Google Custom Search

Saturday, October 13, 2007

Smoking My Pipe, Drinking My Scotch

OK, so that's not me. But that man sure seems to be enjoying his pipe.

Tonight is my night to relax and chill. I'm tired. So, I'm smoking my pipe this evening (with some fine cherry tobacco) while sipping on some Scotch.

Join me this evening for a good smoke and the drink of your choice....

Of course, by the time most of you read this, it will be Saturday. So, I suppose it is a moot point. Oh well...I guess it's the thought and all...

Friday, October 12, 2007

Second Amendment News Roundup for 10/12/07

Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

The Volokh Conspiracy presents some Fairness Doctrine history:

Gun Law News has a very interesting read on the dangers of a Clinton candidacy:

From the NRA: Notice of an important meeting in Pennsylvania concerning a proposed firearms discharge ordinance:

Michelle Malkin has the MUST-read of the day--why did Google ban ads?:

The Buckeye Firearms Association has an important notice concerning a hearing on the Castle Doctrine proposal in Ohio:

The Buckeye Association also says that the shooting in Ohio has resulted in the gun-ban crowd proposing more of the same old tired policies:

John Lott reports on the changing poll numbers regarding support for more gun control:

Xavier Thoughts has some info on the Smith & Wesson Model of 1905 Fourth Change .38 Special:

Tam at A View From the Porch asks an important question concerning Algore's winning of the Nobel Peace Prize:

Ha! Traction Control delivered a new American Flag to a Mexican business that's been in the news of late:

Snow Flakes in Hell writes from the Gun Bloggers Rendezvous in Reno:

The War on Guns posts this concerning an administrative decision affecting the right to bear arms:

Robb Allen of Sharp as a Marble gives us the reason he doesn't buy Global Warming:

Say Uncle posts a great quote of the day:

Red's Trading Post says that Senator Craig has been very supportive in their fight against the ATF:

Random Ramblings of a Republitarian blogs about the Lacey Citizens Academy where one can get some info on firearms:

You just gotta see this over at Cap'n Bob and the Damsel! It seems Algore is joining a group of men of dubious character in winning the Nobel prize:

Armed and Safe has a MOST interesting read today on 'shutting down the blog.' Read the whole is well worth it:

A Keyboard and a .45 writes about a Fox News interview with Newt Gingrich:

If you're like me, you love baseball. Pribek (Trouble Ain't Over) has a great post today entitled, 'Baseball Men':

Breda over at The Breda Fallacy is one of our fellow gun-bloggers. Today she shows us her picture with a new haircut. Now, this is one beautiful woman (and she likes to shoot guns to boot):

Worst President in U.S. History Condemns Bush

James Earl Carter, the worst President in the 20th century if not the entirety of U.S. History, has condemned President Bush for supposedly approving the torture of war prisoners.

Wolf Blitzer of CNN admittedly turned in one of the finest interviews of his career when he played host to ex-President Carter on Wednesday.

A good reporter knows when to interrupt an interviewee and when to simply sit back and let the person talk. Blitzer's instincts in this case told him that he needed to simply let Carter talk.

The thing about Jimmy Carter is that by letting him talk you give him enough rope to hang him. It is difficult to understand or ascertain the internal 'logic' that leads Carter to make the outlandish statements for which he is known.

It is also chilling to think that we actually elected this man to the U.S. Presidency in 1976.

Carter asserted that not only did he suspect that Bush approved torture but that he 'knows it for a fact.'

How? Was he there when such a decision was made? Was he present at Gitmo to witness torture? And if so, who was tortured and who did it?

Of course Carter has not witnessed any of these things. Nor does he have any 'inside knowledge' that the U.S. tortures prisoners of war.

But this is not the only fantasy land assertion made by Carter. He further stated that with regard to Iran, they are no threat to the U.S., Bush should not authorize limited strategic attacks on their nuclear bomb facilities, and that the U.S. 'should simply talk to the Iranians.'

In the first place, Iran is a real threat not only to the U.S. but to our friends in Europe. Our European allies have expressed grave concern about Iran's ability to plunge the world into another World War.

That fact aside, Carter would deal with the threat by simply 'talking.'

Remember, there is a long history here that must be kept in mind. While President, James Earl Carter was faced with the gravity of the Iranian threat and dealt with it by 'talking.'

The result? American hostages were seized by the new Ayatollah regime after the exile of the Shah of Iran, and this nation was plunged into over a year's worth of tension regarding our citizens.

