The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: 2HOW on February 03, 2009, 11:30:41 AM
-
Holder: The Roll of Honor & the Roll of Shame
The NYT reports the confirmation of Attorney General Eric Holder by a vote of 75-21.
The IHT reports the roll call as follows:
The 75-21 roll call by which the Senate voted to confirm Eric Holder as attorney general.
On this vote, a "yes" vote was a vote to confirm Holder and a "no" vote was a vote to reject his confirmation.
Voting "yes" were 54 Democrats, 19 Republicans and two independents.
Voting "no" were 21 Republicans.
Alabama: Sessions (R) Yes; Shelby (R) No.
Alaska: Begich (D) Not Voting; Murkowski (R) Yes.
Arizona: Kyl (R) Yes; McCain (R) Yes.
Arkansas: Lincoln (D) Yes; Pryor (D) Yes.
California: Boxer (D) Yes; Feinstein (D) Yes.
Colorado: Bennet (D) Yes; Udall (D) Yes.
Connecticut: Dodd (D) Yes; Lieberman (I) Yes.
Delaware: Carper (D) Yes; Kaufman (D) Yes.
Florida: Martinez (R) Not Voting; Nelson (D) Yes.
Georgia: Chambliss (R) Yes; Isakson (R) Yes.
Hawaii: Akaka (D) Yes; Inouye (D) Yes.
Idaho: Crapo (R) No; Risch (R) No.
Illinois: Burris (D) Yes; Durbin (D) Yes.
Indiana: Bayh (D) Yes; Lugar (R) Yes.
Iowa: Grassley (R) Yes; Harkin (D) Yes.
Kansas: Brownback (R) No; Roberts (R) No.
Kentucky: Bunning (R) No; McConnell (R) No.
Louisiana: Landrieu (D) Yes; Vitter (R) No.
Maine: Collins (R) Yes; Snowe (R) Yes.
Maryland: Cardin (D) Yes; Mikulski (D) Yes.
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D) Not Voting; Kerry (D) Yes.
Michigan: Levin (D) Yes; Stabenow (D) Yes.
Minnesota: Klobuchar (D) Yes.
Mississippi: Cochran (R) No; Wicker (R) No.
Missouri: Bond (R) Yes; McCaskill (D) Yes.
Montana: Baucus (D) Yes; Tester (D) Yes.
Nebraska: Johanns (R) No; Nelson (D) Yes.
Nevada: Ensign (R) No; Reid (D) Yes.
New Hampshire: Gregg (R) Yes; Shaheen (D) Yes.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D) Yes; Menendez (D) Yes.
New Mexico: Bingaman (D) Yes; Udall (D) Yes.
New York: Gillibrand (D) Yes; Schumer (D) Yes.
North Carolina: Burr (R) No; Hagan (D) Yes.
North Dakota: Conrad (D) Yes; Dorgan (D) Yes.
Ohio: Brown (D) Yes; Voinovich (R) Yes.
Oklahoma: Coburn (R) No; Inhofe (R) No.
Oregon: Merkley (D) Yes; Wyden (D) Yes.
Pennsylvania: Casey (D) Yes; Specter (R) Yes.
Rhode Island: Reed (D) Yes; Whitehouse (D) Yes.
South Carolina: DeMint (R) No; Graham (R) Yes.
South Dakota: Johnson (D) Yes; Thune (R) No.
Tennessee: Alexander (R) Yes; Corker (R) Yes.
Texas: Cornyn (R) No; Hutchison (R) No.
Utah: Bennett (R) Yes; Hatch (R) Yes.
Vermont: Leahy (D) Yes; Sanders (I) Yes.
Virginia: Warner (D) Yes; Webb (D) Yes.
Washington: Cantwell (D) Yes; Murray (D) Yes.
West Virginia: Byrd (D) Yes; Rockefeller (D) Yes.
Wisconsin: Feingold (D) Yes; Kohl (D) Yes.
Wyoming: Barrasso (R) No; Enzi (R) No.
Good on the people of Wyoming, Oklahoma, Kansas, Kentucky, Idaho, Mississippi, and Texas for choosing both of your Senators complete with brains and backbone.
Thanks also to the other opposition Senators, and to all of the good folks who fought against this nominee.
As to the "yes" votes, they will be remembered.
Now, if you listen carefully, you may hear a faint sound in the distance.
For those of you who don't recognize it, that's the Muster Drum.
One of the masterminds behind the second Waco cover-up is the new Attorney General.
He commands the FBI and the BATFE, as well as every single Assistant United States Attorney in the country.
He believes that everyday Americans should be prohibited from owning and using firerams of military utility and their accessories.
He and his subordinates will enforce and prosecute whatever anti-freedom measures the new Congress passes and the President signs.
Get ready.
-
Well, now we know what Judd Gregg paid for Sec. of Commerce. :(
Just sent this e mail to Judd Gregg NH (R?)
Well, After reading the roll call vote on the Holder nomination I guess the People of NH know what you paid to be Sec. of Commerce.
If you want to pursue the Democratic platform why don't you join their party.
Thomas C. Bogan
Laconia NH
-
I see John McCain voted yes,......
Thanks John, way to go!
Real Nice >:( >:(
Oh,
(http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm182/twyacht/Awesome_rage.jpg)
-
I am so disappointed in the GA Senators. I would never have suspected them to have voted "yes". They will both hear about this tonight.
