2nd Amendment – A Must Read

A most impressive letter on the 2nd Amendment from a trial attorney, who isn’t so arrogant to call himself a “Constitutional Scholar”…but maybe he should!

Dear Folks,
I am writing this letter to every elected official for whom I believe I am a constituent- on both a state and federal level. During the near constant anti-gun bombardment we have all been forced to endure since Sandy Hook, a recurring question posed by the media and anti-gun politicians has been: “Why do regular citizens need military-style assault weapons”? Indeed, the President has stated that he does not believe that citizens should own battle rifles at all. The purpose of this message is to respectfully remind you why the Second Amendment exists and point out a few modern day, real-time examples of why it is no less relevant and necessary in 2013 than it was in 1776.

By way of background, I am a trial attorney in Portland, Oregon. I am married, have three small children, and am a founder and co-owner of my law firm. While I would not be so arrogant as to call myself a “Constitutional scholar”, I have done extensive reading on Constitutional history and most of the major Constitutional case law from the United States Supreme Court. I am a member of the Oregon State Bar and the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States.

First, the Second Amendment does not protect the citizens’ right to hunt. Even a cursory reading on the subject makes it explicitly clear that the framers intended the provision as a guarantee that the citizenry would be sufficiently armed to resist a tyrannical government. The fact that such an uprising has not been necessary since the Revolution is no reason to jettison our best and only real protection for keeping our country free and our liberties secure. It is hard to believe that, given the current approval ratings for politicians, any American is ready to guarantee that they would never need to resist a government run amok. For those who claim a citizenry is no match for a modern army (thereby no longer having any use for “battle rifles”), I encourage you to examine some recent history, including the Afghans running out the Russian military, or the extreme difficulty our military has had in that region in the past decade.
After the Sandy Hook incident, staff writer Steve Duin of the Oregonian newspaper wrote a series of gun-bashing articles, the kind that have been typical from nearly every “mainstream” news outlet. In one of his rants, Mr. Duin wrote, in apparent amazement, that some people have the audacity to suggest that the Second Amendment was written to protect citizens from our own government:
Over the course of 15 thought-provoking minutes, Ed Dean — one of a half-dozen guys at the Grant Pass gun dealer’s booth — argued that the right to bear arms is enshrined in the Bill of Rights “to protect you not only from the criminal element but from the government.”

Our government, mind you. A famous breeding ground, since 1776, of despots and jack-booted thugs. I would encourage Mr. Duin and you to learn from some history on “gun control”. Tyrants always institute gun control prior to democide: 1911 Gun control instituted in Turkey, 1.5 million unarmed Armenians massacred. 1938, Germany expanded its gun control and then proceeded to kill 13 million people. In the 1920′s, the USSR and China instituted gun control and proceeded to massacre 20 million, each. 1991, the United Nations in Bosnia instituted gun control. 1995, UN “troops” watched as 7,000 unarmed Muslim men and boys were slaughtered. 1956, Cambodia instituted gun control. By 1974, at least one million unarmed Cambodians were slaughtered. In Rwanda, Darfur, and Sudan, millions of unarmed civilians have been massacred. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” It would seem that Mr. Duin, like many of his propagandist colleagues, believes that those who insist on preserving and protecting our rights against oppressive government should be wearing aluminum hats. I would now point to several recent examples from the Obama administration alone, that typify exactly why millions of Americans are and should remain suspicious of their government, and why we will never voluntarily give up our guns, or submit to incremental steps designed to facilitate future confiscation or restriction.

