Video: “I am not your subject”

posted at 1:21 pm on January 7, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Gun owners have begun speaking out on behalf of their constitutional rights — directly, in some cases, to those who would infringe upon them.  Joshua Boston wrote a letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein, declaring that “I am not your subject,” which has drawn plenty of attention in the post-Newtown political arena.  Boston appeared on Fox and Friends this morning not just to talk about the letter, but to rebut Feinstein’s response to it:


 

“I am not your subject,” Boston wrote.

“I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America. I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.”

Boston explained that he believes once the government takes away assault weapons, it will be a “slippery slope” toward being able to restrict more and more types of firearms.

“Our firearms are important to us and they’re something that we have to have in order to keep what we have as a country going. And this starts us onto a slippery slope. They take (assault weapons) away, next they come for bolt-action guns. And there’s really no reason to register other than they confiscate at a later date in time,” said Boston.

Feinstein assured Boston that her bill would have exceptions for hunting weapons.  The former Marine told Fox’s Steve Doocy that Feinstein doesn’t understand the meaning of the 2nd Amendment:

“This idea that the rights of existing gun owners is strictly limited to hunting and sporting purposes is just absurd and has no basis in the Bill of Rights. It’s not what it was for,” said Boston, who argued that throughout history there have been examples of governments confiscating citizens’ guns.

“It’s something we’ve seen happen time and time again in history. With Stalin, it happened in Cambodia and of course, the Third Reich. No one saw that coming until it was too late,” he said.

One key reason for the 2nd Amendment is the natural right to self-defense.  Ironically, Feinstein took full advantage of that right when she needed to do so.  She armed herself in response to threats in 1995, but seems to have an issue with other Americans making that same choice.

Nor is she the only hypocrite on this stage.  John Fund discovered that the newspaper that found it necessary to endanger the entire community by publishing a map of handgun permit holders ended up getting armed guards to protect themselves after receiving heavy criticism for their decision:

Take the Journal News executives who decided to publish the gun map. The newspaper was so inundated with complaints that shortly after Christmas it took extra security precautions and hired security guards — who were armed — to patrol its Rockland County headquarters. The executives reported no incidents of any kind at the building, but they turned over at least two e-mails they found troubling. The local police said they didn’t find the e-mails threatening and concluded that they “did not constitute an offense.” The Journal News chose not to share with its readers the information that it had hired armed security guards. That revelation came from a competing newspaper, the Rockland County Times, which concluded that the Journal News conducts itself according to the double standard: “Guns are good for the goose but not for the gander.”

Indeed.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Kind of ironic that he says, “I am not your subject,” yet that’s exactly what he is, going to war on their behalf, taking their orders, and believing he “fought for our country”.

[Dante on January 7, 2013 at 1:51 PM]

Ridiculous. He was not a subject by going to war on their behalf. As a citizen, he volunteered to join the military and for the period in which he served. That was a contract, which he voluntarily swore an oath to keep. There was no force taken, no coercion, no violation of right.

You might be on firmer ground if there was conscription, but there isn’t but even that would require the various tests to validate that the person is a subject in the sense used.

Dusty on January 7, 2013 at 2:28 PM

Nicely said Dusty but Dante’s one of our resident dimwits so I doubt you changed its mind.

CW on January 7, 2013 at 3:19 PM

Being that I learned early this AM, that my mother may not survive the week…

annoyinglittletwerp on January 7, 2013 at 2:00 PM

.
I know how hard this is for you and your family. We lost my mother coming on three years ago. She passed away in my daughter’s arms, which, as my eldest brother said in her eulogy, was where she would have chosen to die. Tears still come from typing that sentence – sometimes our blessings are hard to accept. Wel felt the truth of his statement while still encompassed by grief over her passing.

May God grant you, your family and friends comfort and strength in the days ahead. May all of you find the peace in knowing your mother’s spirit transcends this existence and leaves behind our daily pains while continuing in the myriad joys that define her soul.May he give your mother as easy a transition into his presence as possible.

PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 3:19 PM

So sorry, ALT. I lost mine exactly one month ago, so I’m keenly aware what your hurt is.

Forget Dante. He’s nobody to you.

BillH on January 7, 2013 at 3:14 PM

Thanks. My dad died 11 years ago in November. They’re together again.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 7, 2013 at 3:20 PM

Pablo Honey on January 7, 2013 at 1:51 PM

Pablo likes to fancy himself as a great, independent, free thinker, but as it turns out, he is just another sheep looking for a master.

celtnik on January 7, 2013 at 3:20 PM

verbaluce on January 7, 2013 at 2:47 PM

.
C’mon verbaluce !

Three week old gun-related reply I gave you, that now you’re being evasive of.

It all started between you and Galt2009.
.

How does taking away someone’s right of self defense protect them?

Galt2009 on December 21, 2012 at 10:21 AM
.

How are any of the hypothetical proposals presumed to do that?

verbaluce on December 21, 2012 at 10:23 AM

.

Are there or are there not proposals to ban private ownership of civilian (semi-auto) models of military (full-auto) rifles, and carbines?

listens2glenn on December 21, 2012 at 1:17 PM
.

Is this for me?
Yes, that seems to be the essence of what’s be proposed.
Again.

verbaluce on December 21, 2012 at 1:31 PM

.
If you’re acknowledging this, then it’s hardly “hypothetical”.
The Second Amendment is FIRST, about self defense against a Tyranical government. Common criminals come after that.
Then dangerous/nuisance animals … and so on.

Citizens should be allowed to possess the same weaponry as your local and state police. Anything less than that, means your ability to defend yourself against a tyrannical government is compromised. Period.

listens2glenn on December 21, 2012 at 1:24 PM

.
My 1:24 PM comment is for you, as well. Reposting:

verbaluce on December 21, 2012 at 1:12 PM

.
For full-auto, I’m for licensing. Should licensing be Federal or State controlled? That’s another argument.

Civilian (semi-auto) models of fully-auto military rifles and carbines should be no more restricted than a breech loading single shot .22LR.

listens2glenn
on December 21, 2012 at 1:24 PM

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 3:20 PM

As opposed to being infuriated for being manipulated into believing that Islam is a threat and that our government and its policies aren’t the threat? You’re being fooled.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 2:17 PM

911 didn’t happen. 911 didn’t happen.911 didn’t happen. 911 didn’t happen.911 didn’t happen. 911 didn’t happen.911 didn’t happen. 911 didn’t happen.

Dante you’re so smart. Thanks.

CW on January 7, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Pablo Honey on January 7, 2013 at 1:51 PM

Pablo likes to fancy himself as a great, independent, free thinker, but as it turns out, he is just another sheep looking for a master.

celtnik on January 7, 2013 at 3:20 PM

You know that ones a “bottom”

CW on January 7, 2013 at 3:21 PM

The truth is, liberals want to do away with guns because they live in fear of them. They are thieves and manipulators and petty tyrants at heart. They are cowardly children who stand behind their mommies and daddies while throwing stones at others. They fear the adults who have the courage and strength to stand up for themselves, who make their own way in this world, and who would take up arms for a noble cause.

