"Our Dysfunctional Overclass"

 I saw this article and the information did and didn't surprise me, It talked about our "Cloud People" and what they believed and what they would like to do to us "dirt People" you know the "Hoi Pelloi".  We are down in the Gunshine State visiting my brother and Sis in law in the panhandle near Destin.

What does America's overclass think of the rest of us? The short answer is "not much." They think ordinary people's splurging on natural resources is destroying the planet and needs to be cut back forcefully. And that the government needs to stamp down on ordinary people enjoying luxuries that, in their view, should be reserved for the top elites.

These are the implications of the results of two surveys of elite people conducted by pollster Scott Rasmussen by the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, an organization that supports low tax rates and low government spending. The surveys covered not large swaths of the population but were confined to the top 1% of society.

One survey, the Elite, included only respondents with postgraduate degrees, household incomes above $150,000 and residents in a ZIP code with more than 10,000 people per square mile. Another, Ivy League graduates, included adults who attended Ivy League or other selective private colleges such as Chicago, Duke, Northwestern or Stanford.

You probably won't be surprised that the large majority of this Elite feels economically well off. Nor, if you've kept up with recent changes in party identification, will you be much surprised that 73% of these elites identify as Democrats and only 14% as Republicans.

What is surprising is the extent to which this American overclass would deprive its fellow citizens of things they have taken for granted. Half of these groups, 47% of Elites and 55% of Ivies, say the United States provides people with "too much individual freedom."

More than three-quarters favor, "to fight climate change, the strict rationing of energy, gas, and meat," a proposition rejected by 63% of the public. Again, "to fight climate change," between half and two-thirds favor bans on gas stoves (a recent target despite demurrals of Biden bureaucrats and New York state Democrats), gasoline-powered cars (heavily disfavored by Biden Democrats and California rules) and SUVs, "private" air conditioning and "nonessential air travel."

The ascetic economist Thorstein Veblen, in his 1899 book "The Theory of the Leisure Class," argued that the rich engaged in "conspicuous consumption" activities such as golf, polo and art collecting, for which ordinary people had neither the time nor the money.

A century and a quarter later, America has rich people hoping to deprive ordinary people of "conspicuous consumption" activities they can afford and where they clutter up the airports, interstate highways and high-end malls.

For generations, Democrats have liked to portray themselves as the tribune of the little man, the defender of policies that enable ordinary people without special advantages, or with many disadvantages, to live comfortably, securely and in dignity. There may be some condescension in this posture, but also a considerable element of respect

This survey shows that today, this 1% of the public, which includes virtually all elective and appointive Democrats in Washington and states like California, New York and New Jersey, tends to see the bulk of its fellow citizens as selfish and destructive, in need not just of discipline but deserving of harsh restrictions on their freedoms.

This attitude is echoed by the wider group of Democratic voters. A 2023 Pew Research survey shows that while 31% of Republicans, even with their party out of power, think America "stands above all other countries in the world," only 9% of Democrats do so.

It's an unstable and dangerous situation when a largely one-party elite looks, with fear and loathing, across what Rasmussen describes as a "Grand Canyon gap" between it and its multiparty fellow citizens. It's reminiscent somehow of the "let them eat cake" French royalists in 1789 or Russian nobles in 1917. An overclass this disconnected and contemptuous risks disruption.

A better approach comes from an undoubted member of America's elite, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon. Speaking to CNBC at Davos last month, Dimon recounted a bus trip to Spokane and Boise and Bozeman: "People are growing. They're hungry to grow. They're innovating. It's everywhere. It's not just Silicon Valley."

Perhaps aware the Mountain West votes Republican, Dimon, who calls himself a centrist Democrat, conceded that former President Donald Trump "wasn't wrong about some of the critical issues" and was "kind of right" about NATO and immigration and "grew the economy quite well."

Of elite Democrats' contempt for Trump supporters, he had less to say. "The Democrats have done a good job with the deplorables, hugging their Bibles and their beer and their guns. I mean, really? Can we stop that stuff and actually grow up and treat other people respectfully and listen to them a little bit?"

It's a question other members of our dysfunctional overclass might ask themselves.

Michael Barone is a senior political analyst for the Washington Examiner, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and longtime co-author of The Almanac of American Politics. His new book, "Mental Maps of the Founders: How Geographic Imagination Guided America's Revolutionary Leaders," is now available.

"Our Elite Have Failed Us"

 I snagged this from "SSG" Or the Security Studies Group, a Next Generation Think Tank.  I will use their stuff if I think is pretty good and usually it is.  I have commented about this, it seems that our "Betters" who have gone to all the right schools and have all the right connections, don't have the best interest of our country anymore.  I remember back "in the day" those that graduated from an ivy league school were expected to behave in according to a certain code, sure get rich was acceptable, even lauded, but not at the expense of the country.  This new bunch of "Betters" we have, they don't care about the country, they want to stick it to the country and to the West, they have been indoctrinated by their schools and their echo chamber to despise their country and the West not realizing that all the benefits of a modern civilization are only possible by living in the West.

 

Age beyond age on British land,
Aeons on aeons gone,
Was peace and war in western hills,
And the White Horse looked on.

-G.K. Chesterton, The Ballad of the White Horse

Iran struck Erbil today with missiles launched openly from its own territory, aimed apparently at the American consulate there. They didn’t manage to hit it, which isn’t very surprising; the reason the Iranians want nukes so bad is that their missiles can’t hit anything well enough to be worth something without a nuke.