And why were the hostages finally released? Because one Ronald Reagan had promised during the 1980 Presidential campaign that he would unleash the full force of the U.S. military against Iran unless the hostages were released.

On the day Ronald Wilson Reagan was sworn into office in January of 1981, Iran released the hostages.

The abject failure of 'the Carter Doctrine' from top to bottom, including domestic economic policy, gives the ex-President very little credibility with which to condemn a sitting U.S. President.

Thursday, October 11, 2007

Second Amendment News Roundup for 10/11/07

Images courtesy of A Human Right.

Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

Mike McCarville tells us about the latest Fred Thompson endorsements from Oklahoma:

A Keyboard and a .45 alerts us to an important Second Amendment case, via The Volokh Conspiracy, that has broad implications concerning executive power:

Alphecca says that the 'People of the Gun' tribe is growing:

Alphecca also points to overwhelming evidence that professionals in Ohio missed all the signs that the perpetrator in the school shooting yesterday was a powder keg waiting to explode:

Armed and Safe comments on the shocking silence of the mainstream media about the mass shooting in Wisconsin:

Cameron Bailey shows us an article that helps smokers fight back against the abuse that society heaps upon them:

Of Arms and the Law says that support for gun laws is dropping:

Oscar Poppa points to a time in America when it was expected that fathers teach their boys to shoot:

Red's Trading Post continues to be victimized by the jackbooted thugs of the ATF:

Sharp as a Marble has the latest example of pure PSH:

Nicki at The Liberty Zone writes about a most disturbing trend--pediatricians interrogating children about their parents, particularly asking them if their parents own guns:

The Ninth Stage has the news about an interesting gun control debate coming up in Kansas:

The Ninth Stage also opines on the 'scourge of plastic guns':

The War on Guns reports that the charges against Jessie and Snuffy have been dropped:

Glad to see that Tam over at A View from the Porch finally got her picture up on the People of the Gun...and it's a good one!:

John Lott writes about the unfairness with which the mainstream media treats Fred Thompson:

Michelle Malkin reports that a freakin' idiot judge has barred the Bush crackdown on illegal alien workers:

Gun Law News provides an alert that Fox News is discussing school concealed carry:

From the NRA: Long Beach, California is crafting a new ammo registration ordinance:

Pelosi Reverses Decision on Flag

This didn't take long. Word has come this afternoon that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, under intense pressure from House Republicans, has reversed her earlier decision to uphold the architect's office snub of an Eagle Scout by refusing to allow him to refer to God in a tribute to his grandfather.

The Eagle Scout has requested a flag be flown at the Capitol in honor of his grandfather. He requested that the wording on his official documentation include the word 'God' because his grandfather is a deeply spiritual person.

The capitol architect's office refused to allow the reference to God, and Speaker Pelosi initially upheld that decision.

By earlier this afternoon, however, House Republicans had already gained over 100 signatures on a measure to condemn the Speaker and to reverse her decision. An outrage from the citizens across the heartland was also heard in Washington.

Thus, Speaker Pelosi reversed her earlier decision, stating that no longer will the architect's office be allowed to censor such documents on the basis of religious expression.

The citizens have won a significant victory. Let freedom ring. And let the forces of anti-freedom be condemned.

Pelosi, House Dems Snub Eagle Scout

House Democrats along with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, apparently feel that requests to fly flags in honor or memory of someone at the Nation's Capital must be done without any mention of God.

Here are the facts as we understand them.

First, an Eagle Scout requested that a flag be flown at the Capitol in honor of God, country, and his grandfather. These requests are routinely honored by the House.

Second, the Scout requested that the official document describing the flying of that flag include specific language related to God, country, and his grandfather. Historically these requests have been no problem.

Third, the Capital architect who handles these requests denied the young man the right to refer to God in his tribute to his grandfather.

Fourth, naturally the Eagle Scout was sorely disappointed and his family was saddened and angered by such an arbitrary decision. When the news of this reached several House Republicans, the outrage ensued.

Fifth, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated she supports the Capital architect and that she intends to implement one single generic document in cases of special requests for the flying of a flag--a document that will not mention Creator, Deity, or God. No longer will citizens have the right to choose their own wording.

Sixth, a Republican member of the House stated that unless Pelosi changes her mind about the snub of the Eagle Scout, he will introduce legislation next week denouncing House Dems and reversing Pelosi's decision.