1. The Obama administration’s Justice Department killed dozens, and perhaps hundreds, (including Americans) with Operation “Fast and Furious”

It is obvious that the traffic of illegal firearms is a problem. That is why Eric Holder and his henchmen in the Obama Justice Department should be prosecuted for sending thousands of illegal guns into Mexico, knowing they would be used to kill. For those of you who may not remember,
shortly after taking office in 2008, Obama and Mr. Holder tried unconvincingly to suggest to the American people that gun control in the U.S. was necessary because our guns were somehow responsible for causing the rampant drug-cartel shootings that have killed thousands of Mexicans. The illegal and ill-conceived “gun walking” experiment called Operation Fast and Furious was designed by our government to show us that we should curtail our freedoms to stop violence in another country. In the incident described in the following article, 16 people, including 14 teenagers, were killed with illegal guns that our government purposefully sent to Mexico:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2211289/Operation-Fast-Furious-Guns-failed-gun-program-used-2010-Mexico-massacre.html#axzz2K34T0bKt

2. Obama encouraged and signed into law the unlimited detention of American citizens from American soil

From my research, no major news outlet ever even reported that, as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (Section 1031), Obama signed into law the abolition of the protections guaranteed by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments for American citizens “suspected” of being a terrorist. This bill, called by some, the “Unlimited Detention Bill” allows my government to take me to Guantanamo Bay or some other gulag with no lawyer, no trial, no due process, and no limit on the time they could detain me. This is precisely the kind of thing that makes a thinking citizen question the motives and integrity of his government. So that there is no mistake, here is a clip of Michigan Democrat Senator Carl Levin making clear that it was Obama’s administration that asked the drafters of the legislation to apply the unlimited detention/no trial provisions to American citizens, when American citizens were originally exempt from those provisions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BI6bMwXs_8

3. Obama, Nobel Peace Prize Winner, has authorized and committed the unilateral assassination OF HIS OWN CITIZENS, and convinced himself it’s legal

In the best example yet of why American citizens living in 2013 should be wary of their government, several news outlets just released a memorandum in which Obama’s Justice Department rationalized the President’s killing of American citizens as somehow legal- with every aspect of such plans, from selection of the individual to be killed to the “execution” of the assassination plan carried out exclusively within the executive branch, and all of it in secret:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/05/obama-kill-list-doj-memo

One might also question why over 1.5 billion rounds of hollow-point ammunition have been purchased by domestic federal agencies in the past 18 months- including Department of Homeland Security and The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association? Why is the federal government demanding the banning of weapons for the American people and simultaneously arming domestic agencies with truly astounding amounts of ammunition?

In conclusion, I would like to respectfully suggest that you focus your attention on the real business of the state and country- allowing business to function in a free market and stop pretending that it is the role of government to create jobs, and addressing a growing debt problem that is soon going to become untreatable. Nuclear weapons did not crush the Soviet Union- debt did. Thank you for your time, and God Bless the United States and the Constitution each of you swore to uphold.

Very truly yours,
-Nick Dazer

Gun Trafficking

I’m all for increasing penalties for gun trafficking, lets start with Obama and Holder for their approval of giving guns to the Mexican Drug Cartel, without tracking the guns and without cooperation of the Mexican Government.

Fast and Furious was a gun trafficking operation that killed hundreds of Mexican children, border control agents and more.

Yes, Obama, lets talk about giving guns to criminals, because most law abiding Americans feel strongly AGAINST it!

Is Courage Lost in Congress?

Dear Congress,
Yes, I know Obama is 100% to blame for the pay raise you received yesterday via an Executive Order, however, will any of you grow a set and put forth immediate legislation to “undo” that order?

Will any of you actually step up and say…
“When Congress has not passed a budget in FOUR years, when spending is out of control, when legislation stops on the desk of either the Speaker of the House or Senate Majority Leader and is not brought forward for a vote, when our economy is in a mess…that NO, Congress will NOT get a raise for allowing a POTUS or its fellow members to continue unchecked spending of American Tax Dollars”

We know Obama doesn’t have the courage to protect the hard earned money of Americans, but is there NO ONE left in Congress with the courage or character to stand up for Americans and stop these executive orders that are further wasting our money?

$250,000 combined is NOT rich

Honest question, why is it acceptable to MANY to penalizing people who have busted rear-ends to become higher earners?  I’m seeing too many comment that they are okay with couples who earn $250,000 a year or more, have their taxes raised, but not on the “middle class.”  Earning a higher wage is not automatic.  Many people who earn this combined income have given up time with family for years, invested tons of money on higher degrees, taken high risk jobs, take high travel positions, moved to where the job is, and more, to earn what they do now. Many people who earn this combined income are now in their 40’s, 50’s and 60’s, which are higher earning income years and are now able to start paying off debts and saving for their retirements.

