3 Boxes of BS

Many politicians are often accused of being tone deaf. I think President Obama takes it to a new level here.

President Obama is suggesting that House Republicans on the issue of gun control appear neither willing to work with him nor inclined to listen to the American public on the issue.

Well, this is where he gets part of it right — House Republicans (mostly) aren’t willing to work with him but he completely misses the part about them not listening. Look at the numbers — how many Concealed Handgun Licenses, how many firearms (of all sorts) being sold, ammunition of most self defense calibers hard to find. Yet strangely enough, many hunting calibers are still plentiful. More on that later..

“The House Republican majority is made up mostly of members who are in sharply gerrymandered districts that are very safely Republican and may not feel compelled to pay attention to broad-based public opinion, because what they’re really concerned about is the opinions of their specific Republican constituencies,” the president said in an interview with The New Republic.

Would make a joke about pots and kettles here but I would just be called racist. Is there a single district out there that isn’t ‘sharply gerrymandered’?

Obama also said he can get 50 percent of public support for many of his upcoming initiatives, but “I can’t get enough votes out of the House of Representatives to actually get something passed. … I think there is still shock on the part of some in the party that I won re-election.”

President Obama, with all due respect — Get over yourself you pompous egotistical prick! This isn’t about you, it is about the policies that have worked to disarm America for decades. Enough is enough !

And that is what you are seeing. I find it stunningly ironic that you claim earlier the public is with you but here you say you can get ’50 percent of public support’. So which is it? Is there a broad base of people pushing for gun control or is the nation almost evenly divided?

The president said he has a profound respect for the traditions of hunting that date back for generations.

He said that moving forward on the topic means understanding that the realities of guns in urban areas are very different from the realities of guns in rural areas.

Reality changes based on location? Could you publish a scientific paper on that? Yeah, that is what I thought. Just another line trying to divide the country. Funny how people in the country are worried about slow response times and I, a city dweller, am also worried about slow response times. Country folks worry about home invasion; Wow….so do I.

It is almost as if you don’t have a frakkin’ clue.

He said it’s understandable that people are protective of their family traditions when it comes to hunting so “gun-control advocates also need to do “a little more listening than they do sometimes” in the debate.

The interview appears in the Feb. 11 issue of The New Republic.

Obama also said one of the biggest factors in the gun-control debate will be how it is shaped by the media.

I absolutely agree with you on this one. The main stream media is doing all the can to demonize standard capacity magazines, modern muskets (AR-15s) and anyone who owns them.

“If a Republican member of Congress is not punished on Fox News or by Rush Limbaugh for working with a Democrat on a bill of common interest, then you’ll see more of them doing it,” he said. “I think John Boehner genuinely wanted to get a deal done, but it was hard to do in part because his caucus is more conservative probably than most Republican leaders are, and partly because he is vulnerable to attack for compromising Republican principles and working with Obama.”

Another part I think you are right….this must be a record. I do think the “Republican Leadership” is left, very left/liberal than the majority of the party. It shows in their actions over the last decades.

The president argued  that “the more left-leaning media outlets recognize that compromise is not a dirty word” and that party leaders, including Senate Majority Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, are “willing to buck the more absolutist-wing elements in our party to try to get stuff done.”

Lawdog lays the smackdown on your idea of compromise so I won’t repeat it here but I will tell you that many people are getting tired of your idea of compromise.  The main stream media can go stuff itself in their own orifices. I will note that your idea of ‘get stuff done’ seems to include trampling over the traditional rights of people. Sorry President Obama but you lost most of your credibility when you tried to link the 2nd Amendment to hunting. Read the history of this country and you’ll find out what we already know — it is about being able to stand up to people who ‘try to get stuff done’ over the objections of the people.

Has Obama himself ever fired a gun? Yes, he says, he and others shoot skeet frequently at the president’s Maryland retreat, Camp David.

Oh and just when does this happen? I thought you were too busy playing golf.

The president also said much of the challenge in Washington is to make Americans feel that national politics is indeed connected to their day-to-day realities.

“And that’s not an unjustifiable view,” he said. So everything we do combines both a legislative strategy with a broad-based communications and outreach strategy to get people engaged and involved, so that it’s not Washington over here and the rest of America over there.”

Right, you want to make me think Washington is connected to my day to day reality but you talk about Hunting instead of crime, you talk about compromise instead of mental health, you issue Executive Orders without batting an eye or worry about the consequences.

No Mr. President you aren’t connected to reality in any shape form or fashion.

Listen carefully Mr. President; you are the representative for more then 50% of the country. Many of us do not agree with you ideas, plans or executive orders for ‘gun control’ — and isn’t it amazing that not one of your ideas included arresting criminals for outstanding warrants ?

We will not sit idly by as our rights are taken from us piece by piece, compromise by compromise. Hear what I and millions of others are saying; I beg of you to listen.

