Conservatives Won’t Win Elections by Refusing To Compromise – Dr. Ben Carson
….”Perhaps an illustration is in order: Two armies are engaged in a war. Let’s call the good army that is trying to defend an entire society the red army and the bad army that is trying to invade and pillage society the blue army. The blue army occupies a superior strategic position and is composed of slightly more troops, putting the red army at a distinct disadvantage. Some in the red army feel that they are right and, therefore, should simply march directly into battle with the blue army because right always wins.
Fortunately, some members of the red army are wise and have a better plan. They send a battalion of troops to the base of the mountain occupied by the blue army to distract them while the vast majority of red troops approach the mountain from the backside. They descend upon the blue army by surprise, completely vanquishing them and winning the war. The decoy red battalion may have sustained some casualties, but in the long run, the war was won, and the entire society was saved.
I hope this illustration is useful in helping some to understand that achieving a critical mass of conservatives and RINOs (Republicans in Name Only, as some call them) in office will ensure that we can get non-activist Supreme Court and federal judges in place who respect the U.S. Constitution”
RRD: My God man are you blind? Where have you been? Who is arguing that “right always wins”? Teapartiers are not concerned that their “leaders” have a different plan for fighting the enemy,they fear that they are going to surrender to the enemy or join them and fight with them against us, (or at best wage a half-hearted campaign.) They have good reason for their fears. Need I point out how many times the Republicans have betrayed us over and over again under Bush and later? This is not about tactics or strategy,it is about the fundamental question of whether the GOP leadership etal will fight for what we believe in or simply use us as pawns to amass power for their own purposes.
To the headline I would respond by saying Republicans cannot expect our support if they betray us & compromise away our rights. Whether we should or should not support them is another matter,it depends on how bad the particular candidate is & how great the risk of not supporting him is (in both the near & long term).
But condescension & straw men arguments will not persuade people.
Did IRS illegally specially scrutinize “Israel-related organizations”?
……” The complaint alleges that during [a telephone] conversation, [IRS] Agent [Diane] Gentry told Z Street’s counsel that she had two major concerns about approving the application …: first,that the organization engaged in “advocacy” activities that are not permitted under Section 501(c)(3); and second, that the IRS had special concerns about applications from organizations whose activities relate to Israel, and whose positions with respect to Israel contradict the current policies of the U.S. Government. According to the complaint, Agent Gentry told Z Street’s counsel that the IRS carefully scrutinizes all Section 501(c)(3) applications that are connected with Israel, and that “these cases are being sent to a special unit in the D.C. office to determine whether the organization’s activities contradict the Administration’s public policies.” …
……” Blanket orders from the secret surveillance court allow these communications to be collected without an individual warrant if the NSA operative has a 51% belief that the target is not a US citizen and is not on US soil at the time. Targeting US citizens does require an individual warrant, but the NSA is able to collect Americans’ communications without a warrant if the target is a foreign national located
surveillance capability to deal” with the issue. “These solutions were successfully tested and went live 12 Dec 2012.” Two months later, in February this year, Microsoft officially launched the Outlook.com portal. Another newsletter entry stated that NSA already had pre-encryption access to Outlook email. “For Prism collection against Hotmail, Live, & Outlook.com emails will be unaffected because Prism collects this data prior to encryption.” Microsoft’s co-operation was not limited to Outlook.com. An entry dated 8 April 2013 describes how the company worked “for many months” with the FBI – which acts as the liaison between the intelligence agencies and Silicon Valley on Prism – to allow Prism access without separate authorization to its cloud storage service SkyDrive. The document describes how this access “means that analysts will no longer have to make a special request to SSO for this – a process step that many analysts may not have known about”. The NSA explained that “this new capability will result in a much more complete and timely collection response”. It continued: “This success is the result of the FBI working for many months with Microsoft to get this tasking & collection solution established.” A separate entry identified another area for collaboration. “The FBI Data Intercept Technology Unit (DITU) team is working with Microsoft to understand an additional feature in Outlook.com which allows users to create email aliases, which may affect our tasking processes.” The NSA has devoted substantial efforts in the last two years to work with Microsoft to ensure increased access to Skype, which has an estimated 663 million global users. One document boasts that Prism monitoring of Skype video production has roughly tripled since a new capability was