The Biden administration via the State Department issued a statement that reads as if they regard it as a matter for criminal investigation by the local authorities, rather than the clearest possible act of war.

Coming from somebody else, that might seem like a kind of strong answer: a statement that ‘Your best efforts to hurt me aren’t really worth my notice.’ Coming from this administration, it’s anything but that. They’re allowing Russia — even now — to negotiate a deal they hope to make with Iran, which will let them develop those nukes they want so much. It’ll also allow Russia another outlet to escape the sanctions the Biden administration claims to be so proud of imposing.

Once they get this deal, the administration will claim victory. Iran will build nuclear weapons. Russia will evade sanctions. Eventually, those missiles Iran’s government already aren’t afraid to fire at our diplomatic missions will have teeth.

This is being done by the people who claim to be the top experts on national security and diplomacy in the entire world, as J. Michael Waller pointed out. They’re from the best schools; they were shaped by the finest institutions. Like our generals were, the ones who took no responsibility whatsoever for the collapse and destruction in Afghanistan. These are the elite, so we are told.

Our systems for producing elites are manifestly broken. They worked for a long time, but they are broken now. Like the Roman cursus honorum, a series of offices of increasing honor and power that a  leader would go through, they used to ensure that our leaders had the right experience to carry out their duties competently at each new level. For a long time, America’s systems kept our world secure by providing competent leaders who each knew their jobs, had each been prepared at every level for the next duty.

That no longer works. There is no way to deny the evidence of our eyes. It is not just our leaders but our systems that have failed. We have no choice but to find a new way of choosing leaders, and to replace those who were brought up in the old system. That can be done thoughtfully, or it can just be allowed to happen when the system collapses under the weight of its accumulating failures. Either way, it is coming fast.

 

People notice when the Cloud People lie....

 

 I also shamelessly "clipped" this from American Thinker.  The Pics are from my collection of pics I have on my folder saved in the cloud.

 

 

I'm going to try to explain what's going on in America right now by drawing a connection between two news stories.  On the surface, they don't seem to have much to do with each other, but when you really think about them, it's obvious that there's a common thread.

The first story comes from way back in November of 2018, when President Trump complained about an "Obama judge" on the Ninth Circuit ruling against his asylum policy.  Trump's comments angered Chief Justice John Roberts of the Supreme Court, who gave a speech saying:

We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.  What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them.  That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.

Trump responded by tweeting: "Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have 'Obama judges,' and they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country...."

For the Deep State and its sympathizers, Roberts's statement was a dignified and erudite defense of the institutions of liberal democracy, while Trump's tweet was a crass attack on said institutions

 

Ordinary Americans, who aren't emotionally invested in keeping up the illusion that all is well on the banks of the Potomac, saw something different.  They saw John Roberts telling a lie and Donald Trump telling the truth.

Everybody knows that most of what the upper level of the judicial system does is politics by another name.  They know that most of the time, Obama judges, Trump judges, Bush judges, and Clinton judges rule differently on politically charged questions.  And a large portion of the American people decide whom to vote for in presidential elections based mainly on what kinds of judges they want the next president to appoint.

John Roberts has the audacity to tell these people that none of this is true and that all judges are really just doing their best to enforce the same laws in an impartial way.

And then, right after this creature of the Deep State (not even a Democrat, but a moderate Republican) has told his lie, Donald Trump does what most politicians won't do (including Republicans) and tells the truth.

Over the next few years, when Trump's base continues to believe Trump's statements in preference to those of the media, the regulatory agencies, Anthony Fauci, the "moderates" in Congress, or whomever, the elite classes and the plutocrats and the mainstream press continue to act surprised, as if there were no reason for anybody to take Trump's word over theirs about illegal immigration, or the origin of the coronavirus, or hydroxychloroquine, or election fraud.

 

Except there was a reason why the Deplorables listened to Trump instead of the mainstream voices.  It is that the mainstream voices have been lying to them for a long, long time, without even trying to be subtle.  Eventually, the Deplorables noticed, and they decided to trust someone else.

Now for the second, and more recent, news item, in which we see our self-appointed betters growing impatient with plain lying and moving on to censorship, as exemplified by YouTube's decision, about a week ago, to ban all content questioning the efficacy of COVID vaccines.

You know who questions the efficacy of COVID vaccines?  Scientists.  Anyone who's been following the news for the last year or so knows that while most scientists studying the vaccines believe that their efficacy is well above zero, there have been all sorts of disagreements about how well they actually work.  Do they prevent serious symptoms 90% of the time or only 70% of the time?  Do they work at all against the delta variant?  Do their effects fade with time?  Is a third dose necessary?  Will people who already have natural antibodies get any benefit from the vaccines?

The scientific community has debated all these questions, and attentive news-watchers know that there isn't a settled consensus.  This should surprise nobody, as the vaccines are new and approved for experimental use only.  At this point, it's good that scientists aren't all thinking the same thoughts, because that means that at least some of them are doing their jobs.

However, the people who run this country (and let's be honest: at this point, the government agencies and the big corporations are all run by the same left-leaning plutocrat class) have decided that the Deplorables aren't allowed to know any of this.

These people know that the Deplorables don't trust them anymore.  So they have to rely on censorship, because they can't just make their case with logic, and say things like We all know that the science isn't fully settled yet, but most of the evidence indicates that the vaccines work most of the time, and your chances of getting harmed by a vaccine are small compared to your chances of getting harmed by the virus, so we're recommending that you get the shot.  But if you don't, we won't try to punish you or shame you, because we still believe in liberty.

