Category: Politics

WE’RE NOT GOING BACK

We’re Not Going Back. You can’t make us.

Let me introduce you to a concept called “singularity.”

It was the hot thing in my field in the 90s. We were accelerating in tech so fast that eventually we were going to hit a point called the singularity. After that point, everything that came before would be non-understandable to the average human. And everything that comes after would not be understandable to us now.

This went along with augmented humans, where were were all going to have hardware ports in our brains and be plugging in thumb drives for extra knowledge. And stuff.

For the record, I was always agnostic on this. (Kind of like on aliens, yes.)

I’ve written one trans-humanist story, and it was because I was invited to a trans-humanist anthology. It’s kind of the price of admission. You get a call that says “Hey do you want to be in x y z anthology?” What they are actually saying is “Do you want six hundred bucks?” (More or less.) And if you’re trying to make a living with words (which is a remarkably precarious existence) you go “Sure, I can do that.” And when the prompt is something like “psychedelic drugs of the seventies” or “Alien strip clubs” you build in a morning to go down the weirdest internet rabbit holes, and become an expert (over time) in the strangest subjects.

What you don’t do is say “Your notion is silly. What even.” Because, you know, you want six hundred bucks, which are the difference between buying groceries and… uh…. not.

But I never truly bought it. Look, yes, a lot of people are nuts. My husband, for instance, wanted us fully hooked on to Alexa, and it took me months of carefully disconnecting the thing whenever I caught it connected before he gave up.

I can see — just not near, because tech is not there — augmented thought and reality devices in a headband, or perhaps a hood, or even glasses, or a neat clip that goes around your ear. Kind of like based bluetooth headsets. Heck, people get me one I can reliably dictate to with my thoughts, so I can write every minute I’m not actually asleep and I’ll buy it and never take it off.

But actual hardware installed in the head? Or inserted in my body not to treat a permanent problem, but just because? Yeah. No. No with bells on and a little mandolin.

Look, I came of age in the time of reel-to-reel home movies. Now? Now my DVDs are gathering dust, because everything is streamed. I’m not doing that with things that require major surgery.

And as for singularity? Like the last trump, it happens every day, little by little and man by man. If you’d brought me forward from 1990 even to day, I’d have a week of extreme confusion trying to understand how we live now. And hard adaptation. Me from the sixties… well, I’d probably eventually happen (Humans are more pliable than most people think) but it would take a long, long time.

But sometimes, sometimes, there singularities of experience and understanding. And once you go there, you can never ever go back. You just can’t.

And we went through one of those in the last six years. And how. Things we thought we knew turned out not to be so. Experts have proven themselves either craven, stupid, or bizarrely twisted. And if they believed half the things they told us too, they’re experts ONLY in make believe.

The masks came down. The whole beautifully painted picture of a reality that we all accepted because …. well, because pretty much everyone did. Even those of us who thought that they were out of their minds on certain things accepted some vast parts of it.

Because you had to believe some parts of it, and well… We believed things like that our politicians, no matter how idiotic, weren’t deliberately malicious and trying to kill us. We believed things like that our medical establishment was actually trying to keep people healthy. We believed– well, a lot of things that just weren’t so.

But the last few years have proven we were wrong. However stupid we thought our politicians were they’re dumber than that, but also they will say and do anything, even if it kills you, to avoid losing power or to gain more power. Our doctors might be fine — I know there are several here as regulars — but the establishment is horrendous.

And we’re not going back. What’s been seen can’t be unseen.

Continue reading “”

It’s apparent now that he’s considered expendable.

Observation O’ The Day
The media bail on Biden:

All polling points to Biden’s majorities in the House and Senate being wiped out come the November midterm elections. When that happens, and I mean the very next day, these innuendos and grumblings for Biden to step aside will become full-bore primal screams, and he won’t be able to survive them.

-Stephen L. Miller

CNN Crushes President Joe Biden With Fact Check.

It may not be something that CNN watchers are used to seeing, but President Joe Biden got hammered by a fact check from the network.

“Gas prices weren’t over $5 when Biden took office. The Social Security hike isn’t a Biden achievement. The Trump tax cut didn’t ‘only’ go to the top 1%. Biden didn’t cut the debt in half. Biden didn’t get Congress to pass a law to forgive student debt,” CNN fact checker Daniel Dale said.

“The unemployment rate. Biden said at the Florida rally on Tuesday: ‘Unemployment is down from 6.5 to 3.5%, the lowest in 50 years.’ He said at the New Mexico rally on Thursday: ‘Unemployment rate is 3.5% – the lowest it’s been in 50 years.