They fear that their cowardice and weakness will be exposed and that they might be called out face to face to give an account of their selfish, childish, and destructive schemes.

I would love to see an “OPEN CARRY DAY”. Then they would know what we already know:
We are the Americans. We are the life, breath and power of this nation. We could easily survive and even thrive without a single liberal. They would stumble into chaos without us. Without our strength, ingenuity and passion, they would all die in a generation, for they would have no wealth to steal.

Deep down they know this, even as they ridicule us, they know that their existence depends on us and we rely on them none at all. And the hate us for it.

I hope more of us decide to show them these truths and rub their noses in it. Stop buying their goods. Stop enlisting their services. They supply nothing that you can’t easily do without. It is already happening, you know. Not by scheme or conspiracy, but seemingly from an inner sense of justice.

Where is Katie Couric now? Tina Fey? Think they ever wonder what happened to their celebrity? They became symbols of what is wrong with this society, the very evil that the leftists find so enjoyable: ridiculing strong, honest Americans to keep them in their “proper place” to be sucked dry by government decree at the whims of the worthless anklebiters and their power-hungry rabblerousing masters, alike.

I urge you all to stand up. To take a page out of the parasites’ handbook and stand against these blighters. Quietly boycott everything sold by everyone you know who supports this world’s subculture of leeches and ticks. Don’t do them any favors, either. They voted for this mess, make live in it. Spend your time with like-minded citizens who love this country and come up with new ways to (figuratively) starve off this plague of locusts.

*rant off*

You know its either that or blast off and nuke ‘em from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure…

ROCnPhilly on January 7, 2013 at 3:22 PM

PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 3:19 PM

Thanks. I stopped speaking to Ma 2 months ago-which makes this rougher. She always said that after she died, she wanted her and my dad’s ashes scattered over the Gettysburg National battlefield. My brother, Spawn, and I will see that it gets done.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 7, 2013 at 3:23 PM

You can get off the internet if you think you’re in danger of being “screwed with”. Nah, you just tried to be exploitative in playing some sympathy-guilt card.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 2:14 PM


How is it possible to hate yourself so much that you would make a statement like that in a public forum?

You need to take your truly diseased mind off the internet and seek immediate psychiatric counseling.

PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 3:23 PM

Prayers ALT.

wolly4321 on January 7, 2013 at 2:59 PM

.
y’all are my family, so I’m hanging out here.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 7, 2013 at 3:03 PM

.
*… hug … kiss on the cheek *

Oh gosh, I’ve made myself “blush”! … : )

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 3:26 PM

Hell their socialism is proven in their NAME. NAZI. Contraction of Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP). Which is National Socialist German Workers’ Party .

Anyway, take your corrupted and corrupting distortive labeling attempts and screw off. I’m not the least bit interested in the doper-Libertarian movement or its advocates. Their platform is asinine.

rayra on January 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM

Yeah, Nazi’s were a far left political party. They hated the communists (another left wing political party) for a lot of reasons, including the communist disdain for national borders, and the fact that something liek 4 of the 6 communists leaders in germany at the time were jewish.

3 Questions:

1.Seriously, you’re blaming America for what murderous Radical Muslims from another country did?

2.What are you doing that’s so terrible that you do not want anyone watching you walking down the street?

3. Do you wear your tin foil hat like Napoleon, from side to side, or like Adminiral Nelson, from front to back?

kingsjester on January 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM

1) No, I don’t think 9/11 was Americans fault. I think we would have been attacked regardless of our previous foreign policy decisions.
2) Uh, I just prefer freedom of movement without being monitored / tracked by the US govt
3) Everything I’ve said has been reported by popular news organizations (not to say its accurate, but it’s not like I’m pulling my facts from alex jones)

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 3:26 PM

She always said that after she died, she wanted her and my dad’s ashes scattered over the Gettysburg National battlefield. My brother, Spawn, and I will see that it gets done.

annoyinglittletwerp
on January 7, 2013 at 3:23 PM

.
Uhhhhh . . . . . is that legal ?

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 3:28 PM

‘Patriot Act! Bushitler! Illegal War! Waterboarding! Rawk!’

/

rayra on January 7, 2013 at 3:15 PM

Yes, that is the sum total of my argument. But yeah, lets totally marginalize people who don’t believe in undeclared wars, torture, or government subversion of our fourth and fifth amendment rights. Then, in the next breath, lets critize Obama for undeclared wars (libya) and for trying to subvert our second amendment rights.
It’s very intellectually honest and consistant.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 3:28 PM

She always said that after she died, she wanted her and my dad’s ashes scattered over the Gettysburg National battlefield. My brother, Spawn, and I will see that it gets done.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 7, 2013 at 3:23 PM

.
Uhhhhh . . . . . is that legal ?

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 3:28 PM

Nope, but I sure as hell wouldn’t let that stop me if it were my moms last request.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:29 PM

but it’s also not an existential threat like the government tries to make it out to be every time they want to expand their police powers to take away more and more of our freedoms.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 2:51 PM

Two unrelated things, and a false assumotion or two. It is indeed an existential threat in the explicit sense. It is about eradicating the total concept of secular liberal Westernism (not just other religions. Remember, bin Laden reserved his greatest personal contempt not for Christian evangelists — whom he rather respected — but secular liberals). But the implication in your statement is that the “threat” is confined to wars in distant lands. This is hardly the scope of Islam’s ambition or even the primary focus of its energies today. The war against the West and individuality is manifested in the spread of lawfare, libel tourism, political correctness, speech codes, corruption of educational curricula and other academic infestations, Islamic penetration into the State Department and Pentagon, Sharia courts, and the pressure to assert Muslim religious practice as exceptional — all under the sponsorship of Isamic front groups (CAIR is only one of many). Islam is an existential threat because it has expanded the war to every front of our collective cultural existence.

