Americans Continue Stocking Up On Firearms And Ammo.

Americans Continue to Arm Themselves
A commentary by J. D. Longstreet
*************************

Here’s some information I picked up from Rasmussen the other day:

Fifty-seven percent (57%) of Americans say gun sales are up in the United States because of a fear of increased government restriction on gun ownership.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 23% say gun sales have risen because of a fear of increased crime. Twenty-one percent (21%) are not sure.

Sixty-three percent (63%) of men say the threat of more gun control is behind increased sales, compared to 51% of women. Fifty-nine percent (59%) of whites agree, while African-Americans are more closely divided on the question.

You may read the entire article from Rasmussen Here.

It is good to know that 75% of Americans believe the constitution guarantees the right to own a gun. A whopping 92% of Republicans say the Constitution guarantees their right to own a gun, compared to 64% of Democrats and 71% of adults not affiliated with either of the major political parties.

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The amendment is part of the Bill of Rights.

Gun control advocates have argued that the Second Amendment refers to the arming of a militia for the common defense and is not a guarantee of an individual’s right to own a gun. The National Rifle Association and numerous political leaders, both Democrat and Republican, among others, disagree.

Now we have Judge Sonia Sotomayor, nominated for the US Supreme Court by President Obama, with a record on the 2nd Amendment which is troublesome to gun owners – and that is putting it mildly. US Senators are being urged by their constituents to carefully question Judge Sotomayor about her position and her rulings on cases having to do with the second amendment.
Take a look a portion of Sotomayor’s record on gun rights:

Sotomayor ruled in United States v. Sanchez-Villar (2004) that "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right."

She was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states.

Fox News reported back in May that in her senior thesis at Princeton University, Sotomayor wrote that America has a "deadly obsession" with guns and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to firearms ownership.

I ran across an interesting article on a site called “The Patriot’s Mind” a few days ago. The title of the piece is: “What the Media won’t tell you about Judge Sotomayor.” You will find it HERE.

And we must not forget the new Obama Attorney General, Eric Holder, who is reportedly not, shall we say, a keen supporter of gun rights.

Americans continue to practically run to gun shops to purchase weapons. They are buying ammunition, semiautomatic sport-utility rifles, and handguns, and shotguns. (Shotguns are a bit easier to employ for the beginner. You just point it in the general direction of your target and pull the trigger. There’s a pretty good chance you’ll get a piece of your intended target.)

The plain truth - is Americans are afraid this new government is going to disregard the constitution and take away their guns and/or make it nearly impossible for them to purchase ammunition for their weapons. That is one reason Americans are buying guns. The other is, or should be, self-explanatory.

From the mouth of, quite likely, the 20th century’s worst dictator, Adolph Hitler, is the most important reason Americans should never give up their 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Here is what Hitler said: "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing."-- Adolph Hitler, Hitler's Secret Conversations 403 (Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens trans., 1961)

Now compare that to what Thomas Jefferson said to John Cartwright in 1824. Jefferson said: "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."

When Americans survey the political landscape in Washington DC today one cannot escape the feeling that powers are gathering to strip Americans of a cherished right - the right to keep and bear arms.

Americans have almost instinctively understood that it was the gun that secured our freedom from Great Britain and it was the gun that has kept us free ever since.

James Madison had this to say in The Federalist Papers, No. 46 about American’s gun rights:

“The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”

And finally, Patrick Henry, that fiery Founding Father had some strong words about the people resisting the abuse of power by their government. Henry said this:

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.”

Through lips curled into a sneer Patrick Henry said this:

“O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone...Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation...inflicted by those who had no power at all?”

Americans must, must, remember, that without the right guaranteed us by our Founding Fathers in the 2nd Amendment, we would have NO WAY to secure all the other rights. Somewhere along the way, over the past 233 years we seem to have forgotten that.

With our guns we are citizens. Without them, we will fairly quickly become slaves.

J. D. Longstreet

********************

Conservative<+Gun+Rights+Constitution+Sotomayor+Obama

“…Men Shall Cry: Peace! Peace! But There Will Be No Peace.”

