Liberty Minnesota

If King George’s troops had defeated the colonists, what would history books read today about our founders?

Would they be terrorists or radicals?

How much of our perception is based on the outcome?

If the South had successfully seceded and abolished slavery on their own, would you live today in the “free” South or the “federal” North?

Two revolutions, two outcomes. Two very different perceptions generations later.

From GOA this morning

Anti-gun ObamaCare on Life Support!
– ObamaCare needs one final stake through its heart

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://gunowners.org

Friday, January 22, 2010

Congratulations on a tremendous victory on Tuesday!  And thank you all for your help in getting Scott Brown elected to the U.S. Senate in Massachusetts.

Gun Owners of America was the first national gun lobby to endorse Brown, and with your aid, he was receiving more than one million dollars a day in his comeback win over anti-gun Martha Coakley.

With your help, Massachusetts — the bluest of blue states — has sent a message to Washington:  take your ObamaCare bill and shove it!

By a vote of 52% to 47%, Massachusetts voters sent anti-ObamaCare candidate Scott Brown to the Senate — defeating liberal icon Martha Coakley.  And D.C. Democrats are beginning to understand that GOP victories in New Jersey and Massachusetts are merely a precursor to the electoral bloodbath still to come in November.

Obama-Pelosi still committed to passing socialized health care

But has the prospect of losing two hundred congressional seats caused Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi to back off of their efforts to shove this bill down the throats of the American people?

Amazingly, no.

It”s like you stepped in something.  And, as much as you scrape and scrape the bottom of your shoe, you just can”t get rid of the smell.

At first, Pelosi’s strategy was to get the House to pass the Senate version of ObamaCare — verbatim — so that the bill goes straight to the Oval Office, without having to break another filibuster in the Senate (which no longer has a filibuster-proof majority).

Thankfully, there are SO MANY rank-and-file Democrats who have revolted against this strategy (Democrats who are scared to death of losing their seats) that Rep. Pelosi yesterday said the Senate bill is not viable… WITHOUT CHANGES.

“I don’t see the votes for [the Senate bill] at this time,” Pelosi said.  But note the words “at this time.”

Despite huge obstacles, Pelosi trying to resurrect ObamaCare

Pelosi did say there’s a “foundation in that bill” they can work with.  So Pelosi may just try to pass one big fix-up bill — using a “reconciliation” bill that will only need 51 votes when it goes to the Senate — or simply break up the Senate bill into smaller pieces and send those parts to the President.

But remember that the Senate health care bill which Pelosi now seeks to fix contains the following problems:

* It will allow BATFE to troll a health/gun database in order to take away firearms from tens of millions of Americans;

* It is jam-packed with billions of dollars of bribes paid to buy the votes of sleazy senators;

* It will impose a host of new taxes, force Americans to buy expensive insurance which they can’t afford, and increase insurance premiums in the individual market by 10 to 13%; and,

* It will continue the bankrupting of our country by increasing the deficit by half a trillion dollars, when the underhanded accounting tricks are discounted.

You can be sure that most, if not all, of these problems will be left untouched.

ACTION: So please contact your Representative.  Tell him or her to vote against the bribe-filled Senate ObamaCare bill, and that no amount of “fixing” will make this bill acceptable.  The Senate already tried to fix the gun problems in the bill but failed miserably.

You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send a pre-written message to your Representative.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Representative:

You are being urged by Nancy Pelosi to dive into the Senate’s moral cesspool and pass its ObamaCare bill — either cut up in pieces or, as a whole, accompanied by a “fix up” reconciliation bill.

If you do this, the Massachusetts results are just the faintest of forebodings of the electoral bloodbath which will erupt in November.

The American people have made it clear they do not want Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to cram this bill down our throats.  And yet, Pelosi delusionally concludes that the path to electoral success is to keep cramming and cramming and cramming and cramming.

In case you have forgotten, the Senate ObamaCare bill:

* Will allow BATFE to troll a health/gun database in order to take away firearms from tens of millions of Americans;

* Is jam-packed with billions of dollars of bribes paid to buy the votes of sleazy senators;

* Will impose a host of new taxes, force Americans to buy expensive insurance which they can’t afford, and increase insurance premiums in the individual market by 10 to 13%; and,

* Will continue the bankrupting of our country by increasing the deficit by half a trillion dollars, when the accounting tricks are discounted.

Please tell me now that you oppose this bill and that no amount of “fix up” will make it acceptable.  The Senate already tried to fix the gun problems in the bill but failed miserably.  It’s time to pull the plug on ObamaCare.