-
Martinez of FL (R) didn't vote. He's not running for re-election in'10...great, he's given up already!
-
My senators were split
-
Two Dem's in Colorado... Two yes's >:(
Shame..DAMN Shame
-
Why have scruples when the guiding principle is: go along, to get along.
-
I am so disappointed in the GA Senators. I would never have suspected them to have voted "yes". They will both hear about this tonight.
You got that right.
-
I guess this just proves that the GOP does not care guns... what a shock... I've never said that before. ::)
-
Who is putting the Salt Peter in the GOP's water?
I think its a conspiracy..........Did most of the testicular fortitude in the GOP leave the building? ,,,Like Elvis..?
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress.... But then I repeat myself."
Mark Twain
-
Here is a brief note I just sent out to both of my Georgia Senators:
Dear Sir,
I was deeply disappointed to see that both of my Senators from Georgia voted their approval for the confirmation of Eric Holder for Attorney General. Mr. Holder is known to be blatantly unfriendly towards gun owners and proponents of our God-given right to keep and bear arms, which was recently upheld by the Supreme Court.
I sincerely hope that the selection and approval of Mr. Holder for this position does not spell discord for the rights of free Americans to own and shoot the very firearms that have made and kept us free for over two hundred years.
If it does, it will be remembered at the next election.
Charles Goins, Jr.
Ty Ty, Ga.
-
Here is the reply I received today regarding the note in the last post from Senator Chambliss (R-Ga.).....:
Dear Mr. Goins:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the nomination of Eric Holder to become Attorney General under the Obama Administration. It is good to hear from you.
President Obama nominated Mr. Holder to be the Attorney General on December 1, 2008 and he was confirmed by the Senate on February 2, 2009. I believe the President deserves great deference in filling his Cabinet. (emphasis mine)
While Mr. Holder and I have differences on policy and judicial theories, I supported Mr. Holder because of his great experience and because I believe he can competently fill the role for which he has been nominated. Mr. Holder has previously been unanimously confirmed to judicial positions by the United States Senate on three separate occasions. In 1988, he was nominated by President Ronald Reagan to be associate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. In 1993, President Clinton nominated Mr. Holder to be the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, and in 1997, President Clinton nominated him to be Deputy Attorney General of the United States.
Although I continue to have concerns with some of Mr. Holder's policy views, particularly his view of the Second Amendment, after speaking with him, I am convinced he recognizes that the Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, recognizing the Second Amendment right to be an individual right, to be the law of the land.
Moreover, I believe that if any changes will be made to our country's gun policies, they will be made by Congress or the court system, and not the Department of Justice. I also had serious concerns about the role Mr. Holder played in the pardons of Marc Rich and members of the FALN group when he was at the Department of Justice. These pardons have been nearly universally condemned by the entire legal community. In his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mr. Holder fully recognized his mistakes in those pardons and stated if he had to do it again, he would have done things differently. I believe he will take that learning experience with him into his role as Attorney General.
I have closely scrutinized Mr. Holder's nomination by reviewing his testimony from the Judiciary Committee and personally questioning him. I believe Mr. Holder is qualified for the position of Attorney General. Again, although I do not agree with a number of the positions Mr. Holder has taken in the past, I believe that Presidents, including President Obama, should be given deference in filling their Cabinet.
If you would like to receive timely email alerts regarding the latest congressional actions and my weekly e-newsletter, please sign up via my web site at: www.chambliss.senate.gov .
Please let me know whenever I may be of assistance.
-
I know there are a lot of you with only one vote, but Minnesota is supposed to have TWO!!! The one we have voted yes of course, but if we only had our other one in place to offset her we wouldn't look as bad :'(
-
Anti-gun Eric Holder Sworn In As Attorney General
-- See who stabbed you in the back
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
GOA wants to thank all of you for your hard work in opposing the
extremely anti-gun Eric Holder for Attorney General.
While we lost the battle on Monday (by a vote of 75-21), you guys
registered your opposition loud and clear.
There is no doubt that your activism truly made gun rights THE issue in
this nomination battle. Every Senator who spoke against Holder
mentioned Second Amendment fears. And even among many of the Senators
who voted for him, there was tremendous concern regarding Holder's
stance on gun rights.
As stated by The Washington Post yesterday, "Holder overcame concerns by
a small but vocal group of GOP lawmakers about his position on national
security and GUN RIGHTS, as well as his recommendations in two
controversial clemency decisions by President Bill Clinton."
This was truly a battle worth fighting. In fact, the man who was being
deified two weeks ago is now the very same President who is widely seen
as not being able to shoot straight in selecting cabinet members and is
already starting to lose public support. The battle over Holder was
certainly central to taking the bloom off this rose.
So thank you for helping magnify our voice on Capitol Hill. GOA spent
many hours lobbying against Holder, as we were the only gun rights group
in Washington to tell Senators we would be rating this vote in our
end-of-session grade report.
With Holder in office, you can expect to see renewed efforts to drive
gun dealers and manufacturers out of business -- similar to the efforts
he supported while in the Clinton administration.
Expect also to see attempts to classify more guns as "not
suitable" for
sporting purposes. And don't be surprised to see attempts to use the No
Fly List to disqualify gun owners from exercising their Second Amendment
rights. (Bureaucrats can add innocent Americans to the No Fly List --
and have done so -- without any due process of law being followed.)
With Eric Holder at the helm, the list could easily become a No Gun
List, as there are already discussions in Washington about doing this.
