Sunday, February 24, 2013
Coburn: Any proposal that keeps a record of legit gun owners will 'kill' Senate bill
Oklahoma Republican Sen. Tom Coburn said Sunday any Senate legislation on gun control that includes a national registry of firearms owners will be a deal breaker.
Coburn is part of the bipartisan Senate panel seeking ways to curb gun violence and that purportedly is about to agree on a proposal to expand background checks to most private gun sales, with national record-keeping still unresolved.
“There absolutely will not be record-keeping of legitimate gun owners,” Coburn told “Fox News Sunday.” “That will kill this bill.”
The potential deal on background checks was reported Saturday by The Washington Post
.“I don’t think we’re that close,” Coburn also said.
More @ Fox
RSK® Mk5
Horace sent this to me and I find it very appealing. Thanks, Man!
The RSK® Mk5 (CRKT Model 2380) is a compact, lightweight fixed blade designed to some very strict constraints. As such, it really isn't meant to be an EDC (Every Day Carry) blade (though some of my beta-testers have done so). It was designed expressly as a back-up blade, and specifically to fit into a small survival kit tin or pouch. The RSK® Mk5 is compact and light enough to fit in almost any small personal survival kit or stash-away location, yet robust enough that it's a knife you can bet your life on™.
The RSK® Mk5 is the result of a collaboration between me, custom knifemaker David White and a member of my ETS Survival Forum, Dr. Andrew Osborne. The original design was developed by Dr. Osborne for his own use and he then commissioned a knife from David (at the time a student in one of his chemistry classes at Emmanuel College). David refined the design, based on Dr. Osborne's cardboard and Kydex models which were designed to fit into an Altoids tin, a popular container for pocket-sized survival kits. Dr. Osborne thought I might be interested in taking a look at his new knife.
This just happened to coincide with the early stages of development of a pumped-up version of my Pocket Survival Pak™, the Pocket Survival Pak™ PLUS produced by Adventure Medical Kits, which would include a knife. Since my search to that point had been less than successful (more on that later), I was quite interested.
More @ Doug Ritter
Win a free AR-15
In honor of this magnificent rifle, JoeForAmerica.com is giving away a new AR 15 to the lucky man or woman who wins this drawing.
If you support Americans’ right to own the AR 15 and want a chance to win this one, simply register below by submitting your email address. That’s it. Good luck!
– Joe Wurzelbacher (Joe the Plumber)
Sign up @ Joe For America
Unwed Couples to Get Military Benefits — Only If They’re Gay
Logic (101)
Heterosexual unmarried partners do not qualify for the benefits.
Panetta issued his directive in a memorandum to the secretaries of the military departments and the undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness.
Citing the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, Panetta states: “Discrimination based on sexual orientation no longer has a place in the military.”
The memorandum continues: “At the direction of the President, the Department has conducted a careful and deliberative review of the benefits currently provided to the families of Service members. We have now identified additional family member and dependent benefits that we can lawfully provide to same-sex domestic partners of Military Service members and their children through changes in Department of Defense policies and regulations.
“These benefits shall be extended to the same-sex domestic partners and, where applicable, children of same-sex domestic partners, once the Service member and their same-sex domestic partner have signed a declaration attesting to the existence of their committed relationship.”
More @ Newsmax
On Feb. 25 & 26, make ‘Five Phone Calls for Freedom’
Friday, February 22, will witness an unprecedented attack on your rights as Obama mobilizes his army of left-wing activists to push for federal gun bans. “Roll Call” recently ran a piece entitled, “Organizing for America Plans 'National Day of Action' to Mobilize Grass Roots on Guns.” It went on to say:
“Organizing for Action is planning its first official mobilization in support of President Barack Obama’s proposals to curtail gun violence. The nonprofit that inherited Obama’s campaign infrastructure and 2 million strong volunteer army will hold a ‘national day of action’ on Feb. 22, officials said Tuesday.”
If that doesn’t scare you, it should
What you are seeing is “Barry the Community Organizer” doing what he does best: Attacking your rights using millions of rabid radicals who will stoop to any level of deceit in order to control you. The grass roots initiative began with his State of the Union address, in which he packed the house with families of victims of mass killings. Next, Obama went on the road to sell his plan at schools in Atlanta and elsewhere.
Now MoveOn.org is joining the fray by running TV ads that proclaim, “The NRA doesn’t speak for me.” In case you didn’t know it, these are the same folks that you brought you “ACORN”; MoveOn.org is funded by the left wing “Tides Foundation” which is itself funded by none other than freedom-hating billionaire George Soros.