"…Men shall cry: Peace! Peace! But there will be no peace.”

A commentary by J. D. Longstreet

*************************************

It bothers me when I hear politicians, and former politicians, call for a lasting peace in the Middle East… especially a Southern politician, a Baptist, at that, and… a former President of the US.

I am referring, among others, to former “horrible” President Jimmy Carter of Plains, Georgia.

Now, let me see if I can explain this a bit:

It is always difficult to “unmix” politics and religion; at least it is for me. I really like to keep them separate, as much as I can… with the knowledge that each will, most certainly, intrude on the other… and there is no way to stop that. Not in a free society, anyway.

I was raised Southern Baptist. I left the Baptist church when I was in my mid-twenties and became a Lutheran. I felt the Lutheran church offered me something I could not find in my former denomination. Today that offering has been revoked and I find myself a “non-practicing” Lutheran.

Experience in the Baptist church taught me many things. One is that the policy Mr. Carter is suggesting, a “Lasting Peace in the Middle East”, is certainly not what the Baptist church teaches... at least they didn’t when I was a Baptist. In fact, it taught just the opposite… that there would be no peace, whatsoever, in the Middle East, until the return of Christ and the great battle of Armageddon.

So, you can imagine how my jaw dropped when I read Carter’s article in the Washington Post. You can find it HERE.

What’s going on here? Has “Jimma” finally gone round that bend he has been approaching, rather rapidly, of late? Or, has the Baptist church changed its stance on Peace in the Middle East? I simply don’t know. But, knowing the Baptists, as I do, (there are a number of my family, including my brother, who are Baptist ministers) I cannot believe the church has changed its teachings to reflect modern, secular, politics (I expect I’ll hear from a Baptist, or two, about this! Fine people, those Baptists!! How’s that for “sucking-up?”).

The last I heard, (and I have some friends who travel to Georgia, fairly often, and attend church at Carter’s church… and even attend the Sunday School class he teaches, or did teach.) the Baptist Church had not changed it’s teaching on “End Times”, Armageddon, or the Rapture. So, I have to wonder how other Baptists, members of one of the most conservative denominations on the earth, feel about this prominent Baptist misrepresenting their belief.

Carter’s association with the Baptists and his obvious break with them concerning Israel, and the Middle East, is a puzzlement. But then, politicians, who wear their religion on their sleeves, have always raised my eyebrows.

There is a distinct difference between wearing one’s religion on one’s sleeve, and practicing one’s religion, as that worthy adversary, Democrat Senator Joe Lieberman, does. I do not question his faith. He lives it.

Seems to me America would be a much better place if our politicians would LIVE their religion rather than publicly touting it as so many do.

Am I guilty of judging others by going against the biblical precept, “Judge not, that ye be not judged”? Of course I am! Christ himself said: “Ye shall know a tree by the fruit it bears.” I’m just examining the fruit! I’m kind of a “fruit inspector”, if you will.

I suggest we ALL begin examining the fruit we’re being offered much more closely than we have in the past. All the evidence we need to convince those among us who STILL need convincing has been splattered all over the media lately.

J. D. Longstreet

********************

Conservative+Religion+Politics+America

A Republic… IF We Can Keep It!

A Republic… IF We Can Keep It!
A commentary by J. D. Longstreet

************************************

The story is told that when Ben Franklin emerged from the Constitutional Convention an anxious lady asked him what kind of government they had given us. His famous reply was: “A republic, Madam… if you can keep it.” And, for the most part, we Americans have been trying to keep it. But “change” is in the air.

Have you noticed how the Democratic Party has stopped denying its socialist tendencies?

Months ago, as I began to write about the dangers of socialism to America, (and how the Democratic Party has become a sort of Democratic/Socialist party) I was stunned when they, the democrats, did not refute it! See, I had expected democrats to deny any connection to socialism. But they didn’t. It was then that it struck me… they don’t deny it because they can’t. Apparently, they have embraced socialism.