That's the sort of argument that might have worked fifteen years ago.  It doesn't work today, because the Deplorables know that the people saying it have their heads so far up their own rear ends that they either can't see or don't care about the obvious untruth of statements like "we do not have Obama judges or Trump judges."

Instead, they rely on coercion and censorship.  Science takes a backseat to politics, just as it did way back in the spring of 2020, when scientists did a bunch of studies on the efficacy of cloth masks, most of which suggested that they don't work, and then dropped the whole topic like a hot rock once it became apparent that most of the people who didn't want to wear masks were those nasty Trump voters.

So upper-class liberals are left banging their heads on the wall and saying: Why do these people keep on trusting Donald Trump, even after the events of January 6, and why won't they believe the FDA when it tells them not to treat COVID with horse-deworming pills, and why are hospitals having to shut down because so many of their employees — medical professionals! — are willing to lose their jobs rather than get the vaccine?

The answer is that all this is happening because people notice when the elites lie.  They notice when the elites engage in censorship.  And they don't un-notice.  Also, once they've stopped trusting you, they won't start again just because you want them to.  Instead, they'll trust somebody else, even if, in your (now irrelevant) opinion, that somebody else is the worst person in the world for them to trust.

Latest Colorado shooting and the opportunistic weasels of the Left

Before I go on  bit of a rant...Just a bit mind you, I hope everyone's Thanksgiving went well and we got stuffed like a turkey with our favorite food, watched the Cowboys go down in flames on Thursday night TV and spent time with our families and friends.   I have been busy with house improvements, the spousal unit wants to buy another house in the same school district so the crumb-snatcher can stay in the good school district. whereas I on the other hand want to move out of state.  I love Georgia, but we are getting a lot of people from the north and that ain't soo bad except they haven't figured the cause and effect thingie yet.  They move away from the north because of the poor schools, poor infrastructure, poor job opportunities and they bring the same attitudes and beliefs that caused where they came from to be a poor schools, poor infrastructure, poor job opportunities shithole.  I believe that Georgia will go blue in 10 to 15 years on account of the migration and us "locals" will be outvoted.  I don't want to be Like the Clint Eastwood Character in " Gran Torino"

  A couple of days ago, we had this jerk do a shooting near the planned parenthood offices in the peoples republic of Colorado and the usual politicians immediately spouted the tired rhetoric of "gun control". 

   We have "Dear" Leader" the best Gun and Ammo salesman on the planet immediately double down on the failed policies and threatening to do more executive actions to restrict guns from people they consider "radicals"  which happen to include everyone from the gun community, veterans and other conservative groups whereas the islamic terrorist, Workplace Violence proponents, victims of Climate Change are given a free pass because they have been disenfranchised.  If the elitist try to push through another gun control bill, they will get their butts handed to them in the polls, and if they try to ban them, the acts of civil disobedience will far eclipse the people in the northeast corridor whom refused to register their EBR* with the state in New York and Connecticut like their betters want them to because they are considered "wage slaves" who sole purpose is to serve the state and have half of their productivity seized to be distributed by the state reflecting the desires and wished of their betters whom know what is best for the unwashed masses.

*Evil Black Rifles A.K.A. The AR15 series of rifles and any other firearm that scares the crap out of the liberals.
According to The Gazette based out of Colorado Springs, the earliest reports from police stated that there was no connection to Planned Parenthood.

Other news sources also confirmed this as they amended earlier statements that said there was an active shooter “at a Planned Parenthood clinic.”

Police later began an investigation into the events to determine the motives of the shooter, Robert Lewis Dear. He was arrested after surrendering at 4:52 p.m. outside Planned Parenthood. Two civilians and one police officer were killed.
The facts in this situation do not lie. This shooter’s rampage began on the street outside an eye care center, not Planned Parenthood. The rampage was not specifically targeted at Planned Parenthood as part of the GOP’s opposition to funding of the organization.
One could just as easily reach the conclusion this man had it out for eye doctors, since that’s where the shooting originated. At such early stages in the investigation of such a tragedy, speculation has no place in the arena. Facts must be the only voice heard in the crowd as police try to make sense of the insanity.
But, in typical fashion, the liberal media is jumping to conclusions anyway, priming the America public with preformed opinions with little basis in actual fact. With flashy type font on their television ticker tapes and wordplay designed to incite near panic, they are drawing partisan lines in the sand to further divide America.
H/T Young Conservatives