We are not winning these under-the-radar conflicts in one part because the government is NOT identifying them as an existential threats. Just the opposite — it is abetting them.

rrpjr on January 7, 2013 at 3:30 PM

rayra on January 7, 2013 at 3:15 PM

Yes, that is the sum total of my argument. But yeah, lets totally marginalize people who don’t believe in undeclared wars, torture, or government subversion of our fourth and fifth amendment rights. Then, in the next breath, lets critize Obama for undeclared wars (libya) and for trying to subvert our second amendment rights.
It’s very intellectually honest and consistant.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 3:28 PM

Ya, you kind of lost that whole argument with the phrase “Undeclared” war.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 2:51 PM

Two unrelated things, and a false assumotion or two. It is indeed an existential threat in the explicit sense. It is about eradicating the total concept of secular liberal Westernism (not just other religions. Remember, bin Laden reserved his greatest personal contempt not for Christian evangelists — whom he rather respected — but secular liberals). But the implication in your statement is that the “threat” is confined to wars in distant lands. This is hardly the scope of Islam’s ambition or even the primary focus of its energies today. The war against the West and individuality is manifested in the spread of lawfare, libel tourism, political correctness, speech codes, corruption of educational curricula and other academic infestations, Islamic penetration into the State Department and Pentagon, Sharia courts, and the pressure to assert Muslim religious practice as exceptional — all under the sponsorship of Isamic front groups (CAIR is only one of many). Islam is an existential threat because it has expanded the war to every front of our collective cultural existence.

We are not winning these under-the-radar conflicts in one part because the government is NOT identifying them as an existential threats. Just the opposite — it is abetting them.

rrpjr on January 7, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Please see my blog article Jihad in America: The Grand Deception.

Ya, you to Timin203

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:32 PM

She’s but a hack for the Marxist minded left in America, known transparently as the democratic party with a few gazillion RINOs thrown in for good measure.
Psst. They know full well what the 2cd amendment says and they fear it! And they know full well that the assault weapons ban is a phony image game like creating a black messiah to run for president, but they do keep winning this way, trolling for support with lies and your tax dollars, while the GOP uses logic, and boring economic lessons to try to stop them.

At least the Patriots weren’t stupid enough to think they could ever “educate” the king, who understood power was all that counted.

Don L on January 7, 2013 at 3:34 PM

Uhhhhh . . . . . is that legal ?

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 3:28 PM

.
Nope, but I sure as hell wouldn’t let that stop me if it were my moms last request.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:29 PM

.
Yeah, I guess there are “ways” around that. . : )
.
DISREGARD ME, ‘twerp.

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 3:34 PM

Thanks. I stopped speaking to Ma 2 months ago-which makes this rougher. She always said that after she died, she wanted her and my dad’s ashes scattered over the Gettysburg National battlefield. My brother, Spawn, and I will see that it gets done.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 7, 2013 at 3:23 PM

.
ALT,

My mom suffered a fall, elbow injury and a rapid slide to being trapped inside her own mind a little more than a month after my father passed.

During the rapid slide, almost all of our discussions with her with focused on trying to encourage her, help her improve her focus and regain her mental faculties – not talking over things we would have said if we had known how soon we would not be able to get her to hear them though she was still present with us.

I learned first hand the truth ofsomething I had read years before and agreed with the concept in theory.

Someone who is so much a part of you NEVER dies. They go right on living inside of you.

I have had many “conversations” with my mom since her death. She is still here guiding me … and occasionally “poking” me when I want to slack off. :)

PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 3:35 PM

We are not winning these under-the-radar conflicts in one part because the government is NOT identifying them as an existential threats. Just the opposite — it is abetting them.

rrpjr on January 7, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Do you honestly believe that the middle east will be able to overpower the US culturally, militarily and economically? I’m not saying they don’t want to, just that they have as much chance of pulling that off as africa does. Yes, we need to be aware of the threat, but it’s not worth throwing off our whole constitution for some idiots from third world hell holes trying to bring the world back in time by 700 years.

Ya, you kind of lost that whole argument with the phrase “Undeclared” war.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:30 PM

As in, “not declared.” Afghanistan and Iraq were at least sort of declared by congress, libya was not at all. Congress has been slowly ceding war powers to the executive for decades, and I don’t think it’s a healthy trend. I think war is something we should not enter lightly, and if / when we do, we should use our military in overwhelming force, with a clearly defined mission, to destroy the enemy, and not “win their hearts and minds.” Endless offensive wars are not a staple of a free people.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 3:36 PM

We’ve got a boatload of anti-2nd here in Tucson, tomorrow. Jan.8 anniversary. Giffords, Barber,, the whole spread. Gun buy backs.

wolly4321 on January 7, 2013 at 3:37 PM

Endless offensive wars are not a staple of a free people.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 3:36 PM

But endless wars against the forces of tyranny are the destiny of Free People.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Yeah, Nazi’s were a far left political party. They hated the communists (another left wing political party) for a lot of reasons, including the communist disdain for national borders, and the fact that something liek 4 of the 6 communists leaders in germany at the time were jewish.

No, it was rather simpler than that- the Communists were the established competition. The Communist leaders being Jewish were just a happy (?) political coincidence.

BillH on January 7, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Ya, you to Timin203

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:32 PM

Ooh, lots of words. From a brief skimming, I don’t see anything I disagree with. I just have faith in our economic system and our cultural superiority and I lack faith in a system based on a crazy religion.

I’m not saying we should totally ignore the muslims and any threat they pose, but we should realize that, without oil, the middle east would be a forgotten part of the world. Technology and innovation will make their oil less and less necessary for the rest of the world, they will go completely broke, and their caliphate will collapse before it’s even formed.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 3:40 PM

Uhhhhh . . . . . is that legal ?

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 3:28 PM

.
Nope, but I sure as hell wouldn’t let that stop me if it were my moms last request.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:29 PM

.
Yeah, I guess there are “ways” around that. . : )
.
DISREGARD ME, ‘twerp.

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 3:34 PM


uhmmmmmm, the Gettysburg battlefield is very large.
Unless someone is planning on bringing a marching band along … something along the lines of what ALT’s mom wants should be relatively easy to do in a discrete fashion.

If you have never been, you should try to visit it when you can. I have been all over America and not even Washington, D.C. can compare with Gettysburg for giving you a first hand feel for the troubled history of this glorious country.

PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 3:41 PM

But endless wars against the forces of tyranny are the destiny of Free People.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Endless wars are unsustainable, period. At the very least not without a break while the nation waging it is no longer in danger of imminent collapse.

We are Rome trying to fight barbarians in Britannia while the government is run by the stupidest sons of wh0res imaginable and the capital city looks like something out of a soothsayer’s nightmare.

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 3:41 PM

We should go to all those gun buy backs, stand out in the parking lot with a sign that says, we’ll pay twice what the cops are paying for your weapon. Should be cheaper that way to pick up another gun.

Kissmygrits on January 7, 2013 at 3:42 PM

but we should realize that, without oil, the middle east would be a forgotten part of the world.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 3:40 PM

Now learn to face reality, they do have oil, and that oil and the immense wealth that come from it isn’t going away any time soon. Furthermore their religion and political system is and always was predicated upon their only means of achieving wealth and power being the violent conquest of those that had the resources to create their own wealth and power.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:43 PM

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Endless wars are unsustainable, period. At the very least not without a break while the nation waging it is no longer in danger of imminent collapse.

We are Rome trying to fight barbarians in Britannia while the government is run by the stupidest sons of wh0res imaginable and the capital city looks like something out of a soothsayer’s nightmare.

