Under the radar.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Monday, November 28, 2011
MoveOn wants ME to host a "99%" party!
| |
I guess they don't know that "taxing Wall Street" will kill jobs...and that CONgress has no business attempting to "create jobs".
Hasn't their experience with Osama's "job creation" sunk in?
++++++++++++++++++++++
Dear MoveOn member,
After months of being held hostage by the GOP, Congress has one month left in 2011 to show it can do more than help Wall Street and millionaires.
In December, Congress can extend unemployment insurance—or it can abandon the unemployed. It can take up a bill to tax Wall Street and create jobs—or leave millions unemployed. As murky and complicated as Washington politics can seem, the choices are that simple. So it's time to take the message and intensity of our protests this fall to the front doors of our elected officials.
That's why on Thursday, Dec. 1, we're organizing "99% Congressional Speak-Outs" at the local offices of our senators and representatives. We'll expose Republicans for making it their top priority to protect millionaires instead of creating jobs—and we'll call on Democrats to fight hard to help Americans get back to work and stay in their homes. Can you organize an event in your community so that we can bring the protests and message of the 99% to Congress's front door?
I can't lead this event, but keep me up to date on the campaign. The truth is, despite more and more Americans rising up against a system rigged to help millionaires and corporate lobbyists, most politicians in Washington haven't done enough to help us get through a brutally slow, jobless recovery. "Speak-outs" are simple events that give people the chance to share their stories and messages with politicians and the media. With hundreds of 99% Speak-Outs happening on the same day, we'll cut through the noise and rhetoric of Washington and draw a line in the sand: members of Congress can either help millionaires and Wall Street or stand up for the 99%.
Until now, Congress has largely been shielded from our energy and anger. But we've seen how passionate protests can bring national focus to the economic disparities we face, and now we're going to harness our collective power to change Washington's priorities.
Can you host a "99% Congressional Speak-Out" at your representative's or senator's office?
Hosting an event is easy, and we'll give you all the materials you need to make it powerful. A "speak-out" is similar to a rally but has room for people in the crowd to "speak out" and share their message in addition to any scheduled speakers you may recruit. These events are simple to organize, but they help hold elected officials accountable to their constituents and amplify our message through local and national media coverage.
Thanks for all you do.
–Lenore, Anna, Carrie, Joan, and the rest of the team
MoveOn is committed to nonviolence in the long tradition of protest movements throughout our history that have brought America closer to our founding dream—liberty and justice for all. As progressives, we respect all people and do not support or endorse any violence or property destruction.
++++++++++++++++++++++In December, CONgress can borrow more money to keep paying unemployment for a few more months, or they could get serious about cutting the size of the government and reducing what it needs to keep running - and incidentally, help the private sector decide to "create" jobs because their compliance costs just dropped. Or, they can screw around with raising taxes and cause more job losses.
Looking at the last paragraph, I guess they don't support the "occupy" movement after all. I wish they would make up their minds!
But then, they are "progressives" - they have no minds, just receptacles for the words of their handlers.
9-9-9
Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan explained:
I still don't like the idea of ANY income tax - but if he can kill the IRS, I'm willing to take another look. A federal sales tax on top of sales tax will hurt the lowest income levels worst.
Why is the "underground" economy symbolized with a pistol? I'm offended.
I still don't like the idea of ANY income tax - but if he can kill the IRS, I'm willing to take another look. A federal sales tax on top of sales tax will hurt the lowest income levels worst.
Why is the "underground" economy symbolized with a pistol? I'm offended.
Newt is the front-runner right now
and it turns out he's a RINO from way back:
++++++++++++++++++++
Newt Gingrich is the poster child for these sort of “flexible” principles.
I’ve been around the block a few times (I’m about to start my 20th year as a gun rights lobbyist) and dealt with literally thousands of candidates and politicians, but no Republican politician has managed to support and vote for anti-gun legislation and still proclaim that he is “pro-gun” more effectively than Newt Gingrich.
Don’t be fooled by his rise in the polls; Newt Gingrich has a long history of supporting gun control …
… and he has blatantly refused to return his National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey.
With more than three decades as a public figure, Newt is the quintessential political chameleon, shifting his views to reflect whatever is popular with the Washington, D.C. chattering class.
++++++++++++++++++++
H/t Alphecca
Go read the whole thing. If he's not for self-defense, what IS he for?
I still like Herman Cain.
++++++++++++++++++++
The Inconvenient Truth About Newt
I know I don’t have to tell you, but politicians often say one thing but do the complete opposite — especially if they think no one is looking.
I’ve been around the block a few times (I’m about to start my 20th year as a gun rights lobbyist) and dealt with literally thousands of candidates and politicians, but no Republican politician has managed to support and vote for anti-gun legislation and still proclaim that he is “pro-gun” more effectively than Newt Gingrich.
Don’t be fooled by his rise in the polls; Newt Gingrich has a long history of supporting gun control …
… and he has blatantly refused to return his National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey.
With more than three decades as a public figure, Newt is the quintessential political chameleon, shifting his views to reflect whatever is popular with the Washington, D.C. chattering class.
++++++++++++++++++++
H/t Alphecca
Go read the whole thing. If he's not for self-defense, what IS he for?
I still like Herman Cain.
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Motivational Poster
From an email I got:
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.." -- Winston Churchill
These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read. Unfortunately, most voters don't know this.
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealth out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them; and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work, because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
Can you think of any reason for not sharing this? Neither could I. Dangerous bill
This is going around - looks to me like another Patriot Act kind of thing that could be used to rein in Americans who don't agree with their government, if that government wanted to:
+++++++++++++++
Lots of wiggle room for who is defined as an enemy belligerent.
S.3081 - Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010
A bill to provide for the interrogation and detention of enemy belligerents who commit hostile acts against the United States, to establish certain limitations on the prosecution of such belligerents for such acts, and for other purposes.+++++++++++++++
Lots of wiggle room for who is defined as an enemy belligerent.
Idiot, and proud of it!
Contributions or gifts to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee are not tax deductible.
This message was sent to: ckuecker@ckent.org | To unsubscribe, click here: http://dccc.org/remove. Change or update your email address and contact information by clicking here. |
Yes, there will be death panels
Thanks to the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler:
+++++++++++++++
Here’s an expert from the call:
Audio at the link. Scary.
Can buses that recycle the exhaust into the passenger compartment be fire behind?
+++++++++++++++
SHOCK – Brain surgeon confirms ObamaCare rations care, has death panels!
Sarah Palin was exactly right about death panels as this caller attests. Tonight, a brain surgeon called into Mark Levin’s radio show and said that he had just recently visited Washington DC to review Obama’s new health care plan for advanced neurosurgical care for patients over 70 years old, issued by HHS. The plan, that included “ethics panels”, stated that if your were over 70 years old and on government supported healthcare and you visited an emergency room, you get “comfort care”:
The Right ScoopHere’s an expert from the call:
Caller: Basically what the document stated was that if you were over 70 and you’d come into an emergency room and you’re on government supported health care, that you’d get “comfort care”.+++++++++++++++
Mark Levin: Wait a minute…what’s the source for this?
Caller: This is Obama’s new health care plan for advanced neurosurgical care.
Mark Levin: And who issued this? HHS?
Caller: Yes. And basically they don’t call them patients, they call them units. And instead of – they call it “ethics panels” or “ethics committees”, would get together and meet and decide where the money would go for hospitals, and basically for patients over 70 years of age, that advanced neurosurgical care was not generally indicated.
Mark Levin: So it’s generally going to be denied?
Caller: Yes, absolutely. …If someone comes in at 70 years of age with a bleed in their brain, I can promise you I’m not going to get a bunch of administrators together on an ethics panel at 2 in the morning to decide that I’m OK to do surgery.
Audio at the link. Scary.
Can buses that recycle the exhaust into the passenger compartment be fire behind?
Osama's Million Gun Ban
Sign the petition. I did.
You don't have to contribute to Ron Paul, but it might be a good idea, if you've got the money.
Otherwise, we're going to end up with a RINO running against Osama next November.
++++++++++++++++
Posted: November 26, 2011
8:35 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WND
A stealth plan by the Obama administration to classify hundreds of thousands of workhorse rifles used by the U.S. military and public alike as dangerous has prompted a grass-roots campaign to save the weapons, and a key U.S. senator has lent his voice to the effort.
"If we're going to reverse President Obama's Million Rifle Ban, gun owners have to turn the heat up on Congress now before it's too late," writes Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., in a campaign launched by National Association for Gun Rights.
"Please sign your Firearms Freedom Survey and put yourself squarely against President Obama's Million Rifle Ban."
The effort urges taxpayers to commit to voting against any senator who "votes to maintain Barack Obama's M1 Garand Rifle Ban."
The controversy developed, as WND reported in 2010, when the Korean government requested the transfer of hundreds of thousands of the rifles to U.S. private entities for subsequent commercial resale.
The weapons, however, suddenly were classified by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms as a "threat to the public safety in the U.S." The State Department then canceled plans by the Republic of Korea to return the weapons, totaling a little short of a million.
Read more: Backlash against Obama's rifle ban to target Congress http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=371401#ixzz1euMuU6NF
++++++++++++++++
H/t Alphecca
You don't have to contribute to Ron Paul, but it might be a good idea, if you've got the money.