You must forgive me if I get a bit wound-up when socialism is the topic. I have watched that “destroyer of nations” reap its harvest for many, many, decades. It is, in my opinion, the greatest threat to democracy on the planet. I see socialism as presenting an even greater threat than the Islamofacist terrorists! I will never be comfortable with a socialist government in America. We can argue “degrees” of socialism all day and it won’t matter. As the expression goes: “a little leaven leavens the whole loaf.”

As Independence Day rushes toward us, I think it is pure irony that now, as a “near” socialist nation, America can celebrate an event named “Independence Day” with a straight face!

As I write, in the year of our Lord 2009, Americans are anything but independent! We are fat, and lazy, and dependent on our new “near” socialist government for far too much and we are begging them to take on more of our care through a National Healthcare System that at least some of us recognize as socialized medicine and which has been dubbed “ObamaCare.” There is very little “independent” about Americans today. In less than six short months of the Obama regime we have gone from “King of the Hill” to just another member of the “mediocrity pack” of nations.

I know this is difficult to swallow. You can’t know how much pain it cause me to write these words. I have stood on the ground where the Wright brothers took their first flight launching America into the space age. They had no idea that their short flight would end up taking man to the stars, but of course, it did. I have trod the ground from which our astronauts blasted off to land and walk upon the surface of the moon. I have witnessed America claw her way to the top through sheer willpower and determination to be the best. And now, as I approach the autumn of my life, I am watching the decline and fall of that same America. Do you really think I don’t feel a copious amount of pain? I think I must now know what the ancient Romans felt as they watched the greatest civilization in history, to that day, decline, crumble, and fall in ruins around them.

“Oh,” but you say, “… socialism is the only way to go. Everyone will be equal! No class, no class warfare…” and such.

Well, let us see if we can break it down so that even those of you in love with the “cancer of nations,” socialism, can understand it.

The story is told of an economics professor at a small college who made a statement that he had never failed a single student before but had once failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan.” All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A. After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride, too, so they studied little. The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else. All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

Socialism will brung the end to private enterprise. Just think: under socialism there would be no small businesses, none of those Mom and Pop stores we are so fami,liar with in America. There would be no entrepreneurs. Socialism calls for the redistribution of wealth. Broken down, that simply means taking the money you earned and giving it to those you feel did not earn it. Socialism demands that all wealth in a nation, and that includes yours, will be controlled by the government. In other words, you will own nothing --- not even your own money. The government owns everything and everyone is given only what it takes for that person to survive. Socialism celebrates the lack of an upper class and a lower class. Under socialism there is only one class. And in THAT class all people suffer equally.

Americans have made an awful decision. They have decided to give up. Freedom is just too hard. It requires entirely too much work and effort on the part of the individual. It is much easier to sit back, relax, and allow the government to take care of us. Look, folks, birds locked in a golden cage are just as much a prisoner as those locked in a rusty old quarter-inch mesh wire cage. A prison is a prison and man is quite capable of creating his own.

Americans remind me today of the little granddaughter of a friend. He tells me she just recently went through the stage all parents are familiar with called…”potty training.” When she finished her business she would sit patiently on the porcelain throne, and yell her head off, until someone appeared to take care of that most important chore – the hygienic cleansing of the recently employed lower sphincter. (The vernacular is much more colorful and maybe a bit more descriptive, but, at the risk of creating a pun here, I wanted to keep it clean!) The child’s actions sound so much like what Americans are doing today, sitting on the porcelain throne yelling our heads off while waiting for someone to come take care of the last, but important, chore. The government will take care of it, but there is a price to be extracted from each of us. The price is the loss of our freedom.

They say that Satan’s greatest trick is convincing mankind that he doesn’t exist. It may be his best trick but it doesn’t hold a candle to the trick socialism has played on America.