Your voice needed now more than ever
You have politicians scared. As a founding member of the Coalition to Stop the Gun Ban, which now comprises 38 state and national organizations, GRNC members have been blasting Congress with a coordinated message that we will punish any legislator who supports gun control. So to counter your influence, “Barry” plans to “out-grassroots” you. Will you let him?
More @ GRNC
Immigration Reform Deception: The Negligible Distinction between Two Really Bad Plans
Mike Scruggs
In late January, the “Gang-of-Eight” (Four radical Democrats and pro-amnesty Republican Senators McCain, Graham, Flake, and Rubio) launched Senate legislation to grant legal status (amnesty) and immediate work permits to millions of illegal immigrants now in the U.S.
Since the 1965 Immigration Act, U.S. immigration policy has been good for illegal immigrants, employers who use cheap foreign labor in preference to American labor, and the Democrat Party. It has been bad for American workers, law-abiding employers, taxpayers, their families, and the rule of law.
The 1965 Act, whose Senate Floor Leader was the late liberal icon, Edward Kennedy, extended family preferences from spouses and minor children of recent immigrants to an unending chain of parents, siblings, sibling spouses, and in-laws, now referred to as “chain migration.” It resulted in both runaway legal and illegal immigration, which was predominantly unskilled and poorly educated and almost exclusively from third-world countries.
The 1987 Amnesty (passed in 1986) and six legislative amnesties since then have further compounded our immigration problems and managed to make our immigration policies a major generator of huge Federal healthcare and Social Security liabilities and heavy fiscal and tax burdens on state and local governments. American workers have also borne a heavy burden of displacements and downward pressure on their wages due to competition from cheaper imported labor, both legal and illegal. The Heritage Foundation estimated that the defeated 2007 McCain-Kennedy Amnesty would have cost over $2.5 Trillion over the first ten years in Social Security and Medicare liabilities alone. The Senate Gang-of-Eight proposed Amnesty would cost considerably more. The Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimates the annual fiscal impact of illegal immigration to be over $100 Billion per year for education, healthcare, and law enforcement alone.
By 1990, the disastrous results of the 1965 Act compounded by the chain of amnesties beginning in 1987 had become painfully visible, and Congress created a commission to study our immigration problems and make sensible recommendations for redress. The Jordan Commission, named for its Chair, Rep. Barbara Jordan of Texas, was among the most highly qualified ever brought to bear on a national problem. They studied immigration problems for over six years, and presented their findings and recommendations to Congress and President Clinton in 1997. Despite a mounting problem of out-of-control legal and illegal immigration and corresponding fiscal and social problems, their crucial, urgent, and sensible recommendations were ignored. Political posturing for ethnic votes, cheap-labor-lobby campaign financing bribes and threats, and the influence of liberal media trumped truth and the national good.
In fact, enforcement of immigration laws at the workplace dropped to near zero during the first six years of the G. W. Bush Administration. Bush, McCain, and a relatively small minority of Republicans in Congress, especially in Border States, tried to play an accomodationist strategy to get Hispanic votes. Ignoring the predominant socio-economic character of their target voters, it was an unmitigated and easily predictable disaster. Relatively low-skilled and poorly educated voter groups, no matter from what country or ethnic background, are unlikely to favor conservative healthcare, welfare, and spending policies. A voter group that favors Obamacare by 69 to 23 polling margins is likely to favor other liberal social-welfare polices by roughly the same margin. This has been the consistent Hispanic voting pattern going back at least to 1980. The latest generation is even more liberal. Furthermore, liberal Republican agendas cause millions of conservative voters to stay at home on Election Day. The November 2012 election results gave clear evidence that our immigration policies are nearing the tipping point to assuring permanent Democrat dominance at the national level. An amnesty will not gain Hispanic or immigrant votes for Republicans. It will swell the ranks of the electorate with more Democrats. Republican backed amnesty or any other attempt to out-liberal the Democrats will also make conservatives stay at home.
President Obama has his own immigration plan with even more generous provisions for illegal immigrants, but it is not much worse than the Gang-of-Eight plan. The Gang-of-Eight is deceptively comparing their amnesty as more conservative than Obama’s plan. But it is not conservative at all. The plans are identical in most respects. In my opinion, the Obama Plan was deliberately leaked as part of a joint stratagem with the Gang-of-Eight to portray the Gang’s plan as a “moderate” alternative to Obama’s plan in order to get more Republican votes. This is outrageous misrepresentation.
NumbersUSA CEO Roy Beck points out that both the Gang-of-Eight and the Obama plans will give INSTANT ANMESTY and work permits to illegal aliens while remaining silent on the impact on 20 Million Americans who cannot find full-time work.
