Google Custom Search

Saturday, April 28, 2012

Hesitation indicates dissent in GOP on Holder contempt charges

On Thursday of this week the Los Angeles Times reported that the U.S. House of Representatives had drafted a 48-page contempt citation against Attorney General Eric Holder for obstruction and failing to cooperate with an investigation into the Fast and Furious scandal.
Congressman Darrell Issa, R-CA, who chairs the committee conducting the investigation, had told reporters earlier in the week that he planned to proceed with the contempt charges and that the completion of that process would occur in a few weeks, not months.
However, when Issa granted an interview with Fox News' Megyn Kelly yesterday, he appeared to hesitate in answering direct questions concerning the contempt charges. A video of the interview can be accessed here.

Friday, April 27, 2012

Congressman pressures ATF for hassling gun stores

An Alaska Congressman has put the pressure on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) for what he termed "hassling" gun stores in his state.
U.S. Congressman Don Young, R-Alaska, sent a letter to the ATF two days ago stating that he has heard from several gun store owners who are complaining that the agency is harassing them to turn over their bound books containing the records of gun and ammunition purchases, the customers' names and addresses, and their official background checks.

Karl Rove predicts Romney loss to Obama

Republican strategist Karl Rove, who is considered the architect of George W. Bush's two successful campaigns for the White House, is predicting that Mitt Romney will have a difficult time beating Barack Obama in the general election in November.
According to Rove, the situation is so dire that if the election were held today, Obama would win handily.
Romney is the presumptive Republican nominee, although he does not yet have enough delegates to win.
Rove is known for his pinpoint accuracy in predicting how the states will vote in general elections. In 2008 he correctly predicted the election results in 48 out of 50 states.

Good News

Mike Vanderboegh says that he is doing much better today after getting a good night's sleep last evening. He's even posting over on his blog, Sipsey Street Irregulars.

We thank God for every answer to prayer.

Thursday, April 26, 2012

Urgent Prayer Request

I am just now seeing this. Got behind on things today.

But here is a message from David Codrea:

I had business to attend to this morning, and was unable to receive phone calls.  When I was able to reestablish communications, there was a voice mail message from Mike--he said he "had a bad night last night" and "they're taking me into the emergency room."
I called his number 10 minutes ago and his wifeRosey answered.  She said he's having trouble breathing, they're worried some fluid may be getting into his lungs and they're taking him in for another CAT scan.
These folks have been through a lot. Now would be a pretty good time to send another plea up the chain of command. 
Folks, if you pray, now would be a good time to send one up for Mike Vanderboegh.

The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Thursday, April 26, 2012

All guns and politics from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.

Blonde Sagacity registers a complaint. I can fully relate.

From the Barrel of a Gun notes a good example of why we need the Castle Doctrine.

GunRights4US reports yet another outrage from the TSA.

Mike Vanderboegh has info on the ATF's mysterious grenade smuggling case.

Way Up North says that under Obama the Air Force has become the most anti-Christian outfit in the history of the U.S. military.

David Codrea wonders if the right questions will be asked at today's ATF 'round table' discussion.

WRSA posts a good one from Oleg Volk. Take a look.

Karl Denninger declares that the race baiters in Florida and elsewhere must be held to account! I agree.

Stand Up America examines who are the real "fat cats" given that Barack Obama keeps harping on them so much. Hint--they are not who Obama says they are!

The New York Liberty Report issues an alert to beware May Day, May 1, 2012. The Commies of the 'Occupy' movement plan major disruptions.

New information names kingpin the FBI protected in Brian Terry murder

The murder of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in December of 2010 was the precipitating factor that led to the first news story concerning the now infamous Fast and Furious scandal involving the ATF, the DOJ, and their scheme to send American guns to Mexican drug cartels.
As that story has developed it has become clear that the government agencies involved in the scandal, including the FBI, were keenly interested in hiding certain information concerning Agent Terry's death, the most obvious being that one of the guns found at the murder scene was identified by whistleblower agents as a Fast and Furious gun and that this gun somehow mysteriously disappeared and never made it to the lab for analysis.
New information that has become available within the last 24 hours indicates another major reason the FBI in particular sought to keep the facts concerning Agent Terry's death a secret.