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- True to form, and consistent with Rahm Emanuel’s advocacy to never let a serious crisis go to waste, citizen  disarmament swindlers and other totalitarian lobby shills have taken to social and “regular” media to lay blame for Friday’s Colorado Planned Parenthood murders on groups that stand in the way of their goals. Those include gun owners, right to life activists, Republicans, Christians, white males, and others “progressives” view as impediments and threats to their objective of total control.
That’s typical collectivist thinking. Blame a group you want to marginalize and demonize for the actions of a misfit aberration, and draw fraudulent generalized conclusions from which to infringe on rights and increase the state’s control.
Consistent with that, early news accounts related that Barack Obama had been briefed on the incident while it was an in-progress standoff.  And consistent with those wishing to “fundamentally transform” the Republic, the talking point that Constitutionalists — accused by those who hate what they stand for of being “home grown terrorists” — pose a greater danger than Islamic State jihadists is being mirrored and parroted.
At this writing, little is known about the suspected killer [see update, below] except his name, which will not be mentioned here, his age and that he came from North Carolina (and that he may be a peeping tom/cruel to animals). Despite that, presumptions are being made and conclusions are being drawn and spread by those who view the slaughter of others as opportunities to advance their agenda. About the only fair inference to be made at this time is that on top of everything else, the killer must be a wretched coward, willing to murder, but when his time came to face immediate, certain death, he chose life, surrendering to police who showed him more mercy than he showed his victims.
But say the “worst fear” is realized, that the murderer turns out to be a self-professed NRA-supporting Christian “conservative.”  His actions belie and deny everything each of those “labels” stands for. They show he grasps nothing about principles professed by those groups, and they do nothing to transfer his sole guilt to anyone else.
Predictably, the enthusiastic blood dancing and knee-jerk demands for more “gun control” have commenced with eye-rolling feeding frenzy fervor, along with no shortage of hate-filled tirades against “ammosexuals.”  And naturally, the political temptation will exist to “do something.”  Here’s what to keep in mind:
Nothing will be enough.  Nothing would have had a chance to stop or minimize these killings except armed citizens on the scene. Even if the goal of total citizen disarmament were enacted, which is what the goal is, that would depend on everyone obeying such edicts, and on government officials and functionaries benevolent and wise enough not to abuse absolute power.
Now, as always, advocates for the right of the people to keep and bear arms must hold fast, not waver, and not listen to the phony siren call of “compromise.” That’s not possible with those who will greedily take what they have no moral claim to, one piece at a time, but who won’t be satisfied until they have it all.

Here we go again....Another Elitist and "sensible gun restrictions"

I saw this link to the Daily Beast and some gentleman named Shawn VanDiver is proposing some what he calls "sensible gun restrictions" to avert the next tragedy.  My comments will be in black. Here is what he is proposing:

The fact is that thousands of deaths all across our country can be prevented with solid intelligence sharing and common sense regulation. Between 83% and 91% of the country supports background checks for all gun purchases and yet, somehow, this simple provision is consistently written out of proposed legislation. It is time that we make this a permanent policy priority rather than a set of talking points to be rolled out alongside the names of our next shooting victims.    We have a background check run everytime we purchase a firearm at a retail settings.  Now private sales are just that...private sales.  The average gun owner will not sell a firearm to a person that LEGALLY cannot own one.    Now he also has to mention "Victims"  gotta roll out the emotionalism when making a statement.  

I am proud gun owner. I’m also a single father. I do not want to ban guns but I do want to protect my son from the dangers they pose.

I love my guns, and I’m no hypocrite. But I love my son more. I love taking him to school, a movie, or simply around the block without fearing for his life. It is dangerous and shortsighted to require so little of our fellow gun owners, because—as 11-year-old Hunter’s case tragically shows—they hold the very lives of those around them in their hands.

Again rolling out the emotionalism...gotta try to dance on the blood of the innocents again.  But liberals run on emotionalism....logic is beyond them.  

So what can we do? The best proposals are all about common sense and moderation—too often four-letter words in politics. Background checks and mental health evaluations for all gun owners, on a five-year verification cycle, would be a great first step.  I already covered background checks now they throw in the "Mental Health Evaluation" every 5 years like owning a firearm is some mental illness and the person that believes in owning a firearm is somehow a mental defective.   Also having a Obamacare mandated Dr giving me a mental health exam somehow screams * you are screwed*

Requiring licenses and negligent discharge insurance would be part of common sense reform. Much like vehicles—which are also key pieces of personal property that can take lives when they are operated irresponsibly, firearms should require a license to own and operate. A tiered licensing system could apply to different types of weapons. Insurance could cover any damages caused by negligent discharge, and skyrocketing rates might prove discouraging for repeat offenders.  Now he is rolling out the "lets treat guns like cars and license and have insurance on them. with a tiered system for pistols and if you own a EBR(Evil Black Rifle) you will pay lots more money to what ever insurance company the government mandated....kinda like Obamacare.  And remember cars are regulated by the feds under the "Commerce clause"   I vaguely recall something about the 2nd amendment  A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

     Our   rights to bear arms is not to be infringed...especially from the government.  What the government givith...the government taketh away.    Our rights to self defense is both a natural right and a right that was codified under English law before the constitution was written.    So basically   "no"   

Prudent limits need to be imposed. We should consider putting a cap on the number of firearms purchased for personal use. Allowances could be made for licensed gun dealers, but home protection and hunting require don’t require individuals to keep an arsenal. At the very least, misdemeanors such as DUIs, drug charges, and white-collar crimes should be added to the list of crimes that preclude offenders from owning firearms.

By whose definition is an "arsenal?"   Your friendly neighborhood anti-gun senator?   again the term is subjective by whose definition...It is not any body business what kind of guns I own, I have multiple firearms for multiple roles.  There isn't a one size firearm for all uses....firearms are not crescent wrenches.   Also adding to the number of crimes that would preclude ownership of firearms is death by 1000 cuts, it is to whittle down the number of gun owners to almost zero.  

Opponents will no doubt ask how we intend to pay for all of these new requirements. A tax on ammunition and weapons manufacturers and end-users seems like a relevant place to start. With $617 billion spent to fund our national defense, we can certainly grab a billion or two to fund these lifesaving reforms.   What is with liberals and taxes....lawful gun owners already pay a multitude of taxes.  Also mentioning the national defense budget....why not go after the entitlement programs....Oh wait...the democrats need those to buy votes to keep themselves in power.  

