive fashion. The editor who made that decision was later fired, but NBC botched their apology by doing it in an email to the Hollywood Reporter and not coming straight on TV to apologize, as it is their medium.
In what is surely going to set off another wankfest amongst the libertarian commentariat, Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson has become eligible for federal matching funds:
The Federal Election Commission has declared Gary Earl Johnson eligible to receive federal matching funds. Johnson sought and won the Libertarian nomination for president for 2012.
To become eligible for matching funds, candidates must raise a threshold amount of $100,000 by collecting $5,000 in 20 different states in amounts no greater than $250 from any individual. Other requirements to be declared eligible include agreeing to an overall spending limit, abiding by spending limits in each state, using public funds only for legitimate campaign-related expenses, keeping financial records and permitting an extensive campaign audit.
Based on documents filed by Gary Johnson 2012, Inc. on April 27, 2012, contributions from the following states were verified for threshold purposes: Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia and Washington. All of the materials included with this submission may be viewed here. Based on Johnson’s initial threshold submission, the Commission requested on May 25 that the United States Treasury make an initial payment of $100,000 to Johnson’s campaign.
Once declared eligible, campaigns may submit additional contributions for matching funds on the first business day of every month. The maximum amount a primary candidate could receive is currently estimated to be about $22.8 million.
Our U.S. Constitution is a remarkably efficient document. It is our only founding charter. Many times changed, rendered, adumbrated. But it’s essence is unshakable. Written in Thomas Jefferson’s handwriting, edited against his will, pored over, discussed, hushed about, while it lay about some small wooden tables in independence Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Americans believe, that the Constitution is the link between our government and our lives. Congress and the Executive, can not overstep the harmony that exists, by each American following his path of liberty. Unfortunately, too many harmful minds, want too much power in this country. Power never vested in the Constitution. Power never meant to be handled by bureaucrats or officials or committees. We need to change all this. The oath of office should be sworn on the Constitution. In the Capital Rotunda. Among the historicity of remains from past great ages of the United States.
Drones in our night skies. Unelected lawyers interpreting the U.S. Constition. Surveillance. Internet spying. Blackouts and Stasi-like encroachements. Torturing. Deaths and internment of American citizens. Socialization of medicare for the elderly, and healthcare for those in mid-age. Food stamps and deductibles for people who do not work. Taxation over representation. Data-accumulation. Groping at airports. Fumbling and nefarious Justice Department officials. Cronies. Welfare abuses. War and destruction as an industry, like Hollywood and Corporate America! Blame-games. Undermining of basic civil rights. Monetarism-mongering! Unaccountability and state-sponsored fear. Campaigns of division. Solutions disguised for self-created problems.
Republican voters are being put through the pincers. We are back to 2008. Heaps of strong candidates, but no consensus. Great speeches, but no substance. PAC money spent by the millions, but no conclusive results. GOP candidates are even welcoming Democratic voters, to smear each other, to add to their victories, or to just plainly embitter each other. The Republican race is not going to get any more civil. Once, we see these subterfuges, we can ask the real questions: what will it take to unseat Obama in November, and who can best do this?
In America the conservative movement has been changing. Neo-conservatives, who had for roughly two decades (1980-2000) held the strongarm of the party, are gone with the Bush Administration’s doctrine of “pre-emptive strike” and the PATRIOT ACT. We are in the midst of the dregs. Still trying to find out which direction this country will spill it’s spirit of changelessness.
For all his grandeur, Mitt Romney just has not taken his campaign to the next level. Rick Santorum has peaked, but more likely will not hold his miniscule leads. Newt Gingrinch’s populism and Ron Paul’s constitutionalism, so similar to each other, are self-negating. None is in charge. Marginal candidates can’t win delegates, nor the RNC party’s nomination. Mitt Romney, the ever-chameleon like business mogul, can’t strike a human touch to save his life and political prospects.
If Mitt Romney is the front runner of the wolves, ready to flay Obama; what is his version of the American Dream? How does he see this country, through which prism? Is it a legalistic, rigidly technocratic, institutional approach? It seems, his advantage is not his base, his character, anything as much as his warchest. He won’t run out of steam. Even if the delegate count gets close in Tampa, FL this spring; he’ll be able to resurrect himself, make the necessary promises and sail away with the nomination.