J. D. Longstreet

**********************

Conservative+Socialism+Republic+Government+America

I Miss America! ... J. D. Longstreet

I Miss America, Already!
By: J. D. Longstreet

*****************************

With the 4th of July, celebrated as Independence Day in the United States, fast approaching, scribes all over the nation are dutifully dipping their quills into their inkpots to scribble the obligatory few lines on the topic: “What America Means to me”, again this year, as in every year since, well, since there has been an America, I suppose.

But, I must confess, I am having difficulty this year. Each time I pull up to the keyboard, and type those few words, my eyes want to tear up and I get that lump in the throat that I used to associate with singing the national anthem and watching the flag march by, proudly held aloft by a veteran of the US Armed Forces. It is a common trait among those of us who have worn our nation’s uniform.

Ah, but this year, this year, the would-be tears are not only for those who have paid the price of our freedom with their body and blood - and sometimes even their sanity, it is for what we, as Americans, have lost in just the first five short months of the new presidential administration’s reign.

Near the top of my list of things we Americans have lost is PRIDE. Pride at being an American. Pride that was earned - that was paid for by the men and women who went before me into the jaws of hell and back to free a people in a country the name of which some of them could not even pronounce. It was pride earned because Americans were a people who would lend a hand to their fellow man, far away, who yearned to be free from a brutal dictator.

America used to be thought of as a “can-do” nation. It didn’t make a lot of difference what needed doing, America could, and would, do it. It never occurred to us we could fail. I mean, after all, we were AMERICANS! We DON’T FAIL!

It was confidence. Self-confidence, if you will. We were a nation of rugged individualists who did not rely on government for a damned thing. As a matter of fact, the less government we had - the better.

The nation, itself, was founded largely by the outcasts of other nations. Occasionally, other nations would send their criminals here as punishment. I know that is difficult to believe but it happened! They were people who had nothing to lose, with their backs against the wall they had one way to go and that was straight ahead - and the devil take the hind most! Those were the people who formed the bedrock foundation of the people the world would come to know simply as “AMERICANS.” Unique in the history of the planet - there had never been a nation made of people like those Americans. They were different. They knew it and they loved it.

They were a people who wanted their freedom - and so they took it – and they took it from a world superpower, no less. They created an experimental system of government called a representative republic and made it work! Some 80 years later they fell out, over state’s rights, and split into two separate countries and went to war against each other. The War for Southern Independence was unlike anything the world had seen before and since. They went at killing each other with workman like precision. On more than one occasion soldiers would cheer and applaud the other side’s bravery in the midst of the battle! More Americans died in that war than in all the wars America has been involved in added together. Some say the way that war ended has much to do with where America finds herself today. I cannot disagree with that. As a result of that war’s ending we stand today as one nation containing two countries made up of 50 separate and sovereign states. At some point it is bound to unravel.

America’s downfall came quickly once it began in the early 1990’s.

I have concluded ignorance is the cause of America’s downfall. We Americans are, as a whole, stupid. We are the least educated, dumbest, society on earth. How else can you account for the people we elected to lead the nation? I mean… just LOOK at that bunch! Now… look at what they have done to the country in less than six months! There is no easy way to say this – the election of Obama was a huge triumph for ignorance in America. If you STILL do not believe me, stick around for oh, a year, maybe eighteen months, or so, and watch what is going to happen and THEN tell me I am wrong.

Come on folks! Look at the fare on your TV. Most of it is insulting to anyone with a slightly above average IQ. You must understand the comprehension level of the average adult American today is around that of a third grader, or below. The people who produce the garbage on TV have to dumb it down so the average American can understand it! How else are they going to be able to sell it to the networks as vehicles for their commercials?

Our public school system (the government schools, as many now refer to them) is absolutely pathetic. It is a colossal failure. The curriculum has been dumbed down so that we are graduating kids who can barely function in a world that will surely pass them by. We know what is wrong with our schools and we know how to fix them - but we won’t. You must understand that for the government (we now have in America) to continue to control the reins of power they need MORE dumb Americans - not less. Our cookie-cutter schools are turning them out by the millions every year.