I’m sorry, but yes, it looks like the government, that we elected, is not capable of actually cutting spending immediately, and so taxes will have to be raised, if we want to reduce our debt. In my personal opinion, it should be across the board, or not at all. The penalizing of people who have worked for years to gain higher incomes, the people who take the high risk/high reward jobs, the people who risked it all to start a business, and more, is simply wrong.

Why?

The top 1 percent of income earners, $344,000+ per year, paid 36.73 percent of all federal income taxes in 2009.
The top 5 percent of income earners, $154-$344,000 per year, paid 21.93 percent of all federal income taxes in 2009.

So, 5 percent of Americans paid 58.66 percent of all federal income taxes in 2009.

You want to raise taxes on the 1 and 2 percent income earners who already pay a higher percentage than others and obviously do pay their fair share, then raise them on everyone, even the bottom 50 percent should have some skin in the game to understand how our system works and that there is “NO FREE” – someone pays for it.

If you don’t have an income to pay taxes and are receiving any kind of Federal funded benefits, you should have a number of mandatory hours that you work to receive your benefits to cover what you would pay. (Remember, individuals who receive S.S. do pay Federal income taxes) It’s a simple equation, value of benefits received is equal to annual compensation, adjusted estimated benefit compensation times tax rate, taxes owed divided by minimum wage or comparable wage for duties performed, equals hours of work due to the Federal Government.  There are a lot of services provided by the Federal government that could be done by “benefit” receivers, providing additional Federal savings.

And by the way, a combined income of $250,000. a year, is NOT rich.

Raise My Taxes…if

Dear Obama & Congress,

I’m happy to pay more taxes if you agree to a 4 to 1 ratio.

Example -
For every 5% in tax increases on anyone, you implement the following:

1:  5% across the board budget cut in EVERY Federal department, including the White House operations and vacations budget, effective when the tax increase begins. If any department says they can’t do it, the Head of that department is immediately fired. This isn’t a reduction that can be spread out over multiple years, it’s an immediate reduction in funding.

2:  5% reduction of staff in EVERY department, including the White House staff, effective when the tax increase begins.

3:  5% cut in pay, across the board for EVERY federal employee, including all serving in Congress and the POTUS, effective when the tax increase begins.

4:  5 “something for free” programs are ELIMINATED, effective when the tax increase begins, example – Obamaphones, ability to purchase “specialty/premium” items with EBT cards, etc.. You see, if you want to take more money from me, in which I will receive no additional benefit, those receiving money for doing nothing should also experience a reduction in benefits from the Federal Government.

No write offs or delayed cuts/savings can be taken, simple immediate cut in spending, effective for the upcoming year.

No using the reduction of staff savings to be applied to the 5% budget cut.

If the above takes place, then the taxes raised might actually start to be utilized to pay down the national deficit.

I haven’t seen ANY real ideas, from either side, that addresses both real cuts and “fair” tax increases, so I thought I’d give you an idea.

Will NOT be Silenced

Fast & Furious, Benghazi, Fast & Furious, Benghazi

An American was killed on our border, hundreds of Mexican Citizens murdered, and we learn it was 100% caused by a program called “Fast & Furious”, a program Obama has claimed “Executive Privilege” to end an investigation and the media has ignored and refused to investigate.

An American Ambassador is murdered with three other men who served our nation in Benghazi, Libya. We learn security was denied and reduced before the 11th Anniversary of 9/11, even though two terrorist attacks had already been reported months before. We learn two former Navy Seals called in for back up and fought for seven hours before being murdered. Obama has blamed a video, given multiple false accounts, and now “takes offense” when asked for the truth. The media continues to ignore and refuses to investigate.

How much blood has to be shed under Obama for the media to do their job and demand answers for the families and for America?

Whether it is incompetence or deliberate, these two situations alone should be enough for every American to turn their backs on Obama and demand he and his administration be held responsible.