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 3:41 PM

If that is what you really believe, then go surrender to the nearest tyrant.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:45 PM

But endless wars against the forces of tyranny are the destiny of Free People.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Throughout most of the history of the world, including in most places today, tyranny is the status quo. It is not our job or our role to try to tame the rest of the world, if they want freedom, they can fight for it just like we had to. Our military should be used to defend our country, not promote our ideals, no matter how well intentioned.

No, it was rather simpler than that- the Communists were the established competition. The Communist leaders being Jewish were just a happy (?) political coincidence.

BillH on January 7, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Fine, my point was that there is not an idealogical reason why Nazi’s would have a problem with Communists. Marx identified (coined the phrase, I believe) socialism as the phase between capitalism and communism that countries would go through, where the government controlled / owned most means of production, but there was still some private ownership and trade.

The most right wing government ever founded was ours. If we insist on using the right / left scale, anarchy (no government) would be on the far right, with communism / socialism / progressivism / statism etc clustered on the far left. The scale goes from 0 government to 100% government control. I don’t see the political scale as some giant circle where the wise people occupy the smart part of the circle and libertarians and progressives are really indisguishable. Just because we happen to have some ideas in common, with totally different reasons for believing those ideas, doesn’t mean that liberalism and libertarianism are related.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 3:46 PM

Now learn to face reality, they do have oil, and that oil and the immense wealth that come from it isn’t going away any time soon. Furthermore their religion and political system is and always was predicated upon their only means of achieving wealth and power being the violent conquest of those that had the resources to create their own wealth and power.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:43 PM

They could be utterly insignificant within the decade if the west developed our own oil. There is no military in the middle east that would stand a chance of invading the US. And, as with socialism, eventually you run out of other peoples money. There is no industry or economy in the middle east divorced from persian rugs, and oil.

If that is what you really believe, then go surrender to the nearest tyrant.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:45 PM

That’s just stupid. We absolutely cannot afford to continue fighting wars around the world. If we are invaded by a tyrant, we should definitely defend ourselves, but Iraq and Afghanistan were / are of no significant military threat to us.

Pull our troops out from the middle east, europe, and asia, and force middle easterners, europeans and asians to shoulder the financial burden of their own defense.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 3:51 PM

Muslim countries constantly wage war against their own women, christians and jews. Saudi Arabia even makes it illegal to read our the bible in their country. There is no tolerance of other views in Muslim countries. Thus they have no problem forcing their views through Jihad. Some use political others violence but it is the duty of every single Muslim to wage Jihad. The holy books demand it.

Steveangell on January 7, 2013 at 3:16 PM

Ok. So?

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 3:51 PM

We’ve got a boatload of anti-2nd here in Tucson, tomorrow. Jan.8 anniversary. Giffords, Barber,, the whole spread. Gun buy backs.

wolly4321 on January 7, 2013 at 3:37 PM

Yeah. Good ol gun buy backs. Buy barely servicable rusted pos antiques, no questions asked so Baggy Pantorama can put it down on a new used chrome-sided Taurus. I mean like you know Baggy need a nice shiny tool for the night shift.

Little more than a government-run pawn shop subsidy. At least the lefties can sleep well at night knowing the muggers got upgrades.

ROCnPhilly on January 7, 2013 at 3:52 PM

But endless wars against the forces of tyranny are the destiny of Free People.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Throughout most of the history of the world, including in most places today, tyranny is the status quo. It is not our job or our role to try to tame the rest of the world, if they want freedom, they can fight for it just like we had to. Our military should be used to defend our country, not promote our ideals, no matter how well intentioned.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 3:46 PM

History obviously isn’t one of your stronger subjects. From the perspective of history we learn that tyrants are never content to grab and hold a small fiefdom. The endless wars against tyranny are the eternal struggle of Free People, because it is the only thing that keeps them a Free People.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:52 PM

Except that Dante ( like his beloved fuhrer Herr Doktor)believe that 9/11 was an inside job by the Evil Bushitler and his Sith master DarthCheney…

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 2:40 PM

But I don’t believe that at all. Why are you lying?

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 3:55 PM

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 3:34 PM

uhmmmmmm, the Gettysburg battlefield is very large. Unless someone is planning on bringing a marching band along … something along the lines of what ALT’s mom wants should be relatively easy to do in a discrete fashion.

If you have never been, you should try to visit it when you can. I have been all over America and not even Washington, D.C. can compare with Gettysburg for giving you a first hand feel for the troubled history of this glorious country.

PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 3:41 PM

.
I’ve been there three times (currently live about one hours drive),
and that’s exactly the way I feel about it, as well.

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 3:56 PM

3,000 dead Americans on 9/11/2001, as well as statements by the Islamists in the Middle East say you’re the one being fooled.

Mitoch55 on January 7, 2013 at 2:38 PM


I think you might be underestimating the 9/11 truther mentality’s stupidity …

… which conveniently ignores all the other radical Islamists other attacks on American facilties (first World Trade Tower, embassy bombings, etc) that pre-dated 9/11 and for which the terrorists continue to seek publicicity.

PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 3:56 PM

But I don’t believe that at all. Why are you lying?

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 3:55 PM


Why are you not seeking the professional psychiatric help you so desperately need?

PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 3:57 PM

If that is what you really believe, then go surrender to the nearest tyrant.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:45 PM

Go stick your face in a tree-shredder you John Wayne wannabe. It would take a brainwashed NeoCon like you to equate wanting to not be at war with EastAsia forever with ‘surrendering to the nearest tyrant’.

Except that Dante ( like his beloved fuhrer Herr Doktor)believe that 9/11 was an inside job by the Evil Bushitler and his Sith master DarthCheney…

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 2:40 PM

And now you’ve confirmed what we’ve suspected: you are an a$$hole of a Rushbot with the vocabulary of off-his-Meds-ved and the IQ of a brick.

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 3:59 PM

History obviously isn’t one of your stronger subjects. From the perspective of history we learn that tyrants are never content to grab and hold a small fiefdom. The endless wars against tyranny are the eternal struggle of Free People, because it is the only thing that keeps them a Free People.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:52 PM


If you truly want to confound him …

… ask him what he proposes with regard to China’s “South China Sea Prefecture” they have recently ‘created’.

PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 4:00 PM

History obviously isn’t one of your stronger subjects. From the perspective of history we learn that tyrants are never content to grab and hold a small fiefdom. The endless wars against tyranny are the eternal struggle of Free People, because it is the only thing that keeps them a Free People.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:52 PM

I have a fairly good grasp of history. I know that until Woodrow Wilson and the progressive foreign policy, Americans understood that the world is a dangerous and tyrannical place. We should lead by example, for sure. We can and should morally and even with weapons & money help others’ fighting for tyranny. And hell, you can go join foreign freedom fighters on the battle field if you want.

