21 January 2013

Open Letter To Speaker Boenher

From: Frank E Kledas

First Sergeant, United States Marine Corps (Retired)

The Honorable John A. Boehner

Office of the Speaker

H232 Capitol

Washington, D.C. 20515

January 19, 2013

Dear Speaker Boehner;

I received my natural Republican card in the mail this afternoon.

Sir, you are asking for my support, along with asking for a donation of 25, 40, or 50 dollars for the Republican “cause.” My immediate question to you is this: can you please give me any reason(s) at all as to why I should support the national Republican Party any longer? For the last four years now during your political game of chess with the opposition party in the House you have been out-maneuvered and out-witted every step of the way. You have also been held in either check, or, in fact, checkmated by the House members on the Democratic side of the house. Time and time again Obama and the rest of his administration have out-smarted you, out-played you, and beat you at every turn. You have not been able to stop Obama and his party’s reckless spending one iota, not to even mention the upcoming obvious total destruction of our country due to the Obama administration’s disregard for tenets of the Constitution of the United States of America.

By being complicit in picking Romney, hand-in-hand with those other Republicans that obviously also thought he was the best choice for the job to put up as our candidate to run against Obama in last year’s presidential election, you, sir, helped select a very weak individual to represent not only our party, but also the American people, in general. And then, to top it off, by Governor Romney then picking Ryan as his vice-presidential running mate, we wound up with now two weak candidates. And now, today, because the blue blood establishment Republican Party has shot itself in the foot once again (the first time was RINO McCain, of course, four years ago) we are facing another “four years of the same”. It is becoming redundant now.

By not attacking Obama on the legitimacy of his birth certificate with regard to his father, a loyal British subject, and his (Obama’s) right to set foot in the oval office in the first place, you missed a great opportunity of nipping it in the bud up-front, when it would have been the most appropriate time for you to take some kind of action on the issue.

And just lately, by not fiercely demanding answers with regard to the attack on our consulate in Libya, with Obama’s decision to not defend our consulate there, you dropped the ball once again. We needed answers then – and we need answers now. We need to know the answers to the questions that only his Secretary of State can answer, yet you sat on your thumbs and let Hillary Clinton get away with her obvious, wide-open dereliction of duty, just the same as you have done with Obama. Their inaction in this matter led to the murder of our ambassador, and yet, as of today, there has still been no formal charges filed against either Obama or Clinton, nor any other State Department officials. This leads we, the people, to believe, essentially; that somehow no one is responsible for the act of war that took place against our country while the people in charge were watching it unfold in real time on their satellite linked TV sets in the war room, intently watching the murders take place. I wonder if they were offered popcorn and cokes in the war room while they watched. President Obama was, in this case, as probably in all others, except maybe vacations is/was working as an absentee president in the matter at hand – as he was not called to task on it by you or anyone else of any real authority. It is almost as though there is a conspiracy taking place in the lofty realm of the big government you have all helped create for yourselves.

When will you personally, and the Republican Party, in general, even begin to realize that in order to beat the Democrats at their own game, the one they beat you with all of the time, that you are going to have to play rough politics and get down on the same level that they operate from. You are going to have to get down in the dirt and sling mud exactly the same way they do. All of you need take the damn gloves off and come out swinging! Make an attempt at winning for us once in a while. Do it for the Republican Party, and do it for the country. Try. Make the attempt. Please.

During these last four years the American people have been held hostage by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, as well as many of the other members of the Democratic Party, and this is a known fact that the whole country is well aware of. Everyone in the country, I suppose, except for the leaders of the Republican Party.

Mr. Speaker, surely you know, just as well as the rest of us, that Obama did not win the White House with an honest and open vote. The vote was a total fraud, top to bottom. He was elected by the votes that were coming out of the grave yards in the cities of Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, Cincinnati and San Francisco, among a few others, and also with the help of our 50 states many crooked, mob-led, mob-enforced unions, hand-in-hand with the help of thousands upon thousands of undocumented aliens all over the country. Sir, it does not take a mental giant to figure all of this stuff out. What it does take is some words and some action on our Republican Party’s leadership to get the various balls rolling to make everything right once again in our country. Is it any wonder at all for you people on Capitol Hill that you are all ranked so lowly in the eyes of the citizenry of this country? Surely you have wondered once or twice about it. Where was the outcry out of the Republican Party while all this was going on? Where were all of the challenges that should have been taking place at the polling places during the election process while all of these many violations were in the process of taking place against our country? The Fox News Channel was telling us all about the fraud that was taking place. I can only assume that the members of congress were out shopping for Christmas presents somewhere, leaving no one in charge. The answer to this question, I believe, is that our party was not only silent on the subject, but absent without leave. AWOL. In the military services of our country that would be a court-martial offense.

