2006 Republican "Disaster" - again...

As I read different commentators around the internet bemoaning all the voters who didn't vote Republican in the last election, but either withheld their vote or voted 3rd party and calling them idiots and blaming them for the disaster, let me lay this quote on you:

"I didn't leave the Democratic party, the Democratic party left me!"
-Ronald Reagan

That, dear reader, is what happened this past election. The Republicans left those of us who have faithfully voted for them since 1980. They turned their backs on us, took us for granted, and got their lunches handed to them for it.

And have they learned anything from their disaster? Let me put it to you this way: Giuliani. McCain. Romney. These are the Republican front runners today. All three are either partly or fully against the issues that are important to real conservatives (like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, to use the Founders words - which the neo-cons seem not to understand.)

Giuliani: This liberal Republican and esrstwhile cross-dresser thinks the 2nd amendment only applies to hunters. Is also pro-abortion and pro-gay "rights". But he's a "leader".

McCain: Once called religious conservatives "agents of intolerance", and thinks that restricting free-speech is what it takes to clean up political campaigns (see "McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform") now is sucking up to those same "agents of intolerance" because they vote.

Romney: You just don't know where he stands on anything. Is spending most of his time these days backpedaling from earlier positions he took on fireams ownership, gay marriage, and other topics that would typically cause conservatives to look for someone else to support. Obviously being a supposed conservative in Massachusetts you have to do some things to be a successful politician, but to me that just makes it worse. If you have convictions then stand by them even in the face of opposition and criticism. I can respect a man like that even if I don't agree with them.

Honestly, the only one with any backbone is Giuliani - at least he tells you where he stands and sticks with it. But none of them are palatable to conservatives. The only conservative that is being mentioned is Newt Gingrich and he hasn't even announced yet.

Gingrich is interesting to me, but he is such an academic that he loses people when he gets to talking on minutia and they tune him out. Plus, he has some character issues, which is why he was ousted from the House. If he came in with a simple message that resonates with everyone like he did with the "Contract with America" he could win it all.

The problem with Gingrich is that he is not a "Liberty" candidate, as he has supported and defended the "Patriot" act, one of the greatest usurpations of Liberty ever created. For that reason alone I could not vote for him.

Honestly, I would love to vote for Ron Paul, but I don't know if he will make it to the first primary, let alone be a player in the race.

So, Republicans. Here is a great sea of votes waiting for someone who is worthy of them. Will you learn from 2006 and put forward good candidates, or will you continue in your losing ways and give us the likes of Giuliani, McCain, and Romney?

We'll see.

Trolley Square

Since the Brady Bunch is once again sharing their incredible ability to deny reality with the rest of the world, I'll do my part to counteract it.

1. Taking firearms out of the hands of law-abiding citizens (that is, those whose right to keep and bear them is confirmed [not bestowed!] by the Constitution of the United States) only creates more victims. It does NOT create safety for anyone but the criminal, who need not fear being shot by his apparent victim.
2. This attack was stopped by a person carrying a concealed weapon. The gunman was not stopped by oratory, he was stopped by a bullet.
3. An off-duty police officer out of his jurisdiction is the equivalent of a CCW holder. More people would have been slaughtered (yes, that is precisely the word for it) if this officer had not intervened. With his GUN!
4. The fact that the Brady Bunch denies these common-sense facts in no way makes them less true.
5. The attack was not stopped by the "No Weapons" sign on the door.
6. Bravo to Officer Hammond!
   

Folks, here it is: firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens REDUCES crime. The mature adult accepts facts and understands the truth rather than trying to deny it. The truth is, the world is a dangerous place and the wise person understands his times and prepares to deal with them rather than living in some spaced-out world of denial.

Question of the Day

As the Socialist Administration of Michigan Governess Granholm continues to look for ways to solve the deepening budget crisis, it didn't take long for her to put tax increases on the table. She is proposing a 2% increase in the income tax, a 1% decrease in the sales tax, and an expansion of sales tax to services. So now you would pay an extra 5% for your haircut, car wash, legal fees, lawn care, snow removal, car repairs, day care, and all sorts of other services.