I don’t want to pay for it. Or send off young men to die in a foreign land to protect someone else’s freedom. Someone else who may or may not appreciate what we’re trying to do, and who may or may not end up blaming / hating us when we leave.

It’s impossible for us to go around the world and fix the myriad of problems, many of them hundreds if not thousands of years old. And even if we could, flexing that kind of muscle will not / does not make us too many friends. Why give up american blood and money for someone else?

If they want freedom, let them fight for it, earn it, and appreciate it as we have.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 4:00 PM

Sticking one’s head in the ground and ignoring the wrold around them and the effect that it has on your own country’s sovereignty, does not make one a “concervative”. It makes one an isolationist, in the tradition of World War II’s Father Conklin.

kingsjester on January 7, 2013 at 2:47 PM

No one is suggesting or advocating that at all. Learn the difference between isolationism and non-interventionism, and learn that interventionism is the foreign policy of progressivism, the foreign policy of Woodrow Wilson and FDR. Also, recognize that the State’s actions have consequences.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:01 PM

If you truly want to confound him …

… ask him what he proposes with regard to China’s “South China Sea Prefecture” they have recently ‘created’.

PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 4:00 PM

Well, we could let China’s neighbors worry about it and we ourselves could extradite ourselves from the situation before the shooting starts.

Orrrr… we can continue to fight everyone else’s battles with borrowed / printed money until our currency and military collapse in on itself and we’re left to be over-run by other countries who didnt squander blood and money interjecting themselves in to every disagreement around the world.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 4:03 PM

It’s impossible for us to go around the world and fix the myriad of problems, many of them hundreds if not thousands of years old. And even if we could, flexing that kind of muscle will not / does not make us too many friends.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 4:00 PM

Friends? We don’t need no friends! We’re Amurricuh! We can do everything all by ourselves!

/do I really need it

The outright arrogance of “We can solve it all” is just appalling. Yes, on some level, it’s a beautiful belief. I used to subscribe to it…when I was a small and idealistic child.

Then I grew up and learned about this thing called “limited resources, unlimited desires”.

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 4:03 PM

HEY … Dante !
.
Is the idea of us being “in jeopardy” simultaneously by Islamists and our own Government, too much for you to accept?

I believe that’s the “perfect storm” we’re facing.

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 4:03 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 7, 2013 at 2:33 PM

So sorry to hear that alt. Love & Prayers for you and yours at this trying time. Never easy to lose anyone you love. Strength, Courage and Grace to you.

bluefox on January 7, 2013 at 4:05 PM

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:43 PM

They could be utterly insignificant within the decade if the west developed our own oil. There is no military in the middle east that would stand a chance of invading the US. And, as with socialism, eventually you run out of other peoples money. There is no industry or economy in the middle east divorced from persian rugs, and oil.

If that is what you really believe, then go surrender to the nearest tyrant.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:45 PM

That’s just stupid. We absolutely cannot afford to continue fighting wars around the world. If we are invaded by a tyrant, we should definitely defend ourselves, but Iraq and Afghanistan were / are of no significant military threat to us.

Pull our troops out from the middle east, europe, and asia, and force middle easterners, europeans and asians to shoulder the financial burden of their own defense.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 3:51 PM

Wow, not only is history not one of your stronger subjects but apparently neither is logic.

First, there is no developing our own oil to the point that Middle Eastern oil will ever become insignificant. Crude oil is a internationally fungible commodity, no putting that genie back in the bottle no matter how much you might want to. Because of the incredibly vast amounts of crude in the Middle East they can and will continue to be able to dictate the world wide price of crude oil for decade if not centuries to come.

Second, America’s National Security interests do not stop at America’s national borders. The relative peace Europe has maintained for the last 70 years is directly attributable to American participation in NATO.

The United States of America is not an agrarian society and unless the entire world economy collapses it will never be one again. America’s might and wealth were built on manufacturing and international sales of manufactured products.

Moreover those involved in the Islamic move to recreate the Great Islamic Caliphate believe and aggressively practice the concept of asymmetrical warfare. That is a tactic that forgoes conventional armies, uniforms and declarations of war. Just like the vast quantities of crude oil in the Middle East, no amount of you not believing or wishing it to go away is going to cause that to happen.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:06 PM

They only want to disarm R/Cs and they only want to tax them too.

Schadenfreude on January 7, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Screw you, libertarian toad. And take your ridiculous political spectrum nonsense with you. The spectrum is actually circular, the far left and the far right meet on the backside. IT’s why I say there’s no significant difference between them in effect. They all want the same self-centered crap and the destruction of the status quo to achieve it.
It’s also why the left lies so hard about who the nazis were, choosing to focus solely on the right-fascist definition instead of acknowledging their actual socialist roots. And why the nazis were so anti-communist, in classic circular-firing squad style.
Hell their socialism is proven in their NAME. NAZI. Contraction of Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP). Which is National Socialist German Workers’ Party .

Anyway, take your corrupted and corrupting distortive labeling attempts and screw off. I’m not the least bit interested in the doper-Libertarian movement or its advocates. Their platform is asinine.

rayra on January 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM

Pure, unfettered ignorance.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:07 PM

3 Questions:

1.Seriously, you’re blaming America for what murderous Radical Muslims from another country did?

2.What are you doing that’s so terrible that you do not want anyone watching you walking down the street?

3. Do you wear your tin foil hat like Napoleon, from side to side, or like Adminiral Nelson, from front to back?

kingsjester on January 7, 2013 at 3:07 PM

As usual, you contribute absolutely nothing to a discussion.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:09 PM

Pure, unfettered ignorance.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:07 PM

You are the expert on it.

I notice how you never have any facts to counter…

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 4:10 PM

911 didn’t happen. 911 didn’t happen.911 didn’t happen. 911 didn’t happen.911 didn’t happen. 911 didn’t happen.911 didn’t happen. 911 didn’t happen.

Dante you’re so smart. Thanks.

CW on January 7, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Where did I say it didn’t happen? You’re making a straw man argument, and trying to mock someone’s intelligence?

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:11 PM

If that is what you really believe, then go surrender to the nearest tyrant.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:45 PM

Go stick your face in a tree-shredder you John Wayne wannabe. It would take a brainwashed NeoCon like you to equate wanting to not be at war with EastAsia forever with ‘surrendering to the nearest tyrant’.

Except that Dante ( like his beloved fuhrer Herr Doktor)believe that 9/11 was an inside job by the Evil Bushitler and his Sith master DarthCheney…

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 2:40 PM

And now you’ve confirmed what we’ve suspected: you are an a$$hole of a Rushbot with the vocabulary of off-his-Meds-ved and the IQ of a brick.