Musings After Midnight: NOW What Are You Gonna Do--Romney's Apparent Smooth Sail to the Nomination and Other Abominations

Welcome to another episode of Musings After Midnight. I intend to speak plainly this evening, so get set. (And I will sometimes address myself to an unnamed numbskull who is actually a composite of several people I know, so don't take it personal and don't assume I am talking about most of you, whom I happen to greatly value and respect).

Let's get right down to business, shall we?

I admit that my chops are chapped over the fact that apparently Mitt Romney is going to sail smoothly right to the Republican nomination, now that he swept all of the contests that were held yesterday, and now that Newt Gingrich has recognized that his bid is essentially over.

As for Ron Paul, as much as I prefer him over Romney, I think his chances of securing the nomination are next to nil, despite his well orchestrated campaign of winning delegates state by state.

He won't have enough to win.

So, as one person asked me today, "NOW what are you gonna do? You made it clear from the start that you can't stomach Romney. You warned the GOP about him time and again. But nobody paid attention. So do you sit this one out? Do you write in a candidate? Do you vote third party? What?"

Let me make it clear I have no intention of sitting out an election. EVER! I have voted in every election since I became eligible to vote...the same year that Moses led the children of Israel across the Red Sea. And now, at my age, I am not going to break that streak. I have formed a habit, and habits are harder to break the closer you get to 60.

So, you can rest assured that I WILL vote.

I know that such a thing seems to go right over the heads of hopelessly hammerheaded imbeciles who think that just because I hate Romney and Obama both, that this means that I will sit at home and refuse to vote. After all, that is the only choice I have, right? I mean, loathe the thought that someone could actually consider voting for a Party OTHER THAN the Republicans or Democrats. And heaven help the poor soul who would even as much as briefly entertain the notion that he would write in a candidate's name who isn't on the ballot.

Excuse me while I get this out.


Ahem, citizens have the right to vote FOR WHOEVER THEY WANT.

If I want to vote for the Bull Moose Party, I can.

If I want to write in the name of Jaborangus Armadillus Polygangum, I HAVE THAT RIGHT.

Now, is it always the prudent thing to do to act in such a manner? Well, no, of course not. I doubt that old Jaborangus will get any votes other than mine. That means that my act of writing in his name is a wasted effort, an exercise in complete futility.

But, remember, my dear fellow citizen, you ALWAYS have more than two options when you vote. And don't EVER let ANYBODY tell you otherwise.

Having said that, however, I must address the utility of making such a move.

Is it wise? Is it useful? Does it help? Is it good for the country? Can I live with myself when I do so? Am I being true to conscience?

Here is where the rub comes in. Those questions are not always easy to answer. And sometimes the answers depend on a myriad of factors that make each case different.

I am going to have a VERY hard time pressing Mitt Romney's name on that computer screen in the voting booth. I loathe his record on gun rights, abortion, RomneyCare, immigration, and even taxes and spending. I don't think his proposals go far enough, even in the areas where I can come close to agreeing with him, such as the economy.

And I have often stated that voting for Romney would be a betrayal of my conscience.

So, let's look at other options for consideration, just to follow them through to their logical conclusions.

I am NOT under ANY circumstance voting for Obama. So, that's out.

But, what about a third party or writing in a name?

Frankly, there isn't a third party that I would cast a vote for. I have looked at all of them, and all of them are problematic...every bit as much as the Republicans and Democrats. Every candidate who has ever run on the Libertarian, Constitution, or Reform Party tickets has made statements that to me are every bit as much to be deplored as statements by Romney and Obama.

And some of these Parties have essentially been overtaken by pot heads who strike me as nothing more than rejects from the 60s who claim to be 'libertarian' only so they can work for legalized drug use.

Now, I have a problem with the war on drugs as well, but not for the same reasons as some of these people. I don't want to legalize drugs so I can use without the threat of arrest. I want to decriminalize drugs because I think that prohibition is wrong and doesn't work. There is a vast difference.

I am very uncomfortable around illicit substances. Always have been. I don't like it. I don't like the way people act when they are under the influence of these substances. But that does not mean I think they are criminals or should be in jail.