Sincerely,

---

Second Amendment March

Check out the Second Amendment March speakers lineup.  In addition to GOA’s Larry Pratt, confirmed speakers include: Former Texas state Representative Suzanna Hupp (a survivor of the Luby’s massacre), Sheriff Richard Mack, Stewart Rhodes of Oath Keepers and many others.

Find out more at: http://www.secondamendmentmarch.com

---

Please do not reply directly to this message, as your reply will bounce back as undeliverable.

To subscribe to free, low-volume GOA alerts, go to: http://www.gunowners.org/ean.htm. Change of e-mail address may also be made at that location.

To unsubscribe send a message to gunowners_list@capwiz.mailmanager.net with the word unsubscribe in the subject line or click on the link at bottom.

Problems, questions or comments? Please visit  http://gunowners.net/cgi-bin/ttx.cgi?cmd=newticket or call 703-321-8585 during normal east coast business hours.

There is a common phrase that “you can’t legislate morality.”  Here I will touch on why this is no longer the case.

In conversation with my wife the other day I defined myself as a libertarian (small ‘l’). The thought then raced through my head that in saying I am a libertarian I in no way want to be associated with Libertarians as there is no liberty in killing the unborn.

So I got to thinking.  Do I really believe in liberty?  Do I really believe that people should be able to do as they please as long as it doesn’t harm or intrude on anyone else?  — That has always been my definition of liberty.

Merriam-Webster gives us:

lib·er·ty
Pronunciation:
\?li-b?r-t?\
Function:
noun

1: the quality or state of being free: a: the power to do as one pleases b: freedom from physical restraint c: freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d: the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e: the power of choice

Perhaps here it is defined in the view of the individual and not a group.  Certainly if someone can do anything they please, there is the potential for the people around them to not be free or have liberty.  Without a context of freedom and rights, this definition makes no sense.

So where do we get “freedom” and “rights”?  From Thomas Jefferson’s pen we know that:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

From the Declaration of Independence we understand that these rights, which cannot be taken away, are from our Creator.  Certainly as our lives have been created we have the right to pursue those lives unobstructed.  I say unobstructed because if your pursuit of life and happiness forcibly takes life or happiness away from others, we no longer have common liberty.

So what if your neighbor’s pursuit of happiness is to have homosexual relations in his front yard in plain sight?  Or yell obscenities only when children are near?  Should one’s own pursuit of happiness include a constant effort to shield your family from the pursuit of others?  Or is there a common ground?
It is well known that John Adams stated:

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

So what is a “moral and religious people”?  And why did he yoke the two together inseparable?

Again Merriam-Webster tells us:

mor·al
Pronunciation:
\?mo?r-?l, ?mär-\

1 a: of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical b: expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior c: conforming to a standard of right behavior d: sanctioned by or operative on one’s conscience or ethical judgment e: capable of right and wrong action

and

re·li·gious
Pronunciation:
\ri-?li-j?s\

1: relating to or manifesting faithful devotion to an acknowledged ultimate reality or deity

So what Adams was saying is that the structure of government defined in our constitution only works if the people under the government know the difference between right and wrong and are held to judgment for actions under an ultimate reality (in some cases God).

So where does this leave us with our homosexual neighbor or the profanity slinger?  Are their actions right or wrong?  And who is to decide?  What is the ultimate measure of right and wrong?

For those who believe in the Pentateuch or Torah  the Ten Commandments are a guide.  For the Christians, Jesus narrowed the commandments down to:

36″Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37Jesus replied: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

But where does an atheist or agnostic get any sense of morality?  The answer is they don’t.  At least they don’t necessarily have a sense of right and wrong that is generally accepted.  Since they don’t answer to an ultimate reality they are allowed to create their own morality.  Since creating your own sense of right and wrong wouldn’t necessarily adhere to any principles or morality, I’ll call their morality pseudo-morality.  Without an ultimate reality, those with a pseudo-morality require that the government step in to serve the role of judge.  It is for those without God that we need to create legislation to define morality. How else would we protect the liberty of others from the pseudo morality of the homosexual neighbors.

In considering liberty and legislation, it is out of morality that we do not do that which may impose on the liberty and pursuit of happiness for others.  The moral person knows not to drive twice the speed limit while drunk because this may impose on the pursuit of happiness for others.  However, the pseudo-moral could claim they receive all their happiness from such actions.  Firing a weapon into a crowd may not injure anyone; however, there is the chance it would and we need to legislate to control those without the moral compass to know this is wrong.  If the government requires $10,000 per year per person to meet its obligations, who would pay this tab?  Only those who felt morally obligated would submit their taxes without legislation.

So with regard to the phrase you can’t legislate morality: if one is not to legislate morality, what else would one legislate? And it is true that we can not have liberty without a defined morality for all.