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 3:59 PM

Grow up and face reality. It aint pretty, it don’t work the way you want it to and it is just plain mean. I don’t listen to Rush or Medved, and one day, far in the future, when you finally grow an IQ, you can come discuss IQ’s with me.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:11 PM

As usual, you contribute absolutely nothing to a discussion.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:09 PM

As usual, you are reprehensible, and behave like the south end of a north-bound mule.

kingsjester on January 7, 2013 at 4:12 PM

The United States of America is not an agrarian society and unless the entire world economy collapses it will never be one again.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:06 PM

.
You appear to be more optomistic about the “entire world economy” than I am.

I believe there is an ‘orchestrated collapse’ coming.

That’s what Soros does best.

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 4:13 PM

She always said that after she died, she wanted her and my dad’s ashes scattered over the Gettysburg National battlefield.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 7, 2013 at 3:23 PM

Interesting.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Grow up and face reality. It aint pretty, it don’t work the way you want it to and it is just plain mean.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:11 PM

Well you got THAT part right at least.

Here’s reality:

Wars require money.
We are $16 trillion in debt and growing.
We will soon not have the money for anything from welfare to war.

Thus we can either have an orderly withdrawal while there’s time or a disorganized mess when it all hits the fan.

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 4:14 PM

Ya, you kind of lost that whole argument with the phrase “Undeclared” war.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Why? Don’t you advocate that government follow the Constitution? If not, my mistake.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Pure, unfettered ignorance.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:07 PM

.

As usual, you contribute absolutely nothing to a discussion.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:09 PM

.
As usual, you are bitter and cantankerous.

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM

But endless wars against the forces of tyranny are the destiny of Free People.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:38 PM

Endless wars are the result of a Federal Reserve that counterfeits money and the progressive income tax. Otherwise, they would never be paid for.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 2:46 PM

Wow.
Ok.
Well…so you’ve been waiting for to respond to a comment, right?
Just that it doesn’t seem you’re asking me a question.
But ok…
I (and many) don’t share your view of what the 2nd amendment means. I’d say my view more resembles Scalia’s Heller opinion…which while acknowledging that there is indeed a right, it isn’t unlimited. And the 2nd amendment doesn’t disallow reasonable restrictions.

You understand of course that many who, like yourself, consider themselves fully clear on what the 2nd means would view your caveats on fully autos to be ‘unconstitutional’.
Yet you are able to make a distinction and support a ‘restriction’ here.

verbaluce on January 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM

Ya, you kind of lost that whole argument with the phrase “Undeclared” war.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Why? Don’t you advocate that government follow the Constitution? If not, my mistake.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM

A formal “declaration of war” is not constitutionally required. See the minutes from the Constitutional Convention 17 August 1789.

If a Declaration of War was required, then Congress would or should have impeached Thomas Jefferson (1st Barbary War), James Madison, who wrote the COTUS (2nd Barbary War), every president from Zachary Taylor to Grover Cleveland (The Apache Wars, whose shortest respite was never more than 90 days), and William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt (Philippine-American War). And, those just get us to the turn of the 20th century.

Ron Paul is wrong and so is the Left, who screamed that Bush waged “illegal wars.” I was against the Iraq War and the Afghan ground war, but neither was illegal. The AUMFs were constitutionally sufficient.

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:01 PM

I understand the consequences of state intervention all too well, they are called RAMP ceremonies, and I have been to far too many in my lifetime. However I have also faced the very enemy that you seem to believe is not, and while I do not agree with the way we are executing the war on terrorism, the threat is real, and cannot be ignored.

MarshFox on January 7, 2013 at 4:20 PM

annoyinglittletwerp @ 3:23pm
listens2glenn @ 3:28pm

When Dad died he wanted to be spread around his favorite golf course. I’m sure that would have been frowned upon, but I played a round with my brother and discreetly whipped a handful around each tee and green (no traps, he HATED the sand).
It’s easily done.
Twerp, my heart goes out to you. You’re one of my favorite HA posters. Honor your Mother at Gettysburg. You’ll never regret it.

teacherman on January 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM

Someone who is so much a part of you NEVER dies. They go right on living inside of you.

I have had many “conversations” with my mom since her death. She is still here guiding me … and occasionally “poking” me when I want to slack off.
PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 3:35 PM

Well said. My brother, mother, aunt and father died consecutively each year beginning in 2004 and I never thought I’d get through it. I miss my parents every single day. Dad was a WWII vet and mom worked in a war plant. When I get tired of fighting this battle and watching my country decay in front of me, I remember how much they sacrificed. And I tell myself that if this country is going down, I won’t be waving a white flag. That’s how I honor them.

TxAnn56 on January 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM

If you truly want to confound him …

… ask him what he proposes with regard to China’s “South China Sea Prefecture” they have recently ‘created’.

PolAgnostic on January 7, 2013 at 4:00 PM

Absolutely nothing.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:24 PM

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:11 PM

Thus we can either have an orderly withdrawal while there’s time or a disorganized mess when it all hits the fan.

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 4:14 PM

OR… We could put an end to the insane Wilsonian practice of fixing every damned country we break. We pay a thousand time as much fixing countries that we wage war against as we pay to break them in the first place. The whole point behind waging a war, is to break things and kill people until the other side calls it quits.

If it becomes necessary for us to come to your country and break all your shit and kill all of your assholes, then you can damned well clean up the mess afterwards on your own dime.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:24 PM

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:11 PM

Thus we can either have an orderly withdrawal while there’s time or a disorganized mess when it all hits the fan.

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 4:14 PM

OR… We could put an end to the insane Wilsonian practice of fixing every damned country we break. We pay a thousand time as much fixing countries that we wage war against as we pay to break them in the first place. The whole point behind waging a war, is to break things and kill people until the other side calls it quits.

If it becomes necessary for us to come to your country and break all your $hit and kill all of your as$holes, then you can damned well clean up the mess afterwards on your own dime.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

verbaluce on January 7, 2013 at 2:47 PM

No, I’d just like for you to think/see, alas.

Schadenfreude on January 7, 2013 at 2:50 PM

Well that’d require you being able to think and see that I do…
Like Listens2Glenn – I support reasonable restrictions on the possession and use of firearms. It’s not an unreasonable or thoughtless position.
For that you need to look at arguments for banning any and all firearms or arguments supporting 100% unlimited access to any and all guns.
By the way…do you even have a position on this?

verbaluce on January 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

First, there is no developing our own oil to the point that Middle Eastern oil will ever become insignificant.

We have enough oil in the US, Canada, and south America to put enough slack in global supply to make the middle east irrelevent. If China develops their oil and Russia can develop their artic oil, there would be no reason to purchase from the middle east except convenience. If, simultaneously, the free market moves to natural gas from heating oil for home heating (as it is), that will drive down demand as well. No need to be so insulting, boss, you look up everything I’m saying.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Welcome to the Stout Hemp Rope Party…

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 1:46 PM

Aaah, jeez. Now we’re gonna have to listen to ‘genuine’ demand (and whine) that you run out right this very instant and start hangin’ reporters.
And it was such a nice day.