Once again, sir, the Republican Party was out-witted, out-maneuvered and totally out-classed by the Democratic Party on this issue and many others, too numerous to even mention here. And now, sir, even as I speak: we are looking at yet another disaster that is in the beginning stages there on Capitol Hill. This upcoming, looming disaster has to do with Obama’s appointment of Hanoi John Kerry to the position of Secretary of State to relieve Hillary Clinton. This individual, Congressman John Kerry, should have been tried for treason and locked away in a federal prison many decades ago and, in my opinion, should still be festering away in some dark and dank cell in Leavenworth, Kansas. He should never have been allowed to serve in either one of the two houses of Congress. The act of treason against one’s country should not be rewarded by placing the person in a position of responsibility. I can think of only one other low-life person of his ilk that Obama could possibly appoint to that cabinet post that might be even close to being worse than the appointment of Kerry, and that person is Hanoi Jane Fonda. But, then again - maybe I spoke too soon. Just possibly in today’s modern Republican Party the members might most likely cheer her on, instead.

In closing Mr. Speaker, I suppose I'll have no other choice but to support your party, but only for the simple fact that we only have a two-party system in our country, providing me no other recourse. I strictly refuse to support the other one, the Progressive (read: Communist) Party. Essentially, I am taking the path of the lesser of two evils, which s exactly what I did when I cast my ballot for the office of President last November. Bottom line, sir, as of right now I do not believe that our present-day Republican Party has anybody, nor even any bright star on the parties immediate horizon that can run against literally any Democratic candidate nominated in the near future. That is how far down on the totem pole I believe our party has sank while the party leadership has been napping their lives away. I can only hope that enough people in America come to their senses sometime within the next couple of years to sift through the ashes of this last election, see and recognize the error of their ways, and hopefully come up with a newer, much brighter, much, much more aggressive party that can lead us into the future. The party has disappointed me for a number of years now. The party needs to give we the voters a broader range and choice of candidates for the office of president.

But, actually sir, I rather doubt that I will be hearing back from you. I doubt if this letter will even get past your various assistants, much less into your hands to read; as most correspondence that is sent such as this will most likely just end up in the round file, or maybe just swept out with the other trash. However at least I had my say in what I believe is a very grave matter for not only our party, but for our whole country.

Respectively yours and Semper Fidelis,

Frank E Kledas

First Sergeant, United States Marine Corps (Retired)

20 January 2013

West Point center cites dangers of ‘far right’ in U.S.

West Point center cites dangers of ‘far right’ in U.S.

A West Point think tank has issued a paper warning America about “far right” groups such as the “anti-federalist” movement, which supports “civil activism, individual freedoms and self-government.”

The report issued this week by the Combating Terrorism Center at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., is titled “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right.”

The center — part of the institution where men and women are molded into Army officers — posted the report Tuesday. It lumps limited government activists with three movements it identifies as “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement.”

The West Point center typically focuses reports on al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists attempting to gain power in Asia, the Middle East and Africa through violence. (emphasis added) 
But its latest study turns inward and paints a broad brush of people it considers “far right.”
It says anti-federalists “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights. Finally, they support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government. Extremists in the anti-federalist movement direct most their violence against the federal government and its proxies in law enforcement.”

The report also draws a link between the mainstream conservative movement and the violent “far right,” and describes liberals as “future oriented” and conservatives as living in the past.
Read more:
Follow @washtimes on Twitter

16 January 2013

The “Militia” of the 2nd Amendment | A Soldier's Perspective--

My bud CJ nails it once again. Make the jump and read the whole thing.