For some gun-rights advocates, no amount of smart budgeting will change their mind because for them any attempt to restrict firearm ownership amounts to an assault on liberty. But most sensible people, even those who own guns and value the 2nd Amendment, understand that the exercise of rights requires some trade-offs. After all, a majority of NRA members support background checks too.    We lawful gun-owners have compromised enough, it seems for common sens gun restrictions...we have to give up something every time there is a call for common sense gun control, we lawful gun owners have to give something up....it is for the sake of "Compromise"   As I look through my well worn oxford dictionary the word compromise is basically each person gives something up to work out a deal.  Well what does the anti gunner give up.....Not a damm thing....we are the only ones that compromise every time.  The comment of "majority of NRA members support background checks" is a red herring.  He is trying to cloak his gun restriction agenda under the guise of compromise.

Tragic assaults on public safety by dangerous people are only part of the problem in the United States. A good guy with a gun can turn into a bad guy due to one slip up or a simple misunderstanding and an itchy trigger finger. It’s time we prioritize the debate on gun control and see some real change.

  Again the demagoguery "itchy trigger finger..?"  The average gun owner knows well the ramifications of having to use their firearms....the Zimmerman trial was an example of this.  Zimmerman defended himself against Trayvon Martin and he was pilloried by the media.  and certain members of society.  

This is the biggest fear of the average gun owner....But we know that we are ultimately responsible for ourselves...not the government.

Reasons to own a firearm.

1.  It is your INALIENABLE RIGHT to provide for self-defense and defense of others.
2.  In a violent attack, a firearm is the single best tool for protecting hearth and home.
3.  Criminals AVOID armed people and those they think are armed. 

4.  Obama just released 36,000 violent illegal aliens from prison.
5.  Bad people are not scared away by harsh language but 230 grains of jacketed hollow point through the gourd works pretty good.
6.  Criminals are criminals because they break the law and taking from you and yours means nothing to them.
7.  YOU are responsible for YOUR self-defense and safety.
8.  Criminals, like the ones Obama and ICE and Eric withholder just released are AMORAL. They have no problem raping, robbing, assaulting, or murdering you to get what they want.
9.  Sometimes governments have gotten too big for their britches and need to be "pruned."

FACT:  About 6,850 times a DAY Americans LEGALLY use firearms to protect themselves. (FBI)
FACT:  In every state were concealed carry laws have been passed, the murder rate and crime rate has lowered and in gun-free zones like Chicago, the murder and crime rate has skyrocketed.
FACT:  The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed.
FACT:  Roughly 200,000 women in the US use firearms to defend themselves against sexual assaults. Imagine if Paula Jones had had a firearm handy...
FACT:  Gun ownership has exploded in the USA (Obama-NRA Gun Salesman since 2009) yet firearms homicides are down 40% (FBI).
FACT:  In the UK, a strict NO GUN nation, violent crime is 4 times higher than in the USA.
FACT:  In the NO GUN UK, 125% more women are raped than in the USA.
FACT:  In the NO GUN UK, 133% more violent assaults are committed.
FACT:  In the NO GUN UK, they have the second highest overall crime rate in the EU!
FACT:  In the GUN BAN city of Chicago, in 2012, they were designated the "deadliest global city." Imagine, Chicago more dangerous than Kirachi,

Shawn VanDiver is a 12-year Navy veteran and adjunct faculty at three universities teaching military studies, national security policy, homeland security, and international security and trade. He manages corporate security and enterprise risk at a major tech company. He is a member of theTruman National Security Project’s Defense Council. Views expressed are his own.

Now I like to do a bit of background research on events and people...it is responsible journalism  But I am a blogger and I try to be accurate as possible.   I do research on people, especially people that are running on his bonifieds as a "responsible gun owner.... and a navy firearms instructor and veteran"   Well it is apparently that this Shawn is a member of Obama's "Organizing for America"  Here is the Link

The Vagabond supports Barack Obama(Meeting)

Meeting of Barack Obama supporters at the Vagabond kitchen, located in the South Park neighborhood of San Diego. There will be a 5% discount on all food and drink, as well as a 10% donation to Barack Obama's campaign. Ask for Shawn at the door. Please RSVP so we know how many to prepare for.

Time:

Host: Shawn VanDiver

Contact Phone: 619-756-9518

Location: The Vagabond (San Diego, CA) 2310 30th st San Diego, CA 92104

• Google Maps
• MapQuest
• Yahoo! Maps

  We have this elitist tool spouting off crap and they are hoping that people will accept his credentials and buy off on his bullcrap.  This guy is a hack for the Obama administration and he is trying to play himself off as the "average American."    What a load.  This guy reminds me of that Army colonel that pushed his version of "gun control" and he really had pissed Me Off  Now we have this guy trying the same time.   I will use the same response that I used to the colonel.

The conduct of Hillary Rodham Clinton during watergate.....

I guess I will start paying more attention to Hillary, since the same media that gave us the most transparent administration in history have decided that since a black man is president, now it is the turn of a women to inhabit that office all in the name of diversity, qualifications and integrity don't mean anything, as long as another block is checked off.    I saw Hillary making the Sunday talk show rounds and she being coy about the media fawning over her like they did for the messiah back in 2007/2008.  This shows me that the fix is in and she has already been coronated by the media and other elitist to be the new standard bearer.  I made a comment back in 2008 when Hillary and Obama were dueling for the democratic nomination, I had commented to a friend of mine *ShellDude*"Obama is a lightweight, Hillary is vicious and vindictive."  I remembered the antics she had pulled when Bill was president from the White House travel office firings, to the Rose Law Office being located in their private quarters 2 years after being subpoenaed.  Funny how that works out.   Remember Hillary "dodging" sniper fire in Bosnia and that was debunked.   I have noticed that anybody that ever went up against the Clintons especially Hillary, things happened like a disproportionate amount of "Suicides" statistically speaking compared to the general population.