Please join the discussion.

Edited to Add — by the way Mr. President, I expect to hear today that the Secret Service Details on you, your wife and children have all switched over to double barreled shotguns. After all, your expert, your vice-president has told the country that is the best weapon for protection.

And let them know how you feel about House Bill 80 — the bill would add the underlined section to current law.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTIONA1.AASection 39.03, Penal Code, is amended by amending Subsection (a) and adding Subsection (c-1) to read as follows:
(a)A public servant acting under color of his office or employment commits an offense if he:
(1) intentionally subjects another to mistreatment or to arrest, detention, search, seizure, dispossession, assessment, or lien that he knows is unlawful;
(2) intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power, or immunity, knowing his conduct is unlawful; [or]
(3) intentionally subjects another to sexual harassment; or
(4) as part of a determination of whether to grant another person access to a publicly  accessible venue or form of  transportation, intentionally and without probable cause:
(A) touches the anus, breast, buttocks, or sexual organ of the other person, including touching through clothing;
(B) removes a child younger than 18 years of age from the physical custody or control of a parent or guardian of the child or a person standing in the stead of a parent or guardian of
the child;
(C) otherwise engages in conduct constituting an offense under Section 22.01(a)(3); or
(D) harasses, delays, coerces, threatens, intimidates, or effectively denies or conditions access to the other person because of the other person ’s refusal to consent to  (A), (B), or (C).
(c-1) For purposes of Subsection (a)(4), “public servant” includes:
(1) an officer, employee, or agent of:
(A) the United States;
(B) a branch, department, or agency of the United States; or
(C) another person acting under a contract with a branch, department, or agency of the United States to provide a security or law enforcement service; or
(2) any other person acting under color of federal law.

This is just one more area we need to push back on; let’s keep up the pressure to reduce the unconstitutional over-reach of the federal authority.

H/T to Cormac

This image has been going around the net for a while. My son T.R. sent it to me a couple of days ago.

Many people (mostly anti-rights cultists) are shocked to find out that the Supreme Court ruled that criminals don’t have to register their firearms .

We hold that a proper claim of the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination provides a full defense to prosecutions either for failure to register a firearm under 5841 or for possession of an unregistered firearm under 5851.

Yep, the case was U.S. v Haynes.
I wonder if the antis really want to keep calling me an “unconvicted felon“?

Please join the discussion.

or send a few emails if you would folks.

Now would be a great time to contact your federal representatives, to call the White House and let them know it is not the time to push for greater gun control.

Let’s get the message out that Sandy Hook was an atrocious crime but it was committed by one individual. Our rights should not be restricted due to the actions of one person or even a dozen.  If that was the case people belonging to Mayors Against Illegal Guns should be the most restricted group of people in history.

I send emails yesterday to my Federal Representative and Senator. I called the White House and asked President Obama not to push for new gun control laws.  I think it is important for them to hear from us; to let them know not everyone wants additional, ineffective laws.

I’ll be calling my state level representatives today; asking not only for them not to push new gun control laws but to find out how they plan to expand our rights.

So please, if you have a few minutes –Sign the White House Petition against new laws, make a few phone calls or emails. You can find your Senator here  or your Representative here.

Let’s stop being the Silent Majority and make our voices heard.

Not surprisingly,  those in charge of catching criminals want it to be easy to snoop through your private communications.

AT&T, Verizon Wireless, Sprint, and other wireless providers would be required to record and store information about Americans’ private text messages for at least two years, according to a proposal that police have submitted to the U.S. Congress.

CNET has learned a constellation of law enforcement groups has asked the U.S. Senate to require that wireless companies retain that information, warning that the lack of a current federal requirement “can hinder law enforcement investigations.”

They want an SMS retention requirement to be “considered” during congressional discussions over updating a 1986 privacy law for the cloud computing era — a move that could complicate debate over the measure and erode support for it among civil libertarians.

2 years worth of text messages for each and every cell phone user would be a considerable burden on companies. And that is just if they record the meta data (to/from, date/time); recording the actual text messages would be a staggering issue. Just check out what companies have to do for email archiving to comply with federal laws for an example of how bad it can be.

It wasn’t immediately clear whether the law enforcement proposal is to store the contents of SMS messages, or only the metadata such as the sender and receiver phone numbers associated with the messages. Either way, it’s a heap of data: Forrester Research reports that more than 2 trillion SMS messages were sent in the U.S. last year, over 6 billion SMS messages a day.

I know what I plan on doing if this becomes law; passive resistance.
I will send a message to all my contacts explaining that at least once per day one or more people will receive a text containing such words as; cocaine, murder, secession, robbery, assault, etc. I plan on making it very difficult for law enforcement to actually use any of my text messages as evidence. Oh, they will be able to I’m sure. But they’ll have to comb through them individual and repeatedly.
I say this because the wireless companies and law enforcement agencies do not seem to think my communications should be secured by the 4th Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

If companies and law enforcement agencies respected my rights (e.g. actually obtained a search warrant) instead of writing themselves one through the guises of ‘exigent circumstances’ I would make their job easier.