The “Militia” of the 2nd Amendment | A Soldier's Perspective

We hear a lot of static from all sides of the aisle. Some claim that the Founding Fathers could have never envisioned the type of weapons we have today. Others say that the 2A only applies to the military.  
So, what is the truth? What is the “militia” of the Constitution referring to? I’m not going to present a grammatical argument to this issue, though one would suffice alone in coming to a realization of what “the militia” is. Instead, I’m going to talk about what our Founding Fathers intended through their own words.
Interestingly, I’ve never heard anyone quote the ACTUAL LAW in any argument about what constitutes the militia.
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
Title 10, Subtitle A, Part I, Chapter 13, § 311

The Statute of Liberty

The Statute of Liberty

If you've ever toured Monticello, then you know that Thomas Jefferson had very strong opinions about what his legacy should be. He wanted to be remembered as the man who wrote the Declaration of Independence and as the "father" of the University of Virginia. Both are inscribed on his tombstone, along with his second proudest achievement--authoring the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom.

....what Jefferson wrote in Fredericksburg some 230 years ago was such a groundbreaking defense of freedom that the men who drafted our Constitution relied on it for the framework of the First Amendment. "No nation," the third President said years later, "has ever existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be." Thomas Jefferson understood then, as we do now, that religious freedom is fundamental to every other freedom on earth. Maybe that's why, despite all of his other accomplishments, Jefferson considered the statute one of his greatest legislative feats.

WATCH: New NRA video slams President Obama over hypocrisy | National News

WATCH: New NRA video slams President Obama over hypocrisy | National News

Texas to Join Wyoming: Felony Charges for Enforcing New Gun Control

Texas to Join Wyoming: Felony Charges for Enforcing New Gun Control
"We can no longer depend on the Federal Government and this Administration to uphold a Constitution they no longer believe in."

15 January 2013

GOP congressman threatens impeachment if Obama uses executive action for gun control

GOP congressman threatens impeachment if Obama uses executive action for gun control

“Any proposal to abuse executive power and infringe upon gun rights must be repelled with the stiffest legislative force possible,” he added. “Under no circumstances whatsoever may the government take any action that disarms any peaceable person — much less without due process through an executive declaration without a vote of Congress or a ruling of a court.”

He concluded by claiming that an executive order would be not just “not just an attack on the Constitution,” but also an “attack on Americans.”

“If the president is allowed to suspend constitutional rights on his own personal whims, our free republic has effectively ceased to exist,” he said.

Read more: 

14 January 2013

Obama: Some Gun Control Measures 'I Can Accomplish Through Executive Action'

Obama: Some Gun Control Measures 'I Can Accomplish Through Executive Action'

Dear Leader seems to be throwing down a gauntlet to law-abiding American citizens. I believe he's deliberately trying to piss us off to get a reaction.

He WANTS a reaction that will justify the use of his Civilian Defense Force to "quell uprisings against government employees confiscating weapons."

Media Puts Privacy of Child Rapists Above Law-Abiding Gun Owners

Media Puts Privacy of Child Rapists Above Law-Abiding Gun Owners

The enemedia is performing its duties as the propaganda arm of the most exteme groups who are pro-big government control and anti-liberty. The Consitution means nothing in their twisted view of society.

Up is down and down is up. Wrong is right and right is wrong.

12 January 2013

Are you willing to die to take my guns?

H/T to a Brother Marine. Wish I knew who to thank for writing it.

When They Come For Your Guns, Do You Have A Responsibility To Fight?

I feel a tremendous responsibility to write this article though I am a little apprehensive. Thinking about the possibility of rising up against our own government is a frightening thing for many of us. I am not Johnny Rambo and I will be the first to admit that I do not want to die. The reason I feel compelled to write this, however, is simply because I don’t think the average American is equipped with the facts. I feel that a lot of American citizens feel like they have no choice but to surrender their guns if the government comes for them. I blame traditional media sources for this mass brainwash and I carry the responsibility of all small independent bloggers to tell the truth. So my focus today is to lay out your constitutional rights as an American, and let you decide what to do with those rights.