Otherwise, we're going to end up with a RINO running against Osama next November.
++++++++++++++++
Backlash against Obama's rifle ban to target Congress
'These were made in America, by Americans, for Americans'
Posted: November 26, 2011
8:35 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WND
 M1 Garand |
"If we're going to reverse President Obama's Million Rifle Ban, gun owners have to turn the heat up on Congress now before it's too late," writes Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., in a campaign launched by National Association for Gun Rights.
"Please sign your Firearms Freedom Survey and put yourself squarely against President Obama's Million Rifle Ban."
The effort urges taxpayers to commit to voting against any senator who "votes to maintain Barack Obama's M1 Garand Rifle Ban."
The controversy developed, as WND reported in 2010, when the Korean government requested the transfer of hundreds of thousands of the rifles to U.S. private entities for subsequent commercial resale.
The weapons, however, suddenly were classified by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms as a "threat to the public safety in the U.S." The State Department then canceled plans by the Republic of Korea to return the weapons, totaling a little short of a million.
Read more: Backlash against Obama's rifle ban to target Congress http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=371401#ixzz1euMuU6NF
++++++++++++++++
H/t Alphecca
Environmentalist == liar?
Pretty much. Photoshopped scare photos all over the Net. From Watts Up With That?:
+++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++
He gives some examples of how easy it is to fake things:
+++++++++++++++++++
To illustrate how easy this is to make black smoke from steam, I located an image of a smoke stack online of the Zimmer Power Plant Smoke Stack in Moscow, Ohio, here
Then I applied the simple technique I described.
See how easy that is to make black smoke where there was only steam before?
UPDATE2: Here’s another example of Photoshop at work. The greens must really hate this power station in Britain. “Black” smoke from cooling towers? Really? Everyone knows they produce water vapor, and even the sun angle doesn’t look right in this one from the Guardian.
It doesn’t survive the test either:
And yet if you do an image search for this power station, you’ll find nothing like this image anywhere else except on the Guardian Website.
UPDATE: Autonomous Mind looks into the photo above, conversing with the photographer is interesting more for what he doesn’t say. Well worth a read here:
+++++++++++++++++++
Photoshopping in the “worseness”
Readers may recall that we caught NOAA NCDC red handed putting in a photoshopped flooded house a couple of years back for an official government report.
+++++++++++++++++++
He gives some examples of how easy it is to fake things:
+++++++++++++++++++
To illustrate how easy this is to make black smoke from steam, I located an image of a smoke stack online of the Zimmer Power Plant Smoke Stack in Moscow, Ohio, here
Then I applied the simple technique I described.
- highlight a part of the steam with the point to point select tool
- feather it
- adjust the brightness and contrast to make it look darker.
See how easy that is to make black smoke where there was only steam before?
UPDATE2: Here’s another example of Photoshop at work. The greens must really hate this power station in Britain. “Black” smoke from cooling towers? Really? Everyone knows they produce water vapor, and even the sun angle doesn’t look right in this one from the Guardian.
Eggborough cooling towers Photograph: Murdo MacLeod
And yet if you do an image search for this power station, you’ll find nothing like this image anywhere else except on the Guardian Website.
UPDATE: Autonomous Mind looks into the photo above, conversing with the photographer is interesting more for what he doesn’t say. Well worth a read here:
Has the Guardian published fauxtography?
Seen at Ace of Spades
Briar patch?
This makes me think of Brer Rabbit begging not to be thrown into the briar patch, somehow:
++++++++++++++++
“Historically, states have been given the right of self-determination when it comes to gun control,” Weinberg said. “Regardless of how you feel about New Jersey’s gun control laws, the federal legislation which was recently passed by the House would set a terrible precedent, and opens the door for Second Amendment activists elsewhere in the country to override New Jersey’s own laws. Hopefully, Governor Christie and our Congressional leaders will stand up for our state and oppose this overreaching federal bill.”
The resolution (SR-132), would express the state Senate’s opposition to the federal bill (H.R. 822). The proposal, which was approved by a vote of 272-154 on Nov. 16, would allow individuals with a permit to carry a concealed weapon in one state the ability to carry a concealed weapon in every other state that allows people to carry concealed weapons, without having to reapply for a permit in each state. The result would be that individuals with a permit to carry from a more lax gun control state would have unchecked ability to carry a concealed weapon in N.J., where they may not even qualify for a permit. The federal bill is not expected to pass the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate.
Currently, only Illinois and the District of Columbia prohibit individuals from carrying a concealed weapon.
Weinberg noted that only seven Republicans voted against the legislation in the House – where it had large support from the National Rifle Association – despite the fact that Republicans tend to favor states’ rights over federal regulation.
“I find it a bit ironic that the move to trample states’ rights to regulate firearms is coming from Republicans who are all too eager to demand states’ rights on such things as health care, abortion and defining marriage as between a man and a woman,” Weinberg said. “While our Constitution guarantees people a right to bear arms, the decision was made to allow states to regulate guns, in order to allow them to develop strategies that meet the individual states’ demographic, economic and lifestyle needs. What works for Florida or Texas may not work for New Jersey and vice versa, and gun control should be the sole provision of the individual states, not the federal government.”
If approved by the Legislature, copies of the resolution would be sent to leaders in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.
++++++++++++++++
H. R. 822 does nothing of the sort, as far as I can see, but does trample on state's rights, as it would possibly require a federal standard for concealed carry, and the Second Amendment says that the federal government has no business setting such a standard.
A "resolution" is basically a waste of time, bearing no power to force a vote. It could, however, incite Senators to vote in favor of a stealth gun control bill, just to "stick it" to this stupid woman.
What we need is a Supreme Court packed with justices who have read and understand the Constitution as fixed law, not a "living document", and will rule based on the original intent of that document, not on what is politically expedient or currently "politically correct".
At that point, New Jersey's un-Constitutional gun laws will be overturned legally, as they should have been decades ago, along with the un-Constitutional gun laws of 50 states and Washington, DC.
++++++++++++++++
N.J. Sen. Weinberg introduces measure opposing federal Right-to-Carry bill proposal
Says bill would violate New Jersey's gun control laws
Sen. Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen) announced Friday she has introduced a legislative resolution condemning the “National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011,” saying that the federal proposal would undermine New Jersey’s gun control laws and states’ traditional role in deciding the best gun control strategies for each individual state.“Historically, states have been given the right of self-determination when it comes to gun control,” Weinberg said. “Regardless of how you feel about New Jersey’s gun control laws, the federal legislation which was recently passed by the House would set a terrible precedent, and opens the door for Second Amendment activists elsewhere in the country to override New Jersey’s own laws. Hopefully, Governor Christie and our Congressional leaders will stand up for our state and oppose this overreaching federal bill.”
The resolution (SR-132), would express the state Senate’s opposition to the federal bill (H.R. 822). The proposal, which was approved by a vote of 272-154 on Nov. 16, would allow individuals with a permit to carry a concealed weapon in one state the ability to carry a concealed weapon in every other state that allows people to carry concealed weapons, without having to reapply for a permit in each state. The result would be that individuals with a permit to carry from a more lax gun control state would have unchecked ability to carry a concealed weapon in N.J., where they may not even qualify for a permit. The federal bill is not expected to pass the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate.
Currently, only Illinois and the District of Columbia prohibit individuals from carrying a concealed weapon.
Weinberg noted that only seven Republicans voted against the legislation in the House – where it had large support from the National Rifle Association – despite the fact that Republicans tend to favor states’ rights over federal regulation.
“I find it a bit ironic that the move to trample states’ rights to regulate firearms is coming from Republicans who are all too eager to demand states’ rights on such things as health care, abortion and defining marriage as between a man and a woman,” Weinberg said. “While our Constitution guarantees people a right to bear arms, the decision was made to allow states to regulate guns, in order to allow them to develop strategies that meet the individual states’ demographic, economic and lifestyle needs. What works for Florida or Texas may not work for New Jersey and vice versa, and gun control should be the sole provision of the individual states, not the federal government.”
If approved by the Legislature, copies of the resolution would be sent to leaders in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.
—TOM HESTER SR., NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM
H. R. 822 does nothing of the sort, as far as I can see, but does trample on state's rights, as it would possibly require a federal standard for concealed carry, and the Second Amendment says that the federal government has no business setting such a standard.
A "resolution" is basically a waste of time, bearing no power to force a vote. It could, however, incite Senators to vote in favor of a stealth gun control bill, just to "stick it" to this stupid woman.
What we need is a Supreme Court packed with justices who have read and understand the Constitution as fixed law, not a "living document", and will rule based on the original intent of that document, not on what is politically expedient or currently "politically correct".
At that point, New Jersey's un-Constitutional gun laws will be overturned legally, as they should have been decades ago, along with the un-Constitutional gun laws of 50 states and Washington, DC.
One more vote
That's all it will take to convert America into the Soviet Union:
Nearly three years into President Obama’s first term in office, Michelle Obama finally said something with which I can agree.
At a recent fundraiser for President Obama’s re-election campaign in Providence, Rhode Island, the first lady told her audience:
“We stand at a fundamental crossroads for our country. You’re here because you know that in just 13 months, we’re going to make a choice that will impact our lives for decades to come … let’s not forget what it meant when my husband appointed those two brilliant Supreme Court justices … let’s not forget the impact that their decisions will have on our lives for decades to come.”