So, if you say America has passed her zenith, I certainly would not argue with you. Today’s America is but a caricature of the real America. And I really, really, miss America!

J. D. Longstreet

*****************

Conservative+America+Education+government+Dumb

Whatever Happened to the Kang Nam?

A note from Radarsite: Despite its being at least as dangerous, in its global implications, as the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, and despite the fact that, according the rather ambiguous Korea Herald report quoted below, this looming maritime crisis still remains factually unresolved, we hear no more about it. Did the Kang Nam really turn around and head back home without discharging it deadly cargo? Did Kim Jong Ill really blink? Or as one skeptic suggests, did it already offload at some unknown port? Either way, thanks to the overwhelming event of Michael Jackson's demise, and various other more important stories, it seems that the Kang Nam crisis is no longer deemed newsworthy. It's off the front page. But it's not off our radar screen. Did the world just avert a major catastrophe? Or has the world just decided to look the other way?

We will follow up on this. - rg

------------------------------------------------

From the Korea Herald

Kang Nam may be heading back home

The Kang Nam, a North Korean ship suspected to be carrying illicit weapons or related material, may be headed back home, according to diplomatic sources here.

"The ship is near our waters. That is about all I can say," said one diplomatic source on the condition of anonymity.

Experts said this could mean that the ship is on its way back to North Korea, indicating that the latest United Nations Security Council sanctions are taking a toll on the reclusive communist state.

"If the ship is on its way back, it would mean that Resolution 1874 is taking effect and causing the North to retreat," said Kim Tae-woo, vice president of the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses.

It has been almost two weeks since the Kang Nam set sail on June 17, but Seoul has claimed it has no information on the whereabouts of the ship.

The Kang Nam is the first North Korean ship to come under international scrutiny since the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 1874 that strongly recommends member states to help search and ground North Korean ships suspected of carrying illicit weapons or related material.

Some observers said the Kang Nam may have already unloaded such items, but others said the North would wait until the last minute, as the weapons and materials constitute a vital source of funds for the impoverished regime.

Myanmar, the alleged destination of the Kang Nam, has recently told the foreign press that it would not allow the ship to disembark if it is found to be indeed carrying such items.

The government of Myanmar already has an idea of the items on the ship as the Kang Nam must declare them in advance, according to Foreign Ministry officials.

"The fact that the Myanmarese government has spoken out, if it has as some of the news reports claim, it indicates that the resolution is working," said one Foreign Ministry official.

The Myanmar Embassy here said it had no comment.

A United States destroyer - USS John McCain led by Capt. Jeffrey Kim - is reportedly close on the Kang Nam's tail. But the destroyer is not authorized to forcefully search the North Korean ship.

Due to these limits, critics have said the resolution needs to plug the loopholes by allowing such actions by the member states.

(jemmie@heraldm.com)


By Kim Ji-hyun

Honduras Defending Democracy and Constitution

by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

In researching the events taking place in Honduras, I see President Obama immediately cited the outster of President Manuel Zeyala as "not legal." Another "gird your loins" moment for the American President. The question is: was this a coup d'etat or a constitutional succession?

Roberto Micheletti

Why did the Supreme Court rule that ousted President Manuel Zelaya was subverting the rule of law in Honduras? Why did Congress rule the same?

Zelaya's term of office ends in 2010. He called for a "controversial referendum" to take place on June 28th. The referendum, if approved, would have made changes to the Honduran Constitution to allow Zelaya to run for office for another term, an action the Supreme Court says is not lawful.

While Honduran law allows for a constitutional rewrite, the power to open that door does not lie with the president. A constituent assembly can only be called through a national referendum approved by its Congress.

But Mr. Zelaya declared the vote on his own and had Mr. Chávez ship him the necessary ballots from Venezuela. The Supreme Court ruled his referendum unconstitutional, and it instructed the military not to carry out the logistics of the vote as it normally would do.

After the Supreme Court declared the referendum not lawful, Zelaya vowed to hold a vote on the referendum anyway. Zelaya dismissed "the military chief," Romeo Vasquez, who opposed Zelaya's position on the referendum. The Supreme Court asked that Vazquez be reinstated. Zelaya refused.