Hillary Clinton Ex-Boss Says He Fired Her from Her Work on the Watergate Investigation for Being a "Liar" and "Unethical"-Truth!

Summary of the eRumor:  The eRumor says that as a 27-year old working on the Watergate Investigation in the 1970s,  Hillary Clinton was "fired" from her position for being a "liar" and "unethical." The Truth:  This email is the text of a column published on March 31, 2008 by Dan Calabrese, founder of Northstar Writers Group (www.northstarwriters.com). The story is based on statements by Jerry Zeifman, a Democrat, who was a counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee.  He said that he supervised then Hillary Rodham who got a job working on the investigation of the Watergate scandal, which eventually brought Richard Nixon's presidency to an end through resignation. Zeifman published a book in 2006 titled Hillary's Pursuit of Power.  On his website, which is no longer on the Internet, Zeifman said "Hillary Clinton is ethically unfit to be either a Senator or   President--and if she were to become President, the last vestiges of the traditional moral authority of the party of Roosevelt, Truman and Johnson will be destroyed." Zeifman said that during her work on the investigation of the Watergate scandal, Hillary Rodham "...engaged in a variety of self-serving unethical practices in violation of House rules." In 1998 Zeifman was a consultant to a member of the Judiciary Committee that impeached President Bill Clinton and said he "gained extensive personal insights into the unethical practices of Hillary Clinton in her White House 'West Wing' office." Specifically, Zeifman believes that Hillary Rodham Clinton and others wanted Richard Nixon to remain in office to enhance the chances of Senator Ted Kennedy or another Democrat being elected president.  Zeifman contends that in 1974 a young lawyer who shared an office with Clinton came to him to apologize that he and Clinton had lied to him.  The lawyer, John Labovitz, is quoted as saying that he was dismayed with "...her erroneous legal opinions and efforts to deny Nixon representation by counsel -- as well as an unwillingness to investigate Nixon."  Zeifman charges that Clinton regularly consulted with Ted Kennedy's chief political strategist, which was a violation of House rules. Another reason for Clinton's conduct, according to Zeifman, was that Democrats did not want Nixon to face an impeachment trial because they feared that as a part of his defense Nixon might want to bring up abuses of office by President John Kennedy. Zeifman said he regrets that when he terminated Clinton from the Nixon impeachment staff he did not report her unethical practices to the appropriate bar association. There has not been any response that we have found from Clinton to the book or to Zeifman's accusations. Posted  04/7/08  Updated 01/11/14

Continuation of the Liberal Elitist call for "gun control"

I got another email link from JPFO.org with the continuing story of the LtColonel that believes that the American people should be disarmed with the exception of certain "acceptable firearms"   I had posted Here on it as have many other bloggers.  Well JPFO sent more information on it.

Here is the colonel with all his glory(notice the lack of bracket for NVG use)  Well I will post the entire missive that L. Neil Smith wrote as an open letter to the good Colonel.

    

By L. Neil Smith, lneil@netzero.com.
The Libertarian Enterprise. December 18th 2013

Prepared for Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. © JPFO. Inc 2013

CORRECTION: We must humbly apologize for having used an incorrect picture, which was believed to be correct at the time. The substituted picture is described as the actual Lt. Col Bateman being discussed, derived from his Facebook page.

This is an open letter, of sorts, to Lieutenant Colonel Robert Bateman, a "second amendment-hating ... active military commander" who, according to Paul Joseph Watson writing for Prison Planet.com, December 6, 2013, composed an article for Esquire magazine in which he advocated a total ban on all firearms, and closing down all gun manufacturers except for those who produce weapons for the federal government.
Apparently he threatened a blogger who had the gall to disagree with him, vowing to "pry your gun from your cold, dead, fingers" and allegedy issuing veiled death threats. "You will be disarmed," it says here. "The state will have a monopoly on firepower." He even schemes to make it illegal for most types of guns to be inherited. "I'm willing to wait until you die," he tells us, "hopefully of natural causes".
He apologizes for a future in which she will die.