This was music to the ears of the small, affluent crowd of admirers who cheered and applauded. But to gun owners, Michelle Obama’s remarks should sound like a warning bell, alerting us to the danger ahead should Barack Obama win re-election and get the opportunity to alter the current make-up of the Supreme Court.
When Americans flock to the polls in 13 months, we will not simply decide which direction our country should take over the next four years. Rather, we will decide whether or not our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms will survive over the next several decades.
Currently, the Second Amendment clings to a 5-4 pro-freedom majority on the Supreme Court. Just one vote is all that stands between the America our Founding Fathers established and a radically different America that Barack Obama and his supporters envision.
If you want to read something scary, take another look at the minority opinions in the Supreme Court’s landmark Heller and McDonald decisions that struck down Washington, D.C.’s and Chicago’s unconstitutional gun bans. In the Heller dissent, four justices concluded that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to own a firearm, nor does it protect our right to defend ourselves, our families, or our property. In McDonald, the same four justices argued that the 5-4 Heller decision should be reversed.
If these four justices had just one more vote on their side, their opinion — that the Second Amendment should not exist in today’s modern society — would be the law of the land today. And assuredly, the anti-gun activist wing of the court knows how close they are to gaining the upper hand. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg told a Harvard Club audience in 2009, she looks forward to the day when a “future, wiser court” overturns 5-4 decisions like Heller.
Praying for the health of five justices is not a sound legal strategy for ensuring that our Second Amendment freedoms survive the relentless legal assault that gun-ban groups are waging in courtrooms across America. We need a president who will nominate sound, originalist nominees to the high court — nominees who will preserve the freedoms our Founding Fathers enshrined in our Constitution.
If President Obama gets the opportunity to tilt the balance of the Supreme Court in his favor, we’re unlikely to see another pro-gun victory at the Court in our lifetime. Even worse, the 5-4 majorities in Heller and McDonald will be in serious jeopardy of being reversed, effectively eliminating the Second Amendment.
NRA members, gun owners and all freedom-loving Americans should heed Michelle Obama’s warning. We must spend the next 13 months working to make sure her husband doesn’t get four more years to destroy American freedom for generations to come.
Chris W. Cox is the Executive Director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) and serves as the organization’s chief lobbyist.
Michelle Obama’s Warning To Gun Owners
Nearly three years into President Obama’s first term in office, Michelle Obama finally said something with which I can agree.
At a recent fundraiser for President Obama’s re-election campaign in Providence, Rhode Island, the first lady told her audience:
“We stand at a fundamental crossroads for our country. You’re here because you know that in just 13 months, we’re going to make a choice that will impact our lives for decades to come … let’s not forget what it meant when my husband appointed those two brilliant Supreme Court justices … let’s not forget the impact that their decisions will have on our lives for decades to come.”
This was music to the ears of the small, affluent crowd of admirers who cheered and applauded. But to gun owners, Michelle Obama’s remarks should sound like a warning bell, alerting us to the danger ahead should Barack Obama win re-election and get the opportunity to alter the current make-up of the Supreme Court.
When Americans flock to the polls in 13 months, we will not simply decide which direction our country should take over the next four years. Rather, we will decide whether or not our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms will survive over the next several decades.
Currently, the Second Amendment clings to a 5-4 pro-freedom majority on the Supreme Court. Just one vote is all that stands between the America our Founding Fathers established and a radically different America that Barack Obama and his supporters envision.
If you want to read something scary, take another look at the minority opinions in the Supreme Court’s landmark Heller and McDonald decisions that struck down Washington, D.C.’s and Chicago’s unconstitutional gun bans. In the Heller dissent, four justices concluded that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to own a firearm, nor does it protect our right to defend ourselves, our families, or our property. In McDonald, the same four justices argued that the 5-4 Heller decision should be reversed.
If these four justices had just one more vote on their side, their opinion — that the Second Amendment should not exist in today’s modern society — would be the law of the land today. And assuredly, the anti-gun activist wing of the court knows how close they are to gaining the upper hand. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg told a Harvard Club audience in 2009, she looks forward to the day when a “future, wiser court” overturns 5-4 decisions like Heller.
Praying for the health of five justices is not a sound legal strategy for ensuring that our Second Amendment freedoms survive the relentless legal assault that gun-ban groups are waging in courtrooms across America. We need a president who will nominate sound, originalist nominees to the high court — nominees who will preserve the freedoms our Founding Fathers enshrined in our Constitution.
If President Obama gets the opportunity to tilt the balance of the Supreme Court in his favor, we’re unlikely to see another pro-gun victory at the Court in our lifetime. Even worse, the 5-4 majorities in Heller and McDonald will be in serious jeopardy of being reversed, effectively eliminating the Second Amendment.
NRA members, gun owners and all freedom-loving Americans should heed Michelle Obama’s warning. We must spend the next 13 months working to make sure her husband doesn’t get four more years to destroy American freedom for generations to come.
Chris W. Cox is the Executive Director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) and serves as the organization’s chief lobbyist.
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Glock misfire
Had some friends over today to do some shooting. Took my Glock 19 out, since I intend for that to be my primary carry gun.
Ran a magazine of Winchester ball ammo through it, no problem. On the fifth shot of the second magazine, the gun wouldn't fire.
Waited a minute, in case it was a hangfire, then tried to rack the slide - jammed. The trigger went forward, but when I pulled it, it acted like it wasn't catching the striker properly.
The slide would only go back about 1/8", but that was enough to be able to pull the slide latch down and pull off the slide.
When I examined the back of the chamber, it was obvious that the round was not fully seated and was jamming the barrel. I used my knife to force the cartridge into the chamber, and was able to remove the barrel. Had to use my knife again to extract the round - it was real tight in the chamber.
The round had a light primer strike, and on close inspection, I saw a bulge in the side of the case about 1/4" up from the base. Not a bulge right at the bottom, like on a Glock spent round - this looked almost like the case had been struck on the end and bulged out in the middle of the case wall.
I bought the ammo loose in bulk in an ammo can a while back from one of the online distributors - the ammo can is marked "Factory Reload". I guess this particular case was not sized properly.
What 9mm gun puts a bulge in the middle of the case wall?
Ran a magazine of Winchester ball ammo through it, no problem. On the fifth shot of the second magazine, the gun wouldn't fire.
Waited a minute, in case it was a hangfire, then tried to rack the slide - jammed. The trigger went forward, but when I pulled it, it acted like it wasn't catching the striker properly.
The slide would only go back about 1/8", but that was enough to be able to pull the slide latch down and pull off the slide.
When I examined the back of the chamber, it was obvious that the round was not fully seated and was jamming the barrel. I used my knife to force the cartridge into the chamber, and was able to remove the barrel. Had to use my knife again to extract the round - it was real tight in the chamber.
The round had a light primer strike, and on close inspection, I saw a bulge in the side of the case about 1/4" up from the base. Not a bulge right at the bottom, like on a Glock spent round - this looked almost like the case had been struck on the end and bulged out in the middle of the case wall.
I bought the ammo loose in bulk in an ammo can a while back from one of the online distributors - the ammo can is marked "Factory Reload". I guess this particular case was not sized properly.
What 9mm gun puts a bulge in the middle of the case wall?
Friday, November 25, 2011
On the economy front
I keep telling people it's a depression - and CNBC seems to be agreeing:
Dow, S&P Log Worst Thanksgiving Week Since 1932
Fundamentalist Envionmentalism
If you needed any proof that the environmental movement is a quasi-religion - maybe a full religion for many greenies - here's some:
This is the "Ark of Hope" which houses the "Earth Charter", written by our good friends who also gave us Agenda 21..
From the Ark of Hope website:
Second question - does Osama know one or more of his unicorns has been co-opted like this?
That's a trivia fact I shall remember - that papryus is used in wastewater treatment. Did Sally get permission to take that stuff?
I wonder whose bathtub Moses soaked the tablets for the Ten Commandments in...
In case you need to know the Word of Gaea, here's a link to the PDF in English.
This is the "Ark of Hope" which houses the "Earth Charter", written by our good friends who also gave us Agenda 21..
From the Ark of Hope website:
The Ark was designed and painted by Vermont, USA artist Sally Linder, built by cabitnetmaker Kevin Jenness and lined by fabric artist Beth Haggart. It was crafted from a single plank of sycamore maple from a sustainable forest in Germany. The five painted panels that form the sides and top of the Ark each represent the flora and fauna of the world as seen through the images of the world's traditional artists.First question - where did they get the unicorn horn, and did they apply for the proper endangered imaginary species permit required before harvesting said horns?Each panel visualizes a season, a direction, an element, and a universal symbol. Symbols of faith from traditional religions and indigenous societies surround the top panel of "Spirit" that honors the children and young animals of the world. The 96" carrying poles are unicorn horns which render evil ineffective.
Inside the Ark's lid is the Earth Charter handwritten on papyrus paper. The University of Cairo supplied Sally with instructions for making paper with papyrus - a plant known to have the ability to purify water of pollutants. The papyrus was harvested from the Living Systems, Inc. waste treatment plant in South Burlington, VT, soaked for two weeks in Sally's bathtub, then pressed using 90,000 pounds of pressure at Langdell Papers, a Vermont papermaker in East Topsham.