Seventh, the issue is not about religion or 'separation of church and state.' Such an assertion is nothing but a red herring. This is about honoring the requests of citizens to have their official documentation worded in the manner of their choosing, which the House has always honored.

Eighth, it is a known fact that the Capital architect in question supports the removal of all references to God in the public square, despite the fact that Washington itself is full of such references in historic political documents, as well as in some of our famous structures, such as the Jefferson Memorial, the Supreme Court, and the U.S. Congress.

Ninth, my hunch is that House Republicans are not the only ones outraged by Pelosi and the Dems on this issue. There is a growing storm a-brewin' in the vast American heartland.

Tenth, when you put extremists with San Francisco values in charge of Congress, you can expect to see this kind of outrageous behavior. When you snub a Boy Scout, you have immediately alienated 75% of the country.

So, my friends, get set for quite a show in the House over the next few days.

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Second Amendment News Roundup for 10/10/07

Images courtesy of A Human Right.

Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

The Buckeye Firearms Association has all the late-breaking news on the school shooting in Cleveland today, the victims of which were mostly unarmed teachers:

John Lott reports something today that you WILL NOT hear in the mainstream media. A judge in the U.K. has ordered that when students view Al Gore's movie, 'An Inconvenient Truth,' they must be given a warning about the movie's inaccuracies (finally the U.K. gets something right):

Mike McCarville posts the SCHIP fallout in the state of Oklahoma:

A Keyboard and a .45 has the good news and bad news about a Hooters in Arlington. Yessirreee, I'll take a table full of what's in that picture right there!! Yep, yep, yep. Excuse me while I go back for a few more looks:

Armed and Safe hopes that a letter he posts will help to educate an Illinois Sheriff on trusting the average citizens with firearms:

Cameron Bailey points to yet one more reason to vote against Hillary Clinton:

Cap'n Bob, as a resident of California, has an insider's perspective on several important pieces of legislation of interest to gun owners, via the NRA (it's time to contact Arnold again):

Dustin's Gun Blog provides helpful info on the International Defensive Pistol Association:

Mr. Completely has the good news from Glock:

Of Arms and the Law has news about the debate in New Jersey concerning firearms supposedly coming into the state from Pennsylvania being responsible for crime:

Red's Trading Post gets some good press about their troubles with the ATF from the American Free Press:

Say Uncle asks the question, do you really think it's just the CCW holders doing all the shooting?:

Sharp as a Marble has something you just gotta see!:

Snow Flakes in Hell blogs about Philadelphia's crime problem and differentiates sensible solutions from those that Paul Helmke is espousing:

The Bitch Girls offer commentary on NRA endorsements:

Nicki at the Liberty Zone has this to say about gun trace data:

The Ninth Stage has an interesting read about a man barricaded in an apartment with a TV:

The War on Guns comments on the latest ridiculous statement oozing from the mouth of New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine:

Traction Control has some memorable words from Ronald Reagan:

Tam at A View from the Porch holds forth on some hardware!:
Xavier Thoughts has a story of self-defense in Dallas:

Fred Thompson Joins the Political Big Leagues

Fred Thompson joined the political big leagues by appearing side-by-side with his GOP rivals in the Oct. 9 debate in Dearborn, Michigan. Apart from a rusty start after being tossed the very first question by Chris Matthews, the candidate settled down fairly quickly and actually began to appear comfortable discussing the issues.

This was Thompson's very first foray into the national spotlight within the context of a major political debate. As a U.S. Senator his campaigns were regional. As an actor his TV appearances were scripted. A major political debate, however, featuring all of your Party's heavy-weights and a live audience to boot, is in a league of its own that makes Senatorial campaigns and acting roles seem like small potatoes.

Yet Thompson showed that not only was he ready to play in the big leagues but that he could hold his own with such standouts as Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney. He was serious, steady, humorous at times, and most of all he provided details to proposals to save Medicare and Social Security.

Beyond that, he told the truth in plain language.

Americans have an affinity for candidates who can connect with them, speak their language, and yet inspire confidence. Fred Thompson is able to pull that off magnificently as opposed to one of his opponents in the other Party, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

How can a candidate who has a long history of corruption and a tendency to cover past untruths with more untruths inspire any confidence at all?

This, in essence, is Hillary's main problem, and it is a problem that will haunt her for the rest of her life whether she wins the Presidency or not.