About a month ago I let the “democracy” word slip in a discussion with a fellow blogger. I know better. Americans have been conditioned to use this term. It’s not an accurate term and it never has been a correct term to describe our form of government. The truth is that the United States of America is a constitutional republic. This is similar to a democracy because our representatives are selected by democratic elections, but ultimately our representatives are required to work within the framework of our constitution. In other words, even if 90% of Americans want something that goes against our founding principles, they have no right to call for a violation of constitutional rights. If you are religious you might choose to think of it this way… Say that members of your congregation decide that mass fornication is a good thing. Do they have the right to change the teachings of your God? The truth is the truth. It doesn’t matter how many people try to stray from it.

Did I just compare our founders to God? In a way I did, but please note that I am not trying to insult anyone. For the purpose of the American Government our constitution and founders who wrote it are much like God is to believers. It is the law. It is indisputable. Our founders did not want a “democracy” for they feared a true democracy was just as dangerous as a monarchy. The founders were highly educated people who were experienced in defending themselves against tyranny. They understood that the constitution could protect the people by limiting the power of anyone to work outside of it much better than a pure system of popularity. A system of checks and balances was set up to help limit corruption of government and also the potential for an “immoral majority” developing within the American People. We have forgotten in this country that we are ultimately ruled by a constitution. Why is a democracy potentially just as dangerous as a monarchy? Let’s look at something that Benjamin Franklin said because it answers that question more fully and succinctly than I can.

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin

Even 230+ years ago our founders were perceptive enough to realize that democracy was a dangerous form of government. How so? Because the citizens of a country can become just as corrupt as any government. We have seen evidence of this throughout history. Ask Native Americans and African-Americans if this population can become corrupt. I think in 2012 we are seeing evidence of what Franklin was trying to tell us. Just because a majority of people may support certain ideas it does not mean that those ideas are just. In simple terms, just because most Americans love our president and voted for him, it does not mean that he has the power to go against our constitutional rights. Next I’d like to review the text of the second amendment. It is very clear. This is the law of this land. So when Senator Feinstein or President Obama talk about taking your guns, you need to think about something. Are they honoring their sworn oath to uphold the constitution?

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.

This is a pretty clear statement. The fact is that it took 232 years for the Supreme Court to even rule on this amendment because it has never been successfully challenged. In 2008 a case ofColumbia v. Heller the Supreme Court ruled that a handgun ban in Washington D.C. was unconstitutional. One also has to take this into consideration. The Supreme Court supports your right to own guns. If you want to research this decision further you can . For those who try to debate the spirit of the 2nd amendment, they are truly no different from people who will try to take Biblical quotes out of context to try to support their immoral decisions. The founders were very clear on the intent of the 2nd amendment. Let me share a few quick quotes here:

The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. -Thomas Jefferson
Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good. -George Washington
The Constitution shall never be construed….to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. -Samuel Adams


I could find hundreds of quotes like these.This country was built on the right to bear arms. It was built on the rights of an individual to bear arms, regardless of what his government or neighbor happened to think. This is crystal clear.

Ironically the people who voice their opinions against this right have their free speech protected by your guns. Without guns in this country, all other amendments become null and void, simply because “We the People” will lose our power of enforcement. We need to keep this in mind as our “representatives” try to push gun bans. I don’t care if 99% of people are in support of gun bans (which is far from the case), it is a violation of our constitutional rights, plain and simple.

A constitutional republic protects the rights of the individual even when their ideas are very much in the minority. If I were the only person in America who believed in the 2nd amendment, I would still be within my rights to call upon it. You would all think I was insane and possibly celebrate if I was gunned down, but in the end I would be the only true American among us.

Our framers were very clear on this. If my government comes to take my guns, they are violating one of my constitutional rights that is covered by the 2nd amendment. It is not my right, at that point, but my responsibility to respond in the name of liberty.

What I am telling you is something that many are trying to soft sell, and many others have tried to avoid putting into print, but I am going to say it. The time for speaking in code is over. If they come for our guns then it is our constitutional right to put them six feet under. You have the right to kill any representative of this government who tries to tread on your liberty. I am thinking about self-defense and not talking about inciting a revolution. Re-read Jefferson’s quote. He talks about a “last resort.”