“But Biden didn’t acknowledge that September’s 3.5% unemployment rate was actually a tie for the lowest in 50 years – a tie, specifically, with three months of Trump’s administration, in late 2019 and early 2020,” the fact checker said.

“Since Biden uses these campaign speeches to favorably compare his own record to Trump’s record, that omission is significant.

“The unemployment rate rose to 3.7% in October; that number was revealed on Friday, after these Biden comments. The rate was 6.4% in January 2021, the month Biden took office,” he said.

Biden’s student debt policy

“During an on-camera discussion conducted by progressive organization NowThis News and published online in late October, Biden told young activists that they ‘probably are aware, I just signed a law’ on student debt forgiveness that is being challenged by Republicans.

“He added: ‘It’s passed. I got it passed by a vote or two, and it’s in effect.’

“Biden’s claims are false,” he said.

“He created his student debt forgiveness initiative through executive action, not through legislation, so he didn’t sign a law and didn’t get it passed by any margin.

“Since Republicans opposed to the initiative, including those challenging the initiative in court, have called it unlawful precisely because it wasn’t passed by Congress, the distinction between a law and an executive action is a highly pertinent fact here,” the fact checker said.

“A White House official told CNN that Biden was referring to the Inflation Reduction Act, the law narrowly passed by the Senate in August; the official said the Inflation Reduction Act created “room for other crucial programs” by bringing down the deficit. But Biden certainly did not make it clear that he was talking about anything other than the student debt initiative” he said.

Gas prices

“Biden correctly noted on various occasions in October that gas prices have declined substantially since their June 2022 peak – though, as always, it’s important to note that presidents have a limited impact on gas prices.

“But in an economic speech in New York last week, Biden said, ‘Today, the most common price of gas in America is $3.39 – down from over $5 when I took office.’

“Biden’s claim that the most common gas price when he took office was more than $5 is not even close to accurate,” the fact checker said.

“The most common price for a gallon of regular gas on the day he was inaugurated, January 20, 2021, was $2.39, according to data provided to CNN by Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy.

“In other words, Biden made it sound like gas prices had fallen significantly during his presidency when they had actually increased significantly,” he said.

“In other recent remarks, Biden has discussed the state of gas prices in relation to the summer peak of more than $5 per gallon, not in relation to when he took office.

“Regardless, the comment last week was the second this fall in which Biden inaccurately described the price of gas – both times in a way that made it sound more impressive,” he said.

But the president may be getting desperate as on Saturday, polling analysis publication FiveThirtyEight changed its Senate forecast from a “toss-up” to leaning Republican, Newsmax reported.

At president, the analyst firm lists Republican chances of winning the Senate at 55 in 100 versus Democrats retaining control at 45 in 100.

The new predictions come after the outlet reported on Monday: “Herschel Walker’s scandals may hurt his chances against Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock. Meanwhile, Democrats are hoping to pick up a seat in Pennsylvania, but that race has gotten a lot tighter recently.”

“Other Senate races are competitive but have identifiable favorites. For instance, strong Democratic incumbents currently have an edge in Arizona and New Hampshire. And the Senate races in North Carolina, Ohio, and Wisconsin are also close but will likely result in Republican winners,” the outlet also added.

Just more willful ignorance

BLUF
The stereotype of gun owners is a lie. The media calls us male-pale-and-stale, and who cares if old white men are disarmed anyway. In fact, gun owners now look like a cross section of the USA. Minority urban women are the fastest growing segment of new gun owners. I think Democrat politicians are afraid that more women and minorities will decide to become gun owners. These new gun owners might enter the culture of armed America and protect themselves.

That fear keeps Democrat politicians up at night.

New Gun Owners are Invisible to the News Media and Democrat Politicians

More people own guns today than ever before. That growth is a continuation of a long term trend that goes back several decades. In addition to that gradual increase, we’ve also seen an extraordinary growth in new gun buyers in the last two years. We had to rewrite who owns guns and why they own them. Today, about four-out-of-ten families have a firearm in their home. Despite the astounding changes in gun ownership, the way some politicians talk about guns and gun owners is out of date. New gun owners are subjected to a crash course in being misperceived and misrepresented by politicians and by the mainstream news media alike.

What is real and what is fantasy?

Sitting President, Joe Biden, echoed old myths about gun owners at a fundraising event in June. He said,

“More people get killed with their own gun in their home trying to stop a burglar than, in fact, any other cause.. Think about that. Because it’s hard to do. It’s a hard thing to do.”