Second question - does Osama know one or more of his unicorns has been co-opted like this?
That's a trivia fact I shall remember - that papryus is used in wastewater treatment. Did Sally get permission to take that stuff?
I wonder whose bathtub Moses soaked the tablets for the Ten Commandments in...
In case you need to know the Word of Gaea, here's a link to the PDF in English.
Seen on the road
Driving through Janesville this afternoon I was behind a lady on a Harley - this might be the last good riding day for a while around here.
She was wearing a black "Sons of Anarchy" hoodie with the Grim Reaper holding an M-16 with a sickle blade on the barrel.
Takes some guts to wear a fake biker logo. At least she had a Hog. I couldn't pull that off on my Yamaha.
She was wearing a black "Sons of Anarchy" hoodie with the Grim Reaper holding an M-16 with a sickle blade on the barrel.
Takes some guts to wear a fake biker logo. At least she had a Hog. I couldn't pull that off on my Yamaha.
Thursday, November 24, 2011
The 51st State?
Maybe.
A state Republican legislator has introduced a bill to the Illinois General Assembly to separate the Chicago's county from the state--effectively making the midwestern city the 51st state in the union.
The bill, filed by State Rep. Bill Mitchell of Decatur Tuesday, would "enact legislation dividing Illinois and Cook County into separate states" because county residents "hold different and firmly seated views" on "politics, society, and economics" from people in the rest of the state. The bill's supporters point to higher tax rates and strict gun laws in the Chicago area and contend that the northern county is out of step with its Illinois neighbors.
"These liberal policies are an insult to the traditional values of downstate families," Mitchell told the Decatur Tribune. "When I talk to constituents, one of the biggest things I hear is 'Chicago should be its own state . . . .Our voters' voices were drowned out by Chicago."
The measure would put the issue up to a vote by state residents through a referendum and then would require approval from the United States Congress and the president. As of this writing, the bill has just one other co-sponsor.
+++++++++++++++++
A nice wall around afflicted Crook County to keep the rot in would be in order...
Thanks to Say Uncle .
Chicago (AP)
The bill, filed by State Rep. Bill Mitchell of Decatur Tuesday, would "enact legislation dividing Illinois and Cook County into separate states" because county residents "hold different and firmly seated views" on "politics, society, and economics" from people in the rest of the state. The bill's supporters point to higher tax rates and strict gun laws in the Chicago area and contend that the northern county is out of step with its Illinois neighbors.
"These liberal policies are an insult to the traditional values of downstate families," Mitchell told the Decatur Tribune. "When I talk to constituents, one of the biggest things I hear is 'Chicago should be its own state . . . .Our voters' voices were drowned out by Chicago."
The measure would put the issue up to a vote by state residents through a referendum and then would require approval from the United States Congress and the president. As of this writing, the bill has just one other co-sponsor.
+++++++++++++++++
A nice wall around afflicted Crook County to keep the rot in would be in order...
Thanks to Say Uncle .
Dream
Woke from a vivid dream. Summer, I was riding my bike - pedal, not motor - down a four-lane road, keeping to the right edge as I should.
A blue sedan with roof lights pulled up next to me and cut me off. The person driving was evidently a police officer of some sort - no uniform, just attitude. He escorted me to a park area where dozens of people were sitting. He started to ask me where my helmet was - I guess this alternate world had a law requiring bike helmets for adult riders.
I began to lecture him on the proper duties of the police and about personal liberty. He seemed receptive.
Just as I was winding up for a grande finale, I woke. I do remember saying strongly that I would wear a nanny-state bike helmet in my coffin, not earlier.
I did not seem to be carrying - or maybe it was just so common that I didn't notice.
Six hours sleep - so here I am, in the shop, babysitting the last bits of an Ubuntu upgrade on my web and email server, and looking to do some more code before T-day.
A blue sedan with roof lights pulled up next to me and cut me off. The person driving was evidently a police officer of some sort - no uniform, just attitude. He escorted me to a park area where dozens of people were sitting. He started to ask me where my helmet was - I guess this alternate world had a law requiring bike helmets for adult riders.
I began to lecture him on the proper duties of the police and about personal liberty. He seemed receptive.
Just as I was winding up for a grande finale, I woke. I do remember saying strongly that I would wear a nanny-state bike helmet in my coffin, not earlier.
I did not seem to be carrying - or maybe it was just so common that I didn't notice.
Six hours sleep - so here I am, in the shop, babysitting the last bits of an Ubuntu upgrade on my web and email server, and looking to do some more code before T-day.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
No help wanted!
It's the economy.
++++++++++++++
WACO, Ga. -- A west Georgia business owner is stirring up controversy with signs he posted on his company's trucks, for all to see as the trucks roll up and down roads, highways and interstates:
"New Company Policy: We are not hiring until Obama is gone."
"Can't afford it," explained the employer, Bill Looman, Tuesday evening. "I've got people that I want to hire now, but I just can't afford it. And I don't foresee that I'll be able to afford it unless some things change in D.C."
Looman's company is U.S. Cranes, LLC. He said he put up the signs, and first posted pictures of the signs on his personal Facebook page, six months ago, and he said he received mostly positive reaction from people, "about 20-to-one positive."
But for some reason, one of the photos went viral on the Internet on Monday.
And the reaction has been so intense, pro and con, he's had to have his phones disconnected because of the non-stop calls, and he's had to temporarily shut down his company's website because of all the traffic crashing the system.
Looman made it clear, talking with 11Alive's Jon Shirek, that he is not refusing to hire to make some political point; it's that he doesn't believe he can hire anyone, because of the economy. And he blames the Obama administration.
"The way the economy's running, and the way my business has been hampered by the economy, and the policies of the people in power, I felt that it was necessary to voice my opinion, and predict that I wouldn't be able to do any hiring," he said. ++++++++++++++
Video at the link.
++++++++++++++
Company Policy: We are not hiring until Obama is gone'
6:53 PM, Nov 23, 2011
Written by Jon Shirek
WACO, Ga. -- A west Georgia business owner is stirring up controversy with signs he posted on his company's trucks, for all to see as the trucks roll up and down roads, highways and interstates:
"New Company Policy: We are not hiring until Obama is gone."
"Can't afford it," explained the employer, Bill Looman, Tuesday evening. "I've got people that I want to hire now, but I just can't afford it. And I don't foresee that I'll be able to afford it unless some things change in D.C."
Looman's company is U.S. Cranes, LLC. He said he put up the signs, and first posted pictures of the signs on his personal Facebook page, six months ago, and he said he received mostly positive reaction from people, "about 20-to-one positive."
But for some reason, one of the photos went viral on the Internet on Monday.
And the reaction has been so intense, pro and con, he's had to have his phones disconnected because of the non-stop calls, and he's had to temporarily shut down his company's website because of all the traffic crashing the system.
Looman made it clear, talking with 11Alive's Jon Shirek, that he is not refusing to hire to make some political point; it's that he doesn't believe he can hire anyone, because of the economy. And he blames the Obama administration.
"The way the economy's running, and the way my business has been hampered by the economy, and the policies of the people in power, I felt that it was necessary to voice my opinion, and predict that I wouldn't be able to do any hiring," he said.
Video at the link.
Wow
The Plot Thickens on The Arab in the White House
An intensive investigation has revealed the identity of the man whose Social Security number (SSN) is being used by President Obama: Jean Paul Ludwig, was born in France in 1890, immigrated to the United States in 1924, and was assigned SSN 042-68-4425 (Obama's current SSN) on or about March 1977. Ludwig lived most of his adult life in Connecticut. Because of that, his SSN begins with the digits 042, which are among only a select few reserved for Connecticut residents. (The first three digits of a Social Security number indicate the area that issued it, pretty much like zip codes. I knew a gal from Main whose # started with 003.)
Obama never lived or worked in that state! Therefore, there is no reason on earth for his SSN to start with the digits 042. None whatsoever!
Now comes the best part! Ludwig spent the final months of his life in Hawaii, where he died.
Conveniently, Obama's grandmother, Madelyn Payne Dunham, worked part-time in the Probate Office in the Honolulu Hawaii Courthouse and, therefore, had access to the SSNs of deceased individuals.
The Social Security Administration was never informed of Ludwig's death and, because he never received Social Security benefits, there were no benefits to stop - therefore, no questions were ever raised.
The suspicion, of course, is that Dunham, knowing her grandson was not a U. S. Citizen, (either because he was born in Kenya or because he became a citizen of Indonesia upon his adoption by Lolo Soetoro) simply scoured the probate records until she found someone who died who was not receiving Social Security benefits. She selected Mr. Ludwig's SSN from Connecticut for Barry Soetoro, AKA Barak Obama.
Just wait until Trump gets past the birth certificate and onto the issue of Barry O's use of a stolen SSN. You will see leftist heads exploding, because they will have no way of defending Obama. Although many Americans do not understand the meaning of the term "natural born," there are few who do not understand that if you are using someone else's SSN it is a clear indication of fraud.
Let's all get this information out to everybody on our mailing lists. If the voters of this great nation can succeed in bringing this lying, deceitful, cheating, corrupt, impostor to justice it will be the biggest and best news in decades for our country and the world.
+++++++++++++++++++
Real?
Snopes says no.
How many Tea Party people waste their energy on this stuff, while Osama sits in the White House, gnawing away at the remains of America?
