Google Custom Search

Saturday, April 10, 2010

When Armies Are Unleashed Against Citizens--2 Pages of ObamaCare Bill

A new analysis of a provision within the ObamaCare law is raising serious questions concerning the intent and legality of the bill.

Full documentation, including videos, are provided at Conservative Examiner.

I admit that I was skeptical of the suspicions of the ObamaCare provision and funding for a 6000-person 'private army' of physicians to be trained by and serve under the military.  It seemed to me that the provision pertains only to a quick government response to a national healthcare emergency.

But when I thoroughly considered Judge Andrew Napolitano's analysis of the provision, along with its obvious and troubling Constitutional violations, I now believe that these suspicions are justified.

Washington Post Picks Up Story about April 19 'Restore the Constitution' Rally on the Potomac

Interesting.  The mainstream media has picked up the story on the 'Restore the Constitution/Open Carry Rally' on the Potomac in Washington, D.C. on April 19.

WRSA reports.

Be sure to follow the links.  Especially note the comments section at WaPo on this story.  Frightening.

Codrea--"Gun Owners Can Build Bridges with the Medical Community"

Many of us in the firearms rights movement have been very concerned for quite some time now about the anti-gun bias of certain physician groups, particularly now that extremists run the government and believe that guns are a 'public health issue.'

At the same time, however, most doctors are not members of these groups.  Only around 25% of physicians, for example, belong to the increasingly liberal AMA.

This means that gun owners have a golden opportunity to build bridges with doctors.

David Codrea explains.

Everyone Sees the Coming Economic Disaster but the Obamanoids

They see it in Greece.  They see it in Great Britain.  They see it in Europe.

So, why do the Obamanoids not see it?

Economic disaster is upon us, right at the door.  Many of us have warned of this for a long time, to no avail.  But you can get ready.  Prepare yourself.  Here is the latest from Vanderboegh:

The latest from my old friend Ambrose Evans-Pritchard. (And my British Secret Service control agent, if you believe the LaRouchies. Of course the neoNazis claim I'm a Mossad agent, so there ya go.)

The upshot of all of this impending economic tsunami is this. Only real property, well-located away from concentrations of looters (i.e. both the lumpenproletariat of the cities and the government) and defensible by the armed citizenry will matter. The fight against the collectivist tyranny of the Obamanoids will be subsumed in this larger existential fight just to stay alive.

May God help us all.


Friday, April 09, 2010

Second Amendment News Roundup for 4/9/2010

Focusing on guns, politics and news of interest regarding firearms rights, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

Open Carry is always a good source of the latest info pertaining to the Constitutional right of citizens to carry guns out in the open, for their own protection.  Go to their site and scroll.  Click the links.  And be sure to note the quotes at the top of their main page.  Very informative!

GunRights4US reminds us that the presence of crooked cops is good reason to refrain from giving blanket support to all police forces no matter what.  As long as law enforcement upholds the law and refrains from corruption, we support them.  But to support corrupt organizations, such as the ATF, is just plain stupid.

Standing By points to a stunning analysis of Barack Obama that portrays a man who is totally out of touch with the citizens.

Nicki has an important read entitled, 'Letter to a Soldier.'  This is also a very worthy endeavor.  Take a look!

Newbius writes a gut-wrenching piece that reminds us that we need each other.  That goes for the gun rights community as well.  With our liberties under assault as never before, we need to know that others are out there who are standing with us in the fight.  Nothing is worse than believing one is alone.

The Wandering Minstrel notes that now there is yet another good reason to move to Arizona.

Pax Parabellum provides an excellent roundup of the news on concealed carry from the various states.

Bloviating Zeppelin wonders if America has lost the will to engage in national self-defense.  With all of our talk about personal self-defense, all of that is a moot point unless we adequately defend the Republic as a whole.

Alphecca reports that Missouri is the latest state to join in the anti-federal government move to exempt itself from such big government initiatives as gun control, healthcare, etc.