Mayor John Fetterman, the Democrat candidate for the US Senate from Pennsylvania, also felt the need to comment on guns and gun ownership. He said,

“I have seen with my own eyes at the scenes in my community what a military grade round does to the human body.” He said that rifles, particularly modern rifles, should be outlawed.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul said,

“This whole concept that a good guy with a gun will stop the bad guys with a gun, it doesn’t hold up. And the data bears this out, so that theory is over.”

Those statements don’t fit what we know. We know a lot about new gun owners because we talked with them. Gun stores asked new gun owners why they wanted a gun so the gun shop employee could direct the customer to the appropriate products. The industry trade group representing firearms manufacturers and distributors collected those answers. The stereotypical gun owner used to be an old white man who bought a gun to go hunting. Several years ago, personal safety replaced hunting as the major reason new gun owners buy a firearm. Today, gun owners are from every demographic group; male and female, rich and poor, urban and rural. Gun owners represent every ethnic and racial group. About one-out-of-four African-American adults own a firearm. It seems strange that the mainstream media and politicians have deliberately ignored that change.

Continue reading “”

BLUF
Bassitt, the farmer, said the conservative values of rural, small-town Brazil were now the driving force in national politics. Those beliefs “dovetail nicely with Bolsonarismo,” he said. “They don’t click with Lula and the PT’s socialism.”

Brazil’s rural boomtowns ensure Bolsonarismo’s future

CATANDUVA, Brazil (Reuters) – The small city of Catanduva in the rural farm belt of Sao Paulo state has been ahead of the political curve in Brazil.

In 1996, the city elected leftist Felix Sahao as its first Workers Party (PT) mayor – a full six years before Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva became president of Brazil, establishing nearly 14 years of PT rule.

But Sahao’s administration was marred by financial scandals, presaging the vast corruption probe that jailed Lula, destroyed the PT’s reputation, and paved the way for the scorched-earth politics of far-right President Jair Bolsonaro.

The residents of Catanduva, who have benefited from robust Chinese demand for Brazilian commodities, are now fully behind Bolsonaro. They are attracted to his unique mix of social conservatism, evangelical fervor and small government, sowed in the fertile soils of a booming agribusiness sector and watered with hatred of the “communist” PT.

So even if, as polls suggest, the president loses to Lula in Sunday’s presidential runoff, the whirring tractors and bulging wallets of conservative boomtowns like Catanduva suggest Bolsonarismo is here to stay.

Continue reading “”

Observation O’ The Day:

Interesting!
This appears to be applicable to Markley’s Law. Liberals attack the masculinity of their political opponents because they view that as an extremely potent attack—as it would be against themselves. They are insecure about their manhood and they imagine the same of their political opponents.
As frequently suspected, projection is strong with these people.—Joe

BLUF
Democrats,  Demoncraps, who have spent years delegitimizing the Supreme Court and rule of law, undermining legislative norms, cheering on unprecedented and blatant executive abuses, and using the DOJ to target their political enemies, among other “democracy”-destroying behaviors, do not occupy any high moral ground. And while “democracy” was once just a transparently silly euphemism for “stuff we want,” it has since evolved into a rhetorical device that denotes a decisively illiberal mindset.

DEMOCRATS Demoncraps: The Only Way To Save Democracy Is One-Party Rule.
‘Save Our Democracy’ is the new ‘Russia Collusion.’

At this point, it would save everyone time if Democrats could simply point to a policy agenda item that isn’t going to save democracy — if such a thing exists.

If Republicans vote, they are killing democracy. If they don’t vote, they are killing democracy. The only way to “save democracy,” writes The Washington Post’s Max Boot, is to empower one-party rule — a position that probably sounds counterintuitive to anyone with a middle-school education. “Now you need to vote to literally save democracy again,” contends President Joe Biden, or we will lose our “fundamental rights and freedoms like the right to choose, the right to privacy, the right to vote — our very democracy.”

Chilling stuff. But it doesn’t end there. You will remember that by failing to “reform” the filibuster, which would entail authorizing the thinnest of fleeting majorities to shove through massive generational “reforms” without any national consensus or debate, we are also killing democracy. This has been the position not only of left-wing pundits and the New York Times editorial board, but also senators tasked with defending their institution. I wonder if they will support this democracy-saving fix next session, as well?

Then again, if we don’t nationalize the economy to avert a climate crisis, we are also killing democracy. “We’ve got to save democracy in order to save our species,” Jamie Raskin explains. And if we don’t empty the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to temporarily keep gas prices low to help Democrats win in 2022, we are killing democracy. “We find ourselves in a situation, where keeping gas prices low is key to preserving and strengthening the future of our democracy,” MSNBC’s Chris Hayes says.