A greal lady passes
Anne McCaffrey has died.
Even though the Dragonlady of Pern has "passed between" as her fans might say, there will yet be more Pern stories, That torch has been passed to McCaffrey's son Todd, who has produced most of the recent novels. The next Pern novel, Dragon Time, is to be published next year.
Anne McCaffrey, known as the creator of the "Dragonriders of Pern" novels, has died at the age of 85. Thus passes one of the pioneers in science fiction and fantasy literature, two genres that she often combined in her stories.
McCaffrey has written a number of books in other series, notably her brain/brawn ship series, including "The Ship who Sang." But she is most famous for the adventures set on a far away planet named Pern, where men and women fly on the backs of dragons and fight a deadly substance called "thread" that falls from the sky and afflicts everything it touches. It is a series that has captured the imagination of generations and has developed its own fervent fan following. Indeed, many of the fans have formed their own clubs and role-play scenarios in which they imagine themselves to be characters on McCaffrey's Pern.
The Pern stories were a melding of science fiction and fantasy. On one level, anything that depicted human beings riding on the backs of dragon, iconic mythical creatures, seemed to read like fantasy. But in the novel "Dragonsdawn," the science fiction elements of the Pern novels were laid out. The novel is the story of the first settlers of Pern and how they used genetic engineering to create a race of dragons who could be communicated with telepathically and ridden by a select group of humans in defense of their new home.
As the novels were written, Pern became a fully realized world - a medieval-style society with lord holders, traveling people, and harpers as the equivalent of barons, gypsies, and troubadours taken root on an alien world. Many of the stories, such as the Harper Hall series, had to do with the dragonriders only tangentially.
McCaffrey was the recipient of a number of awards, both from her fans and her peers. She was the first female writer to win a Hugo Award, giving by fans, and a Nebula Award, given by other writers. She was named a Science Fiction Grand Master, elevating her to the pantheon that includes Arthur C. Clarke, Isaac Asimov, and Ray Bradbury. She is also in the Science Fiction Hall of Fame.
Source: The Dragonriders of Pern, Anne McCaffrey, Del Rey, 1988
Anne McCaffrey, Dragonriders of Pern creator, dead at 85, Mathew Jackson, SyFy, Nov 22, 2011
The Ship Who Sang, Annie McCaffrey, Del Rey, 1985
Star Rise Weyr
Dragonsdawn, Anne McCaffrey, Del Rey, 1989
The Harper Hall of Pern, Anne McCaffrey, Nelson Doubleday, 1979
Official email from FEDERAL BURUEA OF INVESTIGATION!
Just got this.
++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++
I can't wait to wire Bob my $120. I really don't want them crimes agencies after me!
++++++++++++++++
| Subject: OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM THE FBI( VIEW THE ATTACHMENT FOR MORE DETAILS/ADVICE) | ||||||||||||
| From: "FEDERAL BURUEA OF INVESTIGATION" | ||||||||||||
| Date: 11/23/2011 2:03 PM |
Anti-Terrorist and Monetary Crimes Division Fbi Headquarters In Washington, D.C. Federal Bureau Of Investigation J. Edgar Hoover Building 935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20535-0001 Website: www.fbi.gov Attention, this is the final warning you are going to receive from me do you get me? I hope you understand how many times this message has been sent to you?. We have warned you so many times and you have decided to ignore our e-mails or because you believe we have not been instructed to get you arrested, and today if you fail to respond back to us with the payment then, we would first send a letter to the mayor of the city where you reside and direct them to close your bank account until you have been jailed and all your properties will be confiscated by the fbi. We would also send a letter to the company/agency that you are working for so that they could get you fired until we are through with our investigations because a suspect is not suppose to be working for the government or any private organization. Your id which we have in our database been sent to all the crimes agencies in America for them to inset you in their website as an internet fraudsters and to warn people from having any deals with you. This would have been solved all this while if you had gotten the certificate signed, endorsed and stamped as you where instructed in the e-mail below. this is the federal bureau of investigation (FBI) am writing in response to the e-mail you sent to us and am using this medium to inform you that there is no more time left to waste because you have been given from the 3rd of January. As stated earlier to have the document endorsed, signed and stamped without failure and you must adhere to this directives to avoid you blaming yourself at last when we must have arrested and jailed you for life and all your properties confiscated. You failed to comply with our directives and that was the reason why we didn't hear from you on the 3rd as our director has already been notified about you get the process completed yesterday and right now the warrant of arrest has been signed against you and it will be carried out in the next 48hours as strictly signed by the fbi director. We have investigated and found out that you didn't have any idea when the fraudulent deal was committed with your information's/identity and right now if you id is placed on our website as a wanted person, i believe you know that it will be a shame to you and your entire family because after then it will be announce in all the local channels that you are wanted by the fbi. As a good Christian and a honest man, I decided to see how i could be of help to you because i would not be happy to see you end up in jail and all your properties confiscated all because your information's was used to carry out a fraudulent transactions, i called the EFCC and they directed me to a private attorney who could help you get the process done and he stated that he will endorse, sign and stamp the document at the sum of $120.00 usd only and i believe this process is cheaper for you. You need to do everything possible within today and tomorrow to get this process done because our director has called to inform me that the warrant of arrest has been signed against you and once it has been approved, then the arrest will be carried out, and from our investigations we learnt that you were the person that forwarded your identity to one impostor/fraudsters in Nigeria when he had a deal with you about the transfer of some illegal funds into your bank account which is valued at the sum of $10.500,000.00 usd. I pleaded on your behalf so that this agency could give you the 11/30/2011 so that you could get this process done because i learnt that you were sent several e-mail without getting a response from you, please bear it in mind that this is the only way that i can be able to help you at this moment or you would have to face the law and its consequences once it has befall on you. You would make the payment through western union money transfer with the below details. NAME: MBAH SAMESON OBINNA ADDRESS: LAGOS NIGERIA TEXT QUESTION:FOR ANSWER: YOU AMOUNT: $120 Senders Name====== Address:============= Send the payment details to me which are senders name and address, mtcn number, text question and answer used and the amount sent. Make sure that you didn't hesitate making the payment down to the agency by today so that they could have the certificate endorsed, signed and stamped immediately without any further delay. After all this process has been carried out, then we would have to proceed to the bank for the transfer of your compensation funds which is valued at the sum of $10.500,000.00 usd which was suppose to have been transferred to you all this while. Note/ all the crimes agencies have been contacted on this regards and we shall trace and arrest you if you disregard this instructions. You are given a grace today to make the payment for the document after which your failure to do that will attract a maximum arrest and finally you will be appearing in court for act of terrorism, money laundering and drug trafficking charges, so be warned not to try any thing funny because you are been watched. THANKS FOR YOUR CO-OPERATION. ROBERT MUELLER II WASHINGTON DC Anti-Terrorist and Monetary Crimes Division Fbi Headquarters In Washington, D.C. Federal Bureau Of Investigation J. Edgar Hoover Building 935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20535-0001 Website: www.fbi.gov
| FBI.txt | 5.5 KB |
++++++++++++++++
I can't wait to wire Bob my $120. I really don't want them crimes agencies after me!
Speaking of CCW
The PSH crew is in full voice:
Dear Chuck,
Black Friday is always hectic, but this one will be different.
Stores will still have shoppers scrambling over each other to snatch up the best deals. But for the first time, almost anyone will be able to carry a hidden, loaded gun.
The last thing you, or your friends and family, should be forced to worry about while browsing the aisles is your safety.
So as you kick off your holiday shopping, don’t forget the easy ways you can urge businesses to value your safety. Bring a stack of SAFE WISCONSIN cards and “no weapons allowed” signs to leave at every shop and restaurant you visit.
Get your WAVE cards and signs to pass out at the stores you visit.
Thanks to the tireless work of WAVE supporters like you, hundreds of businesses around Wisconsin have already opted to post signs keeping guns out.
We're hearing that many stores, including major malls around the state like Oakwood Mall in Eau Claire, Fox River Mall in Appleton and Brookfield Square have adopted no-guns-allowed policies. But there are still too many businesses that don’t know they have a choice when it comes to Gov. Walker’s “guns anywhere” extremism.
Businesses listen to their customers. That’s why you’re the best person to ask them to keep guns off their premises. It’s the best way to make sure the places you and your family go to shop and eat remain places where you can feel safe.
Use Black Friday to make your community safer by passing out informational cards and “no weapons allowed” signs at every store you visit.
I’m thankful for everything supporters like you have already done to reclaim Wisconsin. Have a wonderful and safe holiday!
In Peace,
Jeri Bonavia
Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort
+++++++++++++++
Is Wisconsin Gun Owners or someone passing out "No Guns - No Sale" cards? If not, let's get that going, people!
Dear Chuck,
Black Friday is always hectic, but this one will be different.
Stores will still have shoppers scrambling over each other to snatch up the best deals. But for the first time, almost anyone will be able to carry a hidden, loaded gun.
The last thing you, or your friends and family, should be forced to worry about while browsing the aisles is your safety.
So as you kick off your holiday shopping, don’t forget the easy ways you can urge businesses to value your safety. Bring a stack of SAFE WISCONSIN cards and “no weapons allowed” signs to leave at every shop and restaurant you visit.
Get your WAVE cards and signs to pass out at the stores you visit.