Congress is moving closer to a showdown over the largest expansion of
government in modern U.S. history — a bill which would require
virtually every single American to buy government-approved health
insurance, whether they wanted it or not.  And, in the process, that
bill would feed all of your most confidential medical data into an
enormous database, which could be used to take away your guns.

This is a bit complicated.  But here’s where we are:

Once a year, the 1974 Budget Act allows Congress to pass a bill –
solely for the purpose of balancing the budget — and that bill cannot
be filibustered in the Senate.  Hence, it can be passed with only fifty
Democrat votes (plus the vice president), without any Republican
support.

Now, that supposed “budget-balancing bill” is called the “reconciliation
bill” — and it can only be created if the annual budget resolution
mandates it.

Three weeks ago, the Senate considered its version of the annual budget
resolution.  Gun Owners of America asked you to oppose passage of the
Senate version of the budget resolution for two reasons:

* First, although the Senate version of the bill did not contain
language mandating the giant anti-gun database and the huge $10,000+
per person government health mandate, the Pelosi-devised House version
did.

* Second, although Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND)
protested mightily that the Senate version did not mandate the anti-gun
database and health mandate, GOA found out that Conrad intended all
along to capitulate in House/Senate conference to the Pelosi language.

Now, the budget resolution has come back from conference, and guess
what?

Budget Chairman Conrad stabbed us in the back, just as GOA thought he
would.  His actions meant that Senators didn’t have to go on record
voting for gun control the first time around.

The conference report gives Senate and House Republicans until September
to cave in and agree to pass the anti-gun database and $10,000+ health
mandate.  And, if they do not, the Left Wing Democratic leadership will
pass their own bill with 50 Senate votes — and no Republicans.

And, incidentally, when we say “anti-gun database,” we mean that
everything your kid told his pediatrician about whether you have a gun
collection will be searchable by the government.  And people with
Alzheimer’s, ADHD, and other disorders will begin losing their gun
rights just as quickly as veterans — who have seen the ramifications of
being on a government database.

Although the next vote on this budget resolution will not be the final
battle in this eight-month war, GOA is asking senators and
representatives to vote against the sleazy, corrupt budget resolution
conference report — scheduled for a Senate vote this Wednesday.

Incidentally, the one thing that the federal government can do to reduce
health costs is to remove the anti-gun federal laws which prohibit more
Americans from using firearms to defend themselves and their families.

ACTION:

Contact your senators and representative.  Ask them to vote against the
“fraud scheme” which the budget resolution conference report has become.

Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your legislators the
pre-written e-mail message below.

You can also call them toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear

The budget resolution conference report would set the stage for
legislation to require virtually every American to purchase
government-approved health insurance.  And it would use government
control over health insurance to require providers to feed our most
confidential medical data into an anti-gun government database.

When I say “anti-gun database,” I mean that everything a kid tells his
pediatrician about his dad’s gun collection will be searchable by the
government.  And people with Alzheimer’s, ADHA, and other disorders will
begin losing their gun rights just as quickly as veterans — who have
seen the ramifications of being on a government database for the last
decade.

The budget resolution was sold to the Senate under a lie.  Senators were
told that the Senate version contained no “reconciliation instructions”
when, all along, Budget Chairman Kent Conrad intended to immediately
capitulate in conference.

Please show that such underhanded tactics are unacceptable in the
Congress.  Please vote against the budget resolution conference report.

Sincerely,

GOA

First, Senator Arlen Specter provided the instrumental Republican
support to get anti-gun Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed by the
Senate.

Then, he singlehandedly pushed through the massive economic bailout, the
so-called stimulus bill, which contained several provisions of concern
to gun owners.

So it comes as no surprise that liberal anti-gun Specter, who has no
loyalty to the Constitution, also has no loyalty to the political party
that elected him.  Specter announced this week that he will leave the
Republican Party and run as a Democrat in 2010.

Specter’s announcement comes only after poll after poll showed him
trailing pro-gun conservative Pat Toomey in a Republican primary.

Specter thinks that changing parties will improve his chances of winning
next year.

What he’s going to learn is that the voters of Pennsylvania are much
more concerned about their Constitutional rights than they are with what
political party a candidate belongs to.

Every time Attorney General Eric Holder opens his mouth and talks about
reinstating the Clinton gun ban, gun owners know they have Arlen Specter
to thank.

Back in early January, Sen. Specter said he had “grave concerns” about
Eric Holder.  He made it sound like he was going to join other pro-gun
Senators and oppose the Holder nomination.

Specter was only putting on a show.

After pretending to oppose Eric Holder, Sen. Specter provided the key
support that brought the nomination to the floor of the Senate.

Why the big switch?