The Ol' Broad says it's WEASEL TIME!  If it's Friday afternoon on the Liberty Sphere, then you know it's time for the best political cartoons on algore's internets,  courtesy of The Ol' Broad.  Enjoy...

THUGS: Andy Stern, SEIU and their Connections to Obama

Some pitch a hissy whenever I expose Obama's dubious past.  But just wait till you see his PRESENT connections!

Conservative Examiner does a thorough expose of the various associations between Obama and violent Leftwing extremist groups, such as Andy Stern and SEIU.

And yes, these groups are directly responsible for not only the ObamaCare bill but the trillion-dollar 'economic stimulus bill' as well.  Read on.

Thursday, April 08, 2010

Just How Widespread is the Tea Party Movement? You Won't Believe Your Eyes

Texas Fred sent out an email notice this evening regarding the Tea Party movement in America.  Despite attempts by the Left to portray the movement as an extremist, dangerous fringe, Tea Party activists represent a broad cross-section of citizens.

This site shows just how widespread the movement has become.  You won't believe your eyes when you see the number of links to Tea Party organizations, state-by-state.

Politicians who attempt to malign and marginalize these patriotic Americans do so at their own political peril.

Some Good News for Firearms Rights

The bill that would protect the citizens' right to the Constitutional carry of firearms has been approved by the Arizona legislature.  This good news comes to us this evening from Dustin's Gun Blog.

Citizens are encouraged to contact the Arizona Governor's Office to encourage her to sign the bill.  Dustin provides that link.

This bill generally allows citizens to carry a firearm for self-defense WITHOUT the necessity of a state-issued permit.  The significance of this cannot be understated, and it is hoped that other states will follow.

Judge--'I Would Order That Obama be Declared Ineligible to Serve'

There is more rumbling out of Texas concerning a Judge who says that prior to the 2008 Presidential election, he would have ruled that Barack Obama be declared ineligible to become a candidate.

Regardless of what you may think about 'the birther' issue, this is news, and it needs to be reported--from 'The Betrayal.'

Even the Hillary Clinton campaign hinted here and there that there were problems with Obama's background.

The Black Pastor Who is a Thorn in Obama's Flesh

It cannot be said that opposition to Barack Obama is a racist-motivated phenomenon.  One of the reasons is that there are African-Americans out there who clearly oppose him.  The Reverend Doctor James Manning of Harlem, New York is one of those persons.

Give Us Liberty provides all of the links to Dr. Manning's latest videos concerning Obama.

'We Understand Libs, They Don't Understand Us'

From Greg W. Howard:

All of this latest activity by the White House in sending out a clearly bogus jobs report, making the focus to sell the Obamacare plan even after passage, and so forth indicates just how completely out of touch they are with America. It is obvious that they don’t have a clue what is really important to most of us, and they probably never will.

But there’s a good reason for this. All normal minded conservative folks, and we do make up the largest segment of society, are capable of understanding the liberal mind, but the liberal mind will probably never comprehend us.
Read the whole thing here. 

Second Amendment News Roundup for 4/8/2010

Focusing on guns, politics and news of interest regarding firearms rights, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

David Codrea notes that the medical establishment's hostility to guns is long-standing and pervasive.

Kurt Hofmann says that Missouri should look to Wyoming to see how to successfully pass a Firearms Freedom Act.

Free in Idaho reminds us that April 15 is 'Buy a Gun (and Ammo) Day.'  Americans have responded well to this initiative, even on the other 354 days of the year.  Gun sales have skyrocketed since 'O' became the Fuhrer.

Brigid notes that 'some things just go together.'

Western Rifle Shooters Association points to 'The Anti-Federalist Papers'--a series of position papers written by the Founders who were opposed to 'The Federalist Papers.'  Interesting reading!

Gun Owners of America provides a link to THIS, which describes how to get a Florida concealed carry license.  It takes only about an hour to do, and it's recognized in 33 states.

KC3 alerts us to 2 pro-gun bills in Kentucky that need help.