Thanks to the tireless work of WAVE supporters like you, hundreds of businesses around Wisconsin have already opted to post signs keeping guns out.
We're hearing that many stores, including major malls around the state like Oakwood Mall in Eau Claire, Fox River Mall in Appleton and Brookfield Square have adopted no-guns-allowed policies. But there are still too many businesses that don’t know they have a choice when it comes to Gov. Walker’s “guns anywhere” extremism.
Businesses listen to their customers. That’s why you’re the best person to ask them to keep guns off their premises. It’s the best way to make sure the places you and your family go to shop and eat remain places where you can feel safe.
Use Black Friday to make your community safer by passing out informational cards and “no weapons allowed” signs at every store you visit.
I’m thankful for everything supporters like you have already done to reclaim Wisconsin. Have a wonderful and safe holiday!
In Peace,
Jeri Bonavia
Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort
+++++++++++++++
Is Wisconsin Gun Owners or someone passing out "No Guns - No Sale" cards? If not, let's get that going, people!
CCW license coming?
My daughter got hers this week - and I see my check for $50 to the Wisconsin DOJ was cashed.
Now I wait...
Now I wait...
The Occupy Anthem
This would be a good song for the Tea Party if it didn't sound so damn Communist inspired.
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Letter to the Editor
I went to the Beloit City Council meeting Monday night, and spoke against banning weapons in city buildings. The ordinance passed 4-2, with two members giving good reasons for not wanting the ordinance to be law.
I received an email response to a message I sent to the entire Board. This person stated, "While it is always possible that someone could bring a loaded gun into city hall with the intent of using it, those instances are exceedingly rare across the country, and we have to weigh that possibility against the day-to-day desire of employees, members of the Council, and the general public to avoid the routine presence of guns in city hall and other city buildings. This isn't about making sure there is never a weapon in city hall."
So, in the end this is simply a feel-good law to appease the hoplophobes amongst us, who get their delicate feelings bruised by the thought that someone might be able to defend themselves while they go defenseless, trusting in Authority to protect them.
The people of Beloit now know - four of the six council members do not trust them with their Constitutional rights, are afraid of inanimate objects, and worry more about the "feelings" of people who don't want to take responsibility for their own lives than following the intent of the law.
Regards,
Chuck Kuecker
Update: Published Saturday, 11/26.
I received an email response to a message I sent to the entire Board. This person stated, "While it is always possible that someone could bring a loaded gun into city hall with the intent of using it, those instances are exceedingly rare across the country, and we have to weigh that possibility against the day-to-day desire of employees, members of the Council, and the general public to avoid the routine presence of guns in city hall and other city buildings. This isn't about making sure there is never a weapon in city hall."
So, in the end this is simply a feel-good law to appease the hoplophobes amongst us, who get their delicate feelings bruised by the thought that someone might be able to defend themselves while they go defenseless, trusting in Authority to protect them.
The people of Beloit now know - four of the six council members do not trust them with their Constitutional rights, are afraid of inanimate objects, and worry more about the "feelings" of people who don't want to take responsibility for their own lives than following the intent of the law.
Regards,
Chuck Kuecker
Update: Published Saturday, 11/26.
Reply from Mark Spreizer
Got this from him in response to my email to the Beloit City Council earlier. At least he responds - none of the other board members bothered.
Chuck,
Thanks again for your comments and the information you brought to the discussion. While it is always possible that someone could bring a loaded gun into city hall with the intent of using it, those instances are exceedingly rare across the country, and we have to weigh that possibility against the day-to-day desire of employees, members of the Council, and the general public to avoid the routine presence of guns in city hall and other city buildings. This isn't about making sure there is never a weapon in city hall. As was noted, the ordinance provides no way of doing that. I see this as being about community norms. I was open to the possibility of allowing weapons, but it became clear to me from the comments I received that most residents support maintaining a community norm that discourages carrying guns in public places. It may be fair to say that all the signs do is provide that discouragement, but that's what most people I heard from wanted. If someone chooses to violate the ordinance and risk the fine, and the gun is truly concealed and causes no problems, then nobody will be the wiser, no fine will be imposed, and nobody will feel uncomfortable. I'm not suggesting it, but people are always free to take calculated risk when it comes to their choices of obeying any ordinance. Honestly, I think people who are concerned about self-defense should be more concerned about it while walking down the street along at night than walking into city hall in broad daylight to pay a parking ticket. City Hall would also seem like a rather poor choice of locations for someone who wishes to burglarize a car, for a variety of fairly obvious reasons.
I did attempt to make the ordinance as sensible as possible and reduce unnecessary burden created by the ban on park bathrooms and the ambiguous language that had some people concerned we would ban pocketknives or nail clippers. I felt those were reasonable changes and that to do otherwise and merely ban everything we could to the fullest extent of the law would be reactionary. I am glad that the three amendments were approved and that made me comfortable enough with the ordinance to support it. I believe Beloit's ordinance is now less restrictive than Janesville or Rock County's. That said, if I become aware of any instances of problems caused by this ordinance, I'd be happy to look at any further modifications that might be necessary, and I trust you'll bring any issues to my attention if they occur.
One other thing I would note is that a more regulated training requirement at the state level to receive a concealed carry permit would probably help with some of the concerns that Councilors and residents have about these issues. The current requirements make it almost impossible for the state to verify anything about the training, since instructor signature, training location, and other relevant information is not required. I would also submit that from my perspective, a hunter safety course is inadequate. While knowing how to safely carry a gun is certainly part of the issue, the kind of gun one uses while hunting and the kind of gun one carries for self-defense are not often the same. More importantly, I think any training should include a thorough discussion of when and why and how it would be appropriate to draw and fire a concealed weapon in a situation to defend self or others. Nobody should carry a weapon if they aren't willing to use it, and nobody should be willing to use it if they haven't gamed out the scenarios in which they might use it. I feel that a different sort of training is required if one is learning to safely shoot deer or to potentially shoot a criminal in the middle of a firefight. I hope you will let your representatives in Madison know that more robust training requirements, not more lax ones, would make it easier to municipalities to consider allowing concealed carry permit-holders to carry in city buildings.
Thanks again for your comments,
Mark Spreitzer
My first reply:
Hi, Mark,
It really irritates me when intelligent people cannot see the difference between "feeling safe" and actually being safe.
You strike me as an intelligent person, and I appreciate the efforts you made to remove some of the worse aspects of this law.
However, your first sentence says it all - "we have to weigh that possibility against the day-to-day desire of employees, members of the Council, and the general public to avoid the routine presence of guns in city hall and other city buildings.". How, exactly, does allowing concealed carry affect the desires of these persons? As soon as they leave the loving arms of their gun-free zone, they will be amongst people who COULD BE CARRYING LEGAL GUNS! If they go to such dens of iniquity as Wal-Mart, the same applies. You could have achieved the same feel-safe zone by simply prohibiting open carry of weapons in City buildings - anyone open-carrying would simply have to pocket their gun, and enter - no infringement, and those hoplophobes among us could go right on ignoring reality and feel safe.
This is what I was trying to get across - it's a feel-good law that has no effect on safety, that infringes on the rights of all Beloit citizens and visitors, and could conceivably end up costing the City of Beloit tourist money and business.
Your position on when someone should be concerned about safety brings to mind what I was taught at the concealed carry course I attended last Saturday. There are several conditions of human awareness. Most people go through life in "condition white", oblivious to the world around them and numb to potential dangers. They assume their surroundings are safe because nothing has ever happened where they are, and they don't keep alert to danger. These people are victims waiting for a criminal to find them.
People who realize the world is a dangerous place live in "condition yellow". They are continually staying alert to other people, possibly dangerous areas and situations, and are prepared to focus on danger should it arise. Police officers and firefighters are trained to be in condition yellow when on duty. It's not paranoia - just staying alert. The Boy Scout motto - "be prepared".
I live in condition yellow. People who are disturbed by the thought of guns being in the area are living in condition white, and will be easy prey for the wolves.
I would recommend that you take the same course I took - it will open your eyes, and perhaps make you realize why some of us are so vocal about laws like this. The course I took was taught by Dominic Ferraro, President of Advanced Protection Group. His website is http://www.apgwi.com. Money well spent, even if you don't ever own a gun.
I would also opine that the "feelings" of any group never trump the rights of all. The Constitution was not written to respect "feelings" - just natural rights.
Regards,
Chuck
A second reply, as I got interrupted by a call to eat dinner:
Hi, Mark,
I got interrupted before in my reply. Sorry for this second reply.
Addressing your concerns about training - first, this is an issue of inalienable rights, and the State actually has no interest in whether or not a citizen has completed some arbitrary level of training before exercising those rights. Requiring at least a college-level reading level before being allowed to write to city council members would be an exact parallel.
Every person must be responsible for his or her actions. Reasonable people seek to learn about things before doing them. Unreasonable people do not.
As far as Beloit's ordinance being more or less restrictive than that in another locale, this is really not the issue. Whether there should be any restrictions on the right of free people to protect themselves is the issue - and the basic laws of our country, and of the State of Wisconsin both state that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Making people forgo their rights in order to access their governmental agencies - and they do own those agencies - you and the council are only caretakers - is obviously an infringement. No ordinance should ever be considered solely on the basis of some other place having done something stupid first. You are supposed to be leaders - not lemmings.