Simple.  When it looked like Specter was going to face a primary
challenge from a real conservative, he talked tough and made it look
like he was opposed to Holder.  Then for a while, it appeared that
Specter would not have a serious challenge, so Specter flip-flopped and
decided not to oppose Holder.

With people like Specter in office, it’s no wonder our gun rights are in
such jeopardy.

At least gun owners have a clear choice in the next election.  Former
Congressman Pat Toomey has again taken up the conservative, pro-gun
mantle and will challenge the liberal incumbent.

Visit http://www.toomeyforsenate.com/contribute to support Pat Toomey
for Senate.

Together, we can defeat the Senate’s most dangerous turncoat and replace
him with a real Second Amendment defender.

Specter was one of three Republicans whose vote was needed to pass the
bailout.  When one of the other two Senators expressed reservations,
good old Arlen Specter stepped in and brought that Senator “back in
line.”

Without Specter, there would be no $1 TRILLION bailout.

Really, by the time debt services and other frills of the “socialism
bill” are accounted for, the cost will be over $3 TRILLION!

The debt foisted upon us by Arlen Specter will be passed on to
succeeding generations, AND the bailout is being used as a tool of the
anti-gun left.

You see, the bailout bill contains provisions that can fund anti-gun
activist organizations like ACORN and Moveon.org to the tune of hundreds
of millions — even billions — of your taxpayer dollars.

The bailout also contains provisions to require your doctor to
retroactively put your confidential medical records in a government
database.  Medical records have already been used to deny about 200,000
military veterans their Second Amendment rights, and that situation will
be made worse for all citizens thanks to the Specter bailout bill.

Perhaps no single Senator is negatively affecting the future of this
country more than Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter.

Please help Gun Owners of America make this Specter’s last term in
office by supporting Pat Toomey for Senate at:
http://www.toomeyforsenate.com/contribute

Rep. Toomey challenged Specter in a primary in 2004 with the support of
Gun Owners of America, and came just 1.7% short of winning.

Specter’s bacon was pulled out of the fire only after the incumbent
Senator, President Bush and even, unfortunately, some in the gun rights
community campaigned on his behalf at the last minute.

Well, Senator Specter has sold out the people of Pennsylvania and
conservatives across the nation for the last time.

At the same time we get rid of an enemy of gun rights, we can also help
to elect an ardent supporter of the Second Amendment.

Pat Toomey served in the U.S. House of Representatives for three terms,
before honoring a self-imposed term limit and retiring in 2004.

Rep. Toomey was “A” rated by Gun Owners of America during his time in
Congress.  Even though he was supposedly “too conservative” for the
eastern Pennsylvania district he represented, Toomey stood firm on his
pro-Second Amendment principles.

Unlike Arlen Specter, there was no waffling on the issues concerning
your gun rights.

Gun Owners of America knows from experience that when we’re in the
trenches battling the anti-gunners over reinstating the semi-auto gun
ban, closing down gun shows and funding liberal leftist organizations,
Pat Toomey will be with us shoulder to shoulder.

But first he has to defeat Specter, an anti-gun
Republican-turned-Democrat with millions of dollars in the bank and lots
of new liberal friends ready to give him more.

Gun Owners of America calls on sportsmen and gun owners in Pennsylvania
and across the country to stand with us to defeat Arlen Specter and to
elect Pat Toomey to the U.S. Senate.

Please make the most generous contribution possible to Pat Toomey for
Senate at http://www.toomeyforsenate.com/contribute on the web.

If you prefer to contribute by check, make your check payable to “Toomey
for Senate” and mail to: PO Box 220, Orefield, PA 18069.

Or, you can call the campaign at 484-809-7994 to contribute by phone.

Pat Toomey stands 100% in favor of your gun rights.  Together, let’s
stand with Pat Toomey in this crucial election.

Sincerely,

Tim Macy
Vice Chairman

Friends,

As I mentioned in my last email, we had a temporary success when Rep. Paymar could not muster the votes needed to put his anti-Second amendment provisions on to another bill in committee several weeks ago.  Unfortunately, Rep. Paymar has not given up in his effort to erode our Second Amendment rights.

Last night in the House Finance Committee, Rep. Paymar offered an amendment to the Omnibus Game and Fish Bill that would severely limit private citizens’ ability to sell or transfer firearms at gun shows.  Unfortunately, the amendment went on to the bill.  I spoke against and voted against the amendment, but we were out numbered.  Thankfully, Rep. David Dill, the author of the bill and a pro-Second Amendment legislator, decided to “table” the bill after the amendment went on so the bill did not get voted out of committee.

We need to remain ever vigilant on this critical issue.  I can assure you that I’ll continue to work on your behalf here in St. Paul.