I am not trying to start a Revolt, I am talking about self-defense. If the day for Revolution comes, when no peaceful options exist, we may have to talk about that as well. None of us wants to think about that, but please understand that a majority can not take away your rights as an American citizen. Only you can choose to give up your rights. Congress could pass gun ban legislation by a 90%+ margin and it just would not matter. I think some people are very unclear on this. This is the reason we have a Supreme Court, and though I do not doubt that the Supreme Court can also become corrupt, in 2008 they got it right. They supported the constitution. It does not matter what the majority supports because America is not a democracy. A constitutional republic protects the rights of every single citizen, no matter what their “elected servants” say. A majority in America only matters when the constitution is not in play.

I just wrote what every believer in the constitution wants to say, and what every constitutional blogger needs to write. The truth of the matter is that this type of speech is viewed as dangerous and radical or subversive, and it could gain me a world of trouble that I do not want. It is also the truth.

To make myself clear I will tell you again. If they come for your guns it is your right to use those guns against them and to kill them. You are protected by our constitution. Most of the articles I am reading on the subject are trying to give you clues without just coming out and saying it.

I understand that because certain things in this country will get you on a list that you don’t want to be on. I may well be on that list. This blog is small and growing so I may not be there yet, but I have dreams. I also have my own list of subversives and anyone who attempts to deny my constitutional rights is on that list.

I am not the “subversive” here, it is the political representatives who are threatening to take away my inalienable rights. If they come to take my guns and I leave a few of them wounded or dead, and I somehow survive, I have zero doubt that I will spend a long time in prison and may face an execution. But I would much rather be a political prisoner than a slave. If I go down fighting then I was not fighting to harm these human beings. I was simply defending my liberty and yours. It is self-defense and it is what our country was built on. We won our freedom in self-defense. We would not be ruled by a tyrannical government in the 1770′s and we will not be ruled in 2012 by a tyrannical government. There is no difference. This is a case of right and wrong.

As of now the 2nd amendment stands. It has never been repealed. If Feinstein or Barack have a problem with the Constitution then they should be removed from office. They are not defending the Constitution which they have sworn an oath to protect. It is treasonous to say the least. They would likely say the same about me, but I have the Constitution, the Founders, and the Supreme Court on my side. They only have their inflated egos.

I am not writing this to incite people. I am writing this in hopes that somehow I can make a tiny difference. I have no idea how many of my neighbors have the will to defend their constitutional rights. 2%? 20%? I am afraid that 20% is a high number, unfortunately.

When push comes to shove many people may give up and submit to being ruled. I believe that our government is banking on this. What I do know is that this country was founded by people who had balls the size of Texas and Patriotic Americans take shit off of no one, especially our own government. For evidence of that, you might research the Revolutionary War. My question is how many Patriots are left?

I would hope that our officials come to realize that, regardless of our numbers, we still exist because they are calling Patriotic Americans to action. They are making us decide if we want to die free or submit to their rule. I can not tell you where you should stand on that. I do know that it may make the difference between living a life of freedom or slavery. You must start thinking about this because I believe that the day is coming soon and I personally believe it has already been planned. Not all conspiracy theories are hogwash. They may throw down the gauntlet soon and my suggestion is that you prepare yourself to react.

I mean no disrespect to our elected officials but they need to understand that “We the People” will not be disarmed. If they proceed then it is they that are provoking us and we will act accordingly. We are within our rights to do so.

For those who are in support of taking the guns, you need to ask yourself a very important question, and I am not just talking about the politicians, because if you support them, you have chosen your side.

Are you willing to die to take my guns?

Perspectives On Gun Control and Revolution

Americans never give up your guns

By Stanislav Mishin 
These days, there are few things to admire about the socialist, bankrupt and culturally degenerating USA, but at least so far, one thing remains: the right to bear arms and use deadly force to defend one's self and possessions.

This will probably come as a total shock to most of my Western readers, but at one point, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on earth. This was, of course, when we were free under the Tsar. Weapons, from swords and spears to pistols, rifles and shotguns were everywhere, common items. People carried them concealed, they carried them holstered. Fighting knives were a prominent part of many traditional attires and those little tubes criss crossing on the costumes of Cossacks and various Caucasian peoples? Well those are bullet holders for rifles.

