Coulter Says

Coulter says. "It's something in liberals' DNA: They think they can pass a law eliminating guns and nuclear weapons, but teenagers having sex is completely beyond our control."

State of Missouri Profiling Those Who Criticize the Government

ht/MsUnderestimated

Washington, DC (R and D both) Out of Step With America

I've thrown together a little collection of links to some of my posts from the past couple of months that give examples of Washington's bad attitudes and arrogant actions.

DC delegate Norton nasty and angrily dismissive of expression of opposing opinion.

'Stimulus' bill is actually the creation of a Chicago-style patronage system.

How much of deficit is caused by Democrat fat cats' unwillingness to pay taxes?

The endless parade of tax cheats and ethically compromised getting tossed by the senate.

Only congress can give union goons a real reason to carry a lead pipe.

The Second Amendment gives citizens the right and where withal to protect themselves from congress and such.

DC Delegate Shocked and Disgusted That Citizens Stand Up For Their Constitutional Rights

ht/Jane Q. Republican

The Second Amendment

I'm surprised that this collection of thieves with the soulless stares even let her testify.

Hat Tip/Jane Q. Republican

The 'Experts' And Gun Control

I got the above image from Jane Q. Republican. Below is a longish quote from her post about a new bill introduced into the House. You can follow this link to Jane Q. to get information about who to email or fax about about the bill. Please speak up while there is still time!


"Introduced January 6, 2009 by Illinois Rep. Bobby Rush (D), the Blair Holt Bill has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary: Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
"The crime for which this bill was named, though certainly tragic, was the result of gang violence in Chicago. Illinois democrat Bobby Rush stepped right up to the plate and condemned … gang violence? No. Breakdown of the family unit? No. Absence of role models for urban children? No. The Second Amendment. You betcha! The bill he proposed suggests that gun control could have prevented the death of a 16 year old boy caught in the crossfire of gang warfare on a Chicago city bus. Does anyone, including Rep. Rush, actually believe that gun control laws will prevent Chicago gang members from having and using guns?
. . . . . . . .
"In plain English, if this bill becomes law, in order to buy or possess a firearm, an American citizen must have a license. To get a license, he or she must submit:

" * a passport photo
"* name, address, date of birth
"* all known aliases
"* a thumb print made in front of the person to whom he or she is making the application
"* a statement from one or more law enforcement agencies that he or she is eligible to purchase and own a firearm
"* his or her authorization to release his or her mental health records to the AG’s office
"* a certificate of completion of a written firearms exam covering safe storage, safe handling, use of firearms in homes, related legalities, and any other subjects the AG deems appropriate
"* his or her signature."

Text of the bill.

Stare Decisis When Convenient

Supreme court nominees have started to pledge to apply stare decisis to Roe v. Wade. (I'm waiting to see a senator give up that much of their constitutional power to another branch of government.) But if this stare decisis stuff is so great, let's really put it to use. How about the right to bear arms? There is a much, much, much longer history of citizens being allowed to own guns than there is of the 'right' to abortion. Why, oh why doesn't stare decisis apply here? Could it be that the senate judiciary committee thinks there has been a 220 year long misapplication of the constitution in the case of the second amendment? But I think that if guns could be used to perform abortions the second amendment would be safer. Of course, you'd have a hard time convincing me that any member of congress gives a fat f**k about my constitutional rights. I think they only feel they need to answer to K Street.

I originally posted this in 2007 but I like it and decided to recycle it.

Stare Decisis When Convenient

Supreme court nominees have started to pledge to apply stare decisis to Roe v. Wade. (I'm waiting to see a senator give up that much of their constitutional power to another branch of government.) But if this stare decisis stuff is so great, let's really put it to use. How about the right to bear arms? There is a much, much, much longer history of citizens being allowed to own guns than there is of the 'right' to abortion. Why, oh why doesn't stare decisis apply here? Could it be that the senate judiciary committee thinks there has been a 220 year long misapplication of the constitution in the case of the second amendment? But I think that if guns could be used to perform abortions the second amendment would be safer. Of course, you'd have a hard time convincing me that any member of congress gives a fat f**k about my constitutional rights. I think they only feel they need to answer to K Street.