The man has, in fact, a six-point program for creating a future in which the Second Amendment -- and, most likely, the entire Bill of Rights, because that's typical with hypocritical clowns like him -- would become a dead letter. Why would he want to do that? To create a more peaceful society, of course -- less violence and death -- and if you won't willingly cooperate you will be killed in the house-to house searches.
It doesn't seem to have occurred to this military genius that gun laws are enforced at gun point. You say you want less violence and death, Bob? I wonder how that's going to work out in a nation of 100 million Americans who have obeyed their last gun law, holding 750 million "firearms of modern design in good working order". Will you be out front leading the campaign, Bob, or at home, hiding under your bed?
You appear to have learned nothing from history or human nature, Bob, from the Roaring Twenties or the War on Drugs. Following any prohibition, there's always more, not less of the prohibited commodity. Guns will be everywhere, most of them silenced and fully automatic.
Because ... why not?
My father was a lifelong career military officer who understood the phrase "Duty, Honor, Country" in a way you never will. He flew dozens of combat missions over Europe during World War II, was shot down, and spent a year in Stalag Luft III, a prisoner-of-war camp. He retired as a Major after 30 years, because he blew the whistle on intructors selling test answers to officers at a Strategic Air Command school at Mather Air Force Base in the 1950s. Instead of rewards and promotion, he had to be hidden away by his political allies, in the Arctic.
It is disgusting to think that you remain in the military, while better men than you are being purged by a rogue administration, led by a probable illegal alien and communist, because they will refuse to fire on their fellow Americans who won't give up their guns. When I was in high school, neighbors of mine in the First Air Commandos at Hurlburt Field were among the first Americans to die in Vietnam, beheaded by the Viet Cong, or eaten alive by land crabs, believing that they were defending the rights you now threaten so casually to abrogate.
You are a disgrace to the uniform worn by my dad and millions of other Americans down through history who thought they were answering a call to protect the lives, liberties, and property of their fellow Americans.
I must confess that when I first read the nonsense you'd written, I thought you were probably a fourteen-year-old kid in his pajamas, somewhere, sitting behind a keyboard in his mother's basement, making empty threats simply to enjoy the flap they generated. That's what you sound like, Bob. It's pretty easy to stir gun-owners up; they've been relentlessly defamed and persecuted for so many decades by twisted, broken, sick, moral cripples like Charles Schumer and Dianne Feinstein.
More than anyone, however, your rhetoric and tone make me think of Major Nidal Malik Hasan, whose mental health was never properly looked into once he began issuing threats to those around him, and who killed thirteen innocent individuals at Fort Hood in 2009 and injured thirty more.
There was a time, Bob, when concepts like decency and honor meant something, a time when, had an officer (British, of course) shamed himself as you have, he would have taken his Webley revolver and a single cartridge into the next room and done the right thing. But those times are long past, Bob, and what do you know of decency and honor?
We have been learning the hard way that frustrated "progressives" are among the most dangerous entities on the planet. They turn out to be behind the vast majority of notorious and brutal public shootings. They seem to have no brakes, no self-control, like ordinary human beings. Nor do they seem aware that other people are as real as they are.
I believe that violence could be right around the corner for you, Bob, that you should be separated from the Army now, "for the good of the service", and put away where you can't hurt yourself or anybody else.
So I will predict a different future for you than the future you have predicted for us. I'm a science fiction writer, and that's my job. I caution you, don't try this at home; I'm better at it than you are.
It starts with a militarily marked van pulling up to the curb in front of your office, your home, or the retirement community to which you have been committed. Two burly orderlies get out and enter the building.
In a few minutes they emerge holding you between them, wearing leg irons, handcuffs, and belly chains. Make too much noise, you will be gagged. The media will have been alerted; there will be cameras. Your neighbors will stand around gawking and talking to the microphones. It won't matter if you're frog-marched, carried bodily, or rolled out in a wheelchair with a bottle of oxygen in your lap. The orderlies will put you in the back of the vehicle behind a wire partition and drive away.
After a flight somewhat reminiscent of the movie Con Air or The Fugitive, you will be driven in another military vehicle (the new airport is still under construction) to a tiny rust-belt municipality in western Pennsylvania called Nuremberg, specifically to a newly constructed Gothic-style building patterned after those in another place, a place in Germany, called Nuremberg, in which all those Nazi military and civil officials were tried for their crimes against humanity.
You may remember how that turned out.
Charges against you will include crimes against the Constitution of the United States, violation of the solemn oath you took as an Army officer to uphold and defend that Constitution, and, if it can be proven that you harbored your present views when you took that oath, perjury.
Unlike the original Nuremberg tribunals, you will be alotted your full Warholian fifteen minutes. Your trial will be carried -- along with those of many others -- on cable channels dedicated to such entertainment, and the Internet, where the most interesting or amusing segments from your trial will be exhibited over and over again on YouTube.
The proceedings will be fair but fast, conducted before a jury of the people whose rights you have violated. Once you are convicted, you will be transported by various means to San Francisco, and taken to a brand new 100-story windowless prison, built especially for government miscreants like you, on Alcatraz Island. Constructed entirely of black obsidian-like glass that glitters in the sun, it will become one of the most-photographed objects in the world. All confinement will be solitary, although CNN will be piped into your cell on a 24 hour basis.
Inside the prison without windows, Alcatraz's infamous Rule of Silence will be maintained at Taserpoint. Meals will be simple but healthy, from menus supplied by your fellow inmate, Michelle Obama. Outside, Japanese and other tourists on excursion boats will be delighted to pay for chunks of meat with an expired sell-by date, so they can chum the already-shark-infested waters of the bay around the Rock.
Every day you will be taken for exercise to the roof, a glassy smooth surface without guards or guard-rails, where you may interact with your fellow convicts: mayors and city councilmen, governors and legislators, bureaucrats of every rank and description, Senators, Congressmen, Cabinet members and Presidents. The wind is always strong at altitude in San Francisco, out in the middle of the bay. Should you decide you can't take any more, you are free to be blown over the edge by the wind, pushed over by your former colleagues, or simply to jump, yourself.
Your bones will remain at the base of the building as a warning -- or encouragement -- to others. At long last you will be of service to America.
That's the future I'm working to realize, Bob, and there are millions more like me who share my dreams. I suppose you could make amends before it's too late, abjectly apologizing to everyone you've threatened, insulted, and offended. But that would leave a question hanging.
Why should anyone believe you?