So on Thursday he [Zelaya] led a mob that broke into the military installation where the ballots from Venezuela were being stored and then had his supporters distribute them in defiance of the Supreme Court's order.

The attorney general had already made clear that the referendum was illegal, and he further announced that he would prosecute anyone involved in carrying it out. Yesterday, Mr. Zelaya was arrested by the military and is now in exile in Costa Rica.

The Supreme Court voted to remove Zelaya "to defend the rule of law."

The Honduran Congress later swore in its leader, Roberto Micheletti, as the new head of state after voting to remove Mr. Zelaya for "manifest irreuglar conduct" and "putting in present danger the state of the law."

Micheletti said that the orders carried out as issued by the Supreme Court and the Congress "was not a coup d'etat, but a constitutional succession."

The new government's foreign minister, Enrique Otez Colindres said the new government looks forward to meeting with OAS officials:

...so they can realize that this is a government that respects all laws and the only thing it did was to remove a president for systematically violating the constitution.

Manuel Zelaya was elected as a conservative. He has progressively moved away from that position and cemented relationships with Cuba's Castros, Venezuela's Chavez and Bolivia's Morales. As Wall Street Journal writer, O'Grady said, it is not "about left-right politics."

It is about defending the independence of institutions that keep presidents from becoming dictators.

So how do the Honduran people feel about the ouster? The Latin Business Chronicle says that Honduran business support the Supreme Court and Micheletti's new government:

It is extremely popular,” says Jacqueline Foglia Sandoval, former president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Honduras. “I don’t know of any one who isn’t celebrating."

[The attempted referendum] followed three years of Zelaya policies that were seen as arbitrary and often hurting business, Foglia Sandoval says.

Over the last three years, our ex president had created political and social chaos,” she says. “He [was] very unpredictable and many times [imposed] arbitrary actions that …affected the business climate.

The Latin Business Chronical reports that wage hikes smacked of socialism and resulted in the loss of 150,000 jobs.

[Zeyala] in December to raise the minimum wage by 60 percent despite that unions had demanded 20 to 30 percent and employers had countered with zero to 10 percent.

Not only did he exceed the union demands, but also imposed the new laws as companies already had their 2009 budgets ready, Foglia Sandoval points out. As a results some 150,000 jobs were lost during the past six months, she says.

Another concern was his talk about implementing socialism of the 21^st century, modeled on Venezuela. “People associate socialism with ration cards, with lines, with the things we do not want,” Foglia Sandoval says. “It’s a poor country, but we don’t have rationing, or lack of mobility, or have to ask permission for moving.” Further issues raised by the business community is the lack of security, which Sandoval said Zelaya completely ignored. Drug trafficking is growing and people fear for their personal safety. Foreign investment has diminished, and Zelaya's treatment of foreign oil companies was considered "hostile."

In January 2007, Zelaya announced plans to temporarily assume control of oil terminals and restrict imports of oil to one company in an effort to reduce fuel prices. However, after the US Embassy in Honduras warned that the takeover would have serious consequences, the government reversed its position on the terminals.

Fogliz Sandoval said relations with the U.S. were "worsening."

The people of Honduras are standing to protect their Constitution. This is a hallelujah moment for Democracy.

President Obama has said that the ouster of Manuel Zelaya was "not legal." Obama has said the U.S. will "stand on the side of democracy." He has said nothing about the legality of Zelaya subverting the Honduran Constitution. That is the issue. If a democratic election is held, and then the one democratically elected attempts to take over the government illegally - then why are we not talking about that?

Rudi Stettner at Rant Rave looked at the differences in Obama's handling of the Iranian election and the Honduran succession and summed it up this way:

One thing that was established in the Honduran coup. When there is a "progressive" consensus, Obama will quickly find his voice. Since Islamic radicals are the fascists that liberals love, a blind eye will be turned to their sins.