We must allow the president to unilaterally create trillion-dollar spending bills and break existing private sector contracts by fiat. For democracy. We must pack the court to “save democracy.” We must create a Ministry of Truth to help with “strengthening democratic institutions.” We must vote for a Pennsylvania candidate who can’t cobble two consecutive coherent sentences together because the “fate of our democracy” is at stake, says our former president.

Continue reading “”

Apropos of the Tulsi Gabbard makeover

From a guy in New Hampshire:

I don’t think she fits into the fascist democrat party well, but they are probably using her as a spoiler to steal weak minded voters from the republicans. This is why she did that silly shooting photo op.

I met her a while back, and asked her about her voting record. I had notes about her voting record to have all of my facts straight. She lied to my face about it, telling me that she didn’t vote that way. Classic narcissist style.

The disturbing part of this interaction was that she didn’t even flinch when lying to my face. Not a single physical “tell” that she was lying. It was downright creepy, like talking to a robot.

She did look pretty good in tight black pants and high heeled boots. If people fall for her game, the democrats won’t have to cheat as much in the future because all of the old Fudd guys will be enthralled by the gun bunny who pretends to be one of them.

Standard practice for demoncraps and their organs. The “different bill” is actually Biden trying to promise he’ll somehow forgive student loans.

Psaki Buries Her Knife in Biden’s Back

Jen Psaki is usually wrong, not because she’s stupid, but because she’s an ideologue, a rabid partizan, and statist zealot. And, she seems to savor a well placed lie. But that’s expected from a former White House press secretary, and William and Mary graduate, who spent her entire tenure contorting the borders of reality, gleefully creating fictions to explain Joe Biden’s precipitous decline into senility.

Joe Biden has always been a dummy. Obama admitted it when he commented on Lunch Bucket Joes’ propensity to always screw things up. Biden is a comic book character inked and colored by media hacks and stooges like Psaki.

Jen’s recent statement is a concession to the spectacular proportion of Joe Biden’s failures. To ignore this would produce a lie that would simply be too big to sustain its own mass — even Psaki has to face the facts at some point:

“If it is a referendum on the president, they [democrats] will lose. And they know that.”

The Biden calamity is everywhere. Even casual, single issue voters are forcefully confronted by Biden’s imbecility, ineptitude, and brittle vindictiveness at every turn. Contrary to Psaki’s statements, no one down ballot is safe from this democrat owned and operated national calamity.

He’s that mean old man, raging in his senility from the front porch at all the kids enjoying a bright summer’s afternoon — a pervert showering with his daughter and sniffing the hair of little girls. With a grumpy, malevolent, misanthrope occupying the White House, the November election cycle is there for the taking — and Jen knows it, is gathering her skirts, hoping to salvage a shred of credibility.

The only things standing in the way of a sweeping Republican win in November are the calcified crony capitalists like Mitch McConnell, diddling the Chinese yen in his pocket. Or the moon-faced warmonger Lindsay Graham. This brand of Republicanism is in league with Democrat statists who all vie, like squealing piglets, at the slop trough of tax payer funded slush.

Continue reading “”

RIGHT-WING COALITION WINS IN ITALY, AMERICAN PRESS LOSES ITS MIND

Italy held its national elections on Sunday, and the results already have the global left seeing red. Exit polls show that the right-wing alliance will win a sizable majority, with a government being formed behind Giorgia Meloni as Prime Minister.

Meloni will be the first woman in the country’s history to hold the position.

So who is Meloni? She’s the leader of the Brothers of Italy party and a populist firebrand. Here’s a 30-second video that provides a good summation of her viewpoints.

“Yes to natural families, no to the LGBT lobby, yes to sexual identity, no to gender ideology, yes to the culture of life, no to the abyss of death, no to the violence of Islam, yes to safer borders, no to mass immigration, yes to work for our people”

Naturally, someone who has those political views must be evil, at least according to the American press. As election day approached and it looked more and more certain Meloni would triumph, the fearmongering was turned up to the max. CBS News did a report accusing her of being a fascist because that’s the only insult they know.

Meloni does not, in fact, lead a “neo-fascist” movement. Is she “far-right” in the European sense? Sure, she is, but that doesn’t make her a fascist, and as far as I can tell, none of her proposed policies are fascist. They may make those on the left upset, especially regarding immigration and LGBT stuff, but that’s not the standard for fascism.

Ironically enough, American Democrats base their accusations on the fact that Meloni’s party has its historical roots in turn-of-the-century fascism in Italy. Of course, the problem with that is obvious. The Democrat Party was the party of slavery and Jim Crow, and it remains a party of mass death in regard to abortion. So if the assertion is that a political party with a checkered history is unacceptable, then the Democrats might as well close up shop, otherwise, they are just massive hypocrites.