The Gang-of-Eight and Obama plans both fail to mandate immediate E-Verify. This will leave a visa-violation hole big enough to drive ten million illegals through in a few years.
Neither Gang-of-Eight nor Obama calls for implementation of an entry-exit system to monitor 45 million foreign tourist visas per year.
Neither Gang-of-Eight nor Obama honestly addresses the enormous costs involved in giving millions of illegal immigrants the right to government welfare, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. As usual, they are trying to hide them.
Beck also reminds us that both the Gang-of-Eight and Obama plans would perpetuate Chain Migration, providing a multiple assault on American jobs and infrastructure.
Neither plan deals with the inevitable impact of all amnesties. They generate disrespect for the law and bring millions of additional illegal immigrants hoping to take advantage of current and future amnesties. Based on prior amnesties, Giving 11 million amnesties will result in another 22 to 33 million illegal immigrants within a decade. The economic and social damage of that is almost incalculable.
The Gang-of-Eight proposal, which its advocates are shamefully presenting as a moderate alternative to Obama’s only slightly more villainous plan, is a recipe for national catastrophe on a huge scale. Its provisions are incredibly foolish and destructive.
In late January, the “Gang-of-Eight” (Four radical Democrats and pro-amnesty Republican Senators McCain, Graham, Flake, and Rubio) launched Senate legislation to grant legal status (amnesty) and immediate work permits to millions of illegal immigrants now in the U.S.
Since the 1965 Immigration Act, U.S. immigration policy has been good for illegal immigrants, employers who use cheap foreign labor in preference to American labor, and the Democrat Party. It has been bad for American workers, law-abiding employers, taxpayers, their families, and the rule of law.
The 1965 Act, whose Senate Floor Leader was the late liberal icon, Edward Kennedy, extended family preferences from spouses and minor children of recent immigrants to an unending chain of parents, siblings, sibling spouses, and in-laws, now referred to as “chain migration.” It resulted in both runaway legal and illegal immigration, which was predominantly unskilled and poorly educated and almost exclusively from third-world countries.
The 1987 Amnesty (passed in 1986) and six legislative amnesties since then have further compounded our immigration problems and managed to make our immigration policies a major generator of huge Federal healthcare and Social Security liabilities and heavy fiscal and tax burdens on state and local governments. American workers have also borne a heavy burden of displacements and downward pressure on their wages due to competition from cheaper imported labor, both legal and illegal. The Heritage Foundation estimated that the defeated 2007 McCain-Kennedy Amnesty would have cost over $2.5 Trillion over the first ten years in Social Security and Medicare liabilities alone. The Senate Gang-of-Eight proposed Amnesty would cost considerably more. The Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimates the annual fiscal impact of illegal immigration to be over $100 Billion per year for education, healthcare, and law enforcement alone.
By 1990, the disastrous results of the 1965 Act compounded by the chain of amnesties beginning in 1987 had become painfully visible, and Congress created a commission to study our immigration problems and make sensible recommendations for redress. The Jordan Commission, named for its Chair, Rep. Barbara Jordan of Texas, was among the most highly qualified ever brought to bear on a national problem. They studied immigration problems for over six years, and presented their findings and recommendations to Congress and President Clinton in 1997. Despite a mounting problem of out-of-control legal and illegal immigration and corresponding fiscal and social problems, their crucial, urgent, and sensible recommendations were ignored. Political posturing for ethnic votes, cheap-labor-lobby campaign financing bribes and threats, and the influence of liberal media trumped truth and the national good.
In fact, enforcement of immigration laws at the workplace dropped to near zero during the first six years of the G. W. Bush Administration. Bush, McCain, and a relatively small minority of Republicans in Congress, especially in Border States, tried to play an accomodationist strategy to get Hispanic votes. Ignoring the predominant socio-economic character of their target voters, it was an unmitigated and easily predictable disaster. Relatively low-skilled and poorly educated voter groups, no matter from what country or ethnic background, are unlikely to favor conservative healthcare, welfare, and spending policies. A voter group that favors Obamacare by 69 to 23 polling margins is likely to favor other liberal social-welfare polices by roughly the same margin. This has been the consistent Hispanic voting pattern going back at least to 1980. The latest generation is even more liberal. Furthermore, liberal Republican agendas cause millions of conservative voters to stay at home on Election Day. The November 2012 election results gave clear evidence that our immigration policies are nearing the tipping point to assuring permanent Democrat dominance at the national level. An amnesty will not gain Hispanic or immigrant votes for Republicans. It will swell the ranks of the electorate with more Democrats. Republican backed amnesty or any other attempt to out-liberal the Democrats will also make conservatives stay at home.