Thompson has already pulled into 2nd place behind Mitt Romney in Iowa, the first caucus state, in spite of the fact that he has spent nowhere near the megabucks Romney has unleashed on the state.

In fact, a case could be made that were it not for the megabucks Romney has spent attempting to buy votes in Iowa, and that with mostly his own personal funds, Thompson would probably be in first place in the state. Thompson is also ahead in another early key primary state, South Carolina.

Thus, it's a whole new ballgame. And Fred was right. The race was starting to get rather boring without him.

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Chris Matthews: The Punk Strikes Again

Everyone knows that Chris Matthews of MSNBC is a biased, featherweight partisan who poses as a serious journalist. And just in case they didn't know it before, everyone now knows that Matthews is a punk to boot.

Known for pulling embarrassing stunts that put guests, politicians, and other newsmakers on the spot, Matthews demonstrated during the GOP debate in Dearborn, Michigan on Oct. 9 that he will not hesitate to resort to dirty tricks in order to attempt to embarrass those with whom he disagrees.

The latest of Matthew's dirty tricks is the 'let-me-test-you-on-your-knowledge-of-world-leaders' trick. When asking Fred Thompson about the importance of Canada as our neighbor and trading partner, Matthews asked Thompson, 'Who is the Prime Minister of Canada?'

Leftwing nutcases in the mainstream media have been using this trick ever since Dan Quayle to try to catch a GOP candidate in a mental lapse for which they can then be vilified.

One cannot forget the 2000 Presidential campaign when one of the frozen chosen elitists of the mainstream media whipped out a 10-question 'quiz' to give to then-candidate George W. Bush.

Ladies and gentlemen of the mainstream media (and I do use those terms very loosely), your role is not to give candidates a history test or a memory quiz.

Apparently this dirty trick is alive and well among the mongrels of the media, and Chris Matthews no doubt hoped that he could 'catch' Fred Thompson in a memory lapse.

Nothing doing. Thompson answered the question and went on with his answer.

Matthews had already shown his bias in the debate when, after his colleague had asked Thompson a question to which she followed up with another question, he made the snide remark--with the microphone on--that Thompson's answer 'sure did take long enough...I wish he had stopped with his first answer.'

Thompson quickly shot back, 'That's your opinion, Chris.'

My friends, individuals like Chris Matthews have no business moderating a debate anytime, anywhere.

Comments on Oct. 9 GOP Debate in Dearborn

As expected, Fred Thompson loomed large in the GOP debate in Dearborn, Michigan Tuesday afternoon. After skipping out on all previous debates, given that he was not yet a candidate, the fact that Thompson has skyrocketed to a statistical tie with Rudy Giuliani meant that all eyes were on Fred.

Thompson even occupied the center stage in the debate, which inadvertently served to further highlight his looming stature, figuratively and literally.

Chris Matthews asked Thompson the first question of the debate. Thompson seemed to lose his train of thought at one moment during his answer. But after a rusty first shot out of the starting gate, the candidate proceeded to show that he can stand toe-to-toe with the big guys on the national stage.

Thompson's answers were down-to-earth, folksy, and exhibited his vast knowledge of legal and Constitutional issues after spending decades as an attorney.

While Thompson may not have lived up to the unrealistic expectations of those who expected him to be someone he is not, such as Ronald Reagan, the candidate nonetheless established himself as one who can hold his own with rivals who have been on the stage now for months.

Duncan Hunter also posted a strong performance, particularly on the issue of how the Chinese have taken advantage of U.S. trade policies to come back and hurt us.

The question was asked of all the candidates if they would go on record as supporting whoever wins the GOP nomination for President. Several candidates hedged, including Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, and Sam Brownback.

Mr. Paul insisted that his litmus test was the War in Iraq and whether or not the GOP nominee promises to get us out. Clearly Mr. Paul knows that several top-tier GOP candidates, one of whom is likely to be the nominee, clearly do not share his views on Iraq. Does this mean that he will support Hillary? Or perhaps turn to a third Party?

If this is the intent of Mr. Paul, surely he knows that such a move will hand the election to Hillary. And if he follows through and does such a thing, he not only will lose all of my respect but be relegated to the ash-heap of political history along side of the likes of Ross Perot.

Perot's misguided and laughable campaign as a third Party candidate in 1992 is the single reason Bill Clinton was elected President. If Ron Paul does a similar thing, he will hand the election to yet another Clinton.