added on 14 July 2012. “The audio portions of these sessions have been processed correctly all along, but without the accompanying video. Now, analysts will have the complete ‘picture’,” it says. Eight months before being bought by Microsoft, Skype joined the Prism program in February 2011. According to the NSA documents, work had begun on smoothly integrating Skype into Prism in November 2010, but it was not until 4 February 2011 that the company was served with a directive to comply signed by the attorney general. The NSA was able to start tasking Skype communications the following day, and collection began on 6 February. “Feedback indicated that a collected Skype call was very clear and the metadata looked complete,” the document stated, praising the co-operation between NSA teams and the FBI. “Collaborative teamwork was the key to the successful addition of another provider to the Prism system.” ACLU technology expert Chris Soghoian said the revelations would surprise many Skype users. “In the past, Skype made affirmative promises to users about their inability to perform wiretaps,” he said.”It’s hard to square Microsoft’s secret collaboration with the NSA with its high-profile efforts to compete on privacy with Google.” The information the NSA collects from Prism is routinely shared with both the FBI and CIA. A 3 August 2012 newsletter describes how the NSA has recently expanded sharing with the other two agencies. The NSA, the entry reveals, has even automated the sharing of aspects of Prism, using software that “enables our partners to see which selectors [search terms] the National Security Agency has tasked to Prism”. The document continues: “The FBI and CIA then can request a copy of Prism collection of any selector…” As a result, the author notes: “these two activities underscore the point that Prism is a team sport!”…..
…..”Why are there no libertarian countries? If libertarians are correct in claiming that they understand how best to organize a modern society, how is it that not a single country in the world in the early twenty-first century is organized along libertarian lines?
RRD: “If this women’s suffrage stuff is so great how is that no nation on earth has ever given women the right to vote before now” ;that or words to that effect were no doubt spoken by an anti-suffrage Swede in 1718,similar “arguments” were made about freedom from the monarchy,religious freedom,emancipation from slavery a reduction of anti-Semitism & hatred of gays,& virtually every other right or positive development that “civilized” countries now take for granted. It is hardly rational to say “this is not,& is without precedent ,therefore this should not be”. And is this same argument to be made against gay marriage by Mr.Lind? Or does he simply apply this ludicrous standard to economic freedom? No doubt Lind would oppose the promethean who first seized control of fire on the grounds that it was unprecedented. And what is this “21st century” drivel? Or are we back to the:”that which comes later is automatically progress & therefore good” absurdity? Was Nazi Germany an “improvement” on the Weimar Republic? Was the end of reconstruction and the return of lynchings an “improvement” on reconstruction? What of the dark ages? Was the rise of Islamic fundamentalism an improvement on the Shah’s Iran?
Note that this argument is never made by liberals against their own proposals,quite the contrary,if their proposals fail disastrously ( like the housing projects) it is simply evidence that we need more “bold persistent experimentation” not that there is anything fundamentally wrong with their proposals.
Nor is it true that the repeated failure of socialist states proves that socialism can never work. It proves that socialist regimes have failed repeatedly & therefore implies that such proposals should be looked at with skepticism at the least ,but in and of itself alone it does not prove that no valid argument now or in the future can ever be made for socialism.
But if Lind’s nonsense is the best argument that can be made ,then the intellectual battle against capitalism is dead & the enemies of freedom can only prevail through ignorance & inertia.
Senator Targets Gun Powders with Explosives ‘Background Check’ Law http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/05/08/New-Explosives-License-Impinges-on-Gun-Owners-that-Load-Own-Ammo ……. ”
An analysis of the text reveals profound changes to current law. Lautenberg’s changes in the explosives law would seriously hamper history reenactor hobbyists, black powder hunters, sportsmen, target shooters, and anyone that loads their own ammo with modern smokeless gun powder or the older style black powder. One change would require those that want to buy and store either smokeless powder or black powder to get a new license–at a rate of $50 every three years–to allow them to do so. The bill also says that they will only be allowed to have “limited” supplies but does not seem to say what amount would exceed those limits. Companies making pre-made ammunition are not required to obtain these licenses for now. The bill also redefines what “manufacturer” of explosives means. The original laws defines “manufacturer” as someone who is making explosives (cartridges, etc.) for sale. That commercial aspect of the law is struck out in the new bill. If Lautenberg’s anti- explosives bill passes, anyone that hand loads cartridges for their own use or anyone that uses black powder firearms for hunting, sporting, or hobby use will now be classified as “manufacturers.