Kudos (sort of) to Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, who is indicating that there must be budget cuts and service cuts before even thinking about tax increases.

Which brings me to the question of the day: What is it about politicians that allows them to think that just because government exists, it must expand? That every idea they have must be codified into law and have money spent from the public treasury on it? And if there isn't enough money for their new idea, then we need a tax increase to pay for it!

At what point will these elected ones say "Our goal for this session is to not pass any new laws. We think we have enough laws and our people are regulated enough."? Now there's a novel idea! Ronald Reagan said it best: "Government isn't the solution to our problems, Government is the problem!"

Border Patrol is looking increasingly stupid

I have been following the story the trial and conviction of Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean in Texas. They have been convicted of shooting an unarmed man in the back. Oh, by the way, the shootee was transporting 700 pounds of marijuana when he was stopped by the Border Patrol agents.

Now I wasn't there, I don't know what happened, I didn't see what happened. These guys may be guilty as sin for all I know. But DHS and the Border patrol and the US Attorney are looking increasingly like they are either fools or petty tyrants.

Today's news on this story says that two agents who were there at the scene during the incident have been fired because they gave different testimony during the trial than they did to the Border Patrol investigators. These two were also given immunity to testify against Ramos and Compean. There are also chain of evidence problems with the bullet taken from the smuggler, as well as inconclusive evidence that the bullet was even fired from the pistol of the agent that hit the smuggler.

All in all, it would seem that these two agents should get a new trial, or have the conviction overturned entirely.

We'll see. The US Attorney doesn't seem to have any problem with these two being in jail.

This is just a sample of the carelessness and disregard for the truth that the investigation seems to have been conducted with.

I encourage you to go to WorldNetDaily.com to read the entire series of articles.

The Governess Speaks

As is my wont, I was listening to The Paul W. Smith Show on WJR radio as I got ready for work this morning. I had to be particularly careful shaving today, because Paul was talking to Governess Granholm as I was performing that little ritual, and I tend to have forceful reactions when she is talking.

I didn't hear the entire interview, but the snippet I heard was enough to encapsulate the entire "State of the State" message last night (which I didn't listen to either, as I already know what a democrat will say: "raise taxes, more government". It never fails.).

Paul W asked a terriffic question, to the effect of "if the State is in such dire fiscal shape, why should anyone expect to, for example, have the State pay for their college tuition? Shouldn't people have to pay for that themselves?". It was a more detailed and expansive question than that, but I was never so proud of Paul W than in that moment.

The Governess' response can be summarized this way: "We're investing in our people".

What utter hogwash. Pure unmitigated socialist fantasy. Poppycock!

Voters of the State of Michigan, you did yourselves no favors when you elected and re-elected this woman. All she knows is to grab more power, steal more money, expand the nanny-state. And wrap it all up in compassionate-sounding phraseology so the doofuses will swallow it more easily.

Government invests in nothing. Government takes, by force of arms, the rewards of the labor of one person and transfers them to another who has not worked for them. Government has never created a productive job (thousands upon thousands of bureaucrats are not productive jobs), government has never produced a single product, and government has never expanded anyone's productivity. Politicians always use government to expand their influence and control over the lives of the citizens, and will do whatever they have to do to maintain themselves in that position for as long as possible.

Madam Governess - if you want investment, then cut taxes, cut the size and scope of government, and give people the opportunity to fend for themselves. They will do a much better job of it than any government program ever could.

But of course her ideology will not allow her to to accept this self-evident truth. So the people, or should I say the subjects of the State of Michigan, will bear the taxes and the consequences for years to come.

"I think we have more machinery of government than is
necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the
industrious." ---Thomas Jefferson

Pfizer leaving MI "a punch in the gut"

The big economic news in Michigan today is the Pfizer is all but closing up shop in this state, leaving only a reduced presence in Kalamazoo.

Listening to the Governess on The Paul W. Smith Show this morning was a mixture of stuff. On one hand, you have to say "that must have hurt"when someone gets whacked by news like that. On the other hand, you have to say "if you had any economic sense at all, you would have seen this coming years ago".