All the above horror scenarios are policies that could conceivably occur
without ANY legislation being passed in Congress. That is what makes
Holder's confirmation as Attorney General so dangerous. Through the use
of Executive Orders or by prosecuting gun owners, Holder can inflict
much damage upon the Second Amendment -- even apart from lending his
support for legislation, such as renewing the semi-auto ban.
So what can we do now? Is the battle over Holder finished?
No, not yet. There's one more action item that needs to be taken.
There are 75 Senators who ignored your pleas to vote against Holder.
They need to hear from you and know that you're upset.
They need to be reminded again and again that voting for gun control is
what cost Bill Clinton's party the control of Congress in 1994... and Al
Gore his election in 2000... and John Kerry the presidency in 2004.
And don't forget, there are the 21 Senators who voted right. They need
to be thanked. So please don't file this alert until you've taken the
action item below.
ACTION: Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators a
pre-written e-mail message. You will be prompted to input your zip
code, which will then bring up the correct letter for your Senators.
The pre-written letter will differ according to whether your Senator
voted in favor or against Eric Holder. (Three Senators missed the vote
entirely. GOA is treating their absence as an anti-gun action.)
NOTE: GOA's pre-written letters are usually editable by the sender. In
this instance, they are not for the sake of avoiding confusion, so that
Senators who voted wrong are not thanked (and vice versa).
-
Just received the same reply myself from Chambliss.
Nah, doesn't hack it. Saxby bought political capital by not opposing the nomination, rather than standing up and being counted.
-
Isn't this "Chamblis" character the one you guys were glad beat the Dem in a recount ? Just goes to show, members of BOTH major parties have lost sight of their purpose under the Constitution. We have not had a viable 3rd party candidate since Lincoln in 1860, maybe we should look into changing that for 2012.
By the way, was reading another blog today that mentioned that Micheal Steele, new head of the RNC was the only one of the 4 candidates who does not own at least one gun. :(
-
Please allow an outsider to make a comment.
Unless you guys over there get active, get motivated, get behind your NRA all you will be getting is screwed and not in a nice way.
The writing has been on the board for a long time and for a long time a lot of you (not you guys personally, firearm owners in general) have laughed at the happenings to England and to Australia and thought "that would never happen here, we have our second amendment to protect us, thank god for that". Well its morning time and well and truly past the point of smelling roses.
That funny noise that sounds like a bath emptying is the sound of your rights going down the gurglar.
First it will be licences, then registration, then more restrictive legislation, and before you know it you may as well come over here and live with us and be happy with your bolt action rifles (no semi or full auto allowed), be happy with your pistol and revolvers as long as they dont exceed a certain calibre or below a certain length.............
One thing at least you have a NRA, not a watered down bunch of knuckleheads that couldnt see the grass but for the trees.
Goodluck, you will need it.
-
Face it, both parties have sold the American people out, and the Constitution will be little more than a cultural artifact in 10-15 years at the outside. There was discussion along these lines last summer as we stampeded toward the election, notably the real lack of difference between bho and mccain.
For me, it goes back to JFK's assassination, which basically taught every American president since that if the President really pisses some people off, someone can get to the President, and like in JFK's case, can get away with it - unless you really believe that the scrawny loser Oswald was really that good with a bolt action surplus rifle at a moving target moving down, left and away from the shooter.
One World Gummint, here we come.
-
Unless you guys over there get active, get motivated, get behind your NRA all you will be getting is screwed and not in a nice way.
I just wrote both my liberal Senators...
I am really bothered by what seems to be going on in the Capitol of this fine nation. I read how nearly a trillion dollars is going to be spent on “Stimulating” the economy. As a conservative I am repulsed by the rhetoric that seems all too prevalent in pushing a check towards every liberal lobby group that can be found. Please don’t misinterpret my frustration as being only with the Democrat party, I am equally frustrated with a number of Republican and other parties.
To think for a moment that in my household I could solve all my problems by trying to spend my way out of it is ridiculous. I am not sure if anyone in DC has an economics degree, but it seems as though only a few in the House and Senate seem to have the slightest clue how to manage even a household income. I have seen lobby after lobby line up at the feeding trough to get bailed out of their bad decisions, from banks to home buyers that couldn’t afford the house in the first place. This is irresponsible to reward their bad behavior. Having seen abject poverty firsthand in my own life, it is corrosive to remove the just consequences of someone’s actions; it only encourages the bad behavior.
On an additional note, I see that you supported the new Attorney General who has a history of being anti-2nd amendment. I am not clinging to guns and religion, but I am bothered by anyone who would actively support legislation that would resurrect the attempts the British made at Concord and Lexington. I would hope that you would understand that this is one of the founding principles of this great nation and was inserted in the Constitution of the United States by men who saw firsthand how vital the right to keep and bear arms would be in order to defend freedom.
I hope that you vote against this "stimulus" package and against anything that would erode the rights of every law abiding citizen of the United States of America.
-
First the DISagreement,
1) Oswald was qualified as an EXPERT rifleman, at less than 100 yards, YES he was that good. Did he do it ? We will never know for sure, probably not.
2) The current problems in America go back to FDR, America's first effective socialist President. The entitlement packages he pushed through to (ineffectively) fight the depression did 3 things, it opened the door to the current dem policy of buying the moocher vote with hand outs, it started the rush toward Govt. interference in private business, and taking us off the gold standard left us with money that had no intrinsic value. These three things result in us having a current national debt that would have paid to run all the nations in the world in recorded history based on nothing but the belief that it will be paid off. This is biting us on the butt now with China sliding toward recession, and Putin telling the world not to buy American debt as they will lose their money.