It also does not mean that I am just hunky dory with their behavior. I am NOT.

So, my support for the repeal of drug laws is NOT based on any ulterior motive of mine regarding 'using.' I do not use. And I think that smart people do not use.

But when I get in some of the groups associated with libertarian oriented people, I feel like I am in a foreign land. I can't relate. So, that makes it very hard for me to vote for a candidate that represents that element.

I know, I know, some of you are going to think I am a complete dork, a 'square,' or too 'straight-laced.' Fine. I don't care. I know who I am and what I am comfortable with. And I don't like to be around people in politics who appear to me to be interested in liberty only for the purpose of being able to fry their brains on whatever substance they wish without facing the possibility of jail time.

Liberty is not about that at all, although allowing people the freedom to fry their brains is a small part of it.

If you want to fry your brain and cause your face to look like a monster because of your meth use, go right ahead. I am not going to stop you. I believe you have the complete freedom to act like a fool in a free society. But that does NOT mean I respect you or think you are someone to be trusted.

I know what is going to happen as a result of these statements. Whenever I do this somebody is going to claim I am falsely portraying Libertarians and being unfair. Fine. Your opinion is yours. Think what you want. But I am simply telling you MY EXPERIENCE and how people come across to ME. Impressions are not necessarily based on fact. Impressions are based on experience and emotional reaction. I am telling you how many within the libertarian movement come across to ME.

If you want me to have a different impression of you, then stop putting candidates out there whose main involvement in the political realm is in the 'cannabis movement.' I mean, really...

And let's get another thing straight as well. Signing mutual defense treaties with allies is NOT a violation of the Constitution, which clearly states it is entirely within the power of the government to enter into such treaties. That means that in many circumstances it is perfectly legal and constitutional to have military bases in other countries, if that is a condition of the signed treaties.

It is also perfectly constitutional for the U.S. military to be the most powerful force in the world. Where does it prohibit it? We HAD to attain military and nuclear superiority. Why? Because the Cold War necessitated it! The Soviet Union was building nuclear weapons and expanding their domain into other countries. Their stated goal was to dominate the world.

To counter such a growing power we HAD to have nukes, the manpower, and the firepower and equipment to stop them. Why did we have to stop them?

Do I really need to tell you people this? Sheesh.


Is that plain enough for you, or do I need to spell it out?

The Soviet Union stated that it would dominate the world and BURY the United States. Now, some of you little wussies out there may think that we should have just rolled over and let them screw us because 'the Constitution does not allow thus and so.' But you are a knucklehead. The Constitution MANDATES the national defense, and WE WERE DIRECTLY THREATENED WITH ANNIHILATION FROM THE SOVIET PRESIDENT NIKITA KHRUSHCHEV!

And do you know what that means, o wise wus?

It means that when the country and its citizens are threatened, the national defense must be strong and powerful enough to succeed in that defense.

Now tell me, imbecile, how in the hell were we going to defend ourselves against a super power like the Soviet Union, which had millions in their army, and tons of nukes, unless we ourselves were more powerful than they?

So the next time you want to wax eloquent about your vast knowledge of the Constitutional provision of the national defense by unleashing your projectile vomit in saying the Constitution never allowed for the U.S. to become a world super power, just stop and tell me how in that tiny, microscopic brain of yours you would defeat an enemy like the Soviet Union unless you became the most powerful military force on earth?!

You see, this is another area where I have little patience with Libertarians.

If you don't show up at a gun fight with a pocket knife, then you SURELY don't show up to fight an enemy that has nukes with fishing boats equipped with muskets. Sheesh. Why am I even taking the time to bother with this? This is, like, Elementary Thought 101.

Back to the subject at hand.

So, if there isn't a Party I am comfortable voting for, that leaves me only two choices left--rethink my intention not to vote for Romney, or write in a candidate.

Frankly, I am angry that these are my choices. I have been warning Republicans for over 3 years against choosing another 'moderate' who lacks solid conservative convictions as the nominee. But they did it again, just like they did with McCain in 2008.