President Obama has his own immigration plan with even more generous provisions for illegal immigrants, but it is not much worse than the Gang-of-Eight plan. The Gang-of-Eight is deceptively comparing their amnesty as more conservative than Obama’s plan. But it is not conservative at all. The plans are identical in most respects. In my opinion, the Obama Plan was deliberately leaked as part of a joint stratagem with the Gang-of-Eight to portray the Gang’s plan as a “moderate” alternative to Obama’s plan in order to get more Republican votes. This is outrageous misrepresentation.
NumbersUSA CEO Roy Beck points out that both the Gang-of-Eight and the Obama plans will give INSTANT ANMESTY and work permits to illegal aliens while remaining silent on the impact on 20 Million Americans who cannot find full-time work.
The Gang-of-Eight and Obama plans both fail to mandate immediate E-Verify. This will leave a visa-violation hole big enough to drive ten million illegals through in a few years.
Neither Gang-of-Eight nor Obama calls for implementation of an entry-exit system to monitor 45 million foreign tourist visas per year.
Neither Gang-of-Eight nor Obama honestly addresses the enormous costs involved in giving millions of illegal immigrants the right to government welfare, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. As usual, they are trying to hide them.
Beck also reminds us that both the Gang-of-Eight and Obama plans would perpetuate Chain Migration, providing a multiple assault on American jobs and infrastructure.
Neither plan deals with the inevitable impact of all amnesties. They generate disrespect for the law and bring millions of additional illegal immigrants hoping to take advantage of current and future amnesties. Based on prior amnesties, Giving 11 million amnesties will result in another 22 to 33 million illegal immigrants within a decade. The economic and social damage of that is almost incalculable.
The Gang-of-Eight proposal, which its advocates are shamefully presenting as a moderate alternative to Obama’s only slightly more villainous plan, is a recipe for national catastrophe on a huge scale. Its provisions are incredibly foolish and destructive.
NRA touts internal Justice Dept. memo contesting Obama gun-control measures
The National Rifle Association (NRA) has obtained an internal Justice Department memo that it says shows President Obama's gun-control measures would not be effective without firearms seizures and national gun registration, the Associated Press reports.
The gun lobby is citing the nine-page memo in ads running in 15 states, including several swing states with Senate elections next year. In the ad, the NRA says the memo proves that *the administration “believes that a gun ban will not work without mandatory gun confiscation” and thinks universal background checks “won't work without requiring national gun registration,” according to the AP.
*& good luck with that, kiddies.
More @ The Hill
My Niece Claudia and Eduardo's Wedding
Louise, Bill, (See picture of him below which reminded me of General Lee) my Sister Anne, Carter, Ellen & Dixie.
Antonia, Claudia's older sister.
The canine of honor
Claudia and my Brother Henry. Henry's wife Jessica performed the ceremony. The groom is 38 and Claudia is 35. First marriage for both.
An absolutely delightful couple who danced the night away.
Dixie and I loved the green dress, but the photograph is poor.
Dixie and I loved the green dress, but the photograph is poor.
Rand Paul Demands Answers from Brennan on Drones
Via Randy's Right
Sen. Rand Paul on Friday demanded the Obama White House address “serious constitutional questions” on the legality of making drone strikes on American soil.
“We’re talking about someone eating at a cafe in Boston, or New York — and a Hellfire missile comes raining in on them,” the Kentucky Republican told Fox News. “There should be an easy answer from the administration on this. They should say, ‘Absolutely no, we will not kill Americans in America without an accusation, a trial and a jury.’”
Paul said he sent a letter to John Brennan, Obama's nominee to head the CIA, earlier this week but had not yet received a response.
“I’ve asked serious questions, serious constitutional questions,” Paul told Fox. “I’ve gotten zero response. And that is sort of the way this administration is treating Congress.
Sen. Rand Paul on Friday demanded the Obama White House address “serious constitutional questions” on the legality of making drone strikes on American soil.
“We’re talking about someone eating at a cafe in Boston, or New York — and a Hellfire missile comes raining in on them,” the Kentucky Republican told Fox News. “There should be an easy answer from the administration on this. They should say, ‘Absolutely no, we will not kill Americans in America without an accusation, a trial and a jury.’”
Paul said he sent a letter to John Brennan, Obama's nominee to head the CIA, earlier this week but had not yet received a response.
“I’ve asked serious questions, serious constitutional questions,” Paul told Fox. “I’ve gotten zero response. And that is sort of the way this administration is treating Congress.
More @ Newsmax