This guy could have been our President!

That Frankenstein-looking moron John Kerry is still trying to attain relevance. It's a pity.

Kerry had this to say during hearings on the escalating violence on the Mexico-US border.

At Monday's hearing, committee Chairman Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said he had been shocked to see killings and beheadings "just a stone's throw across the Rio Grande from where we're sitting this morning."

Across the border, thousands of Mexican soldiers patrol Ciudad Juarez, which saw about 2,000 murders in 14 months.

Kerry called for a ban on the imports of assault rifles, such as the AK-47, into the United States. (emphasis mine)

Let me break this down for you.

1. The violence is occurring between rival drug cartels in Mexico.
2. The AK-47 is illegal in Mexico
   
3. The AK-47 is manufactured primarily in China and Russia.
4. The primary smugglers of AK-47's into Mexico are the Chinese.
   
5. What violence has spilled over the border has originated from Mexico.
6. Full-auto AK-47s are already illegal in the US.

So...given these facts, what do YOU think of Senator Lurch's proposal?

The fact is that "make guns illegal" is the default liberal answer to every crime question. The asshats at the SF Chronicle try in vain to support the Senator's claim by citing testimony of an official from the BATF (a patently unconstitutional agency largely responsible for putting the match to the Waco powder keg back in '93). William McMahon is quoted as saying, "Assault rifles bought in the United States are favorites among cartel gunmen, who find them effective for the urban warfare." Yet the best "evidence" to support this that the Chronic could roust to support their claim was the seizure of 60 weapons used in an April 2008 shootout that were traced back to the US. I don't want to burst your bubble, Chronic, but there are certainly a lot more than 60 guns in use by the various cartels.

The fact that the weapons utilized by the drug cartels are (a) already illegal in Mexico, (b) most likely from China, (c) already illegal in the US in full-auto mode (which, one would assume, is the preferred mode of the cartel "warriors"), and (d) illegally smuggled into Mexico, not legally imported (a not-too-subtle distinction lost on the dim-witted Senator), should be cause to make a thinking man reconsider requesting a total ban on a reliable weapon that "looks menacing".

It's a pity he's not a thinking man.

And to think he could have been our President! *shudder*

It's always more power, never less

It's a funny thing, you know. Government and law enforcement agencies are always asking for more and broader powers. They never show up in Congress saying, "Gee, ya know? I really think we're a little big for our britches and we're throwing our weight around a little too much. Please take away some of our broad powers that circumvent key parts of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights." Nope. It's always more. Always.

The Feebs ruined Richard Jewell's life. Ruined Stephen Hatfill's. Drove Bruce Ivins (whether guilty or not) to suicide. And, shocker, they want more power.

A Justice Department plan would loosen restrictions on the Federal Bureau of Investigation to allow agents to open a national security or criminal investigation against someone without any clear basis for suspicion, Democratic lawmakers briefed on the details said Wednesday.

The plan, which could be made public next month, has already generated intense interest and speculation. Little is known about its precise language, but civil liberties advocates say they fear it could give the government even broader license to open terrorism investigations.

Catch the key phrase: without any clear basis for suspicion. Ain't that a kicker?

Have the American people really changed that much since I was a kid? There's NO WAY such a request could be made 30 years ago, in the post-Watergate USA. Memories of Nixon and his cronies abusing their power were still strong then.

Now? The sheeple trust that Big Brother and his appointed agents, the Feebs, the heinous ATF, and der Schutzstaffel - excuse me, DHS - will play nicely and always within the rules, no matter how many sweeping extra-Constitutional powers we give them.

Land of the free, home of the brave? I think not.

Making criminals of us all

In a recent post I casually mentioned a phenomenon that gets very little attention anywhere. In fact, the only other person I've heard mention it before is Ron Smith of WBAL in Baltimore. The phenomenon of which I speak is the passage of laws and regulations by Congress that are so vague you could drive a truck through the gaps. These vague laws are then passed to some faceless bureaucracy to implement. Hilarity ensues.

You'd be surprised at how much of our "law" has been implemented by turf-hungry careerist bureaucrats. Let me lay it out for you.

Congress passes the National Everyone Must Be Happy Act. Just as one would expect from the title of the Act, it's more vague than a mime with ADD. There aren't any details to speak of. Just "be happy, damn it!".