I agree that one should not carry a weapon unless one is prepared and willing to use it. However, my feelings on the subject do not affect the rights of you or any other American, and they should not. You are free to carry a gun or not, with or without training, with or without being prepared to use it - I dare say, without even ever having thought about the responsibility. Because, when all is said and done, you and you alone must answer for anything you do with that weapon.
It's all about freedom - and personal responsibility. You do not achieve freedom by restricting people lest they act badly or stupidly - you allow them to do so, and then hold them responsible for the results of their ignorance or stupidity.
Regards,
Chuck
Think any of that will do any good?
Chuck,
Thanks again for your comments and the information you brought to the discussion. While it is always possible that someone could bring a loaded gun into city hall with the intent of using it, those instances are exceedingly rare across the country, and we have to weigh that possibility against the day-to-day desire of employees, members of the Council, and the general public to avoid the routine presence of guns in city hall and other city buildings. This isn't about making sure there is never a weapon in city hall. As was noted, the ordinance provides no way of doing that. I see this as being about community norms. I was open to the possibility of allowing weapons, but it became clear to me from the comments I received that most residents support maintaining a community norm that discourages carrying guns in public places. It may be fair to say that all the signs do is provide that discouragement, but that's what most people I heard from wanted. If someone chooses to violate the ordinance and risk the fine, and the gun is truly concealed and causes no problems, then nobody will be the wiser, no fine will be imposed, and nobody will feel uncomfortable. I'm not suggesting it, but people are always free to take calculated risk when it comes to their choices of obeying any ordinance. Honestly, I think people who are concerned about self-defense should be more concerned about it while walking down the street along at night than walking into city hall in broad daylight to pay a parking ticket. City Hall would also seem like a rather poor choice of locations for someone who wishes to burglarize a car, for a variety of fairly obvious reasons.
I did attempt to make the ordinance as sensible as possible and reduce unnecessary burden created by the ban on park bathrooms and the ambiguous language that had some people concerned we would ban pocketknives or nail clippers. I felt those were reasonable changes and that to do otherwise and merely ban everything we could to the fullest extent of the law would be reactionary. I am glad that the three amendments were approved and that made me comfortable enough with the ordinance to support it. I believe Beloit's ordinance is now less restrictive than Janesville or Rock County's. That said, if I become aware of any instances of problems caused by this ordinance, I'd be happy to look at any further modifications that might be necessary, and I trust you'll bring any issues to my attention if they occur.
One other thing I would note is that a more regulated training requirement at the state level to receive a concealed carry permit would probably help with some of the concerns that Councilors and residents have about these issues. The current requirements make it almost impossible for the state to verify anything about the training, since instructor signature, training location, and other relevant information is not required. I would also submit that from my perspective, a hunter safety course is inadequate. While knowing how to safely carry a gun is certainly part of the issue, the kind of gun one uses while hunting and the kind of gun one carries for self-defense are not often the same. More importantly, I think any training should include a thorough discussion of when and why and how it would be appropriate to draw and fire a concealed weapon in a situation to defend self or others. Nobody should carry a weapon if they aren't willing to use it, and nobody should be willing to use it if they haven't gamed out the scenarios in which they might use it. I feel that a different sort of training is required if one is learning to safely shoot deer or to potentially shoot a criminal in the middle of a firefight. I hope you will let your representatives in Madison know that more robust training requirements, not more lax ones, would make it easier to municipalities to consider allowing concealed carry permit-holders to carry in city buildings.
Thanks again for your comments,
Mark Spreitzer
My first reply:
Hi, Mark,
It really irritates me when intelligent people cannot see the difference between "feeling safe" and actually being safe.
You strike me as an intelligent person, and I appreciate the efforts you made to remove some of the worse aspects of this law.
However, your first sentence says it all - "we have to weigh that possibility against the day-to-day desire of employees, members of the Council, and the general public to avoid the routine presence of guns in city hall and other city buildings.". How, exactly, does allowing concealed carry affect the desires of these persons? As soon as they leave the loving arms of their gun-free zone, they will be amongst people who COULD BE CARRYING LEGAL GUNS! If they go to such dens of iniquity as Wal-Mart, the same applies. You could have achieved the same feel-safe zone by simply prohibiting open carry of weapons in City buildings - anyone open-carrying would simply have to pocket their gun, and enter - no infringement, and those hoplophobes among us could go right on ignoring reality and feel safe.
This is what I was trying to get across - it's a feel-good law that has no effect on safety, that infringes on the rights of all Beloit citizens and visitors, and could conceivably end up costing the City of Beloit tourist money and business.
Your position on when someone should be concerned about safety brings to mind what I was taught at the concealed carry course I attended last Saturday. There are several conditions of human awareness. Most people go through life in "condition white", oblivious to the world around them and numb to potential dangers. They assume their surroundings are safe because nothing has ever happened where they are, and they don't keep alert to danger. These people are victims waiting for a criminal to find them.
People who realize the world is a dangerous place live in "condition yellow". They are continually staying alert to other people, possibly dangerous areas and situations, and are prepared to focus on danger should it arise. Police officers and firefighters are trained to be in condition yellow when on duty. It's not paranoia - just staying alert. The Boy Scout motto - "be prepared".
I live in condition yellow. People who are disturbed by the thought of guns being in the area are living in condition white, and will be easy prey for the wolves.
I would recommend that you take the same course I took - it will open your eyes, and perhaps make you realize why some of us are so vocal about laws like this. The course I took was taught by Dominic Ferraro, President of Advanced Protection Group. His website is http://www.apgwi.com. Money well spent, even if you don't ever own a gun.
I would also opine that the "feelings" of any group never trump the rights of all. The Constitution was not written to respect "feelings" - just natural rights.
Regards,
Chuck
A second reply, as I got interrupted by a call to eat dinner:
Hi, Mark,
I got interrupted before in my reply. Sorry for this second reply.
Addressing your concerns about training - first, this is an issue of inalienable rights, and the State actually has no interest in whether or not a citizen has completed some arbitrary level of training before exercising those rights. Requiring at least a college-level reading level before being allowed to write to city council members would be an exact parallel.
Every person must be responsible for his or her actions. Reasonable people seek to learn about things before doing them. Unreasonable people do not.
As far as Beloit's ordinance being more or less restrictive than that in another locale, this is really not the issue. Whether there should be any restrictions on the right of free people to protect themselves is the issue - and the basic laws of our country, and of the State of Wisconsin both state that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Making people forgo their rights in order to access their governmental agencies - and they do own those agencies - you and the council are only caretakers - is obviously an infringement. No ordinance should ever be considered solely on the basis of some other place having done something stupid first. You are supposed to be leaders - not lemmings.
I agree that one should not carry a weapon unless one is prepared and willing to use it. However, my feelings on the subject do not affect the rights of you or any other American, and they should not. You are free to carry a gun or not, with or without training, with or without being prepared to use it - I dare say, without even ever having thought about the responsibility. Because, when all is said and done, you and you alone must answer for anything you do with that weapon.
It's all about freedom - and personal responsibility. You do not achieve freedom by restricting people lest they act badly or stupidly - you allow them to do so, and then hold them responsible for the results of their ignorance or stupidity.
Regards,
Chuck
Think any of that will do any good?
Letter from Mitt Romney
Just got a letter from Mr. Romney, asking for my donation to his campaign.
The return envelope had a blank space where my stamp would go.
Even if I was pro-Romney, I wouldn't waste a stamp on a campaign that can't afford a prepaid return envelope - but then, if he HAD given me such an envelope, he would have gotten his returned without money, just a note about his political legacy and how I wouldn't vote for him except in extremis.
The return envelope had a blank space where my stamp would go.
Even if I was pro-Romney, I wouldn't waste a stamp on a campaign that can't afford a prepaid return envelope - but then, if he HAD given me such an envelope, he would have gotten his returned without money, just a note about his political legacy and how I wouldn't vote for him except in extremis.
Email to the Beloit City Council
To the Beloit City Council:
Hello,
Thank you for letting me speak again Monday night about the city gun ban for law-abiding folks.
It was good to see that two of you saw the futility of banning weapons without providing means to ensure that the new law will be obeyed. I have a feeling that anyone who wants to do evil in the Council chamber will bring in anything he or she desires, with little thought of how much the fine is.
Having a graduated fine for subsequent violations sounds like a good idea - until you consider that you probably won't be able to collect even the first offense fine from the guy who decides, after reading the "NO WEAPONS" sign on the front door, that today is a good day for him to die and take a bunch of innocent people with him.
Columbine was mentioned - you do realize that the shooters violated not only federal laws on obtaining and possessing weapons, they also ignored a federal law prohibiting guns within 100 feet of a school. Do you really think a stick-on sign on the front door will prevent a crime?
The only people you will collect this fine on will be those who feel strongly enough about self-defense and their inalienable rights under our federal and state Constitutions that they would rather risk a civil forfeiture than injury or death. A lot of people believe in the old maxim - "better to be judged by twelve than carried by six".
"Municipal immunity" is a fine thing if all you care about is having to defend questionable ordinances in court. How will you feel if someone gets hurt in a city building after they lock their defense in their car? Will you have any different opinion after a few cars in the City Hall lot are burglarized for weapons? How do you feel about advertising that the City Hall parking lot is a good place for gang-bangers and such to obtain guns?