And this raises a serious political question. In terms of campaign strategy, when a candidate uses tactics that he/she knows at the start will help elect a sworn political opponent, does this not mean that the candidate in question in actuality supports the opponent who benefits from those tactics?

After all, every single Democratic candidate has pledged to 'get us out of Iraq.' Since this seems to be the Paul litmus test, I suppose he would rather support Hillary or Kucinich than a member of his own Party.

Not a single GOP candidate can be described as a European-styled Socialist. Yet most if not all of the Democratic candidates are exactly that.

But who cares? At least they will 'get us out of Iraq.'

Mike Huckabee, as always, posted a fine debate performance this evening. It is easy to see why many refer to his 'rising star' status within the Republican Party with his quick wit and thoughtful answers.

With regard to the rest of the field of candidates--McCain, Giuliani, Romney--all did well and provided thoughtful answers to a range of questions on Social Security, healthcare, open markets, taxes, and government spending.

Based upon the answers given in this afternoon's debate, The Liberty Sphere will rate each of the GOP candidates based upon our exclusive 'liberty scale' which focuses on these key issues: taxes, gun rights, abortion, immigration control, national defense, the War on Terror, and U.S. foreign policy.

Here are the ratings (10 is the highest score):

Fred Thompson--10
Mike Huckabee--10
Duncan Hunter--10
Tom Tancredo--8
Ron Paul--7
Sam Brownback--7
John McCain--7
Mitt Romney--6
Rudy Giuliani--6

McCain's movement from a 5 to a 7 is due to the candidate's movement on the issues. We believe, at least at this point, that he has heard the outcry from the citizens about illegal immigration. His willingness to be flexible is a big point in his favor.

Second Amendment News Roundup for 10/9/07

Images courtesy of A Human Right.

Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

The Volokh Conspiracy discusses a study on the political ideology of college professors:

Volokh also has an important review of Naomi Klein's latest anti-capitalist rant in the form of a book entitled, 'The Shock Doctrine':

The Buckeye Firearms Association gives good coverage to a grassroots college student movement to make Oct. 20 - 27 the 'National Collegiate Student Empty Holster Protest' to highlight the fact that students across this nation are sitting ducks to lawless sickos who shoot innocent people, simply because their universities have barred them from self-defense:

Michelle Malkin asks a very good question today: why should teachers be exempt from the 2nd amendment?:

Our favorite intellectual, Dr. Walter Williams, hits the nail on the head with his latest syndicated column entitled, 'The Betrayal of the Civil Rights Struggle':

Say Uncle points out that it's all in the name when it comes to how CNN reports on guns:

Snow Flakes in Hell blogs today on 'prohibited persons':

It seems one of the antis who writes comments on the War on Guns has her undies in a bunch:

I have never tried to hide my utter contempt for Henry Waxman. Well, now it seems the blowhard is going on a witch hunt to try to find something in the radio archives of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Mark Levine which will supposedly help him make the case for the Fairness Doctrine. Traction Control has Levine's response:

Tam at A View from the Porch points out that commies aren't cool in today's segment on 'this day in history'

The Jet Pilot has an excellent read today entitled, 'An Unexercised Right is a Right Lost':

A Keyboard and a .45 points to an example of some common sense gun legislation:

Alphecca shares a couple of noteworthy op-eds, and they are worth the time for a look!:

Armed and Safe has some important developments on the pro-second amendment counties in Illinois and the attempts of the police state in Chicago to stop them:

Cameron Bailey correctly points out that Barack Obama's latest statements on religion show that he wants a theocracy in America:

Oscar Poppa gets right to the point in 'Socialists and Criminals':

Ryan Horsley at Red's Trading Post says it's time to stand up and fight back against Bloomberg and others like him:

The Bitch Girls report that a film version will be made of Ayn Rand's 'Atlas Shrugged,' the famous book that upholds the principles of American capitalism:

The most beautiful blond on earth, Blonde Sagacity, has Hillary's latest endorsement:

From the NRA: Can Guns Stop Crime?:

The Ghost and Mrs. Clinton

One of the ghosts from the Clintons' past just keeps showing up at odd moments. Sandy Berger, the Clinton adviser who was convicted of destroying the only copies of top secret documents about the terrorism threat to this nation, is now a campaign adviser to Hillary Clinton.