“Cool” and “Likable” isn’t Whitewashing of Americans being murdered.

America deserves better.

Kudos to Judge Jeanine for calling out the White House on Benghazi. Click here to watch! <==video
The Families of these Hero’s Deserve Answers and the Truth.
America Deserves Better

Crowley & Obama face off against Romney…and lose.

Journalistic integrity is all but DEAD. When journalists decide it is easier to talk and report on what has been given to them by a candidate and by an administration, instead of actually investigating and researching the facts, there is NO unbiased or truthful reporting. And the ones who love to hide behind “free speech” are the ones who are lazy participants of killing free speech.

Crowley LIED about Libya last night for Obama, she stopped Romney from discussing Fast & Furious right when he said Obama has claimed executive privilege, she stopped Romney from forcing Obama to admit he also has off-shore investments in his pension, she blocked Romney from exposing Obama’s lie about the auto bailout, and gave Obama extra time to sway off topic and attack Romney.  But hey, after the debate and after the world stopped watching, she admitted she was wrong about Libya and Romney was right when pressed by her colleague Anderson Cooper.  But hey, it should make liberals proud that Obama had to have a woman carry his water during the debate.
CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC and even many on Fox might as well admit they are gossip reporters like the National Inquirer. But honestly, there is probably more truth in the National Inquirer now than many of these news networks.
Great Article to read, by William Bigelow on Breitbart.com  -
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/10/17/Crowley-interrupts-28-times-Romney
Candy Crowley, who was suspected of being one more liberal moderator in the tank for Barack Obama, was more than just in the tank for him; she dove in and sucked all the water out for him so he could pretend he walked on water.
In the first presidential debate, Jim Lehrer, no slouch at shilling for the Democratic Party, interrupted Mitt Romney 15 times and Barack Obama only five.
Crowley made Lehrer look like an amateur. She interrupted Obama nine times, (although four of those were when he wouldn’t respect the time limit when discussing assault weapons; he went over his time limit all night long), but when it came to Mitt Romney, she was utterly beyond the pale.
Crowley interrupted Romney 28 times. 28 times. Her desperation to keep Romney from scoring points was so patently obvious that it wasn’t really a surprise when she had her infamous moment: the moment when she interrupted and falsely claimed Romney was incorrect in accusing Obama of refusing to call the Benghazi attack an act of terror. And even beyond the interruptions, there were numerous instances where Crowley’s obvious partisanship prompted her to treat Romney with great disrespect:
1. She wouldn’t let him respond when Obama lied about the auto industry. First she called him Mr. Romney instead of governor, then protested, “there’ll be plenty of chances here to go on, but I want to… We have all these folks.  I will let you absolutely… OK. Will – will – you certainly will have lots of time here coming up.” Romney never did get the chance to respond.2. After the question asking whether gas prices as they stand now are the new normal, Obama got 2 chances to respond. When Romney asked for his second chance, Crowley shut him off by saying, “ … in the follow up, it doesn’t quite work like that. But I’m going to give you a chance here. I promise you, I’m going to.” She didn’t.3. When discussing how he would deal with deductions, just as Romney was about to destroy Obama with statistics, Crowley jumped in to save her man not only by denying the value of statistics, but changing the narrative to say Romney’s numbers couldn’t possibly add up:

“And Governor, let’s – before we get into a vast array of who says – what study says what, if it shouldn’t add up. If somehow when you get in there, there isn’t enough tax revenue coming in. If somehow the numbers don’t add up, would you be willing to look again …”

4. When Romney was trying to make a point of Obama’s pension investing in China, Crowley cut him off by insinuating people were tired of him talking:
“Governor Romney, you can make it short. See all these people? They’ve been waiting for you.  Make it short.”

Then she really tried to humiliate him with this: “If I could have you sit down, Governor Romney. Thank you.” She never asked Obama to sit down.

5. The infamous incident when she interrupted Romney’s claim about Obama’s refusal to call the Benghazi murders a terror attack:

“It – it – it – he did in fact, sir. So let me – let me call it an act of terror…

Prompted by Obama to say it a little louder, Crowley obliged:
“He – he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take – it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.”