Vanderboegh discusses the rules for non-engagement at the Restore the Constitution Rally on the Potomac on April 19.

Days of our Trailers says that some ammo manufacturers are making unwise business decisions by accepting IOUs from bankrupt states.

Tam comments on those times when, during hunting trips, one wishes they had a more substantial firearm.  I agree.  In some places in the deep south, an unexpected encounter with several wild boar will make a believer out of you when it comes to making sure you are adequately prepared. 

VIDEO--Death Threat to Nancy Pelosi and Why Tea Party Has Nothing to do With It

My new Liberty Sphere Report on video is up and running.

You can find it along with some brief commentary at Conservative Examiner.

The Obama Administration, Democrats in Congress, and the mainstream media attempt to implicate the Tea Party for such threats of violence.  They even engage in blatant bias when reporting threats to Democrats, while ignoring such threats to Tea Party activists, Republicans, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and ordinary citizens who dare raise a voice of protest against Barack Obama.

This video provides the balance.

Wednesday, April 07, 2010

How Obama's Background Directly Impacts Policy Initiatives

In order to accurately understand Barack Obama's policy initiatives, one MUST understand his background, including his frantic attempts to hide large portions of it.

This is the topic of my latest report at Conservative Examiner.

If you think that we can just sweep Obama's background under the rug and focus on his policies alone, you are sadly mistaken.  For these dangerous and de-stabilizing policies arise directly from his background...much of which was never reported to the American people in the mainstream media.

And there is a very good reason why the Obama people made sure none of this was known.

Obama's Dangerous Nuclear Policy

Perhaps never before in the history of the United States have we been this vulnerable to attack, except this time, nuclear attack.  And this is due solely to a new policy just implemented by Barack Obama.

The man is not only dangerous but just plain NUTS.  The new policy in a nutshell?  If the U.S. is attacked by a nuclear, biological, chemical, or conventional weapon, Obama WILL NOT USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS TO RESPOND, EVER!

This is tantamount to inviting every rogue nation on earth, including terrorists, to 'come get us! We are disarmed!'

One of the reasons Ronald Reagan was so successful at dismantling the Soviet menace at the end of the Cold War was his standing policy that if anyone, anywhere attacked the U.S., we would blow their sorry asses off the map.

But now, America has elected a panty-waste, a pacifist, a flower-child, a wussy.  Heaven help us.

Conservative Tom Coburn, R-OK, Makes Strange Remarks about Pelosi, Fox News, Tea Parties

I picked up on this story while on Twitter last evening, and I have to admit I was rather taken aback.  U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, R-OK, who is usually a powerful voice for conservatism in the Senate, made some rather unusual remarks about Nancy Pelosi, Fox News, and the Tea Parties.

Mike McCarville out in Oklahoma also noted the story, and posted a link.

If Coburn's objective was to tone down the rhetoric a bit, perhaps his remarks are understandable to a degree.  That being said, it is a much better strategy to acknowledge the outrage, the deep and powerful emotion, that is boiling across America.  When angry people feel they are being squelched or forced to swallow their overwhelming emotions, then eventually like a pressure cooker that lacks ventilation, the thing will experience a violent explosion.

Americans need to give voice to their anger.  This may well prevent violence.

Second Amendment News Roundup for 4/7/2010

Focusing on guns, politics and news of interest regarding firearms rights, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

Western Rifle Shooters Association reports that the collectivists in government and the mainstream media are already beginning to soil themselves over the upcoming Restore the Constitution/Firearms Rally on the Potomac April 19. 

Vanderboegh has more on the April 19 rally.  This is going to be, as he says, 'A No-Shit, Freedom Work' that is 'no place for babies.'  

David Codrea notes that in these days of government-controlled healthcare and social engineering, doctors are encouraged to give patients advice on gun safety...and that means asking if they own guns.  Interesting that this is now a 'public health issue.'  Fascists and Marxists would be proud.