As to your general conclusion, I agree, we're screwed. Within the next 12 years (probably much less) the system will break down under it's own weight. The life style that Americans are used to will be reduced first to total anarchy in the more urban areas, but will level off at about where we were in the late 1800's. There will be those who have taken to the woods and continue to attempt to resurrect the Constitutional Republic, they will either succeed eventually , but at a much reduced level of prosperity or the dominant forces will hunt them down and kill them.
Around 2090 or 2100 things will begin to improve again, but in a form much different than today.
-
I agree, we're screwed. Within the next 12 years (probably much less) the system will break down under it's own weight. The life style that Americans are used to will be reduced first to total anarchy in the more urban areas, but will level off at about where we were in the late 1800's.
I have hope the system will be able to survive, but I don't think we will be where we were in the late 1800s. I can't think of a instance where technological innovation was lost totally from the stone age till now. (of course I could be wrong) also, those who are in the urban areas will fight it out, kill each other, starve and then head out to the rural areas...that will finish them off. ;)
Then the Republic can be restarted on the same premise...only this time we are making a few clairifications to the Constitution.
I would add these to the Constitution as one amendment:
1. There shall be a separation of Church and State to the effect the state may not stop any religious speech. The State many not promote any church, but a simple disclaimer printed near or on any display or on record as not being promoted by the state will suffice if religious symbols, words or ideals are presented anywhere where it may be confused with as State sponsored.
2. Anyone elected official in government gets audited every year by both state and federal tax bodies. Any irregularities will be turned over to another state chosen at random for audit, federal would be turned over to a state that is currently controlled by a member of an opposite political party. All their spending and finances are public record and their bank statements are posted online for everyone to see in a financial recording similar to what is required of publicly traded companies.
3. Any bill that has any spending in it must have the names of who proposed it and no reworking after a vote. Any new part must go through the entire process from the start.
4. The entire US budget is graphed in an online pie chart that can be selected to view ALL aggregate data. All classified programs have to show all Congressional votes but need not be identified as what it entails.
5. Presidents after their presidency are wards of the state and will be given a stipend equal to 75% of their pay as a president. They are not permitted to make or spend any money after office that is not given to them as a stipend. The same goes for Congress.
6. Anyone found to influence lawmakers or elected officials decisions through bribery, extortion or collusion will be tried with a maximum of two appeals. If found guilty two out of three times, life imprisonment.
7. Murder carries the death penalty; they will be tried with a maximum of two appeals. If found guilty two out of three times, executed in no more than 90 days. All crimes are treated as they were committed that morning, 50 year old cases are punished the same.
8. Guns; everyone can own one except those who have been found guilty of a felony, violent crime, had the right legally removed or deemed mentally unfit. A panel of 9 nominated judges in each county will review every legal or medical recommendation for the removal of gun rights.
9. Anyone committing any act against the United States while outside the territorial boarders of the United States will have the same rights and privileges of those in the country that the crime or planning of crime happened. (Example: If they commit an act of terror in Syria, they get Syrian rights.) The trials can take place anywhere.
10. All Japanese prosecuted by the United States after WWII for water boarding are pardoned and reparations paid.
11. Water boarding is a legal for of interrogation.
12. It is not Cruel or Unusual if we think it is the right thing to do as punishment and use it on a regular basis.
13. Concealed weapons can be carried by any adult who passes the current Utah requirements for a concealed weapon and the weapon can be carried anywhere.
14. Fully automatic weapons can be regulated by a permit that cannot exceed ten percent of the first automatic gun cost. One permit is good for multiple guns. Permits must be obtained by Federal Agency similar to the BATF. The permit conditions are the same as those in 12. Silencers will have the same restrictions as they do now.
15. No other regulation or tax can be placed on firearms above normal item sales tax without an Amendment to the Constitution with each citizen of the United States voting on it. All non voters will be considered opposed to any change.
16. Rape is a punishable by the death penalty.
17. Insanity or personal hardship is not an excuse and cannot be considered in a court of law. Exceptions can be made when safety or health or others was at risk. Insane people can be punished the same as all others. Mentally disabled requires a jury of 100 people to vote unanimously that the person fits the definition of mentally disabled by a medical board of three doctors and would not understand the concept of right and wrong at a level greater than a three year old.
18. When minors turn 18 in jail, they will serve the rest of their sentence, required to finish High School and join the military or stay in prison for an additional ten years.
19. Hard labor, never killed anyone and will be used by all prisons for all non-violent inmates. Escaping from a labor program will get a minimum of 3 years solitary confinement.
20. If 30,000,000 people think that you are a jerk, they can petition to have your citizenship revoked and you deported to the country of your choice, which is not required to accept you. All petitions will require 30 million votes of living persons over the age or 18. A finger print must be provided and voting is anonymous.
21. You can opt out of a Union and keep your money.
-
First the DISagreement,
1) Oswald was qualified as an EXPERT rifleman, at less than 100 yards, YES he was that good. Did he do it ? We will never know for sure, probably not.