//

Solaratov on January 7, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 1:51 PM

You’re an idiot.

But then, you know that.

And act accordingly.

Solaratov on January 7, 2013 at 4:29 PM

If they want freedom, let them fight for it, earn it, and appreciate it as we have.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 4:00 PM

Slight problem: we had to get help from France, The Netherlands, and Spain in order to win the Revolutionary War. So, we didn’t do it on our own. Also, no one in the U.S. currently goes into battle without having first volunteered.

Side note: ALT, prayers for you & your family.

chelie on January 7, 2013 at 4:30 PM

A formal “declaration of war” is not constitutionally required. See the minutes from the Constitutional Convention 17 August 1789.

If a Declaration of War was required, then Congress would or should have impeached Thomas Jefferson (1st Barbary War), James Madison, who wrote the COTUS (2nd Barbary War), every president from Zachary Taylor to Grover Cleveland (The Apache Wars, whose shortest respite was never more than 90 days), and William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt (Philippine-American War). And, those just get us to the turn of the 20th century.

Ron Paul is wrong and so is the Left, who screamed that Bush waged “illegal wars.” I was against the Iraq War and the Afghan ground war, but neither was illegal. The AUMFs were constitutionally sufficient.

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 4:19 PM

I love it when people ignorantly trot out Jefferson and the Barbary War.

The Executive has the authority to repel attacks and invasions, and to respond to attack without Congressional approval, which is what happened under Jefferson in regards to Barbary. But a formal declaration of war is required by the Constitution. The AUMFs, however, meet that burden, actions under the War Powers Resolution do not; those are unconstituitonal.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:30 PM

OR… We could put an end to the insane Wilsonian practice of fixing every damned country we break. We pay a thousand time as much fixing countries that we wage war against as we pay to break them in the first place. The whole point behind waging a war, is to break things and kill people until the other side calls it quits.

If it becomes necessary for us to come to your country and break all your $hit and kill all of your as$holes, then you can damned well clean up the mess afterwards on your own dime.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

I’ll even support THIS if that’s what it takes to end our idiotic policy of intervening in every God-d@mned sandpit.

MelonCollie on January 7, 2013 at 4:30 PM

verbaluce on January 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

I will go you one better, nothing that the military has should be with held from ownership by the citizenship. I am sure that, that stance would seem somewhat extreme to you, but if we are going with the true spirit of what that amendment means, and for what it was written, than that is how it would be interpreted.

MarshFox on January 7, 2013 at 4:32 PM

First, there is no developing our own oil to the point that Middle Eastern oil will ever become insignificant.

We have enough oil in the US, Canada, and south America to put enough slack in global supply to make the middle east irrelevent. If China develops their oil and Russia can develop their artic oil, there would be no reason to purchase from the middle east except convenience. If, simultaneously, the free market moves to natural gas from heating oil for home heating (as it is), that will drive down demand as well. No need to be so insulting, boss, you look up everything I’m saying.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 4:27 PM

You keep predicating your assertions in utterly insane “if’s”. China doesn’t have any damned oil or they would be developing it. Same with India. The worlds growing population and the emergence of second and first world economies in Asia and Africa mean that demand for Middle Eastern oil is not going to diminish in your or my life times.

Furthermore the transition to natural gas in the United States is not going to substantially impact the United States consumption (or the rest of the worlds for that matter) of gasoline (the major commercial product of crude oil) for 50 or 60 years.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:35 PM

verbaluce on January 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

I will go you one better, nothing that the military has should be with held from ownership by the citizenship. I am sure that, that stance would seem somewhat extreme to you, but if we are going with the true spirit of what that amendment means, and for what it was written, than that is how it would be interpreted.

MarshFox on January 7, 2013 at 4:32 PM

I agree…that is extreme.

verbaluce on January 7, 2013 at 4:39 PM

Slight problem: we had to get help from France, The Netherlands, and Spain in order to win the Revolutionary War. So, we didn’t do it on our own. Also, no one in the U.S. currently goes into battle without having first volunteered.

Side note: ALT, prayers for you & your family.

chelie on January 7, 2013 at 4:30 PM

The other Europeans fought on our side for their own interest, we may or may not have eventually won without them. So what? The Europeans can help people then.

You keep predicating your assertions in utterly insane “if’s”. China doesn’t have any damned oil or they would be developing it. Same with India. The worlds growing population and the emergence of second and first world economies in Asia and Africa mean that demand for Middle Eastern oil is not going to diminish in your or my life times.

Furthermore the transition to natural gas in the United States is not going to substantially impact the United States consumption (or the rest of the worlds for that matter) of gasoline (the major commercial product of crude oil) for 50 or 60 years.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:35 PM

There is a ton of oil all over Asia, it’s just not right on the surface like in the middle east. With modern drilling, it’s no longer incredibly difficult to get. And if all of New Enland was burning gas instead of oil, that would slack the demand on diesel (not gasoline) but a lot. Us yankees burn a lot of diesel all winter in our basements. Most of New Enland is not piped up for gas yet.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 4:44 PM

Full auto being classified as class 3 is wrong. Full autos should be available to all citizens. No restrictions. Just because a law was made doesn’t make the law correct.

Bmore on January 7, 2013 at 4:46 PM

verbaluce on January 7, 2013 at 4:39 PM

I figured you might, that is why I put it out there, because when that amendment was written it was a direct repudiation of the tyrannical practices of disarming a populace from being able to rebel against the tyrant. They must them be able to arm themselves with the exact same weapons that they would face from the forces of the tyrant. Dan Morgan’s boys scared the crap out of the British because they had rifles, happened later as well down in NO with Jackson in the war of 1812. So while my first comment would seem extreme, in the context of the history in which it was written, that amendment has larger implications than it is being given in today’s society.

MarshFox on January 7, 2013 at 4:49 PM

I love it when people ignorantly trot out Jefferson and the Barbary War.

The Executive has the authority to repel attacks and invasions, and to respond to attack without Congressional approval, which is what happened under Jefferson in regards to Barbary. But a formal declaration of war is required by the Constitution. The AUMFs, however, meet that burden, actions under the War Powers Resolution do not; those are unconstituitonal.

Dante on January 7, 2013 at 4:30 PM

I love it when people ignorantly respond to posts as though they know what it is that they are talking about when they clearly do not.

Congress authorised the First Barbary War on 6 February 1802. It authorised the Second Barbary War on 10 May 1815.

A formal declaration of war is NOT REQUIRED. Again, see the minutes from the Constitutional Convention on 17 August 1789.

Thanks for playing.