Kurt Hofmann says that the Leftwing and the 'moderates' are now smearing Tea Party activists as 'stupid people with guns.'  Not nearly as STUPID as the Leftists, the RINOS, the Mods, and the collectivists endorsed by the NRA simply because they claim to be 'pro-gun' while at the same time attacking every single principle of liberty in the Constitution!

Conservative Libertarian Outpost asks, 'Is the Imposter in Chief a Cowboy?'

Days of our Trailers observes that one of the former 'only ones' has posted an editorial in support of the Chicago Gun Ban.

Brigid blogs on what it's like to be a single female in a hotel room in that bastion of armed criminals and unarmed citizens, otherwise known as 'Chicago.'

Insight on Freedom says that Obama has essentially 'flipped the bird' at citizens and lays out what conservatives plan to do about it.

Say Uncle posts some linky goodness to some gun porn.

Robb Allen highlights the key question a person must ask if they purchase a gun for personal self-defense.

Standing By writes about 'Parting Company.'

Tam points to a story about some New Yorkers who got busted for what mainstream media types referred to as 'an arsenal.'

Way Up North provides some comic relief with a yarn about an old priest who was dying in a hospital.  Political types will enjoy it...well if you are a conservative political type.

Roberta X notes one of the things we have lost in America since the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968.  Since I remember the 1960s very well, along with the years afterward, I can say without any doubt whatsoever that violent crime increased dramatically AFTER this gun control measure passed.

Dustin's Gun Blog reports that the Arizona Firearms Freedom Act was passed into law.

Tuesday, April 06, 2010

Why Eugene Volokh is Wrong on My Story Concerning Bogus Claims on Obama Resume

Law professor Eugene Volokh takes issue with my column at the Examiner earlier in the week which exposed some rather bogus claims on Barack Obama's resume.

I was taken aback, to be frank, by the vehemence with which Volokh attempted to discredit my article.  That being said, he is certainly entitled to his opinion, provided it is understood that it is opinion.

So often in politics that which is more appropriately described as opinion is passed off as fact.  I am certainly not above falling into that trap, and I believe that Professor Volokh has done so in this case.

Here are some excerpts from his post at The Volokh Conspiracy, which is linked above, along with my commentary on why I maintain he is wrong.  My responses to his assertions are in bold letters.

[UPDATE: I just received a message from the Content Manager for Right Side News, which had posted the article I cite below, saying that the article has been removed (I’ve updated the link below to point to the Google-cached version). The message explained that, “After reading the article written that addressed the errors in an editorial post on Right Side News, we pulled the article and will not publish that author’s material again. This URL is now inactive ... Just wanted to say thank you, sir ....” Very glad to hear it! I should note, though, that some of the errors below remain present either in places that the original article cited, or in places that now cite the article.]
I never requested that Right Side News publish my article on their site.  I did not mind that they did so, given they provided full credit and a link, but this was not my doing.  The curious part of this is that they took  the article down after it had been up on their site for at least 24 hours, citing 'content concerns.'  Interesting that these concerns did not prevent them from posting the article to begin with.  And why Professor Volokh would be 'very glad to hear' that my work had been deleted from the site is also very curious.  The fact that he disagrees with some of my assertions is one thing, but I believe this response is way over the top.   
[FURTHER UPDATE: The Blogging Professor has also taken down the post that Right Side News originally linked to.]
The Blogging Professor used at least one of the same sources I used for this story.  He issued an explanation and a clarification about that source, not a retraction.  This source has nothing to do with my article itself, although the source is cited in my article, along with several others.
A couple of people e-mailed me this story, which is apparently making the rounds in some conservative circles. I wanted to warn people away from this; it’s a mixture of error, unsupported rumor and speculation, linguistic gamesmanship, and innuendo suggesting some malfeasance in what is actually perfectly normal behavior. It’s wrong to fall for it and to recommend it to others. And it’s also counterproductive: it undermines your credibility for the actual substantive arguments that should be made against the Administration’s policies. (For me, it’s enough that it’s wrong; but I mention the counterproductiveness as an extra incentive.)
I have repeatedly, consistently, relentlessly, and tirelessly engaged in daily critiques of the Obama Administration's policies.  It is WRONG to insinuate that since I reported problems with Obama's background that this somehow shows I have not adequately opposed the Administration on the merits of its policies.  News is news.  And these allegations concerning Obama's background have NOT been given one ounce of consideration in the mainstream media.  Balance is sorely needed.  That is one of my objectives. 
Let’s look at some items:

According to a special report issued by ‘the Blogging Professor,’ the Chicago Law School faculty hated Obama. The report states that Obama was unqualified, that he was never a ‘constitutional professor and scholar,’ and that he never served as editor of the Harvard Law Review while a student at the school.
1. President Obama’s serving as an editor of the Harvard Law Review is amply documented in publications — including the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe — from the early 1990s, including when Obama was still a student. Nor would it have been an easy hoax to pull off then, since the board contained many dozens of people, including many conservatives, all of whom could have blown the whistle had the allegation been false.
Just to satisfy the super-skeptical, I personally confirmed this with Paul Clement, who was a year behind Obama (and was therefore on the board with Obama the year that Obama was the Law Review’s President), who was Solicitor General of the United States from 2005 to 2008, who is a very solid conservative, and whom I know from when we were clerking. And you can also see Obama’s name of the board member listings at, for instance, p. 128 of volume 104 of the Harvard Law Review (though, in keeping with Harvard Law Review practice, that listing doesn’t include the titles of the various members).
Obama's title was 'President of the Harvard Law Review' and not 'Editor.'  What did Obama publish in the Review as Editor? An Editor is required to publish.

2. The “special report issued by ‘the Blogging Professor,’” which supposedly shows that “the Chicago Law School faculty hated Obama,” is actually a quote of a blog post based on an interview with “the highest tenured faculty member at Chicago Law.” Who that is, I don’t know; the source was anonymous, and it’s not clear to me what “the highest tenured faculty member” even means. But in any event, the uncorroborated views of one anonymous source about the supposed attitudes of his colleagues do not make for particularly persuasive proof.
Anonymous sources are regularly used by journalists.  And this is 'wrong' how?  Anonymous sources brought down the Nixon Administration.  We never discovered who 'Deep Throat' was until just recently, although the Watergate Scandal occurred in 1972.
3. The quotation marks around “constitutional professor and scholar” — in an article about supposed “bogus claims on [the] Obama resume” — seem to suggest that the article is quoting some claim of Obama’s or the Administration’s that he was indeed a “constitutional professor and scholar.” My quick searches revealed that Obama has indeed been described at times as a constitutional scholar by others, in contexts where “scholar” seems to just mean “one who has profound knowledge of [the Constitution]” and not “someone who has written scholarship on the subject.” If you want to point out that Obama isn’t a scholar in the sense of having written scholarship on the matter, or that you think his knowledge of the Constitution is weak (as opposed to that you think his views on the Constitution are wrong, a very separate matter), that’s fine. But absent some claim on his or his authorized agents’ part that he’s a constitutional scholar in the “written scholarship” sense, don’t include the claim that he is a “constitutional professor and scholar” as a “bogus claim[] on [the] Obama resume.”
According to a news story in the Chicago Sun-Times in 2008, the Chicago Law School confirmed that Barack Obama DID NOT hold the title of law professor at the school.  This is from a statement made by the law school itself, no matter what redactions they may have made since 2008.
As to the claim that it’s somehow bogus for Obama or his staff to claim that he’s a “professor,” because his title was actually “Senior Lecturer,” Orin addressed this well in July, but the short answer is that “professor” is a commonly used way of referring to university and graduate school teachers, regardless of their titles. If at some point he wrote on his actual resume, or similar document, that he held the title “Professor of Law,” that would be wrong. But that he is casually referred to as “professor,” or refers to himself this way, is quite normal.
Actually these terms do matter and they mean something.  Professor Volokh would have us believe that the terms 'instructor' or 'adjunct professor' or 'associate professor' or 'professor' are bandied about interchangeably in academic circles.  This was certainly not the case in my educational career, which is significant.  I hold a 90-hour Master's degree, plus several years in post-graduate work in several institutions.  Invariably students were careful to refer to only full professors and associate professor as 'Professor.'  Adjunct Professors were called 'Doctor' if they held that degree, and 'Mister' or 'Ms.' if they did not.  This went for Instructors as well.  This is only right and courteous, given that full Professors and Associates have significantly more education and training than most others on a faculty.  We never wished to insult our Professors by lumping less qualified 'instructors' in with the mix. Titles matter in academia.  And if we are going to 'get it right' as Professor Volokh claims we should do regarding my article, then that should apply to using the correct title when addressing faculty members.