Dear reader, when you base your policies on the failed system of socialism, this is what you get. When you think that taking more money from your citizens is what it takes to make your economy work, this is what happens. Businesses move away from you and your greedy government.

I expect that the letter and the statements that the President of Pfizer gave to you are all about political cover, not reality - although moving some of the Michigan operations to the Soviet Socialist Republic of Kalifornia makes no sense on the face of it. Perhaps they have a sweetheard deal with the Governator or the Legislaturat out there?

After the interview with the Governess, Paul W quoted the former State School Superintendent Tom Watkins from the article in todays Detroit Free Press: "Michigan adds jobs in teardrops, like Google, and loses them in roaring tsunamis". What an apt description.

So, what was the Governess' response to the Pfizer news? "We have to keep working my plan".
Madam Governess - your plan was a failure before it began, because the foundation of it is socialism - a failed economic model. When Government meddles in the economy at any level, it is a disaster for everyone. Start cutting the size and scope of government, start cutting taxes and regulation, and you will see an economic miracle that you will get to take credit for.

We don't need more laws and more government - we need to be set free from them.

Congressional Power Grab Alert!

Our august Senators, convened in Washington DC, have selected as their first bill of the new Congress, a measure to further stifle free speech in the former land of the free and the home of the brave.

S.1 is ostensibly a bill to regulate lobbyist influence in Congress. Possibly a good idea, although if these worthies don't have sense enough to know a bribe when they see one, and to take appropriate action, one must question their ability to make the great decisions of state which come with the office they occupy.

In reality, this is a bill to stifle the political speech of millions of American Citizens, by requiring the organizations they use to monitor the activity of Congress to file paperwork with the Feds whenever they communicate anything of a political nature to those who are not members. With mounds of Federal paperwork to file for each and every message that goes to "the general public" (the actual words used in the bill), these organizations will not be able to afford to send any of those messages due to compliance costs. Thus, the right of Citizens to petition their government for redress of grievances is seriously hindered.

In my own case, I subscribe to mailing lists of several organizations which I am not a member of (GOA, JPFO, Right to Life, etc.) , yet I am not a member of any of these organizations. I rely on these organizations to give me information on the happenings in Congress or my State Legislature. But this source of information would dry up on me if this bill passes.

Dear Reader - please contact your Senators and urge them to vote against this bill, and to support the amendment being offered by Senator Mitch McConnell and Senator Robert Bennett which would delete the offensive part of S.1.

You won't hear about this on the old media (Us? Bias?). But contact your Senators before the end of the week.

Springfield XD45 Compact

Just to get off the political stuff for a while, I thought I would mention that Springfield has come out with the carry pistol I want (yes, there are some good things about Michigan - like "shall issue" CCW). It is the XD45 Compact.



The big problem with concealed carry is the "concealed" part. I like to carry inside-the-waistband (IWB), so what I have to conceal is the grip. The XD45C takes the standard 4-inch service model and shortens the grip. The standard capacity for this pistol is 10+1, but it will also take the full-sized magazine with a spacer. So you carry the gun with the 10-rounder and have a 13 rounder as a backup, total 24 rounds. Right now, with my 1911 I have to carry 2 extra mags, which gives me 25 rounds (8+1+8+8).



I have about 2000 rounds of experience with the XD, in 9mm and .40 S and I really liked the gun. It was dead reliable and felt good in my hand. I'm a .45 guy though, so when Springfield brought out the XD45 I was really excited!



So now, it's "save your pennies" mode for me - I really want that XD.

powered by performancing firefox

What do you think she'll do?

Article from The Detroit News
reporting on our esteemed Governess and her budget report.

She was also heard on WJR radio on The Paul W. Smith Show discussing these numbers. Here is a summation of her comments, with some interjections by, well, me:

Well, we have a lot of job losses, and the automakers aren't doing very good, and our sales tax receipts are down because people aren't buying as much, so we have this big budget shortfall of between one and three billion dollars.

So, state income is down because so many are out of work and aren't spending as much. OK, I'm with you so far. So, madam Governess, what are you proposing to solve this dilemma?