Even as the 9/11 Commission was in the process of requesting and using the documents in question to prevent another major attack, Berger was observed repeatedly going into the archives in Washington to retrieve official documents which he hid in his briefcase, coat, pants, and shoes.

According to the Court and by Berger's own admission, these documents were shredded and destroyed.

Berger was originally charged with criminal cover-up but avoided felony charges by agreeing to a plea bargain in which he pleaded guilty to misdemeanors.

For this he received a slap on the wrist. A $10,000 fine and a 3-year suspension of his national security privileges was the extent of his 'punishment.'

Yet here is part of the original story in the Washington Post (hat tip to INDC Journal):

'Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, a former White House national security adviser, plans to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, and will acknowledge intentionally removing and destroying copies of a classified document about the Clinton administration's record on terrorism....

'The deal's terms make clear that Berger spoke falsely last summer in public claims that in 2003 he twice inadvertently walked off with copies of a classified document during visits to the National Archives, then later lost them.

'He described the episode last summer as "an honest mistake." Yesterday, a Berger associate who declined to be identified by name but was speaking with Berger's permission said: "He recognizes what he did was wrong. . . . It was not inadvertent."

'Under terms negotiated by Berger's attorneys and the Justice Department, he has agreed to pay a $10,000 fine and accept a three-year suspension of his national security clearance. These terms must be accepted by a judge before they are final, but Berger's associates said yesterday he believes that closure is near on what has been an embarrassing episode during which he repeatedly misled people about what happened during two visits to the National Archives in September and October 2003. ...

'The document, written by former National Security Council terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke, was an "after-action review" prepared in early 2000 detailing the administration's actions to thwart terrorist attacks during the millennium celebration. It contained considerable discussion about the administration's awareness of the rising threat of attacks on U.S. soil.'

Removing and destroying classified documents concerning what the Clinton Administration knew of the growing threat of Islamic terrorism is no insignificant matter. In fact, there was a day in this nation's bright history when such actions were considered treason and were subject to the harshest of penalties.

Yet this is one of the individuals who now provides counsel to Hillary's campaign.

That dripping, gurgling noise you hear is the ooze of sleaze.

Monday, October 08, 2007

Second Amendment News Roundup for 10/8/07

Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

A Keyboard and a .45 blogs about a day at the shooting range:

Alphecca has more on the Supreme Court and the DC gun ban:

Armed and Safe has a question for the editorial staff of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel:

If you haven't seen Armed and Safe's comments on H.R. 2640, this is a good time to read an excellent blog post:

Blogonomicon has a slide show on the Second Amendment he entitles, 'Force':

Cameron Bailey is back following his trip and posts this entry:

Cap'n Bob and the Damsel share with us 'shotgun still life' today:

Dustin's Gun Blog comments on 'a liberal's lament':

Xavier Thoughts describes and posts pics on what he calls his 'go get'em guns':

Calling Jeff Soyer! Jeff, Tamara K. wants to be a 'people of the gun' but is having trouble getting on there:

Traction Control has some appropriate words for the New York Times and CNN:

The War on Guns points to a strange change of strategy on the part of President Bush when it comes to capital punishment:

Nicki at the Liberty Zone explains why she doesn't like H.R. 2640:

Nicki also posts this in response to a writer who claims gun control would have prevented the shooting in Wisconsin, although the shooter WAS A COP!:

Of Arms and the Law has the scoop on the federal court that made ConocoPhillips' ban of guns in employee parking lots legal:

Red's Trading Post has the MUST-read of the day, entitled, 'Enemy Within':

Say Uncle has one of the reasons gainful employment becomes more difficult once the 'nanny state' moves in:

Sharp as a Marble has today's example of 'pants shittin' hysterics':

Snow Flakes in Hell has an interesting entry on gun rights within the context of the machine gun controversy that is raging around the country:

The Bitch Girls also give their take in the NFA Collectors-NRA-machine gun controversy, as well as the Hughes Amendment:

John Lott points out that Hillary Clinton is now getting campaign advice from none other than 'sticky fingers' Sandy Berger, who was caught stealing documents from the National Archives on the Clinton's Administration's failures prior to 9/11, but surprisingly she is getting little criticism for it:

The Volokh Conspiracy has an update on groups that wish to deny free speech to those with whom it disagrees on college campuses. One of these has been a target of late--Young Americans for Freedom, which was founded by William F. Buckley many years ago. It seems YAF is now designated as a 'hate group' because it opposes illegal immigration:

From the NRA: the Mayor of Kansas City is the latest to join up with Bloomberg:

Thompson's First Debate Test Tuesday

Republican Presidential hopeful Fred Thompson will make his first debate appearance Tuesday as he joins the other GOP candidates in a forum in Dearborn, Michigan.