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 4:53 PM

There is a ton of oil all over Asia, it’s just not right on the surface like in the middle east. With modern drilling, it’s no longer incredibly difficult to get. And if all of New Enland was burning gas instead of oil, that would slack the demand on diesel (not gasoline) but a lot. Us yankees burn a lot of diesel all winter in our basements. Most of New Enland is not piped up for gas yet.

Timin203 on January 7, 2013 at 4:44 PM

Not in CHINA there isn’t. That’s why china is buying up rights to everything they can get their hands on and why they have basically declared the entire South China Sea to be their property.

As for natural gas, infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure… What comes out of a barrel of crude oil.

Product

Gallons per barrel

gasoline

19.5

distillate fuel oil
(Includes both home heating oil and diesel fuel)

9.2

kerosene-type jet fuel

4.1

residual fuel oil
(Heavy oils used as fuels in industry, marine transportation and for electric power generation)

2.3

liquefied refinery gasses

1.9

still gas

1.9

coke

1.8

asphalt and road oil

1.3

petrochemical feedstocks

1.2

lubricants

0.5

kerosene

0.2

other

There are over 244 MILLION Gasoline fueled cars in America alone. The demand for Gasoline isn’t going anywhere even in your life time.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:55 PM

Forget Dante. He’s nobody to you.

BillH on January 7, 2013 at 3:14 PM

The kind of guy who can never understand why, 30 seconds into the conversation, the girl suddenly finds something else that demands her attention.

CurtZHP on January 7, 2013 at 4:57 PM

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 2:46 PM

.
Wow.
Ok.
Well…so you’ve been waiting for to respond to a comment, right?
Just that it doesn’t seem you’re asking me a question.
But ok…
I (and many) don’t share your view of what the 2nd amendment means. I’d say my view more resembles Scalia’s Heller opinion…which while acknowledging that there is indeed a right, it isn’t unlimited. And the 2nd amendment doesn’t disallow reasonable restrictions.

You understand of course that many who, like yourself, consider themselves fully clear on what the 2nd means would view your caveats on fully autos to be ‘unconstitutional’.
Yet you are able to make a distinction and support a ‘restriction’ here.

verbaluce on January 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM

.
YES … YES … YES ………. finally ………….
.
My apologies, all … I wasn’t intending to go all “Meg Ryan” on you, but it seems like I’ve been waiting forever for this, though it’s only been three weeks.
.
My belief on “full-auto” firearms, grenades, rocket launchers, napalm, thermite, “dirty-radiation” bombs, thermo-nuclear devices, etc. (this list can go on forever ) is that they should not be used by Civil Authorities in a “Police incident”.

I still haven’t learned exactly what the device was, that was dropped from Police-helocopter onto the structure that constituted the “MOVE” fortress, in Philadephia. If it was any device that is prohibited from civilian use, then they shouldn’t have used it.

These devices listed above are not capable of being controlled with precision-control by the user, when implemented.
The user of a full-auto firearm cannot control exactly where each individual projectile goes, down range. But a person using a semi-auto firearm can.

That’s why Civil Authorities shouldn’t be using full-auto weapons, either.
.
As for the rest of the argument, here’s my prefabricated “copy ‘n’ paste” statement:

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is not about the hobby, recreational, or sporting uses of firearms.
It is first and foremost about the common American citizen being enabled with the physical capability to be their own “first-line of defense” against our own government should it become a tyrant.
After that, it’s to help fight an invading enemy.
After that, comes self defense against common criminals.
After that, comes self defense against dangerous or nuisance animals.
Then … comes the recreational or “sporting” applications.

The Founding Fathers never intended, or even believed it was possible for “Professional Law Enforcement” to be the FIRST-LINE of defense for the American citizens. That premise applies in cities and towns as much as it does in “open country”.

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 4:58 PM

When Dad died he wanted to be spread around his favorite golf course. I’m sure that would have been frowned upon, but I played a round with my brother and discreetly whipped a handful around each tee and green (no traps, he HATED the sand).

teacherman on January 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM

.
I don’t golf, but my Dad and brothers all do. I’m going to forward that to them … they’ll get a good laugh out of it. . : )

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 5:02 PM

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Have you ever been introduced to The Mo Doctrine?

:-)

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 5:04 PM

When Dad died he wanted to be spread around his favorite golf course. I’m sure that would have been frowned upon, but I played a round with my brother and discreetly whipped a handful around each tee and green (no traps, he HATED the sand).

teacherman on January 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM

.
I don’t golf, but my Dad and brothers all do. I’m going to forward that to them … they’ll get a good laugh out of it. . : )

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 5:02 PM

My step-fathers ashes “Accidently” fell of the back of somebodies Harley… :wink wink:

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 5:04 PM

CurtZHP- it’s worse than that. He had the gaule to mouth off to someone that just told us their Mother died.

I just don’t see how it gets much lower.

wolly4321 on January 7, 2013 at 5:07 PM

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Have you ever been introduced to The Mo Doctrine?

:-)

Resist We Much on January 7, 2013 at 5:04 PM

I can live with most of that. The only difference being that I believe that we have a moral and ethical obligation to come to the aid of allied nations with which we have such treaties when our aid is requested. But other than that, yea, we neither are nor should be the worlds policemen. If those animals in the Middle East want to kill each other, let them do it right up until the second they start killing our citizens. Then yes, absolutely crush them.

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 5:10 PM

Gun ownership is the ultimate expression of personal responsibility and is iconic for a free society. A strong 2nd Amendment may very well be the one freedom that ensures our republic lasts another two hundred years.

Nexialist on January 7, 2013 at 5:11 PM

And I tell myself that if this country is going down, I won’t be waving a white flag. That’s how I honor them.

TxAnn56 on January 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM

There’s the spirit!

GWB on January 7, 2013 at 5:15 PM

GUNS:

The only Issue Ed Morrisey has any Conservative passion for.

(In all other cases…Little Johnny Boner and Co. move his mouth for him.)

Tim_CA on January 7, 2013 at 5:21 PM

And I tell myself that if this country is going down, I won’t be waving a white flag. That’s how I honor them.

TxAnn56 on January 7, 2013 at 4:23 PM

.
There’s the spirit!

GWB on January 7, 2013 at 5:15 PM

.
Dittos. I read her full comment above, and that line says it all.

listens2glenn on January 7, 2013 at 5:22 PM

GUNS:

The only Issue Ed Morrisey has any Conservative passion for.

(In all other cases…Little Johnny Boner and Co. move his mouth for him.)

Tim_CA on January 7, 2013 at 5:21 PM

And even on the issue of Guns he’s way to gun grabby for my tastes. o_O

SWalker on January 7, 2013 at 5:27 PM

if i were interested in what an alex jones listener, ron paul voter, 9/11 truther miscreant thinks of gun rights, or anything else, i could just go directly to prisonplanet.

sesquipedalian on January 7, 2013 at 5:30 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6