2) The current problems in America go back to FDR, America's first effective socialist President. The entitlement packages he pushed through to (ineffectively) fight the depression did 3 things, it opened the door to the current dem policy of buying the moocher vote with hand outs, it started the rush toward Govt. interference in private business, and taking us off the gold standard left us with money that had no intrinsic value. These three things result in us having a current national debt that would have paid to run all the nations in the world in recorded history based on nothing but the belief that it will be paid off. This is biting us on the butt now with China sliding toward recession, and Putin telling the world not to buy American debt as they will lose their money.
As to your general conclusion, I agree, we're screwed. Within the next 12 years (probably much less) the system will break down under it's own weight. The life style that Americans are used to will be reduced first to total anarchy in the more urban areas, but will level off at about where we were in the late 1800's. There will be those who have taken to the woods and continue to attempt to resurrect the Constitutional Republic, they will either succeed eventually , but at a much reduced level of prosperity or the dominant forces will hunt them down and kill them.
Around 2090 or 2100 things will begin to improve again, but in a form much different than today.
Not to get off on a JFK rant, a range marksman at under a 100 yards is different than hitting a target like JFK presented on that day. But you're right, we will never know. That the way the Warren Commission buried the evidence is a strong indication that we will not be allowed to know - ever.
As for the countries problems, yes, FDR did - with his wife's strong help - do a great deal to damage the institutions of this country, no argument. His ability to even attempt to do what he did lies with Lincoln's abuses of the Constitution and strengthening of the Federal gummint at the expenses of the States' rights. Granted, the Southern states were not interested in "talking" and he didn't have a lot of choices. Still, he started the damage in a truly significant way.
My point was simply that a lesson was given to the Presidents after JFK not to deviate from "the plan".
Thanos, strike 10, 11, 14 and 20, and you have an interesting list. Reasons?
10 - old news
11 - too trivial and ignores other techniques
14 - abolish the BATFE (and all like it) and get the Feds out of something that ain't covered by the 10th Amendment
20 - the are way more than 30 million imbeciles in this country and stripping a person of ctizenry is a dangerous principle to start.
-
10 - old news
11 - too trivial and ignores other techniques
14 - abolish the BATFE (and all like it) and get the Feds out of something that ain't covered by the 10th Amendment
20 - the are way more than 30 million imbeciles in this country and stripping a person of ctizenry is a dangerous principle to start.
10-because if we give them a pardon on it we can use it
11- we prosecuted Japanese after the war for it. So I don't think we should use it. Although if we pardon them, they we could! ;) I am in favor of any tactic.
14- We have to have something that enforces the rules. Even if they are minor rules. Change the department, but someone has to be the police in issue like this.
20-if 30 million people can get together and kick someone out (Alec Baldwin, Barbara Streisand or Al Franken) I think we should be able to kick them out of the club.
-
I can't think of a instance where technological innovation was lost totally from the stone age till now. (of course I could be wrong)
Europe after the "Fall of Rome"
No spending bills can be introduced with out a practical, detailed method of paying for it. Deficit spending is punishable by removal from office .
#6- Abuse of elected position should be punishable by death, once they have been elected we are pretty much supporting them for life anyway.
#14- The only regulation of suppressors will be by FDA as they are a hearing protection device.
-
Europe after the "Fall of Rome"
What rechnology was lost? They didn't fall back into the stone age, they were not able to maintain their empire, but not a loss of technology. Did you mean by going back to the late 1800s as in social mindset or technological society?
#6- Abuse of elected position should be punishable by death, once they have been elected we are pretty much supporting them for life anyway.
Sounds a little harsh, I don't know if I would go with death. Being a screwup should be fatal, but I don't know if I could send someone to the electric chair for taking a bribe, life in prison I could do.
#14- The only regulation of suppressors will be by FDA as they are a hearing protection device.
I am a little hessitant on no regulation on these, maybe you have to have a concealed weapons licence for it. The reasoning is that they are something if very easy for anyone to get they can be used for crime very easily. So I would make them just slightly more regulated but no more regulation that anyone who passes a permit for a machine gun background check could get one. Not too difficult, but a little harder than a 22 pistol. I think with greater abilities it is not unreasonable to require greater responsibility, but it is not reasonable to make it impossible or outlaw completely.
I suppose it would be like gettting a motorycle endorsement for a driver's license. Anyone can get one, you just have to be responsible and every machine gun permit would have the silencer endorsement standard. (something like that)
-
"What rechnology was lost? They didn't fall back into the stone age, they were not able to maintain their empire, but not a loss of technology. Did you mean by going back to the late 1800s as in social mindset or technological society?"
At the fall of the western Empire most learning was lost except that preserved by the Catholic Church, and much of that was only preserved in the Irish Monasteries. Even weapons technology suffered, with things like the Catapult disappearing for hundreds of years from western warfare, Cities became deserted due to the interruption in travel caused by the breakdown in the road system. Even the entire "middleclass" disappeared from western Europe for several hundred years.
However I was thinking more along the lines of society, scattered small towns servicing Farms and Ranches that operated on home generated fuels, methane, wind, solar. Satellite comms would eventually fail due to no one being able to support a Space program, Many technologies would die as a result of inability to make or maintain components, Things like Personal computers will probably go as will CNC machinery with the loss of high tech industry. Basic premise is that while we probably will not lose IDEA's, or knowledge, it will be reduced to things people can make or repair on their own. As an example Ford automobiles may still be around but they will be a lot more like the Model A than the Thunderbird.
-
Just received the same reply myself from Chambliss.
Nah, doesn't hack it. Saxby bought political capital by not opposing the nomination, rather than standing up and being counted.