They won’t, though, because they truly believe they are more enlightened than their political opponents. If you don’t want kids being sexualized by the LGBT lobby, then you must be a fascist. If you don’t want unlimited Muslim immigration that is driving up crime rates, then you must be a fascist. We all know how the game is played, and it’s all meaningless at this point. No one takes the left’s rantings seriously.

Regardless, what has been made clear over the last year is that Europe is shifting. Right-wing governments are talking power all over the continent, and that’s because the left overplayed their hand. They thought they could usher in an era of deranged cultural decadence coupled with economic malaise without consequences. Obviously, voters have different ideas.

“We’re doing things that help those of us in the anti-Trump world bond with one another and that help people in the Trump world bond with one another.”

“We’re locking in the political structures that benefit Trump…. We are in the middle of a cultural/economic/partisan/identity war between more progressive people in the metro areas and more conservative people everywhere else. To lead the right in this war, Trump doesn’t have to be honest, moral or competent; he just has to be seen taking the fight to the ‘elites.’… Trumpists tell themselves that America is being threatened by a radical left putsch that is out to take over the government and undermine the culture. The core challenge now is to show by word and deed that this is a gross exaggeration. Can Trump win again? Absolutely. I’m a DeSantis doubter…. And then once Trump is nominated, he has some chance of winning, because nobody is executing an effective strategy against him.”

David Brooks slogs along, ahead of his crowd, which is moving even more slowly, pondering the mystery, “Why Is There Still No Strategy to Defeat Donald Trump?” (NYT).

The needed “effective strategy” against Trump is “to show by word and deed” that it’s “a gross exaggeration” to think that “a radical left putsch… is out to take over the government and undermine the culture.” I’m not even persuaded that Brooks believes it’s all that much of an exaggeration to think there’s a “radical left putsch… out to take over the government and undermine the culture.” He just wants Trump defeated and hopes anti-Trumpsters execute a good strategy to take him out.

What would work on these “conservative people” who live everywhere but where everyone who needs to think up the strategy lives? Brooks doesn’t know! He doesn’t even know why all these millions of people love Trump. Does he think it’s because they haven’t yet been cajoled out of believing the “gross exaggeration”? If they haven’t abandoned this belief yet, why would it happen now or in the next 2 years?

I saw that Brooks column yesterday and passed on it, but I gave it another look this morning after Meade texted it to me, which he did because I’d posed the question, in real life here at Meadhouse, “Do you think Trump will run and win?” Meade said the column answered my question. I take it that means the answer is yes.

ADDED: The fact that Brooks talks about a “gross exaggeration” reveals that he thinks there is something true. If there weren’t something true, you’d call it a lie, not an exaggeration.

Well, I had never supported SloJoe for as long as I can remember, I always know him as plagiarist who was a pathological liar.
Nice to see some who used to support him seeing the light.

How Joe Biden Lost My Vote

“The new puritans, then, are best understood as a clergy for a godless age, presiding over a dreamscape of their own making, rewriting our language, history and traditions as they go along. Yet, for all their clout, there are still some among us who steadfastly refuse to praise the elegance of the emperor’s new clothes, who would rather point and laugh at the naked man in our midst. Not for the first time in human history, our way out of this madness will depend upon the heretics.” – Andrew Doyle, The New Puritans

Joe Biden emerged from his speech last week “on the continued battle for the soul of our nation” like a squalling infant birthed from the loins of blue-check Twitter, bathed in the blood-red light of militant fascism.

He was finally their guy. Gone was the empathy guy. Gone was the unity guy. Gone was the moderate guy. Be mean, Joe. Get them, Joe. Get tough, Joe. Tell them their participation in Democracy is a threat to … Democracy!

Yes, tell them, Joe. Tell the “MAGA Republicans” they’re not welcome in their own country. Tell them their participation is a threat to a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Tell them that Democracy means they have to sit down and shut up.

Tell the truck driver who travels coast to coast, working the graveyard shift, to bring freshly cut meat to supermarket shelves. Tell the police officer, the waitress, the bartender, the cable guy, the grocery store clerk, the grandmother, the garage mechanic, the veteran who served in Afghanistan who now has been kicked out of the military for not taking the vaccine, the mother of two who now must home school her children – that they are the violent extremists posing the biggest threat to the country they call home.

Tell them, Joe, that you’ve decided to throw them away like human garbage and that you’re hoping for another January 6th so you can arrest anyone who ever voted for or supported Donald Trump. Tell them that you and you alone ARE America, and any threat to your power is a threat to the State because that’s not fascism at all.