I have no problem making cuts - I've had to do that before and I'll do it again.

Good, good. Now we're getting somewhere. What next?

Tax increases are also on the table. We may have to do that to pay for all these government services people need.

I knew it was too good to be true! You almost had it going! But instead, you revert to your socialist ideology, well-proven to lead to an exacerbation of the kinds of problems facing Michigan. Government is the solution to every problem, if only you'll give it more of your money - yeah, that's the ticket! The ticket to economic and social oblivion!

I'd just like to ask you this, madam Governess: All those laid-off autoworkers you're so concerned about, those hard working people that have been given their pink slip and aren't able to find any work in Michigan because of the continuing single-state recession - where are they supposed to get the money to pay your income tax hike? What about those other hard-working folks who still have a job but are just getting by as it is now. What are they going to do to pay your tax? There aren't enough rich people for you to soak anymore - they have all left for other states that don't tax them as heavily as Michigan does.

Michigan, you voted for this woman and now you are reaping what you have sown. Hope you like it.

It's all those Jews that are the problem...yeah, that's it!

From The Los Angeles Times, December 13, 2006, quoting Dhimmi Carter:

The former president also asserted that pro-Israel lobbyists have stifled open debate in this country on the Israeli-Palestinian situation. "It's impossible for any candidate for Congress to make a statement like 'I favor balanced support of Israel and Palestine' " (Link to article)

'Scuse me, Dhimmi, but hasn't President W made those kinds of statements ever since 2000? Isn't this what "The Roadmap" has all been about?

It is good that you only got one term to screw up this country, Mr. Former President and current disgrace. Here's what one of your former employees said about the book (from the same article)

Across the country, one of the leading critics of Carter's book is Kenneth W. Stein, a professor of Middle Eastern history and political science at Emory University. The book prompted Stein's resignation last week from his position as a fellow with the Carter Center in Atlanta.

Stein, who was associated with the center for 23 years and once was its executive director, said in a letter that the book was "replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions and simply invented segments."

Not that I give credence to anyone who works at the Carter Center, still, the fact that the guy resigned says a lot to me about this book and the man who wrote it.

Dhimmi - apparently you haven't been reading your Bible like you claim you do. This conflict has been going on for several millenia, and there's a reason for it. Do you think you can go in and wave your magic Nobel Peace Prize and all of a sudden they will all smack themselves on the forehead and say "Gee - you're right. I can't believe I've never seen it before. Of course we'll stop killing each other - that's so, so, *violent*. Thank you Uncle Jimmy."

I'm no Einstein, but even I can figure it out. But apparently you're smarter than everyone else, ever, President Dhimmi.

Deer Season 2006

Well I guess I have recovered from the 2-week firearm deer season here in Michigan. This year, as for the last 2 or 3 years, the weather decided to be in the 30's at night and 50's during the day, which slowed all the deer down and made them all layabouts!

I stopped going out in the mornings since the deer seem to not move around in the morning on the land that I hunt. In the 7 years I have hunted there I have only seen 2 deer in the morning, both at the same time going to a bait pile. So it just isn't worth it to get up at oh-dark-thirty when I won't see anything anyway!

Maybe one of these years I'll swipe my father-in-law's .480 Ruger revolver and go lookin' for them instead of waiting for them to come to me.

Nevertheless, it is worth it for me to go out every year, if for no other reason than to escape Sodom on the Red Cedar for a time and remember that there is another world outside my basement office. When I go back, I can feel the life being sucked out of me.

Yes I did get one, a little one that I would have passed up if there had been even one more in the field. But the wife wanted venison in the freezer. And who am I to argue.

Flashbacks

"Our strong inclination would be to avoid tax hikes. That's pretty universal. That shows the pragmatism of the Democratic Party. Even the most liberal people said 'No,we shouldn't go for tax hikes.' So we are going to try to avoid it." ---Chuck Schumer

I'm having a flashback to Bill "I tried harder than I ever tried in my life" Clinton.

Hey Chuckie - do you honestly expect us to believe this? Do you honestly think we believe you and your fellow Democrats have the least shred of integrity? (let alone pragmatism).