I worked hard to PREVENT us from getting to this point. I did everything in my power to prevent Romney from gaining such traction. But at this point, it appears he is going to be the one, no matter what any of us want.

My first reaction is to walk away and make the GOP pay for its sins by losing the support of conservatives. They screwed us, and they NEED to pay sooner or later.

But I am not sure this is the year to make them pay. Let me explain.

I am thinking out loud here, so none of this is set in cement. I do think that a day of reckoning is long overdue for the GOP. For too long we have allowed them to take conservatives for granted. They have just assumed we would always come through. And because they feel that way, they feel they can do anything they damn well please and not suffer the consequences.


Republican elites--the ones who have always opposed conservatives such as Reagan, Goldwater, and Buckley--need to be taught a harsh lesson. Screw conservatives and you will get decimated as a Party, completely. Eventually we are going to have to make sure that happens.

But I am not convinced this year is the best time to do it. If we sit this out, or if we turn to a third party, or if we write in a candidate, we may be helping Obama get reelected, and that is the worst thing that could happen for the country.

As I have stated previously, the number one focus in this election is to get rid of Barack Obama. The man is a menace. His supporters are dangerous. His enablers in Congress are traitors. They MUST go. The survival of the country depends on it.

I don't want to do anything to inadvertently help Obama. And no, I am not one of those who believes that voting for someone other than those in the two major parties is a 'wasted vote.' Nonetheless, as we have seen in the past with Ross Perot in 1992, his presence on the ballot gave us Bill Clinton. (I didn't care for George H.W. Bush, either, but he was much better than Clinton).

And so, my friends, I am very much in a quandary. Is a vote for Romney a betrayal of my conscience under the present circumstances (the need to get rid of Obama)?

Would writing in a candidate that I know has no chance of being elected help Obama win reelection, and would that not be an even GREATER betrayal of my conscience?

Life can be very complicated. And this one is a doozy.

I really don't have an answer at this point. But writing it out and sharing it has helped clarify for me what, exactly, the issues are in making an informed decision in this matter.

Stay tuned. I may need to do some more 'thinking out loud' as we go along during the campaign season.

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

New Show Goes Into Syndication! New Start Date Set

The new conservative talk radio show started by Lori Hendry is now officially syndicated and is part of the GAB network--one of the largest radio broadcasting networks in the world.

While the new show will begin on the Radio Colorado Network, it will be heavily promoted on more than 4000 radio stations on the GAB network. We expect it to expand rapidly.

Lori says that the new start date is July 7, 2012, when she returns from an extended trip to Europe.

I will provide more info as the time grows near for the start date.

The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Wednesday, April 25, 2012

All guns and politics from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.

David Codrea announces a new film project about Fast and Furious that documents  the truth behind the scandal.

Mike Vanderboegh was able today to give us a personal account of his medical status. He's obviously had a hard time and continues to do so. Keep him in your prayers!

Tam provides a must read on the walk on the slippery rocks.

Alphecca notes an op-ed found in the NYT from a hunter who supports gun control. These people are nuts.

CLO has a good read on Trayvon Martin and the Stand Your Ground laws.

Around O Town says there is more blood on the hands of the race baiters.

Days of our Trailers reports that the hate-fest has begun with regard to concealed carry and its opposition.

Standing By posts essential reading titled, "Treating Human Life Like an Old Car."

Nicki asks, "Are Ron Paul supporters ignorant or arrogant?" A provocative read for sure.

Mike McCarville reports that sources in the Tea Party movement say that an abrasive member of the Ron Paul team in Oklahoma has been removed from his post. 

Forecaster says our financial system is a 'casino'

A top economic forecaster who is often called upon by CNN, CNBC, and other news outlets to provide an outlook on the state of the economy says that the entire U.S. financial system is a casino and that "if you don't have your money, it's not yours."
Gerald Celente of Trends Research Institute has been featured on CBS News, Oprah Winfrey, and in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and other major mainstream outlets. He is not considered an alarmist who engages in unnecessary fear mongering.
Thus, when Celente told Mac Slavo in an interview published April 23, 2012 by Lew Rockwell that the U.S. financial system is headed toward complete collapse and that there is very little that can be done to avoid it without drastic and painful measures, economic gurus with their ear to the ground sat up and took notice.