Various armies, such as the Poles, during the Смута (Times of Troubles), or Napoleon, or the Germans even as the Tsarist state collapsed under the weight of WW1 and Wall Street monies, found that holding Russian lands was much much harder than taking them and taking was no easy walk in the park but a blood bath all its own. In holding, one faced an extremely well armed and aggressive population Hell bent on exterminating or driving out the aggressor.

This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds. It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington's clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.

Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lying guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors. Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed. The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot.

Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first things they did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.

To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still denied our basic and traditional rights to self defense. Why? We are told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would be everywhere....but criminals are still armed and still murdering and too often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the uniforms of the police. The fact that everyone would start shooting is also laughable when statistics are examined.

While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.

For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room. Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack. What is worse, is, that the best way to stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or "talking to them", it is a bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.

The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?

No it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.

So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self-respect.


Stanislav Mishin

08 January 2013

Beyond 9mm: Concealed Carry in .40 and .45

Beyond 9mm: Concealed Carry in .40 and .45

Good review of three very well designed carry pieces. I am definitely going to look at the Springfield Armory .45.

01 January 2013

Of Benghazi, Concussions, Treason and Reasonable Expectations

H/T to a Brother Marine

All actions have consequences . . .

It is notable that Secretary Clinton is recovering from her concussion right on schedule with her planned departure from the State Department. It is equally notable that the media has had little interest in exploring the connection between the Benghazi disaster, its cover-up, Clinton's fall and the concussion that ostensibly was the reason for her not testifying. But now that the time for her departure is rapidly approaching, she is getting better and will emerge from sequestration just as soon as her departure date passes. Good, honorable behavior, precisely what Americans expect of their public servants, not.

Enter Senator "Swift Boat" Kerry, the darling of every America-self hater, a latter day liberal and pariah for most Vietnam, Iraqi and Afghanistan Veterans.  The Senator has an earned reputation of maligning the sacrifice and service of American Servicemen and women and now looms large as Obama's nominee for Secretary of State.  Had he been a patriot who supported military members, he would at the least be tolerable despite his insufferable arrogance.  Kerry has consistently engaged in disinformation and defamation of the nation's military and is unworthy to represent the United States of America to the world. But alas, consider who is nominating him.

He was deservedly "swift boated" by all but one or two of his Navy, Vietnam cohorts during his candidacy for President. Upon his separation from military service he maligned military members in a self-promoting monologue at Senate hearings; tossed his military awards onto the White House South Lawn in protest against the Vietnam War; consorted with North Vietnamese during the same; cultivated relations with the Sandinistas during U.S. efforts to liberate Nicaragua from Communist domination; the same with Assad of Syria and Hussein of Iraq during those tyrants' reign; and both the Soviets and Chinese Communists during the Cold War. 

That any Senator would sully his reputation by endorsing much less voting for Senator Kerry's confirmation is all but incomprehensible. Take Senator "Maverick" McCain who spent five and a half years as a POW in Vietnam at the precise time that Kerry was consorting with the enemy for example.  Yet, McCain has evidently endorsed Senator Kerry...and whereas that is a magnanimous gesture at the personal level, it is an unforgivable insult to every serviceman and woman who served in Vietnam and the Middle East. One hopes he changes his mind otherwise he will go down in history, not as a great American hero who did and stood for what is right, but as a pathetic ineffective loser who wasted his own life and desecrated the service of millions of brave and patriotic Americans.

One understands that elections have consequences...but consequences do not spell "anything he wants." If that is the case why not give Obama everything he wants, close up shop and go home...regardless of the effects on the nation?  Whether Secretary of Defense or State, confirming Kerry would be a slap in the face of the 58 thousand patriots who gave their lives, the hundred fifty thousand plus who were wounded and the 8 million who served in Vietnam...not to mention 600 plus POWs (except the turncoats and Senator McCain); and all service-members'  families. 

I believe in forgiveness...have written as much on a number of occasions. But forgiveness presupposes penitence and neither Benedict Arnold nor Senator Kerry have been penitent nor sought forgiveness. Senator McCain and all other right thinking Senators should show some political spine, forget Senate collegiality and do what is right for American service men and women, not to mention America, by voting against Kerry's confirmation.