The Department of Feel Good is created to enforce this Act. "Happy" Czar C. Brazen Hubris tasks his department heads to define the policy and the definitions of what "compliance" is, the better to reward those who comply and punish those who don't. When their "little" document is finalized (at around 1,300 pages), the "law" resulting from the Act is now complete. Regardless of the intent of the sponsors of the original bill, the law, as implemented, may be 180 degrees different from that intent.

As a result of this little game, Congress get credit for passing "magnificent" bills like the Americans with Disabilities Act, No Child Left Behind, and, of course, the Assault Weapons ban. Note the resultant success of each of these Acts (/sarcasm).

It is the Assault Weapons ban that comes into play here. Of all the federal black hole gawd-awful agencies that could implement this steaming turd of legislative nonsense, it fell to the very worst - the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF). ATF seems to be the place where the very worst of schoolyard bullies eventually end up working. ATF would just LOVE to make criminals out of every gun owner in America. Think I'm kidding? You'll be of a different mind after reading this.

Savage's dispute with the federal agency stems from a recent project for which he sent a gun part he is developing to the federal government for review.

The part is intended to allow a certain type of gun to be used with a different size and less expensive ammunition. Savage, owner of Historic Arms LLC., said his part would convert the caliber of the guns to operate with ammunition that costs 1 or 2 cents per shell, instead of 25 cents or more.

He said such devices are fairly common. But he told WND he was stunned to get a letter from the BATFE stating that not only was his repair part a gun, it was a machine gun.

That conclusion came after the agency's testing bureau added some metal pieces, a length of chain, some duct tape and plastic wires to his gun part in order to make it fire a bullet.

Okay, follow me here. Dude invents an add-on part to allow guns to fire cheaper ammunition (great for target practice). ATF puts McIver to work on the gun and part. McIver creates a machine gun. Now dude is a criminal...just because some whiz kid could take additional parts never intended for use with either the gun nor the add-on part and rig a machine gun.

It gets better. There's the case of a poor soul whose weapon malfunctioned and shot three bullets with one squeeze of the trigger. He's doing 30 months in Federal penitentiary as a result.

"A gun that malfunctions is not a machine gun," Larry Pratt, executive director of GOA, said. "What the [federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives] has done in the Olofson case has set a precedent that could make any of the millions of Americans that own semi-automatic firearms suddenly the owner [of] an unregistered machine gun at the moment the gun malfunctions."

When U.S. District Judge Charles Clevert imposed the sentence, a commentary in Guns Magazine said, "It didn't matter the rifle in question had not been intentionally modified for select fire, or that it did not have an M16 bolt carrier … that it did not show any signs of machining or drilling, or that that model had even been recalled a few years back.

"It didn't matter the government had repeatedly failed to replicate automatic fire until they replaced the ammunition with a softer primer type. It didn't even matter that the prosecution admitted it was not important to prove the gun would do it again if the test were conducted today," the magazine said. "What mattered was the government's position that none of the above was relevant because '[T]here's no indication it makes any difference under the statute. If you pull the trigger once and it fires more than one round, no matter what the cause it's a machine gun.' No matter what the cause."

No matter what the cause.

Do you still think I'm exaggerating when I say they're trying to make criminals of us all?

Victory over FLDS terrorists

The whole FLDS situation, with the government raid, the invasion of their temple, and the confiscation of their children, has DW waxing wroth.

I have been watching this whole deal with the FLDS and their practice of polygamy. In no way do I agree with any of their teachings. The outrage comes as this: since when does the State or Government or CPS have the right to invade what the FLDS believe to be sacred ground? I am referring to their Temple they had built and paid for on their own.

I understand there was a young girl, 15, that called. Texas law says you can be married at 16. So was she exactly 15 or was she 15½? Then through the corrupt CPS (Communist Party Service) they remove 400 kids? How did they do that? Through leading statements? Through lies?

Then the FDLS tried to ward off the state from entering their temple, but failed.

So what I am getting from all this is that we don't have religious freedom in this country unless you conform to the mainstream. Hey, why did the government not invade Rev. Wright and his congregation based on terror?