On another point - I heard no mention of whether or not self-defense was to be banned for those people forced by the economy to ride Beloit buses. Will this be in the city ordinance, or will it be left to some clerk at the transit authority to decide on "policy"? Also, will "municipal immunity" protect the bus system from lawsuits?
To Mr. Haynes and Mr. Van De Bogart, my thanks for your nay votes.
Regards.
Chuck Kuecker
Hello,
Thank you for letting me speak again Monday night about the city gun ban for law-abiding folks.
It was good to see that two of you saw the futility of banning weapons without providing means to ensure that the new law will be obeyed. I have a feeling that anyone who wants to do evil in the Council chamber will bring in anything he or she desires, with little thought of how much the fine is.
Having a graduated fine for subsequent violations sounds like a good idea - until you consider that you probably won't be able to collect even the first offense fine from the guy who decides, after reading the "NO WEAPONS" sign on the front door, that today is a good day for him to die and take a bunch of innocent people with him.
Columbine was mentioned - you do realize that the shooters violated not only federal laws on obtaining and possessing weapons, they also ignored a federal law prohibiting guns within 100 feet of a school. Do you really think a stick-on sign on the front door will prevent a crime?
The only people you will collect this fine on will be those who feel strongly enough about self-defense and their inalienable rights under our federal and state Constitutions that they would rather risk a civil forfeiture than injury or death. A lot of people believe in the old maxim - "better to be judged by twelve than carried by six".
"Municipal immunity" is a fine thing if all you care about is having to defend questionable ordinances in court. How will you feel if someone gets hurt in a city building after they lock their defense in their car? Will you have any different opinion after a few cars in the City Hall lot are burglarized for weapons? How do you feel about advertising that the City Hall parking lot is a good place for gang-bangers and such to obtain guns?
On another point - I heard no mention of whether or not self-defense was to be banned for those people forced by the economy to ride Beloit buses. Will this be in the city ordinance, or will it be left to some clerk at the transit authority to decide on "policy"? Also, will "municipal immunity" protect the bus system from lawsuits?
To Mr. Haynes and Mr. Van De Bogart, my thanks for your nay votes.
Regards.
Chuck Kuecker
Beloit City Council meeting report
Last night, a few Tea Party types and I went to the Beloit City Council meeting, again to argue for no ban on legal weapons in public buildings.
One woman spoke in favor of a ban - said she would "feel safer" if she knew good folk were disarmed. Didn't seem to realize that only good folk would obey the rule.
Several people spoke against the ban, including your truly.
They amended the original ordinance to exempt park washrooms - so at least an armed citizen can relieve himself legally.
they set fines of $300 for the first "offense", then $400, and $500, for those who keep on insisting on their right to self-defense.
No mention of enforcement procedures was made, so there will be m=no metal detectors or TSA gropers. At least the bad guys won't have to work so hard to get in.
No mention of whether the Beloit bus lines will be free-fire zones.
The city attorney said he thinks "municipal immunity" applies, so there's no legal downside to banning self-defense - the victims won't be able to sue.
The final vote was 4-2 in favor. Haynes and Van De Bogart voted NAY.
Remember - it's better to be judged by twelve than carried by six, and when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
I pray the Beloit City Council does not learn the hard way what a stupid thing they did.
One woman spoke in favor of a ban - said she would "feel safer" if she knew good folk were disarmed. Didn't seem to realize that only good folk would obey the rule.
Several people spoke against the ban, including your truly.
They amended the original ordinance to exempt park washrooms - so at least an armed citizen can relieve himself legally.
they set fines of $300 for the first "offense", then $400, and $500, for those who keep on insisting on their right to self-defense.
No mention of enforcement procedures was made, so there will be m=no metal detectors or TSA gropers. At least the bad guys won't have to work so hard to get in.
No mention of whether the Beloit bus lines will be free-fire zones.
The city attorney said he thinks "municipal immunity" applies, so there's no legal downside to banning self-defense - the victims won't be able to sue.
The final vote was 4-2 in favor. Haynes and Van De Bogart voted NAY.
Remember - it's better to be judged by twelve than carried by six, and when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
I pray the Beloit City Council does not learn the hard way what a stupid thing they did.
Blast from the past
When I was in high school in Chicago, back in the Flower Power days, the SDS wrote on the sidewalks out front of Lane Tech "SDS will liberate this school on (can't remember the date)".
Most of the students made blue armbands and when a car drove south on Western Avenue with people shouting SDS slogans, they got a brick thrown from the crowd. They left in a hurry.
For some reason, a bunch of students crossed Western and trashed a record shop across from Lane. By the time the police arrived, everyone was back on the west side of the street, and Western was littered with LPs and 45s.
No one tried "liberating" Lane again.
This guy claims to be an anarchist, then a socialist. Nice to be certain what your philosophy is!
"Corporations are responsible for shipping jobs overseas" - yeah - because the gov't. passed laws and encouraged them to do that, in order to remain profitable.
This mope voted for Ralph Nader. That says a lot.
Most of the students made blue armbands and when a car drove south on Western Avenue with people shouting SDS slogans, they got a brick thrown from the crowd. They left in a hurry.
For some reason, a bunch of students crossed Western and trashed a record shop across from Lane. By the time the police arrived, everyone was back on the west side of the street, and Western was littered with LPs and 45s.
No one tried "liberating" Lane again.
This guy claims to be an anarchist, then a socialist. Nice to be certain what your philosophy is!
"Corporations are responsible for shipping jobs overseas" - yeah - because the gov't. passed laws and encouraged them to do that, in order to remain profitable.
This mope voted for Ralph Nader. That says a lot.
Cost of recall
The Demonrats don't care how much it costs Wisconsin taxpayers to get rid of Walker - if they fail, the gravy train stays derailed, with luck, forever.
+++++++++++++++
By M.D. Kittle and Kirsten Adshead | Wisconsin Reporter
MADISON — This could get expensive.
Election officials from Wisconsin’s most populated cities and counties sound sure of two things concerning the uncertain days of recalls ahead: The elections would be costly, potentially running into the millions of dollars, and they’re going to chew up a lot of time during a busy presidential election year.
“It will just be nonstop” in 2012, said Sue Edman, executive director of the city of Milwaukee’s Election Commission.
Wisconsin’s municipalities and counties have budgeted for four elections in 2012 — the spring primary, Feb. 21; the regularly scheduled spring election and presidential primary, April 3; the state primary for the fall election, moved up to August; and the general election in November.
Most of the state’s largest counties and cities, however, have not budgeted for a spate of potential recalls, according to an analysis by Wisconsin Reporter.
“Our hands are full, so actually we’re not even thinking about (a recall election), because we don’t have time,” said Sandy Juno, chief deputy clerk for Brown County. “If (a recall election is scheduled), we’ll deal with it.”
She anticipates Brown County’s recall price tag could approach $200,000 per election — primary and general election — should opponents of Gov. Scott Walker and Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch gather the nearly 1.1 million signatures combined required in forcing recall elections. That estimate includes the cost to Brown County and its 24 municipalities.
Organizers of the recall campaigns, the Democratic Party of Wisconsin and United Wisconsin, a liberal political action committee, said they had collected more than 105,000 signatures through the first four days of the initiative, which began Nov. 15. That information could not be verified independently .
+++++++++++++++
More at the source.
$200K for one county. 72 counties. That's over $14 million.
If the Republicans don't challenge EVERY ONE of those petition signatures, they truly will deserve the label "The Stupid party".
+++++++++++++++
By M.D. Kittle and Kirsten Adshead | Wisconsin Reporter
MADISON — This could get expensive.
Election officials from Wisconsin’s most populated cities and counties sound sure of two things concerning the uncertain days of recalls ahead: The elections would be costly, potentially running into the millions of dollars, and they’re going to chew up a lot of time during a busy presidential election year.
“It will just be nonstop” in 2012, said Sue Edman, executive director of the city of Milwaukee’s Election Commission.
Wisconsin’s municipalities and counties have budgeted for four elections in 2012 — the spring primary, Feb. 21; the regularly scheduled spring election and presidential primary, April 3; the state primary for the fall election, moved up to August; and the general election in November.
Most of the state’s largest counties and cities, however, have not budgeted for a spate of potential recalls, according to an analysis by Wisconsin Reporter.
“Our hands are full, so actually we’re not even thinking about (a recall election), because we don’t have time,” said Sandy Juno, chief deputy clerk for Brown County. “If (a recall election is scheduled), we’ll deal with it.”
She anticipates Brown County’s recall price tag could approach $200,000 per election — primary and general election — should opponents of Gov. Scott Walker and Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch gather the nearly 1.1 million signatures combined required in forcing recall elections. That estimate includes the cost to Brown County and its 24 municipalities.
Organizers of the recall campaigns, the Democratic Party of Wisconsin and United Wisconsin, a liberal political action committee, said they had collected more than 105,000 signatures through the first four days of the initiative, which began Nov. 15. That information could not be verified independently .
+++++++++++++++
More at the source.
$200K for one county. 72 counties. That's over $14 million.
If the Republicans don't challenge EVERY ONE of those petition signatures, they truly will deserve the label "The Stupid party".
Everyone already knew this
and now, we have testimony from the Dark Side:
Democrat says Democratic Party bosses use voter fraud [VIDEO]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)