My wife forwarded this email to me today.  It speaks for itself

Guess our national leaders didn’t expect this, hmm? On Thursday, Darrell Scott, the father of Rachel Scott, a victim of the Columbine High School shootings in Littleton , Colorado , was invited to address the House Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee. What he said to our national leaders during this special session of Congress was painfully truthful.

They were not prepared for what he was to say, nor was it received well. It needs to be heard by every parent, every teacher, every politician, every sociologist, every psychologist, and every so-called expert! These courageous words spoken by Darrell Scott are powerful, penetrating, and deeply personal. There is no doubt that God sent this man as a voice crying in the wilderness. The following is a portion of the transcript:

“Since the dawn of creation there has been both good & evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out f or answers.

“The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used. Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain’s heart.

“In the days tha t followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA - because I don’t believe that they are responsible for my daughter’s death. Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel’s murder I would be their strongest opponent..

I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy — it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best.

Your laws ignore our deepest needs,
Your words are empty air.
You’ve stripped away our heritage,
You’ve outlawed simple prayer.
Now gunshots fill our classrooms,
And precious children die.
You seek for answers everywhere,
And ask the question “Why?”
You regulate restrictive laws,
Through legislative creed.
And yet you fail to understand,
That God is what we need!

” Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, mind, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational
Systems for most of our nation’s history.. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact. What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine’s tragedy occurs — politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws. Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.

“As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes, he did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America , and around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him. To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA — I give to you a sincere challenge.. Dare to examine your
Own heart before casting the first stone!

My daughter’s death will not be in vain! The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!”

Do what the media did not - - let the nation hear this man’s speech.. Please send this out to everyone you can. God Bless

I did not attend a tea party yesterday.  I was busy working on my taxes all day and during that time contemplated weather or not to go.  In the end I decided not to.  Not because I don’t believe in the movement but because I don’t think the people supporting it provide any support for real reform.

Let me explain.  I’ve heard numbers in the press and from attendees that there were anywhere from 2,000-10,000 people in attendance on the capital grounds in St. Paul yesterday.

Last year, across all of Minnesota, only 9174 people found the courage to place their presidential votes for the Barr & Root (Libertarian) ballot and only 6787 voted for Baldwin & Castle (Constitution).  The sum of all these votes represents only 15,961 ballots cast for any party that really represents the kind of change the attendees are looking for.   This is barely 1/2 a percent (0.55%) of all ballots cast in the state.

So who were the protesters?  I’m sure some of them actually did support and vote for an actual small government ticket such as Barr or Baldwin.  However, I think the media is largely correct in that these are disgruntled Republicans supporters who only find principles when their representatives are out of power.  But when they are in power, they tax and spend just like the Democrats.  How can you vote for a big government ticket such as McCain / Palin then 5 months later attend a tea party bashing the policies your ticket stood for?

I’ll believe there is a movement when all those who took the time to show up yesterday quit making signs to protest and start voting their supposed new found principles.  They need to realize their votes for McCain only sent the message to Washington that they approve of the big government path.  The tea parties are useless if your not ready to start voting on constitutional principles.

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”
John Quincy Adams

The White House yesterday released the Federal 1040 form for the President and First lady.  At first glance it becomes quite apparent why the president speaks so much about fairness.

The Obamas had an Adjusted Gross Income of nearly $2.7M and $172k in charitable gifts.  That is a giving rate of 6.4%

Former President George W. Bush’s 2006 Federal 1040 shows an AGI of $643k and charitable contributions of $78k.  That folk is 12% nearly double the giving of Obama and only less than a quarter of the income.

So why does Obama feel so strongly that we need to legislate fairness?  It seems quite apparent that he is incapable of giving out of his own heart.  Aparently everybody should be forced to give instead of having the choice to give.  Right now Obama has the choice and he apparently is saying he’d rather keep the money.

There is much to learn from Jesus’s parable of the rich man

Matthew 19:16-24 (New International Version)

The Rich Young Man

¹⁶Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

¹⁷“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.”

¹⁸“Which ones?” the man inquired.

Jesus replied, ” ‘Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, ¹⁹honor your father and mother,’^[a] and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’^[b]”

²⁰“All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

²¹Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

²²When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

²³Then Jesus said to his disciples, “I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. ²⁴Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

Now that Obama has some wealth it is apparent he is choosing the path of the camel trying to get through the eye of the needle on his way to heaven.

Why didn’t we need all these new taxes and this big government 200 years ago?  Because people contributed to society from their heart.  Communities came together for the general good.  Today people like the Obamas think they are above giving and contributing but they feel they can force the rest of us to contribute through legislation to make the world fair.

The Obama’s have been blessed in recent years with incredible income from book sales.  Yet they can’t find it in their own hearts to help those in need with what ultimately belongs to God anyhow.