Here is a simple and easy test;  Would each and every officer and official would agree that any citizen could examine their cell phone logs and text messages simply by signing a paper asking for that information?
I’m guessing they wouldn’t.

Please join the discussion.

Many Anti-Rights Cultists point toward “Jolly Ole England” as a model we should emulate.

Mark Worsfold, 54, a former soldier and martial arts instructor, was arrested on 28 July for a breach of the peace shortly before the cyclists arrived in Redhouse Park, Leatherhead, where he had sat down on a wall to watch the race. Officers from Surrey police restrained and handcuffed him, and took him to Reigate police station, saying his behaviour had “caused concern”.

“The man was positioned close to a small group of protesters and based on his manner, his state of dress and his proximity to the course, officers made an arrest to prevent a possible breach of the peace,” Surrey police said in a statement.

This happened in England at the Olympics. So what ‘behaviour caused concern:

Worsfold, whose experience was first reported by Private Eye, claims police questioned him about his demeanour and why he had not been seen to be visibly enjoying the event. Worsfold, who was diagnosed with Parkinson’s in 2010, suffers from muscle rigidity that affects his face. He was released after two hours without charge or caution.

That’s right…he was arrested because his body language didn’t indicate he was happy. Now not only are law enforcements officers experts in criminal behaviour they are experts in pre-crime behaviour.

Surrey police said: “There were a number of factors which led officers to make this arrest, including the fact that the race was rapidly approaching, the heightened level of security due to the high-profile nature of the event and the sheer number of spectators in attendance. These were fully explained to the individual concerned. He was given words of advice and released with no further action.”

So because a planned activity is taking place as planned and people attending said planned activity are actually there to watch it; that is justification to restrain, arrest and remove someone who isn’t meeting some theoretical ‘normal behaviour’?

If this is the goal; count me out. I’m not interested. I’m not giving up my rights for the illusion safety.

Ooops, it seems the CIA “overlooked” some documents:

The Central Intelligence Agency recently discovered a “4 to 5 inch stack” of documents that relate to the spy agency’s cooperation with the makers of a forthcoming Hollywood film on the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, according to a new court filing.

The documents about CIA dealings with the film now titled “Zero Dark Thirty” were “inadvertently overlooked” in response to a Freedom of Information Act request and lawsuit filed by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, Justice Department attorneys said in a motion filed in federal court in Washington Tuesday afternoon (posted here).

“The CIA discovered a 4 to 5 inch stack of records potentially responsive to plaintiff’s FOIA request that had been inadvertently overlooked during the CIA’s search,” Civil Division attorney Marcia Berman wrote. “The CIA is continuing to look into the circumstances of the discovery of the new documents to ensure the adequacy of its search.”

Yeah, I’m really gonna buy that story folks. Bet you also have a deed to a bridge you want to sell me in there also.

And while you are still searching;  see if you can find the Constitution in there some place, eh.

In an interview with “Viewpoint” host Eliot Spitzer, Drake said there was a “key decision made shortly after 9/11, which began to rapidly turn the United States of America into the equivalent of a foreign nation for dragnet blanket electronic surveillance.”

These powers have previously defended by claims of national security necessity, but Drake says that it doesn’t stop there. He warns that the government is giving itself the power to gather intel on every American that could be used in future prosecutions unrelated to terrorism.

“When you open up the Pandora’s Box of just getting access to incredible amounts of data, for people that have no reason to be put under suspicion, no reason to have done anything wrong, and just collect all that for potential future use or even current use, it opens up a real danger — and to what else what they could use that data for, particularly when it’s all being hidden behind the mantle of national security,” Drake said.

Although Drake’s accusations seem astounding, they corroborate allegations made by Binney only a week earlier. Speaking at the Hackers On Planet Earth conference in New York City earlier this month, Binney addressed a room of thousands about the NSA’s domestic spying efforts. But in a candid interview with journalist Geoff Shively during HOPE, the ex-NSA official candidly revealed the full extent of the surveillance program.

“Domestically, they’re pulling together all the data about virtually every U.S. citizen in the country and assembling that information, building communities that you have relationships with, and knowledge about you; what your activities are; what you’re doing. So the government is accumulating that kind of information about every individual person and it’s a very dangerous process,” Binney said.

Drake and Binney’s statements follow the revelation that law enforcement officers collected cell phone records on 1.3 million Americans in 2011. More news articles are emerging every day suggesting that the surveillance of Americans — off-the-radar and under wraps — is growing at an exponential rate.

It is an awkward time in America’s history but growing less awkward all the time.

“America is at that awkward stage; it’s too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards.”—Claire Wolfe

Please join the discussion.