Why did Joe Biden give that speech? Who thought that was a good idea? Obviously, Joe Biden and his administration know that the “MAGA Republicans” are not a dangerous threat to the country. Otherwise, the Democrats would not have meddled in primary elections, spending upwards of $46 million pushing those very same MAGA candidates towards a win, blocking the more moderate GOP picks.

Surely the Democrats know what they’re doing, right? I mean, they’re asking for America’s vote to stay in power. Joe Biden wouldn’t lie to the people about something as serious as a threat to the Republic, right?

Wrong. Joe Biden did lie. The speechwriter lied. They would do anything, say anything, and put any community or even the country at risk just to stay in power and hold onto the past, the America under Barack Obama from 2008 to 2016.

Continue reading “”

Remember, Biden’s own press secretary says that if you disagree with the majority, you’re an extremist!

A new survey by Trafalgar Group of 1,084 voters finds 62.4 % of Independents and 56.8 % overall view the Biden Philadelphia speech as
“a dangerous escalation of rhetoric that is designed to incite conflict among Americans.”

Incremental?

How Should The National Firearms Act Be Reformed?

United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- How Second Amendment supporters address the potential threat posed by the National Firearms Act to our Second Amendment rights is something that has to be planned starting today, BEFORE the attacks in the wake of a successful court ruling come. Failing to plan is planning to fail, and failure should not be an option.

The first thing to understand is that outright repeal of the National Firearms Act is not happening any time soon. What can be done is to reform the process by which firearms (and certain accessories) covered under this act are transferred, as part of an incremental approach to securing our rights. Yes, this is the “incrementalism” approach – one that has been highly successful over the last three decades on concealed carry.

The fact of the matter is that when we are taking on highly onerous legislation, taking it all out in one fell swoop only happens with a massive stroke of luck, or it provokes a massive backlash. Trusting luck is foolish enough – provoking a massive backlash is stupid, given the nature of our enemies. But as the recent signing of constitutional carry in Texas shows, incrementalism works.

So, what incremental steps can be taken when it comes to the National Firearms Act?

Much will depend on just what the legislative and political landscape will look like. As a given, the current anti-Second Amendment extremist regimes in the House, Senate, and White House be defeated at the ballot box before any reform can be taken. But once we have a pro-Second Amendment Congress and White House, what do we pursue?

First, Second Amendment supporters can modernize the NFA process. This is one example where the “lemon” of the National Instant Background Check System (NICS) can be turned into lemonade. Changing the process from one that depends on local law enforcement certification to an FBI background check would probably go over well with the American people. The tax stamps could then be paid as a surcharge to NICS. Such a bill would not create a perfect situation by any means, but it would represent a good “first step.”

If the situation permits, then Second Amendment supporters might be able to push for repeal of both the 1986 Hughes Amendment and the 1968 restrictions on imports. At the same time, nothing would prevent adding the Hearing Protection Act and the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act to the NFA reform measure. But the important point is to defang the NFA as a potential tool for harassing and obstructing efforts to exercise Second Amendment rights.

To do that, Second Amendment supporters need to work to oust the current anti-Second Amendment regimes in the House, Senate, and White House, and they need to support NRA-ILA and NRA-PVF.

California gun control law stays unenforceable after Democrat lawmakers fail key vote

Democratic lawmakers in California failed to replace an existing gun control bill that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional Thursday, leaving the state’s concealed carry regulations unenforceable.

The legislation failed to pass the California Assembly by a single vote early Thursday morning. California Attorney General Rob Bonta lamented that Californians currently have nearly unfettered access to concealed carry permits following the failed vote.

“There would be a huge influx of applicants now that the ‘just cause’ component has been struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court, and not enough safety precautions for the individuals who are seeking that,” Bonta said.

“If this bill doesn’t pass, people who haven’t had a comprehensive safety evaluation can get a concealed weapon and bring it into [sensitive] places,” he added prior to the vote.

Lawmakers say they will bring the bill back up for a vote during a December session.

California’s concealed carry laws were struck down after the Supreme Court ruled in June that states cannot require Americans to demonstrate the particular need for a firearm in order to receive a concealed carry license.

While the ruling related specifically to a New York law, California’s legislation mirrored the requirement and was struck down.

“California was made less safe tonight by not passing the bill to make us consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision,” said Democratic state Sen. Anthony Portantino, one of the California bill’s central supporters. “It’s unfortunate, it’s sad, it’s surprising.”

Birmingham mayor calls for gun ban

The city of Birmingham, Alabama isn’t exactly Chicago or New York City when it comes to size, but it’s not exactly Lotsee, Oklahoma (population: 6) either.