Exactly.......he sold his vote so he can use it as collateral in the future.
I have yet to hear from Isakson. He usually responds quickly when I write in.
Isn't this "Chamblis" character the one you guys were glad beat the Dem in a recount ? Just goes to show, members of BOTH major parties have lost sight of their purpose under the Constitution. We have not had a viable 3rd party candidate since Lincoln in 1860, maybe we should look into changing that for 2012.
By the way, was reading another blog today that mentioned that Micheal Steele, new head of the RNC was the only one of the 4 candidates who does not own at least one gun. :(
Yes. We were glad he won because up until this point he was a strong supporter of 2A rights.
The main reason we all wanted him to win was to prevent a "super majority" in the senate for the Dems, causing the Rep's to loose filibuster powers.
You are absolutely correct in your assessment.
Sad, sad, sad..........
-
However I was thinking more along the lines of society, scattered small towns servicing Farms and Ranches that operated on home generated fuels, methane, wind, solar. Satellite comms would eventually fail due to no one being able to support a Space program, Many technologies would die as a result of inability to make or maintain components, Things like Personal computers will probably go as will CNC machinery with the loss of high tech industry. Basic premise is that while we probably will not lose IDEA's, or knowledge, it will be reduced to things people can make or repair on their own. As an example Ford automobiles may still be around but they will be a lot more like the Model A than the Thunderbird.
I don't think that the High tech would be lost. With communication as fast as it is all over the world there would be segments of infrastructure that would survive and would allow the people in that area to continue to grow. I could go up to Boeing with a few buddies and we could still make a vehicle with the tools that would be up there even if everyone else in the world disappeared. Since knowledge can be stored so vastly in such small places it would be a short time in my opinion before other innovators started building again.
-
Since knowledge can be stored so vastly in such small places it would be a short time in my opinion before other innovators started building again.
The only flaw in that logic is that building requires capital.
-
The only flaw in that logic is that building requires capital.
And raw material that may or may not be available.
-
The only flaw in that logic is that building requires capital.
Even Marx realized that labor is capital. Locke was right on the money when his theory proposed that labor (I would also include time) naturally created inequality. Inequlity is was causes those with less to attempt to gain more. This natural order of things will produce capital and therefore more inequality. This greater inequality will then cause those with the the greater capital to use that capital to create more opportunities for labor. (I would disagree with Rousseau that this will cause eventual corrosion of society through arts and sciences) This opportunity for others to labor for those with more capital will be paid and their payment will induce others to create more capital to sell to others.
Many would see this as simplistic, but the first thing that people will do if all were set to the same level of nothing would be to trade. Those that trade more effectively or have a needed (Wheat, water, strength or such) commodity will become those with more capital.
I don't think that the world could go back to the stone age. Prometheous has brought the fire, the gods can't take it back. Knowledge is just like the fire, it can be lost for a time, but anyone who remembers it will seek it out.
I know that I could make an internal combustion engine, maybe not a v-12 with a sports car around it, but definately a small two stroke that could power a generator, then a computer with files of information on it...then I have all the knowledge in the world. For the raw material, I would be able to find some in the remains of the old plants that used to manufacture it. I can find old computer parts at a best buy, old car parts at dealerships, old canning equipment at Del Monte, old rocket parts in NM, gun parts at Colt...ect. Once I have something built it is just a step to mass production.
-
Finally got a reply from my other senator regarding his yes vote for Holder as AG. Notice in the bold print the 'promise' of adhereing to the SCOTUS opinion of the 2nd Amendment.
Dear Mr. Goins:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the nomination of Eric Holder to Attorney General of the United States. I appreciate hearing from you and appreciate the opportunity to respond.
I voted in favor of Mr. Holder's confirmation for three main reasons. First, when I spoke to Mr. Holder regarding his nomination he was very forthright and candid. He acknowledged that his interpretations of the Second Amendment may be more strict than mine, but he acknowledged the Supreme Court to be the law of the land and said he would enforce their decision that the Second Amendment is an individual right (emphasis added). Secondly, on the prosecution at Guantanamo, he acknowledged that those who had done interrogations at Guantanamo Bay had done so under the authority of the Department of Justice, and the Department of Justice could not undo what it had done. Lastly, the late Griffin Bell, the former Attorney General and a Georgian, and Larry Thompson, the former Deputy Attorney General under President Bush and a former Georgian, praised Mr. Holder's ability as a lawyer. For these reasons I voted in favor of Mr. Holder's confirmation and he was confirmed by a vote of 75 to 21.
Thank you again for contacting me. Please visit my webpage at http://isakson.senate.gov/ for more information on the issues important to you and to sign up for my e-newsletter.
Sincerely,
Johnny Isakson
United States Senator
For future correspondence with my office, please visit my web site at http://isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfm.
You can also click here to sign up for the eNewsletter
-
First, when I spoke to Mr. Holder regarding his nomination he was very forthright and candid. He acknowledged that his interpretations of the Second Amendment may be more strict than mine, but he acknowledged the Supreme Court to be the law of the land and said he would enforce their decision that the Second Amendment is an individual right (emphasis added).
You may want to tell your stupid Senator that the Supreme Court is NOT the law of the land, The Constitution of the United States of America is the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. SCOTUS just interprets the Constitution.
What a total idiot!
Almost as bad as Biden saying that Vice Presidential powers are outlined in Article 1.