I am absolutely appalled that the government would desecrate their temple the way they did. So that means if any religious group does something that does not agree with the government, that the government can once again come in and show who is really boss.

Don't misunderstand here. I am very clear that the FLDS probably broke the law by six months and maybe more. That does not give anyone the right to invade their privacy. So all you Christians, Catholics, Jews -- if you have any place sacred, you are not safe. Like I said, I am in no way supporting the FLDS. I am trying to figure out what the Holy Hell has happened to our First, Geeeze, ALL our Amended rights.

Vulture, I am now with you 100% with your comments on the TSA. That is where it starts and now the Great (My Ass) State of Tex-ass has 400 misplaced kids ripped from their blood families based on the phone call of a 15 year old whom they can't find. Polygamy is wrong BUT doing what the CPS and Law enforcement did was very scary and has put this citizen on notice. I can't even think of a word to describe the anger I feel and outrage at this.

Well said, DW.

Look, I'm no fan of wacked-out cults. But that stated, there are some very valid and troubling points raised by DW.

• The FLDS broke the law
  
  Apparently it was common practice in this sect to "marry" off these girls as soon as they hit puberty. If true, it's an abomination and it's deplorable, and those guilty of having "married" these barely-pubescent girls should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
  
  They also broke the law with their practice of polygamy. Now, while I find said practice mystifying (Good God! Isn't ONE wife hard enough?), I find it laughable that der Staat wants to enforce THAT aspect of "marriage" while simultaneously pushing for legal status for Gay, Lesbian, and Trans-gender marriage. After all, where does the liberalization of marriage end once it ceases to be "one man/one woman/one lifetime" (which, coincidentally, is the model of marriage given to us in Genesis)?
  


• The over-the-top reaction of der Staat to the "threat" of the FLDS
  
  Whatever the case that can be made against the FLDS, the semi-militarized invasion of the group's ranch and temple was reminiscent of Waco. Way TOO reminiscent.
  
  After all, the Branch Davidians were a wacko religious cult practicing an unconventional religion. There was underage sex between cult leader David Koresh and many of the young women of the group. And they had a stash of weapons (Mein Gott! Weapons!) So the government invaded their compound, first unsuccessfully, then with chilling, deadly precision, with a show of force unprecedented in the history of this nation.
  
  The FLDS were smart not to resist the police invasion. They would have faired no better than the Davidians had they resisted.


• The invasion and desecration of the temple
  
  Regardless of how you feel about the FLDS in particular, or "sacred" buildings in general, this one needs to be addressed. Can you imagine the uproar if storm troopers of der Staat were to invade a "sacred" Muslim building? So.......why is there nary a peep about the invasion of the FLDS temple? Either we practice a policy of honoring the sanctity of ALL buildings considered sacred by the various religions, or we honor none of them. However you might feel about the FLDS, this violation of their rights is simply the prelude to the further violation of OUR rights. The fact that their religion is weird, that its practices may be abhorrent...that's not the point. I happen to think that Islam is weird and its practices (like burkas, fatwas, and jihad) abhorrent. That does NOT give me the right to invade their "sacred" buildings. By extension it does NOT give der Staat the right to invade them, either.


• The confiscation of the children
  
  I'm very deeply troubled by the whole "Child Services as judge/jury/executioner" trend. You mean to tell me that some piss ant government employee can just show up at a person's home and TAKE their children based solely on the judgment call of said government employee? And that's considered okay? If you need any further evidence that we're a nation of sheeple, this is about as definitive as it gets.
  

You won't hear any of these concerns expressed on the blathering heads shows on TV. You won't read any opinion pieces questioning the actions of der Staat's armored goons. You won't hear talk radio decrying the First Amendment violations. Why? Because, sadly, the vast majority of us believe that it's all right to violate the rights of those who are weird or non-mainstream when they're accused of criminal activities.

Oh, one last point, DW. The gestapo-like behavior by the government didn't start with TSA. It started with ATF (the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms). TSA is just the latest step in the journey from free republic to socialist dictatorship.

DW has his say (on security)

It seems DW didn't care for my take on Amtrak security.