Because it’s a good-sized city, it tends to have a lot of the problems one would associate with a larger city. That obviously includes crime.

In fact, now the mayor is using that crime rate to demand stricter gun control laws.

Since January 1, Birmingham Police have investigated 90 homicides to date in the city with 83 of those by guns, according to Mayor Randall Woodfin during Tuesday’s city council meeting.

This, as he reports that over 700 firearms have been taken off the streets in that same amount of time.

Woodfin is calling for stricter gun laws to get those weapons off the streets, while asking for more help from the community.

“I wake up every day thinking how can we address this?” Woodfin said.

At Tuesday’s meeting he had two police officers take in examples of the types of guns that they have confiscated to people could see what they look like – he says the most common ones are mini-Draco’s and the AR pistol. Woodfin said there is no use for them on the streets but harm.

No, that’s not true at all. There are plenty of uses for them; legitimate, law-abiding uses. Just because criminals are using them doesn’t mean no one else is.

As for Woodfin’s calls for gun control, they’re going to fall on deaf ears, as they should.

Look, Birmingham may be pretty rough, and the crime statistics say that it is, but just what gun control does Woodfin think will suddenly make this end?

It seems he wants to ban them.

“If you can’t support this ban that’s un-American because the whole idea is public safety,” Woodfin said. “Federal tax dollars, state tax dollars, local tax dollars, the root of what we do is public safety first.”

So, it’s un-American to want to uphold the actual Constitution? Seriously?

As for public safety, I took another look at the text of the Constitution. The term “public safety” appears exactly once, and that’s only in reference to suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus. That’s it. At no other point does it claim any other right can be suspended in the name of public safety, even the Second Amendment rights.

Further, the idea that you can ban these particular weapons and criminals not get their hands on them is absolutely insane.

On one hand, there are already plenty of them running around the state as it is. A ban now would, at best, simply keep law-abiding folks from buying any more of them. It won’t stop criminals from getting them at all. Even if they ran out of guns to steal, they’d just obtain them from out-of-state sources.

Further, these are easy to put together yourself, even without a “ghost gun” kit. How does Woodfin propose preventing that?

Look, Birmingham’s problems are significant, to be sure, and Woodfin isn’t a complete idiot. Yes, he’s calling for gun bans, but he’s also asking for community help. That’s where he should be directing his time and effort because that’s going to accomplish far more than anything else he’s talking about.

In fact, had he not called for the gun ban, I’d be celebrating him for talking common sense. Instead, he wants something he can’t have, then has the cajones to call it “un-American” if you oppose it.

With RINO-Republicans Like Ohio’s Matt Dolan, Who Needs Democrats?

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “Ohio GOP lawmaker introduces gun safety bill; includes red flag law, enhanced background checks,” ABC affiliate News 5 Cleveland video reports. “Cleveland-area state Sen. Matt Dolan proposed bill with mental health in mind.”

That this obvious advocacy piece masked as news relies on assumptions right out of the starting gate is evidenced by repeating the term “gun safety” in the headline, the lede, the body of the “report,” and twice in the crusading reporter’s embedded self-publicizing tweet (embedded below). And curiously, since “red flag” laws are also promoted, you’d think the term “due process” would appear at least once in an unbiased report?

You’d think.

Also of note, no real opposing viewpoints are presented. The single gun owner quoted who appears marginally uncomfortable with what he’s being told isn’t totally against the idea; he just isn’t sure what it would actually do. He said that “most gun owners don’t want to cause issues.”

I suppose asking someone from Buckeye Firearms Association what they thought about it would be too much of an investigative reporting stretch. Besides, they’d probably just throw a wrench in the predetermined narrative and give the video editor much more work to futz around with context. And that’s assuming anyone at WEWS even bothered to look for “Ohio gun rights groups” to see what might turn up first on Google.

For his part, that Republican Matt Dolan is following a time-worn gun-grabber script could not be more apparent, especially when he declares, “[The bill] protects the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens while also…”

Grabbers always sound that way when they feign “I support the Second Amendment” right before showing everyone their big “but.” Remembering that it ends in “shall not be infringed,” what other tyrannical usurpations besides disarming citizens who have not been convicted, let alone even charged, does Dolan intend to “protect” us with?

“If someone aged 18 to 21 wants to buy a gun, they would only be able to buy a rifle or shotgun that holds only a single round of ammunition if they buy the gun by themselves,” the report notes. So evidently double-barrel Fudd guns are out.

Why would he invent such a ludicrous Constitutionally and historically unsupportable and offensive restriction?