-
2. Anyone elected official in government gets audited every year by both state and federal tax bodies. Any irregularities will be turned over to another state chosen at random for audit, federal would be turned over to a state that is currently controlled by a member of an opposite political party. All their spending and finances are public record and their bank statements are posted online for everyone to see in a financial recording similar to what is required of publicly traded companies.
5. Presidents after their presidency are wards of the state and will be given a stipend equal to 75% of their pay as a president. They are not permitted to make or spend any money after office that is not given to them as a stipend. The same goes for Congress.
6. Anyone found to influence lawmakers or elected officials decisions through bribery, extortion or collusion will be tried with a maximum of two appeals. If found guilty two out of three times, life imprisonment.
7. Murder carries the death penalty; they will be tried with a maximum of two appeals. If found guilty two out of three times, executed in no more than 90 days. All crimes are treated as they were committed that morning, 50 year old cases are punished the same.
8. Guns; everyone can own one except those who have been found guilty of a felony, violent crime, had the right legally removed or deemed mentally unfit. A panel of 9 nominated judges in each county will review every legal or medical recommendation for the removal of gun rights.
9. Anyone committing any act against the United States while outside the territorial boarders of the United States will have the same rights and privileges of those in the country that the crime or planning of crime happened. (Example: If they commit an act of terror in Syria, they get Syrian rights.) The trials can take place anywhere.
11. Water boarding is a legal for of interrogation.
12. It is not Cruel or Unusual if we think it is the right thing to do as punishment and use it on a regular basis.
16. Rape is a punishable by the death penalty.
17. Insanity or personal hardship is not an excuse and cannot be considered in a court of law. Exceptions can be made when safety or health or others was at risk. Insane people can be punished the same as all others. Mentally disabled requires a jury of 100 people to vote unanimously that the person fits the definition of mentally disabled by a medical board of three doctors and would not understand the concept of right and wrong at a level greater than a three year old.
18. When minors turn 18 in jail, they will serve the rest of their sentence, required to finish High School and join the military or stay in prison for an additional ten years.
20. If 30,000,000 people think that you are a jerk, they can petition to have your citizenship revoked and you deported to the country of your choice, which is not required to accept you. All petitions will require 30 million votes of living persons over the age or 18. A finger print must be provided and voting is anonymous.
21. You can opt out of a Union and keep your money.
2. Why would it be necessary to know what your congressman bought at Barnes & Noble. You realize of course this would diminish the pool of people wanting to run for gov't office, too almost nothing. But I suppose that is what you think you want.
5. The founders did not want our elected officials to be insulated from commerce, they wanted them to continue to have a reason to seek the best interests of the nation, the only way to realistically do that is to be involved in the markets. You propose to have a separate class of individuals running the country, once they are elected, wow that's not well thought out I think.
6. & 7.You miss the point of an appeal. An appeal is to ensure all the i's are dotted and all the t's are crossed, to make sure the proper standard was followed. You propose that only two of those proceedings are important, thereby making the entire institution suspect. That's a little inconsistent if you ask me.
8. You underestimate the opposition. You state "everyone can own one". You should consider your phrasing more, that is the true problem making law.
9. Even a citizen? Are you throwing people you have sworn to defend and protect to the wolves? There is no problem with the prosecution of criminals, but the gov't still has a duty to protect them. So far you have given no reason for anyone to have allegiance to your country.
11. If you are going to spell out one form you should really keep going. What else is a legal form of interrogation? Yelling? It is more efficient to list what is not permissible than to list what is permissible, ergo the bill of rights, limiting the powers of the Fed gov't. Those founders knew what they were doing.
12. I am glad to see you have read Starship Troopers.
16. Are you saying women, because generally they are the ones being raped, exceptions may be made, are less than men? That an assault, sexual or not, on a woman is different? I understand the want for a harsh punishment but the definition of something is very important. Rape is classified as, and defined as, an assault. It is an important distinction, you will have to change the definition of rape before you can change the punishment.
17. A jury of 100? It seems now that you are just pulling specious numbers out of your... please give a good reason for 100 jurists. As for insanity that is already the case, mostly- those who are considered insane are deemed mentally deficient, thereby mentally disabled. Sorry its a definition thing again.
18. forcing people to join the armed services is not a good idea. Our armed services have never been better since it became all volunteer. Those coerced into service, even by choosing service over internment, typically don't serve well. That's the last thing I want in an armed serviceman.
20. Yet another number pulled out of your...? A gov't has a duty to its citizens, that citizenship should not be revoked on a whim, yes that is whim. Do you really want a country with no honor, as betraying a duty merely because you don't care for a person, is definitely dishonorable. That is the problem we are having in training armies of the middle east, the belief that one must fulfill their duty, word, pledge, etc.., regardless of to whom it was made.
21. only so long as you accept all responsibility in regards to your work contract, health plan, dental plan, retirement plan, raise schedule, sick days, etc...
-
PegLeg,
I haven't received anything back from Johnny, yet.
On the good side, they both voted against 'porkulus'. Now to write them and remind them to vote against the compromise.
-
2. Why would it be necessary to know what your congressman bought at Barnes & Noble. You realize of course this would diminish the pool of people wanting to run for gov't office, too almost nothing. But I suppose that is what you think you want.
I want the people who are running the governement to have an open window on their life. I don't think they should be given a place to hid their misdeeds. We all know what absolute power does.