Democrats ram largest-ever tax bill through House

The House of Representatives passed the 1,200-plus page Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade tax bill by a narrow margin as the last piece of business on Friday before heading home for the Fourth of July recess. Once again House members had to vote on a bill they hadn’t read, since co-sponsor Henry Waxman (D-CA) added a 300-page amendment just after 3 o’clock Friday morning.

Fearing the vote on the controversial American Clean Energy and Security Act – the largest tax increase in American history – would not go their way, Democrats called one lawmaker in from rehab to help out. According to The Hill, “In a clear sign that Democrats need every vote they can get on climate change legislation, Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.) has returned from medical treatment for alcoholism to vote on the bill. Kennedy, who has missed every vote since going into rehab on June 12, was seen on the House floor talking to his Democratic colleagues.”

Among the 219 “Aye” votes were Mr. Kennedy and eight Republicans, all of whom did a disservice to their constituents. Among the 212 “No” votes were 44 Democrats who deserve recognition for seeing this measure as the disaster-in-waiting that it is.

With the final margin a very thin seven votes, the eight Republicans essentially passed the bill that The Heritage Foundation called “nothing more than an energy tax in disguise” that will raise the cost of electricity.

Even President Barack Obama acknowledges that the $65 billion tax will cause electricity costs to rise: “Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket,” the President told the San Francisco Chronicle in January. Electric utilities, he said, “will have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will have to pass that money on to consumers.”

In addition to electricity costs cap-and trade will also increase the cost of everything that electricity and fossil fuels are used for, and those higher costs will produce job losses, an increase in the federal debt, and a weaker economy. “The reality is when all the tax impacts have been added up, the average per-family-of-four costs rise by $2,979 per year,” Heritage estimates. “In the year 2035 alone, the cost is $4,609. And the costs per family for the whole energy tax aggregated from 2012 to 2035 are $71,493.”

Democrats counter that according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Waxman-Markey would cost the average household only $175 a year by 2020. But critics point out that the CBO analysis looked only at the day-to-day costs of the program, and not at the entire set of economic consequences of energy restriction. A CBO footnote acknowledges as much: "The resource cost does not indicate the potential decrease in gross domestic product (GDP) that could result from the cap.”

Prior to the vote Friday, Michigan Republican Congressman Thaddeus McCotter told the House that “passing this abominable energy tax on working families in a recession shows this job-killing, budget-busting government doesn’t understand how much real Americans are hurting for work. This is the hubris of big government: the delusion that our families’ economic future rests in the manicured hands of Congress rather than in the hard-working hands of the American people. I disagree and I urge the rejection of this bill.”

Undaunted by the dire predictions of analysts, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) blundered forward with the vote, and won, if you can call heaping monumental additional costs on your constituents and other Americans “winning.” Some Democrats aren’t happy about this bill and even environmental groups are opposed to it because, despite all of the additional costs and other harm the amended version will heap on Americans, organizations like Greenpeace believe the form of the bill that was passed is too weak.

The good news is that the bill will have a much harder time in the Senate, and may not even be brought up for a vote.

Cap-and-trade is a scheme to push the U.S. toward “green,” renewable energy despite compelling evidence against mankind contributing significantly to global warming, or global cooling, whichever it is this week. As time passes, the manmade climate change theory is increasingly out of favor with both scientists and regular Americans.

Hardly anyone supports continuing to pour pollutants into the air when there are clean alternatives. The problem is that green alternatives are not viable alternatives; wind, solar and the other clean technologies aren’t well enough developed yet to replace coal, oil and natural gas as major energy sources, and they are more expensive than conventional energy. Trying to force their development by making conventional energy so expensive that no one can afford it is cruel, and trying to put green energy in place before it is ready is foolish.

July 4th is a few days away. There is no better time to look at over-reaching government efforts like cap-and-trade and healthcare reform and consider them in the context of why we celebrate the 4th of July. Everyone who understands the fundamental concepts of freedom that are behind the Declaration of Independence will reject both ideas.

Cross-posted from Observations