The debate is being sponsored by the Wall Street Journal, CNBC, and MSNBC, and will be telecast on CNBC at 4 PM ET with a re-broadcast on MSNBC at 9 PM ET.

Focusing on economic issues, the debate will last for 2 hours.

The buzz surrounding this particular forum is unique for one in a string of fairly forgettable 'debates' held thus far by both political Parties. The thing that is saving this debate from a ho-hum flip of the channel button is the appearance of Fred Thompson.

The long-anticipated entrance of Thompson into the race has created interest on the part of politicos and even interested citizens in the electorate who wish to see how the candidate stacks up against his rivals in the GOP race for the nomination.

One commentator, writing in the New York Post, stated that this was do-or-die for Thompson and that unless he comes through with a stellar performance he is all washed up.

This seems to us to be unnecessary melodramatic overkill. A lackluster performance on Thompson's part will certainly not help, given that so much fanfare has tended to revolve around his entrance into the race. He has much to live up to. But a less-than-excellent showing will not doom him by any stretch. It is still early yet, and he has tons of support.

On the other hand a strong showing by Thompson will certainly secure for him an image of 'gravitas' that will more than likely put him over the top against Rudy Giuliani, who supposedly still leads in the polls but whose numbers actually put him in a statistical tie with Thompson.

Sunday, October 07, 2007

McCain, Episcopalians, and Baptists

John McCain raised more than a few eyebrows recently on the campaign trail when he described himself, not once but several times, as a Baptist. He first made the statement while campaigning in Charleston, South Carolina, and then again while campaigning out west.

Apparently the flap revolves around McCain's past description of himself as a lifelong Episcopalian.

During the 2000 Republican Presidential nomination process during which McCain irked many on the conservative 'religious right,' a move that many claim cost McCain the nomination, the candidate often referred to himself as a 'lifelong Episcopalian.'

McCain never amended that self-description until the campaign appearance in Charleston a few weeks ago, in spite of the fact that he and his family have been attending the mega-church in Phoenix called 'The North Phoenix Baptist Church' for almost a decade.

A reporter asked McCain about it when there was time for a brief news conference.

McCain responded that at first he did not join the church; he merely attended with his wife and family who had joined. Sometime between the 2000 Republican Presidential race and September of 2007 McCain apparently joined the North Phoenix Church.

When asked about his silence about the matter, McCain responded merely that he never made it practice to wear his religion on his shirtsleeve.

The fact that McCain would join the mega-church is really no surprise to those who have followed him through the years. He is avidly pro-life. So is the church. He defends America against multiculturalism by saying that America has its roots in Christianity though some of the Founders were not Christian. They believed nonetheless that the principles that established liberty as the basis for the nation came from Christian concepts as taught in the Bible. One will often find these ideas taught at the North Phoenix church as well.

It is no insignificant fact that in order to join a Baptist church one must verbally express faith in Jesus Christ as personal Savior and Lord.

Though he rarely leads with his religious beliefs, which to McCain are sacred and deeply personal, one can readily see in the candidate an intensely held religious conviction and sincerity. Perhaps his horrific experiences in a prisoner of war camp as a young American soldier helped to solidify in McCain's mind the importance of faith as a sustaining power through the ups and downs of life.

Thus, it is difficult to understand James Dobson's dislike of McCain, given that Dobson's views are generally on the same page when it comes to spiritual matters. The same could be said for Fred Thompson, who stated in a Fox News interview this week that perhaps it was time for Dobson to offer yet another apology for casting aspersions on Thompson's faith.

A fine line exists between exercising prudent judgment and disintegrating into judgmentalism. All too often Christian evangelicals have difficulty walking that line, stepping off course into the practice of judging another person's innermost spiritual life.

While McCain's views on a variety issues have often provoked ire on the part of this writer, we do admit we have noted movement on the part of the candidate on some of these critical matters, such as securing the borders and stopping illegal immigration, and recognizing that McCain-Feingold had many 'unintended consequences.'

But when it comes to religion, McCain is certainly no stranger to the experience of the evangelical brethren...and 'sistren.'