5. The founders did not want our elected officials to be insulated from commerce, they wanted them to continue to have a reason to seek the best interests of the nation, the only way to realistically do that is to be involved in the markets. You propose to have a separate class of individuals running the country, once they are elected, wow that's not well thought out I think.
I thought that someone would bring this up, but I have a solution to that too. They don't get paid unless the country is in the black. Basically, they are the last ones in the pay line. We could even work out a bonus system that gives them a sliding scale bonus if all the bills are paid. The founders of our nation expected everyone to act with honor and integrity, please don't be ignorant and say Congress does that.
6. & 7.You miss the point of an appeal. An appeal is to ensure all the i's are dotted and all the t's are crossed, to make sure the proper standard was followed. You propose that only two of those proceedings are important, thereby making the entire institution suspect. That's a little inconsistent if you ask me.
No, I didn't miss the point of appeal. You missed the point of sentencing and punishment, it actually has to happen at some point in time.
8. You underestimate the opposition. You state "everyone can own one". You should consider your phrasing more, that is the true problem making law.
Really, how is that a problem? Did you miss the Constitution in Washington DC? (Please don't be ignorant and say that it is Philly) If you have the ability to read you would have read the part after "except", you can get back to me on that. ;)
9. Even a citizen? Are you throwing people you have sworn to defend and protect to the wolves? There is no problem with the prosecution of criminals, but the gov't still has a duty to protect them. So far you have given no reason for anyone to have allegiance to your country.
Look up SOFA, those are rights given to our citizens in other countries. I would hope you had some idea that the US makes agreements on how our military citizens will be treated in other countries. If you broke the law somewhere else, you do not have the same rights as you would have here, that is already established. I meant terrorists caught on the battlefield of Iraq brought to Gitmo do not have Constitutional rights any more than the people left in Iraq do. If either does, we MUST defend those who are still in Iraq or we are hypocrites, I am in favor of defending them.
11. If you are going to spell out one form you should really keep going. What else is a legal form of interrogation? Yelling? It is more efficient to list what is not permissible than to list what is permissible, ergo the bill of rights, limiting the powers of the Fed gov't. Those founders knew what they were doing.
The only reason that I have a problem with waterboarding is because we prosecuted Japanese soldiers after WWII for doing it. If we so my #10, I don't have a problem with it anymore. Remember Kalid Sheik Mohammad (sp?) "Lasted a long time" (News Interview with interrogater)
before he broke down, 30 seconds. Seems like waterboarding works.
12. I am glad to see you have read Starship Troopers.
I am disappointed that you don't know who Cesare Borgio was. I didn't read Starship Troopers, I had other things on my bookshelf.
16. Are you saying women, because generally they are the ones being raped, exceptions may be made, are less than men? That an assault, sexual or not, on a woman is different? I understand the want for a harsh punishment but the definition of something is very important. Rape is classified as, and defined as, an assault. It is an important distinction, you will have to change the definition of rape before you can change the punishment.
I think you missed the point, people who rape other people are eligible for the death penalty, kind of like that guy last year who got off on raping a child when the SCOTUS said that he was not eligible for the death penalty.
17. A jury of 100? It seems now that you are just pulling specious numbers out of your... please give a good reason for 100 jurists. As for insanity that is already the case, mostly- those who are considered insane are deemed mentally deficient, thereby mentally disabled. Sorry its a definition thing again.
Read the last part, "Mentally disabled requires a jury of 100 people to vote unanimously that the person fits the definition of mentally disabled by a medical board of three doctors and would not understand the concept of right and wrong at a level greater than a three year old." Charles Manson is not metally deficient, he is insane. Sorry, it must be a clairification thing that you don't get, again. The mental capacity of Susan Smith is just fine, she is insane, but she is still in my opinion more than eligible for death.
18. forcing people to join the armed services is not a good idea. Our armed services have never been better since it became all volunteer. Those coerced into service, even by choosing service over internment, typically don't serve well. That's the last thing I want in an armed serviceman.
We can have a special service for them, I am tired of criminals leaving jail and having no skills except those that got them there. They can join the Salvation Army for all I care. I want them working and doing something for someone other than themselves. Idle hands are the devils tools.
20. Yet another number pulled out of your...? A gov't has a duty to its citizens, that citizenship should not be revoked on a whim, yes that is whim. Do you really want a country with no honor, as betraying a duty merely because you don't care for a person, is definitely dishonorable. That is the problem we are having in training armies of the middle east, the belief that one must fulfill their duty, word, pledge, etc.., regardless of to whom it was made.
"citizenship should not be revoked on a whim," 30 million people is not a whim, but when Cher, Alec Baldwin and several others say something to the effect of " I will move out of this country and give up my citizenship if Bush gets elected" I think we should help them out the door. Citizenship requires responsibility, (Read Spiderman #1) The problem we are having in training armies in the middle east is not the fact that the country won't keep it's pledge, it is the person won't keep theirs. Note the incentive to keep your pledge if you are stripped of citizenship and kicked out?
21. only so long as you accept all responsibility in regards to your work contract, health plan, dental plan, retirement plan, raise schedule, sick days, etc...
Unions don't provide all those, the employer does. The Union may bargin for them, but if you are not wanting to donate your money to their cause, you don't have to. Several states have the option of not being in the union and being able to keep your job, why should you be required to give money to someone you don't like if you get a job at UPS? Unions are a shake down racket. If you don't want to be in one, you should have the "Freedom" (ever heard of this word?) to opt out. Requiring someone to pay union dues is servitude.