The same goes for Warren Buffet.  If he has a guilty conscience because he only pays 17% in Federal income taxes, why doesn’t he find a nice food shelter, church, the list goes on, to contribute to until 30, 40, 50, 70% of his income is given away?  Right now he has that power but instead he decides to impose his will on others to clear his conscience.

We don’t need a Federal Government to tell us it’s ok to give to those with less.  That is the problem with this country today.  Everybody feels guilty about those who go without but everybody looks to the Federal Government to do something about it.

Giving 6% on an income of $2.7M and Obama is complaining about others not doing enough?  That we live in a new era of responsibility?  What ever happened to leading by example?

Of course only a couple years ago, the Obamas were only giving 0-1% to charity.  So maybe there is hope for them yet.

Not sure how far it will go this year but a House and Senate “stand your ground” bill is making some moves.  Next year being an election year may see better results but it’s nice to see them introduced.  Doesn’t mean it’s too early to contact your Reps and let them know you’re behind it.

Due to nonsense legislation like this, I can now carry my firearms anywhere in the state except for schools, Federal buildings and the woods by my house – make sense of that.

From GOA

As Lands Bill Fight Ends
– Greater battles over gun rights loom

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

In March, both the U.S. House and Senate finished up work on a massive,
anti-gun $10 billion omnibus federal land bill.

The bill had been held up for over a year in large part due to GOA
members fighting for Second Amendment rights on federal land — YOUR
land.

The Second Amendment has been null and void for many years on all land
controlled by the National Park Service (NPS).  While regulations
promulgated in the waning days of the Bush administration partially
reversed that gun ban, a federal judge recently blocked those rules from
taking effect.

GOA worked closely with pro-gun members of the House and Senate to add a
complete repeal of the NPS gun prohibition to the larger land bill.
While these efforts delayed passage of the bill, in the end the anti-gun
congressional leadership teamed up with “pro-gun” compromisers and
passed the measure without protecting the Second Amendment.

In an effort to appease gun owners, language was added to the bill to
protect hunting and fishing.  But, as GOA pointed out to the Congress,
the Founding Fathers did not pledge their lives, fortunes and sacred
honor to protect a recreational pastime.

The final attempt to protect the Second Amendment from NPS bureaucrats
came on a procedural vote in the House that would have made in order an
amendment, sponsored by pro-gun Reps. Doc Hastings (R-WA) and Rob Bishop
(R-UT), to repeal the gun ban.  That motion failed by a vote of 242-180.

So now not only does the gun ban remain in place, the new bill greatly
expands the total amount of NPS land.  Since NPS-controlled parks and
trails also include many busy roadways, hundreds of thousands of gun
owners can unwittingly find themselves in violation of the gun ban
without even knowing they are on federal land.

Representatives Hastings and Bishop, along with Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA),
have vowed to continue their efforts to wipe this unconstitutional gun
ban from the books.  In the Senate, Tom Coburn (R-OK) is also pushing
for the repeal of the anti-gun NPS regulations.

Gun Owners of America would like to thank the thousands upon thousands
of email subscribers who repeatedly contacted their congressmen in this
battle to protect the Second Amendment.  We were sold out by
compromisers this time, but we will “remember in November” those who
voted against the Second Amendment.

Please help spread the word so we can get even more people contacting
their elected officials.  As the late Senator Everett Dirksen said,
“When I feel the heat, I see the light.”

And do we ever need to turn up the heat!

Many important battles for your Second Amendment rights lay before us.
For instance, Barack Obama and his anti-gun cronies are making a massive
push to renew the Clinton semi-auto ban.

The President and his Attorney General, Eric Holder, are blaming the
current violence among Mexican drug cartels on firearms from the United
States.  This is another blatant attempt by anti-gun advocates to use
whatever situation they can find to further erode your Second Amendment
rights.

The problems of corruption and violence in Mexico should not be used as
an excuse to curtail your right to keep and bear arms.  But once again
law-abiding American gun owners are in danger of being punished for the
criminal actions of others.

The Clinton gun ban is just one of the attacks that you and GOA will be
fighting.

There is also a massive anti-gun bill in Congress, H.R. 45, that
includes universal gun owner licensing and registration, and the Obama
White House continues its efforts to ban private firearms transactions
at gun shows.

You can help us reach out to even more gun owners.   Please forward this
message to your friends and encourage them to sign up for the GOA email
alerts.

And if you haven’t already become a member of GOA, consider joining.
For a small amount of money such as $35, $50 or $100, you can join with
other Americans to save our Constitutional rights.  Visit
www.gunowners.org to join GOA today.

Thank you again for being part of the GOA team working to protect
American liberty.

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

Please do not reply directly to this message, as your reply will
bounce back as undeliverable.