Author and lecturer L. Neil Smith is Senior Editorial Consultant for Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. A fifty-year veteran of the libertarian movement, he is the Author of 33 books including The Probability Broach, Ceres, Sweeter Than Wine, And Down With Power: libertarian Policy In A Time Of Crisis. He is also the Publisher of The Libertarian Enterprise, now in its 17th year onlin

2nd Amendment and the motives of the left.

I saw this on another blog, and I snagged it, but for the life of me I cannot find the site again to give them the "props".    I have stated this many times, Gun control isn't about guns...it is about control, we the "unwashed masses" need our betters in DC on the Potomic to guide us.  I always knew that the driving force behind gun control is "people control, " same as with Obunglercare.  Once we don't have the means of resistance, we cease to be free and become serfs on the land that formerly was the single most free place  on the planet, but the population as a whole has forgotten what they were, bought the whole "hope and change" stuff and signed away their birthright.    The writings is from this person, the pics are from me.

When I think about this problem, one of the first things I remember is that when hostilities broke out between the American colonists and the King’s soldiers, the latter immediately attempted to secure the armory in Concord. From that failure came “the shot heard ’round the world”.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
“Gun Control” is nothing new. In fact, it’s been around for much longer than guns have existed. It’s been a universal phenomenon amongst human societies. And it’s never been about public safety. It has been, and always will be, an act of caste stratification and population control.

In ancient Feudal societies all around the world, notably China and Japan and many parts of Europe and the Middle-East, peasants and plebeians were prohibited from owning weapons. When the ruling aristocrats and feudal land-owners required a military force, their trusted retainers would issue arms to conscripted peasant-levies, and send them into battle as vanguards of the main force. After battle finished and the troops had looted the field, the retainers would retrieve these weapons and send the serfs back to work. Why were the commoners prohibited from possession of weapons?

Simple.

To prevent uprisings.

Remember that in these points in history, society was rigidly stratified, and the only individuals who could possess arms were men who had proven their loyalty to their rulers. These men were regarded as dignified individuals, men of honour and upstanding moral virtue, while commoners were regarded as little more than productive units in the inventories of their lords and masters. Just look at the culture of respect for the Knights and Samurai of old.

Control of the disarmed populace in turn went on to reflect and perpetuate such social stratification. Without the means to change their government by force, these societies were ruled by the strongest and wealthiest men with armies composed of a loyal minority to defend them.

Force is, and always has been, the highest, most fundamental form of authority. All other authorities have been, and always will be, derived from the means to exert and resist force.

In the late 1700s, the colonists of America knew this lesson from history all too well. During the Revolutionary War, the Founding Fathers fought against a tyrannical and oppressive government which sought to restrict the means to exert and resist force, and sought to take the majority of wealth away from the colonial population. The Second Amendment to the American Constitution was written to ensure that common citizens would always have recourse to the highest form of authority so that in the inevitable event of the ruling body no longer looking out for the interests of the common people at heart, they would be able to resort to force-of-arms to at least stand a chance of overturning a corrupted system.

With the advent of mass-media broadcasting and the rise of the New Feudal-Capitalist caste system, the ruling elites have gained a most powerful weapon: brainwashing. No longer have religious institutions been required to control the masses. Fear imparted by widespread propaganda now does it for them. Even more perceptive people can, and often are, influenced by this conditioning process during the formative years, developing attitudes of apathy.

Which brings us to the nature of Gun Control.

A wise man once said “If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself” (a quote often misattributed to Joseph Goebbels). This is the insidious nature in which the elites of the world have been consolidating their power, by disseminating lies about the nature of force and the nature of weapons. This is most evident in the conditioning of unfathomable numbers of otherwise rational individuals to believe that there are never circumstances where recourse to force of arms is justifiable, and that “non-violent” action is always the best action, which has been demonstrated by history repeatedly to seldom be the case.

This propaganda also revolves around twisting of the facts and manipulation of popular preconceptions, with strong emotive undertones. All too often people remember the times when people use weapons to kill indiscriminately, but all too rarely are people informed of the millions of instances globally where weapons are used to mitigate unnecessary losses of life.

Firearms in particular represented a shift in the paradigm. No longer was it only the strong, quick-witted and talented who may wield arms, but now any individual with the inclination, time and access, has means to exert and resist force. A conceptual precursor to the firearm, the crossbow, drew similar ire during the Middle Ages, where a Papal Decree was issued to prohibit their use in warfare claiming that the ability to give a common peasant the ability to defeat the armour of a wealthy Knight and thus kill him, was an aberration to the natural order. Regardless, control over such weapons and their possession by the peasants was sufficient enough that most rulers saw possession of these weapons as justifiable.

Just as we in this day and age should understand that now, more than ever in history, possession of the means to exert and resist force is not only justifiable, but a necessity. Now more than ever we see a disparity between the wealthy and powerful and the poor and disempowered. Gun-control advocates live in ivory towers, and all too often the most powerful voices amongst them possess the weapons themselves, and/or retain individuals entrusted with such weaponry. This is damning evidence of the hypocrisy and elitism behind laws of personal weapon restriction. We live at a precipice of history, at the branch in the road where we may choose between a society where the minority of wealthy and strong are more equal than the majority, or a society where all men may stand as equals guaranteed by their capacity to exert and resist acts of force.

We are already descending down the path of the former, but it is not too late to stop this decay. The hardest part is overcoming the incessant propaganda, which is the reason why I have written this essay

Remember; you only have the power, if you have the will.

Blessings upon you all