I will agree with Volokh on one thing--this is all the time I wish to spend on this issue.  He had his say, and now I have had mine.

Obama the Invisible Student at Columbia University?

In order to truly comprehend the end-game of Obama's policy initiatives, one must understand something about his background, and questions continue to swirl, this time revolving around his days supposedly as a student at Columbia University.

A thorough analysis of this issue is available at Conservative Examiner.

Interestingly, no one remembers Obama at Columbia with the exception of a very few, not even the head of the Political Science Department where Obama would have taken most of his courses.

He was also notorious for not attending any classes.  So, what was he doing and why?

Monday, April 05, 2010

White House to Media--'Don't Report What You Discover'

Curiously, in light of recent revelations concerning fraudulent statements on Barack Obama's resume, the White House has sought to 'cut a deal' with journalists to prevent them from reporting 'certain things they may learn.'

Read about this outrageous behavior at Conservative Examiner.

What, exactly, is the White House so desperately attempting to keep secret by granting reporters unprecedented access to the President?

Second Amendment News Roundup for 4/5/2010

Focusing on guns, politics, and news of interest related to firearms rights, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

Western Rifle Shooters Association points to an article that perfectly depicts why the 'pragmatists' are wrong and are largely responsible for the current mess we're in.  Collaboration and negotiation with Marxists who are intent on destroying individual freedoms WILL result in the loss of your gun rights eventually.  Remember when 'pragmatists' endorsed Kirsten Gillibrand in New York?  No sooner had she been elected than she was spouting the party line on guns and everything else along with 'Little Chucky' Schumer.  This stuff has gotten us NO WHERE in a hurry, and since the NRA endorses liberal Democrats, I am through with them as well.

Vanderboegh provides sobering reading entitled, 'Will America Break Up?'

David Codrea notes more evidence that gun control does nothing to curb violence and crime.

Kurt Hofmann has a primer concerning defensive handgun carry in Illinois.  Yes, we need to pay attention to what's going on in the various states.  In one way or another those laws impact ALL of us down the road.

Conservative Libertarian Outpost shows that just because one is a member of the NRA does NOT mean they actually support gun owners.  An example from Wyoming is a case in point.

Brigid has an excellent read entitled, 'Delicate Balances.'

MOWCA posts an informative read on 'The Founders vs. Alinksy.'

Pax Parabellum notes an important anniversary that directly impacts concealed carry in restaurants.

Tam says that Michael Bane has some thoughts on the gun culture and where it's headed.

Way Up North reports there is a controversy brewing about pipelines and bullets in Alaska.

Sunday, April 04, 2010

VIDEO: Is the President of the United States a Fraud?

The latest edition of The Liberty Sphere Report is now available on YouTube and focuses on the issues raised in yesterday's Examiner column concerning Barack Obama's fraudulent statements about his educational and work history.

Both the video and commentary can be found at Conservative Examiner.

More information on this explosive issue will be forthcoming. 

Easter Greetings

Happy Easter to all.

May the renewed hope that arises from the knowledge that new life arises from the darkness of death, and that the One who conquered death itself still lives, forever be our motivation and inspiration to press onward in the battle for truth, honor, liberty, justice, and love.

Blessings to each of you.