To subscribe to free, low-volume GOA alerts, go to
http://www.gunowners.org/ean.htm on the web. Change of e-mail
address may also be made at that location.

Dear Marc:

Thank you for letting me know of your support for H.R. 1207, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act.

Like you, I am concerned about transparency and accountability issues surrounding the Federal Reserve.  This is especially true at this time when the Federal Reserve is exercising the “unusual circumstances” authority it was given when established and expanding its balance sheet to over $2 trillion and possibly more.

That’s why I am a cosponsor and supporter of H.R. 1207, which would provide for an audit of the Fed’s books and expand public knowledge of the workings of the central bank, among other common sense reforms.

Thanks again for sharing your concerns, as I appreciate hearing from you.  Please let me know whenever I can be of assistance.

Sincerely,

Erik Paulsen
Member of Congress

Smart Polics brings us an analysis of the latest SurveyUSA poll on Obama’s approval ratings.

SurveyUSA’s latest round of approval ratings for President Barack Obama have been released for a dozen states across the country, in polling conducted March 20-22 of 600 adults in each state.

Although the President has had a consistently higher job performance rating during the first three months of his tenure in states such as New York, Massachusetts, California, and Washington, in no state have Obama’s early supporters been as faithful as those in the State of Minnesota.

From January (64 percent) to March (61 percent), Obama has only lost 4.7 percent of his support in the Gopher State, the lowest of the 12 states polled each month by SurveyUSA. Obama received an approval rating of 62 percent in February in Minnesota.

By contrast, Obama has lost support among Wisconsinites at more than 5 times this rate. Falling at a 24.3 percent clip since his inauguration, the President has seen his approval rating drop from 70 percent in January to 53 percent in March in the Badger State – the largest dip across the 12 states. Obama’s approval rating fell 11.7 percent since February (60 percent).

Obama is also seeing a larger than average erosion of early supporters in Iowa, where 57 percent now approve of the job he is doing as president, down 16.2 percent from January (68 percent) – the third largest drop in support among the 12 states polled by SurveyUSA. The President’s job approval rating fell 9.5 percent since February in the Hawkeye State (63 percent).

Erosion of Approval for Barack Obama’s Performance as President

Rank	State	January	March	% Change
1	Minnesota	64	61	-4.7
2	New York	78	72	-7.7
3	Kentucky	62	56	-9.7
4	Washington	69	62	-10.1
5	Virginia	62	55	-11.3
6	Kansas	62	55	-11.3
7	Missouri	65	57	-12.3
8	Massachusetts	78	68	-12.8
9	California	77	67	-13.0
10	Iowa	68	57	-16.2
11	Alabama	60	47	-21.7
12	Wisconsin	70	53	-24.3
	Average	68.0	59.2	-12.9

Note: As of post time, SurveyUSA had not yet released numbers for two states polled in its January and February rounds – New Mexico and Oregon.

Interestingly, Obama’s support is holding much stronger in states like Kentucky (56 percent, 9.7 percent drop), and Kansas (55 percent, 11.3 percent drop) – states in which Obama received only 41 and 42 percent of the presidential vote respectively.

Obama currently has an approval rating that is 15 points higher in Kentucky than the vote he received for president in that state. In Kansas the President is currently +13. Minnesota ranks in the middle of the pack with the President’s approval rating (61 percent) resting 7 points higher than his vote tally on Election Day (54 percent).

Only the State of Wisconsin finds Obama with a lower approval rating today (53 percent) than his statewide vote last November (56 percent) among these dozen states.

Obama Presidential Vote Share vs. March Approval Ratings

Rank	State	Vote	Approval	Difference
1	Kentucky	41	56	15
2	Kansas	42	55	13
3	New York	63	72	9
4	Alabama	39	47	8
5	Missouri	49	57	8
6	Minnesota	54	61	7
7	Massachusetts	62	68	6
8	California	61	67	6
9	Washington	57	62	5
10	Iowa	54	57	3
11	Virginia	53	55	2
12	Wisconsin	56	53	-3

Note: As of post time, SurveyUSA had not yet released numbers for two states polled in its January and February rounds – New Mexico and Oregon.

This reminds me of that November morning in 1984 when the Star Tribune printed a map of a red United States with only a lonely blue Minnesota.  What can we expect from the state that elects a wrestler and failed comedian to office.

I found an old documentary from 1994.  Larry Pratt hosts and discusses many historical issues regarding the constitution, founding fathers and of course the second amendment.

This week Secretary of State Hillary Clinton jumped on with Atorney General Eric Holder and President Obama’s statements that American gun stores are supplying weapons to Mexican drug trafficers.

“Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police officers, soldiers and civilians.” Said Sec. Clinton.