Continue reading “”

California moved swiftly to limit concealed weapons after Supreme Court ruling. That plan backfired

When the U.S. Supreme Court took a sledgehammer to concealed-carry gun laws that limit firearms in public places, California officials vowed to swiftly respond and enact new restrictions.

But a measure to tighten the state’s rules for concealed weapons failed in the state Capitol early Thursday morning, a shocking outcome for a plan championed by Democratic legislative leaders and Gov. Gavin Newsom.

SB918 by state Sen. Anthony Portantino, D-La Cañada Flintridge (Los Angeles County), would have added a slew of new regulations and background check requirements for gun owners to obtain permits. It also sought to greatly expand the list of public places where guns cannot be carried, including bars, parks, casinos, sports arenas, libraries, churches and gyms.

Ironically, part of what spelled defeat for the measure was the rush by legislators to enact it quickly in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling in June.

Because Portantino added an emergency clause to the bill — so it would take effect immediately upon Newsom’s signature — it needed a two-thirds majority to pass. The measure fell just two votes short on the last night of legislators’ session, on a 52-23 vote in the state Assembly.

Portantino and Democratic leaders, including state Attorney General Rob Bonta, worked feverishly throughout the night to try to whip the necessary votes. The bill faltered just after midnight.

The Supreme Court struck down a New York law requiring gun owners to show they have “proper cause” to get a permit to carry a handgun outside of their home. In other words, the state could not require applicants to demonstrate that they need a gun for self-defense.

The decision in the landmark case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, was widely interpreted as striking down similarly restrictive laws in California and a half-dozen other states.

The court’s conservative majority held, in an opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas, that states can require handgun owners to get a permit to carry in public as long as they use objective requirements to decide whether to issue a permit. Thomas also suggested that the government can still prohibit guns in “sensitive places” like schools and government buildings.

SB918 attempted to take those two openings and adapt California’s law to be as restrictive as possible while complying with the letter of the ruling. Portantino said the state needed to act, in the wake of recent mass shootings across the country, to prevent more violence.

“We need fewer guns on our streets, not more,” he said in a statement earlier this summer. “California will not wait to see the consequences of these trends and will act now to protect the public.”

In California, concealed-weapon licenses are generally available in the state’s most rural counties, those with a population of fewer than 200,000 people. But such licenses have historically been difficult to obtain in metropolitan areas, and cities and counties can create their own restrictions and set fee amounts.

Portantino’s bill was opposed by gun-rights groups, including the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of California, which said the bill would create onerous hurdles for permit applicants and defines “sensitive places” so broadly that it would contradict the court’s narrow intent.

“It is very apparent that this bill is an attempt to pre-empt the expected ruling from the United States Supreme Court,” Gun Owners of California said in a statement. “By your definition the legislature can designate any public place as sensitive.”

That’s Black GUNS Matter, just to make it clear.

If Voters Keep Believing Gun Control Lies, It Will Lead to Communism: Black Guns Matter Founder
Conservatives must spread libertarian message among urban voters, Toure says

Maj Toure is a Philadelphian and founder of “Black Guns Matter,” a movement that advocates for protecting the Second Amendment and promoting responsible gun ownership in black and urban communities. He believes that the gun control movement has been and continues to be racist.

He began his gun rights work after seeing people he knew getting gun charges because they purchased a gun but did not know all the rules of usage, storage, or carry. He began helping people legally acquire and responsibly use guns to defend themselves.

Toure said the Second Amendment is the foundation of liberty in the United States but as more restrictions are placed on gun ownership, we get closer to complete government take over.

“But that [U.S.] Constitution, in the Bill of Rights, is there to check government, not to check the people. But if we keep convincing people that, ‘Oh, this is for your protection’ or restricting the people, we’re going to create another communist regime,” Toure said during a recent interview with EpochTV’s American Thought Leaders program on Aug. 20 at the Turning Point USA Conference.

Toure said what has happened in communist countries is what is slowly happening in the United States.

Necessity of Second Amendment

“The reason why the conversation about the Second Amendment and firearms is so important is that all of your other values and beliefs and all of those different things … if you can’t defend them, you don’t have them,” Toure said.

Recently, the mayor of Philadelphia told Toure that only police should carry guns.

“That’s what he said. That means you’re not fit to serve, you don’t know the Constitution, you don’t even know your job description, you’re just winging it,” he said.

Toure said his organization has to counter these types of anti-American narratives.

“And these are the types of things that we have to consistently remind the American people about because there’s a propaganda onslaught to convince the American people to operate and vote in their own disinterest.”

Continue reading “”