Alriiight Vulture I have to say something here. I have not been a follower of your blog spot. I have known you for years and always knew you were a reasonable thinker. But railing against security? I do a lot of travel on the airlines and so do my kids. Not once have I been DENIED to travel or even searched. I am very glad the security measures are in place. Not once has any of the security measures been a delay. So I don't get where you think putting security measures in place for Amtrak, which by the way is a dirty way to travel, is a bad thing. What if I disagree with the vulture I am a sheeple? I think not my Berkeley loving foe. The Muslims just love us!

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Please try to follow along, won't you? (Arrogant, ain't I?)

Security is a good thing. Security is something the providers of travel should be striving to achieve as a matter of good business -- a safe business is one that can count on the return business of its satisfied customers.

So what's my beef? Airport (and now train) security has been co-opted by the government. This is just one more little trip down the slippery slope to totalitarianism. You haven't had any problems with the TSA Nazis? How about I have -- just about every third time I fly. I've been wanded and patted down. I've had to "f" with my laptop until the Nazi in question was satisfied that it wasn't a bomb. I've had to undo my belt and my pants - in public! - to satisfy some Nazi who must have liked the cut of my jib. I've had the contents of my checked luggage searched.

I haven't been denied travel BECAUSE I HAVEN'T PUT UP A FUSS. Once I say, "No, I won't submit to this unconstitutional invasion of my property and person", I'll be standing curbside waiting for a cab to take me to the bus station -- that is, if I haven't been arrested. Does that sound like freedom to you? Mind you, this is done to me, and to you, and to your kids, and to 95-year-old grandmothers in wheelchairs so that we won't be accused of "profiling", which, to me, is a word that means "good police work", but to the PC crowd, it means something dark, sinister, and racist.

We're sheeple (and trust me, I count myself in that category in this case). Why? Because we WON'T STAND UP TO THIS FLAGRANT ABUSE. Because we just LET IT HAPPEN. Because we subject ourselves to being groped, prodded, and wanded. We submit to having our personal property searched without cause, without warrant, and without due process -- the very things the fourth amendment was written TO PROTECT US AGAINST.

Mark my words -- the people who brought us the TSA "in the name of public safety" will bring us some other "security" apparatus in the near future to "protect" us. And it'll be something that makes the ATF look like a bridge club.

Nate is a genius

Nate, AKA Der Hausfrauhrer, has a blog called The Pan Galactic Blogger Blaster. Nate is Southern - REALLY Southern, "The South shall rise again!" Southern. One of his favorite post topics is ATF - not the federal agency, but rather the alcohol he's drinkin', the seegar he's smokin', and the weapon he's firin'.

And there's a brain along with all of that "Southern". It turns out that Nate's a genius.

You see, in the endless debate of "God or Science", the one argument I'd never heard is the one made by Nate last week in his blog. There's really no summarizing it, and I can't do it justice with snippets, so here's the whole thing, intact. Well done, Nate!

History vs. Science

Given that History and Science are both bodies of knowledge... and both are systems for verifying knowledge... it seems a bit odd that I would choose to juxtapose them so. After all...we're supposed to pit Theism and Science against each other aren't we?

This matchup seems far more logical to me...as the two are in many ways mirror images of each other. Science is the study of what is real. History is the study of what has happened. Again...the matchup doesn't seem natural. After all... what's happened is obviously real...isn't it?

See there-in we have the rub.

The processes of historical investigation are tried and true. They are just as self-correcting as science.

But what can science say about history?

Not a lot really. We can't really experiment to determine if Caesar crossed the Rubicon. In fact...science is really pretty useless for determining anything that may have happened. See science hamstrung by its "repeatability" requirement. Which is odd for something designed to study nature...since nature isn't necessarily prone to performing on demand.

History says...This Happened!

Science says...This couldn't have happened because I don't understand it and can't make it happen again.

History says...Science is irrelevant.

The trouble here is scientists. They have reached the point where they no longer acknowledge that there are things they don't understand. Rather than simply saying, "we don't understand" they claim that the offending phenomena is simply impossible.

History says that Jesus Christ was Crucified and Resurrected. Science doesn't understand it...so it hisses from a safe distance.

3000 years ago we were wise enough to realize that we didn't know everything...

Today...we have shiny trinkets and machines that go "PING!" but we're fools. We're stupid enough to believe that if we don't understand something...it must not be possible.

I can only applaud. Again, well done, Nate!