Meanwhile a Zogby poll conducted this week reveals that only 6% of those Americans  responding to the poll agree that U.S. gun stores are contributing.  Leaving 94% of the population un convinced by the recent retoric from the new administration.

Who is really at fault in the recent AIG fraud?  The people of this country and the Congress are being convinced the Government had to step in because the ramifications were global and the image of the U.S. would suffer.

When a U.S. corporation sells internationally, who is responsible for the purchases?  Does the buyer not have to do their due diligence because they can assume a U.S. corporation is legitimate?  Even domestically can we really rely on the government to protect us in every purchase?  And if that was the goal of government (which it isn’t), shouldn’t we or other countries be able to demand retribution from the government when we are wronged?

This is exactly the path we are going down with AIG and it is a very scary precedent to be setting.  To what end do we expect and hold the government accountable?

At the start of the 19th century there was no government ensuring protection from bad deals.  We learn from Thomas Jefferson’s purchase of insurance that it was his due diligence and free markets that forced insurance agencies to meet the needs of consumers.  Not government assurances.

On 17 August 1800, Thomas Jefferson wrote in his memorandum books, “Insured my houses with Mr. Ast as follows,” including the estimated value, insured value, and premium for Monticello and four different outbuildings.^[1] “Mr. Ast” was William Frederick Ast of the Mutual Assurance Society of Virginia. Jefferson had first considered purchasing insurance for Monticello in 1795, and even went so far as to begin filling out the insurance declaration form,^[2] but he had significant reservations because of the way the company had been set up under a 1794 act.^[3] The Mutual Assurance Society’s constitution was later amended,^[4] and Jefferson purchased insurance in August 1800 for the “Dwelling house” (Monticello), “Outchamber” (South Pavilion), “Stone house” (the structure now known as Weaver’s Cottage), the joiner’s shop, and stable. The total premium was $91.30. At that time, premiums were intended to be paid only once; after 1809, Jefferson began paying an annual premium of $12.84. Jefferson maintained the policies until at least 1823, with only a short gap in coverage in 1820.^[5]

The emphasis is mine but the point is that we can’t rely soley on government to protect us from bad deals.  Those who bought credit default swaps from AIG need to pay the price if they didn’t do their due diligence.  And if they did and AIG was fraudulent, AIG needs to bear the consequences.  Not the Federal Government and the people of the U.S.

Keep holding the flame Michelle!

We already knew Holder’s ban was a non-starter but last week we received more preemptive news against talks of a ban.

From NRA-ILA

Sixty-five House Democrats said Wednesday that they would oppose any attempt by the Obama administration to revive a ban on military-style weapons that President Bill Clinton signed into law in 1994 and President George W. Bush let expire.

The pro-gun Democrats, led by Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark., wrote Attorney General Eric Holder that they would “actively oppose any effort to reinstate the 1994 ban, or to pass any similar law.”

View letters to Eric Holder

Since I live near a National Wildlife Refuge, I take frequent runs through the various trails and regularly carry a firearm while I do.  Last Thursday a U.S. District Judge ruled I can no longer protect myself while in the refuge.  Apparently, my carrying a firearms on me affects the environment in some manner.

I can carry to the refuge and as I leave the refuge but for some  strange reason, I can’t carry while I am in the refuge.  Don’t you love liberty?

From the ruling:

In her 44-page ruling, Kollar-Kotelly called the Interior Department’s rule-making process “astoundingly flawed” and said officials failed to evaluate the possible environmental impacts of the rule change, as required by law. The judge set an April 20 deadline for the Interior Department to indicate its likely response to her preliminary injunction.

http://www.independent.org/blog/?p=1614

With the Obama White House and others pushing for new forms of gun controls, Independent Institute Research Fellow Stephen P. Halbrook was recently interviewed by Glenn Beck on Fox News Channel on the new efforts to force gun owners to purchase a $1 million insurance policy in order to have Second Amendment rights.

Dr. Halbrook is author of the acclaimed book, The Founders’ Second Amendment: Origins of the Right to Bear Arms, which has formed the basis for the Second Amendment Book Bomb.

The Second Amendment Book Bomb has already received more than 3,000 pledges toward our goal to make The Founders’ Second Amendment a bestseller in order to educate millions of Americans this year and send an unmistakable message that tampering with Second Amendment rights with not be condoned. To participate, please go here and pledge to obtain at least one copy of the book, and then urge everyone you know to make their pledge.

If you don’t have your copy of The Founders’ Second Amenment, buy one today.  It’s not only a great resource into the history of 2A but a great cause with the book bomb.

Mr. Halbrook discusses the bill in Illinois requiring a $1M insurance policy with gun ownership.