6.  Just as egregiously, when the question was about assault weapons and Romney naturally started to discuss fast and furious, Crowley quickly shifted him away from that and turned it into an attack on Romney’s assault ban position:
“Governor, Governor, if I could, the question was about these assault weapons that once were once banned and are no longer banned. I know that you signed an assault weapons ban when you were in Massachusetts, obviously, with this question, you no longer do support that. Why is that, given the kind of violence that we see sometimes with these mass killings? Why is it that you have changed your mind?’

The fact that Obama escaped all night long by lie after lie didn’t seem to disturb Crowley in the slightest. She had her shadowy agenda, and she stuck to it fiercely. Now it is our job to throw her out into the sun where every American can see exactly how dirty she is.

Evan Sayet on Political Premise

It was a great night with Evan Sayet and the Romney Radio team last night.

If you missed it, click here to listen!  <==10/4/2012 Political Premise Show Link

Who is Evan Sayet? Evan is a political comedian and speaker.
Evan’s career is divided almost exactly down the middle, his time split between his political humor and his more serious lectures. About his comedy, Ann Coulter says “Who makes me laugh? Easy. Evan Sayet.” while Michael Barone of US News and World Report opines, “Evan has crossed that line from ‘funny to important.’”

His serious work includes “Regurgitating the Apple: How The Modern Liberal ‘Thinks,’” which he delivered to the Heritage Foundation.

Andrew Breitbart calls that talk “One of the five most important conservative speeches ever given.”

Evan’s book, “The Kindergarden of Eden: How The Modern Liberal Thinks” came out this week!
For more on Evan and to buy his book, visit www.evansayet.com

Schizophrenic Chicken Little Media

Obama on unemployed, “it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment.”

chirp chirp

Obama on the debt, “driving up the debt by $4Trillion in 8 years is irresponsible and unpatriotic.”

chirp chirp

Fast & Furious scandal report shows no regard for public safety and agent Brian Terry killed with ATF gun.

chirp chirp

Billions in tax dollars lent to failed green energy “democrat donor” companies. Solyndra, Fisker, Ener 1, Solexel, Tesla Motors, Amonix, and more

chirp chirp

Eric Holder, held in contempt of Congress

chirp chirp

Record number of national security leaks coming from the White House

chirp chirp

Ambassador Stevens raped and murdered on the 11th anniversary of 9/11 in Libya. Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods also murdered. Libyan President says it was a planned attack by al qaeda.  Report shows the U.S. was warned of attack two days prior.  Obama blames a youtube video and does not address the lack of security provided on 9/11.

chirp chirp

42 Straight months of unemployment above 8%, over 10% for African Americans, over 15% for college graduates…

chirp chirp

A record 46 million Americans in poverty

chirp chirp

45 million Americans on food stamps

chirp chirp

Romney says 47% of Americans are dependent upon the government.

“THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING, QUICK, RUN THE PRESSES, THE SKY IS FALLING!”

Islamic Jihad

1979 U.S. Embassy in Iran attacked by Iranian radicals
1983 U.S. Embassy in Lebanon attacked by Islamic Jihad
1984 U.S. Embassy in Lebanon attacked by Islamic Jihad
1998 U.S. Embassy in Nairobi attacked by Islamic Jihad
1998 U.S. Embassy in Kenya attacked –by Islamic Jihad
1998 U.S. Embassy in Tanzania attacked by Islamic Jihad
2004 U.S. Consulate in Saudi Arabia attacked by Islamic Jihad
2007 U.S. Embassy in Greece attacked by Islamic Jihad
2008 U.S. Embassy in Yemen attacked by Islamic Jihad
2012 U.S. Embassy in Egypt attacked by Islamic Jihad
2012 U.S. Consulate in Libya attacked by Islamic Jihad
2012 U.S. Embassy in Yemen attacked by Islamic Jihad

Did I miss any?
Were “hurt a Muslims feelings” videos involved in all these attacks?
I’m not condoning a stupid video, but come on, that’s not what this is about.