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Tuesday, April 24, 2012

All guns and politics from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.

Stand Up America notes that housing values continue to plummet despite all the news the MSM touts concerning 'the recovery.'

The New York Liberty Report has explosive news that Obama's lawyers have admitted, under oath, that the Prez's birth certificate is a FORGERY!

The Truth About Guns provides an interesting review of a new Caracal 9c 9mm W/ Quick Sites.

Brigid reviews the Smith and Wesson 637--a snub nosed wheel gun.

David Codrea highlights the inequity in gun laws which led to an incident in which a trucker accidentally transported ammo to Mexico.

Kurt Hofmann has an important read on the Castle Doctrine, Stand Your Ground, and domestic violence.

The War on Guns provides a Mike Vanderboegh medical update. Keep him in your prayers.

Way Up North offers an explanation of why the Democrat controlled Senate won't pass a budget.

WRSA issues a dire warning. And don't make the mistake of thinking it cannot happen. It WILL, sooner or later.

Pamela Geller confirms what most of us knew all along--that eventually we would see the real consequence of Obama's foreign policy as it relates to places like Egypt. Don't miss this one!

Controversy ensues over new IRS power

A portion of a new highway bill passed by the Senate and expected to be approved by the House, which gives expanded power to the IRS, has sparked controversy.
As reported yesterday the bill gives the agency to power to revoke passports based upon whether or not a citizen owes back taxes. Certain government watchdogs also maintain that the bill would give the IRS the power to revoke gun rights.
The bill is lengthy, 1,674 pages of legalese, that in some places is difficult to follow. 
However, those who have decided to pore over those pages, including this reporter, have reached some conclusions that are very different from that of the persons who first provided commentary on the provisions of the bill.

Monday, April 23, 2012

Announcing My New Radio Gig

Lori Hendry has announced that she will launch a new conservative talk radio show on May 19. I will be joining her as commentator, sidekick, and assistant.

The show is set to launch initially on 2 radio stations in Colorado--KRCN AM 1060 in Denver, and KREL AM 1580 in Colorado Springs. We expect the show to expand to other stations very soon.

While doing the 'A Voice for Freedom' radio show in Florida, Lori attracted the attention of some influential people in the business who are interested in promoting her in other parts of the country.

As a former beauty queen who has worked extensively in the pageant business, Lori's engaging personality has been of great benefit to her as she has felt compelled to involve herself in conservative politics. Her commitment to reclaiming the country for Constitutional principles is very real and forms part of the core of her identity.

I consider it a great honor to be able to work with her in developing and implementing this exciting new venture.

Watchdogs say IRS to revoke gun rights and passports

A new bill passed by the Democrat controlled Senate and now headed to the House would give the IRS broad new powers that watchdogs say include revoking gun rights and passports.
The bill, S.1813, is a reauthorization of the federal highway aid, safety, and construction program. But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, and Senator Barbara Boxer, D-CA, added a major provision to the bill regarding the IRS.
The two Senators apparently want the IRS to have the power to revoke the gun rights of citizens and their right to travel if they owe more than $50,000 in back taxes.
But the problem is that the IRS would not be required to prove that a citizen owes $50,000. All it would take is for the IRS to accuse a citizen owing that amount.

Sunday, April 22, 2012

Media Matters obfuscates truth of Fast and Furious scandal

As reported yesterday the extremist left wing organization Media Matters, which is underwritten primarily by leftist billionaire George Soros, has embarked on a smear campaign against author Katie Pavlich whose newly published book delineates the crimes committed by the Obama Administration in the Fast and Furious scandal and the subsequent cover up.
The Department of Justice is now referring all of those with questions concerning Fast and Furious to the Media Matters website, which has devoted an entire page to the attempt to discredit Pavlich, implying that her book is full of untruths.
But in researching the claims of Media Matters, this reporter discovered that it is Media Matters that is engaging in a campaign of untruths.
The tactic? Obfuscate the truth by erecting straw men arguments that are of no consequence to the pertinent facts of the Pavlich book and the Fast and Furious operation.