” ….. * Tactical Gear and Military Clothing News *: S.792 Explosive Materials Background Check Act Revealed http://blog.predatorbdu.com/2013/05/s792-explosive-materials-background.html?m=1 RRD: I have no doubt that those unfamiliar with firearms will be puzzled as to why anyone would wish to Handload or Reload. See below: Handloading – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handloading …..”
Economy, increased accuracy, performance, commercial ammunition shortages, and hobby interests are all common motivations for handloading both cartridges and shotshells. Reloading fired cartridge cases can save the shooter money, or provides the shooter with more, and higher quality, ammunition within a given budget. Reloading may not be cost effective for occasional shooters, as it takes time to recoup the cost of the required equipment, but those who shoot on a regular basis will see benefit as the brass cartridge case or shotgun shell hull (the most expensive components) can be reused many times (with proper maintenance). Besides economy, the ability to customize the performance of ammunition is a common goal. Hunters may desire cartridges with specialized bullets or specific performance as regards bullet and velocity . Target shooters seek the best achievable accuracy, as well as the best shot-to-shot consistency. Shotgunning enthusiasts can make specialty rounds not available in commercial inventories at any price. Many handloaders also customize their cartridges and shells to their specific firearms, usually in pursuit of accuracy: they can assemble precision ammunition using cartridge cases that have been fire formed in the chamber of a specific firearm.  Handloaders also have the flexibility to make reduced-power rounds for hunting rifles, such as handloading to an equivalent of a milder- recoiling round to encourage recoil-averse hunters to become proficient with a full-power one. Rather than purchasing a special purpose rifle, which many novice hunters would outgrow within a few hunting seasons, a single rifle can be used with special handloaded rounds until such time more powerful rounds are desired & become appropriate. This use of specialized handloading techniques often provides significant cost savings, especially when a hunter in a family already has a full-power rifle and a new hunter in the family wishes to learn the sport. This technique also enables hunters to use the same rifle and caliber to hunt a wider variety of game. Collectors of obsolete firearms who want to shoot those guns often must handload because appropriate cartridges or shotshells are no longer commercially produced. Handloaders can also create cartridges for which no commercial equivalent exists – wildcat cartridges .  As with any hobby, the pure enjoyment of the reloading process may be the most important benefit. Recurring shortages of commercial ammunition are also reasons to reload cartridges and shotshells. When commercial supplies dry up, and store-bought ammunition is not available at any price, having the ability to reload one’s own cartridges and shotshells economically provides an ability to continue shooting despite shortages. There are three aspects to ballistics : internal ballistics , external ballistics , and terminal ballistics . Internal ballistics refers to things that happen inside the firearm during and after firing but before the bullet leaves the muzzle. The handloading process can realize increased accuracy and precision through improved consistency of manufacture, by selecting the optimal bullet weight and design, and tailoring bullet velocity to the purpose. Each cartridge reloaded can have each component carefully matched to the rest of the cartridges in the batch. Brass cases can be matched by volume, weight, & concentricity, bullets by weight and design, powder charges by weight, type, case filling (amount of total usable case capacity filled by charge), and packing scheme (characteristics of granule packing). In addition to these critical items, the equipment used to assemble the cartridge also has an effect on its uniformity/consistency and optimal shape/size; dies used to size the cartridges can be matched to the chamber of a given gun. Modern handloading equipment enables a firearm owner to tailor fresh ammunition to a specific firearm, and to precisely measured tolerances far improving the comparatively wide tolerances within which commercial ammunition manufacturers must operate. Where the most extreme accuracy is demanded, such as in rifle benchrest shooting , handloading is a fundamental prerequisite for success.  Insurgency and resistance groups, as well as military partisans, might also have need to handload cartridges and shotshells due to unavailability or scarcity of factory-produced commercial ammunition within particular jurisdictions, or under certain circumstances. Low quality of available factory ammunition, even without scarcity of ammunition, can also lead to the need for widespread fabrication of handloaded ammunition.