Dear reader, you are a fool if you believe anything a democrat says. Remember the old axiom about what a politician is doing when he is moving his lips!

Post-Election 2006

Still formulating complete thoughts on the election results. Here are a couple of short takes that are still in the developmental stage.

1. Will Republicans get the message of these elections? Conservative principles are what got you into office in the first place, and when you abandoned them, you lost.
2. We don't always get the government we want, but we always get the government we deserve. Here in Michigan, we are last or nearly last in every meaningful economic category, yet we elected a liberal democrat to a second term. A liberal democrat who has done nothing to improve anything here in her first term. I was willing to give her a little bit of a pass for the first half of her administration, as the State budget was not constructed for the economic downturn she got when she took over. All she could really do was cut, and she did. But she had no realistic plan, and she still doesn't - just more socialist utopian drivel that has been proven not to work. Good luck with that, madam Governess. It won't work here any better than it does in France. Or Canada where you came from.
   
3. The educational state of the American electorate is sinking fast. We don't understand basic economics and we don't understand history. Therefore, we make stupid choices. Neither one is difficult to grasp, yet it seems to be beyond many of those who actually vote. God help the USA - he's the only one who can, now.

Michigan Ballot Proposals

I couldn't do any better than my friend "The Shekel" on his blog.

I completely agree with his assessments.

Additionally, Proposal 3 (which would establish a dove hunting season in Michigan) is being used as a vehicle by radical animal-rights groups to gain a foothold in Michigan with the stated goal of eliminating all hunting here.

Unlike The Shekel, I am a hunter and I would like to pass on this heritage to my kids. I came to it late, but I enjoy it immensely (even when I don't see any game!) These nutballs with their strange ideas about the order of nature constitute a very small minority of the population, yet they get big backing from Hollywood leftists to try to spread this, well, bravo sierra. (You haven't heard Harrison Ford sitting in New York but hearing the zebras?)

I make note here of the difference between an environmentalist and a conservationist. An environmentalist elevates nature above all else, including humanity. They give "rights" to creatures who are not intellegent, who cannot reason, and whose sole purpose is to be a part of the food chain. That is - to be eaten.

A conservationist recognizes that one must protect the natural resources we have been given, and that a part of this is to preserve the hunting and fishing heritage of our country. This does not mean that a conservationist is for all-out hunting whenever the mood strikes without bag limits. Indeed, a conservationist is appalled, for instance, at the buffalo hunts of the late 19th century, which were examples of waste and over-hunting.

So the choice is clear: continue to preserve a great American tradition and a moral, responsible caretaking of our wildlife, or the introduction of irresponsibility and a completely false view of nature and our place in it.

So vote Yes on 3, preserve a great heritage, and kick the neo-communists out of town.

Fed-up conservatives disloyal?

As the Sean Hannity's and Rush Limbaugh's of the world would have you believe, if you are conservative and are not voting republican you are somehow "cut-and-run republicans" who don't care a whit about the future of the country, because of all the evils that are going to happen with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House.

I have bought into this line myself in the past, most recently at the last Presidential election. I voted for W for one reason: Supreme Court Justices. So now I have a couple more conservative justices on the court. I also have a government that is more intrusive into my private affairs than ever before without due process of law (namely the so-called "PATRIOT Act"), a government that while under the "control" of Republicans has increased the deficit and debt to levels that Howard Dean would never in his wildest dreams thought possible, and generally made the future bleak for everyone in the country regardless of their political bent. I have to say I don't think it was worth it.

And they have the gall to call themselves Conservative?

So now I fall back on the philosophy of Ronald Reagan as he related to the Soviets: Trust but Verify. (Does anyone see the irony in that statement?) Or perhaps a modification of the old saw "Fool me once, shame on you", only for me the ending phrase will be "Fool me twice and I'll never vote for you or your party again"

So for all you true conservatives, consider how many times you have been ignored once these neo-con's bagged your vote. Consider how many times the issues that mean the most to you have been either ignored or actively opposed. Then consider how much loyalty you owe these people.