“….. Introduction to Handloading http://www.basspro.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CFPage?storeId=10151&catalogId=10051&langId=-1&&mode=article&objectID=32096&catID=&subcatID=0 Handloading | Guns Magazine http://gunsmagazine.com/category/handloading/
The most through critique of the bill is presented by GAO’s legal counsel below. I thought to excerpt from it but–if the author is even remotely correct there are so many problems that it’s difficult to know where to begin. Problems – Gun Owners of America http://gunowners.org/congress04082013.htm Also see: Schumer-Toomey-Manchin Gun Control Legislation: Bad Law on Federal Gun Registry http://blog.heritage.org/2013/04/11/schumer-toomey-manchin-gun-control-legislation-bad-law-on-federal-gun-registry/ ……..”
The STM bill fuzzes up the law prohibiting a federal gun registry. First, the legislation says that nothing in the legislation shall be construed to allow establishment of a federal firearms registry. In addition, it says that the Attorney General may not consolidate or centralize records of firearms acquisition and disposition maintained by licensed importers, manufacturers, and dealers, and by buyers and sellers at gun shows (and makes it a crime for him to do so). But then, the STM bill takes those protections away by using the all-powerful word “notwithstanding”—”notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Attorney General may implement this subsection with regulations.” The courts may construe the “notwithstanding” to allow Attorney General Eric Holder to issue regulations that could begin to create a federal registry of firearms, because the law says he can implement the subsection without regard to the protections against a registry elsewhere in the legislation. The courts view the word “notwithstanding” as very powerful. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said in 1989 in Crowley Caribbean Transport v. U.S. in reference to the phrase “notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter” that “a clearer statement of intent is difficult to imagine” to push aside other laws. The same court indicated in 1991 in Liberty Maritime Corporation v. U.S. that a grant of authority to a department head to be exercised “notwithstanding” any other law generally grants the broadest possible discretion to the department head. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in 1992 in Conoco, Inc. v. Skinner took a somewhat different approach, in which the judges themselves divine the congressional intent whether to let the word “notwithstanding” in a law override other conflicting provisions of the same law.
Obama uses executive power to move gun control agenda forward – The Hill http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/290885-obama-uses-executive-power-to-move-gun-control-forward ……”
The CDC has since awarded a contract to the Institute of Medicine (IOM), which this spring will soon begin looking at the role video games and social media play in gun violence, as well as whether gun technologies and access to guns can be used to reduce violence. The aim is to affect future legislation by giving lawmakers empirical data on an area that has been largely bereft for nearly two decades. Without government research, gun control advocates say they are forced to rely on private studies, which do not hold the same clout on Capitol Hill. “You can’t make good policy without good data, and for a generation the NRA has been throwing dirt in the eyes of Congress so they can’t actually see what’s going on around them,” said Glaze.
”….. Obama Directs His Executive Power at America’s Gun Owners – National Review Online http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/337935/obama-s-directs-his-executive-power-america-s-gun-owners-timothy-wheeler …….”
Memories are short. It was only 15 years ago that Congress cut off federal funding for the Centers for Disease Control’s gun research. Top CDC officials such as Patrick O’Carroll, M.D., had said things like “We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” Nor was Congress pleased that the CDC had funded in the spring of 1995 a newsletter from the San Francisco gun-control group the Trauma Foundation. This newsletter advised “advocates” to “organize a picket at gun manufacturing sites” and to “work for campaign finance reform to weaken the gun lobby’s clout.” There’s no reason to believe the CDC will not again use taxpayer millions to pay for more anti-gun-rights pamphleteering
.”…….. RRD: Kill it. Defund it. The GOP controls the House & has the facts on its side. The gun control lobby does not want “good data” they wanted (& got ) government funded “brainwashing” ( to use Eric Holder’s term) that was precisely why that gang of propagandists was blocked from conducting their “research” . Any “research” that comes out of this should be thrown in the trash with the other garbage. It has no more validity than a ethnographic study of Jews carried out by Goebbels. One side note that will no doubt be regarded as irrelevant (since it is Obama & not Bush doing this): given that Congress explicitly forbade the CDC from conducting its “research” what legal justification is there for Obama to do this?