The Combat Mindset

A naked man breaks into an 88-year old woman's home and attacks her, shoving her face into a chair.

So what does she do?

Grabs him right in the jimmies and gives 'em a good crank.

You GO, girl!

And the perp's name is Michael G. Dick. You can't make this stuff up.

It Ain't Just A River In Egypt

Illinois governor (for the time being) Rod Blagojevich still insists he has done absolutely nothing wrong.

Of course, since Illinois always has been at the top of the corruption hit parade, maybe Blago just can't tell the difference any more.

I was born and raised in Chicago. There is absolutely no way anyone can become a major-league politician in Illinois without buying his/her way into the machine. And everything else is tied up in the mess as well.

When I was growing up, my father worked as an accountant at the main post office. I remember the arguments at home over his refusal to pay off the appropriate politicians in order to get a promotion or raise. That was the only way you could advance in those days.

Much later, a friend worked at the Lincoln Park Zoo. All the upper-level positions there were also political gimme jobs. She told me about a new manager with no animal-behavior qualifications at all who ordered all the toys be taken away from the baby apes in the zoo nursery. According to him, they were animals, not children, and didn't need anything to amuse themselves.

Apes being highly creative, though, they solved their boredom problem by fingerpainting every reachable surface. With, ahem, natural materials.

My friend said Mr. Expert should have been required to clean up the mess himself. With a toothbrush. Preferably his.

So how can people believe that Barack Obama is the only non-corrupt politician to ever come out of that cesspool?

What are the odds?

Moving Forward

As we face a new year with legislatures reconvening, we can count on seeing more bills designed to deprive us of our Second Amendment rights. Those in office who prefer to rule unarmed subject instead of serve self-reliant citizens will be encouraged in their vile purpose by the
coronation and ascensionelection and inauguration of Barack Obama, whose citizen-disarmament record is beyond question.

At least by anyone who is actually paying attention.

So I remind you here of Dr. Suzanna Gratia-Hupp's courageous testimony before the Texas legislature after she survived the massacre at the Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen, Texas on October 16, 1991. Both her parents were killed in that incident.

Dr. Hupp became an outspoken opponent of citizen disarmament/criminal empowerment and successfully ran for a seat in the Texas House of Representatives. She held that seat from 1996 to 2006, when she chose not to run for reelection.

May we all share her courage and determination for the fight to come.

Roberta X Nails It

Roberta X cuts to the chase on the Nanny State. Read the WHOLE THING.

The Product Of Incrementalism

I offer this essay as written by its original author.

Where We're Headed
By Robert A. Waters

You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers.

At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it. In the darkness, you make out two shadows. One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside. As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble.

In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours was never registered. Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm. When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter. "What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask. "Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times.

But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die."

The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters. As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero. Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win. The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars. A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you.

Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges. The judge sentences you to life in prison.

This case really happened. On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk, England, killed one burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term.

How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great British Empire?

It started with the Pistols Act of 1903. This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns. Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns. Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed Man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw. When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead. The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control," demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.) Nine years later, at Dunblane, Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school. For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable, or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns.

The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearms still owned by private citizens. During the years in which the British government incrementally took Away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released. Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying, "We cannot have people take the law into their own hands." All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars. When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities. Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply. Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens. How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been registered and licensed. Kinda like cars. Sound familiar?

WAKE UP AMERICA , THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

I don't know when this was originally written. Tony Martin received an early release from prison after serving four years on July 28, 2003. At the time he returned home, there was still a contract out on his life and police presence was required for his safety.

Whatever the details, the lesson here is about incrementalism. Rick Disney, the gun list member who brought this to my attention also posted:

Something similar happened in Australia several years ago and some of you will remember the incident. Some crazy killed a bunch of kids at a school in Tasmania and the politicians went wild. Naturally, it's good press to blame the gun and not the killer and that's what they went for. It took several years but they finally outlawed guns in all of Australia.

I've told some of you about another incident. Anita and I stayed at a bed & breakfast in Scotland several years ago and had a chance to chat with the lady who ran the place. In short, we learned that the police have the right to come to your home at any time and demand to see and inspect any hunting firearms you may own. You can't refuse them entry. No handguns, of course.

And yes, it can happen here. Remember the word "incremental." The liberal-socialists will slowly work on their goal of no guns for private citizens. Tax ammo so high no one can afford it. Require that bullets be marked individually so they can be traced if involved in a crime. (Now being worked on in California.) Require "safety" features so only the owner can be "recognized" by the gun and shoot it. Put judges in positions to work with a "flexible and living" Constitution.

I'm betting we'll see some of this sooner rather than later from the dangerous people who will be in Congress and the White House for the next several years.

Never think that America's voters have any sense. They have proven that the majority have no clue of what is going on.

More On Eric Holder

Change, huh? Then how come all the names Obama's picking are right out of the Clinton playbook?

From Jim Meyers's article in Newsmax:

Holder also played a key role in the snatching of 6-year-old Cuban Elian Gonzalez from his Miami relatives’ home in April 2000, according to the Web site. Gonzalez was to be sent to Cuba where his father lived. 

...

Holder has already come under fire due to his involvement in the Mark Rich pardon in the final hours of the Clinton presidency.

Billionaire Rich renounced his U.S. citizenship and moved to Switzerland to avoid prosecution for racketeering, wire fraud, tax fraud, tax evasion, and illegal trades with Iran in violation of the U.S. embargo following the 1979-80 hostage
crisis.

Seventeen years later, Rich wanted a pardon, and he retained Jack Quinn, former counsel to the president, to lobby his old boss.

Holder had originally recommended Quinn to one of Rich's advisers, political analyst Dick Morris reported. And he gave substantive advice to Quinn along the way.

Once the pardon was granted, Holder sent his congratulations to Quinn.

Obama's Proposed Federal Ban On Concealed Carry

Via Breda, we have a post by New Jovian Thunderbolt on the implications of a federal ban on concealed carry.

"So three types of politicians support the federal ban, those acting purely on politics and damn the truth, those that adhere to an erroneous irrational political philosophy, and tyrants. None of these motivations is truly defensible except perhaps the first. And that purely political calculation goes away when the voting public is informed about the issue.

"And hence the purpose of this post."

And the purpose of my link.

Are We Surprised?

Barack Obama has nominated Eric Holder for attorney general.

From Alan Gottlieb in the Second Amendment Foundation's press release:

The nomination of Eric Holder for the post of attorney general of the United States sends an “alarming signal” to gun owners about how the Barack Obama administration will view individual gun rights, as affirmed this year by the Supreme Court, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

"Eric Holder signed an amicus brief in the Heller case that supported the District of Columbia’s handgun ban, and also argued that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right," noted SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. "He has supported national handgun licensing and mandatory trigger locks. As deputy attorney general under Janet Reno, he lobbied Congress to pass legislation that would have curtailed legitimate gun shows.

"This is not the record of a man who will come to office as the nation’s top law enforcement officer with the rights and concerns of gun owners in mind," he observed.

Holder’s nomination, like the appointment of anti-gun Illinois Congressman Rahm Emanuel as White House Chief of Staff, tells American gun owners that Obama’s campaign claims supporting the Second Amendment were "empty rhetoric," Gottlieb stated.

During his campaign, Obama claimed to be a centrist, claimed to work "across the aisle," and claimed to support gun rights. He claimed his previous record did not reflect the path going forward he planned to take.

So far, everything he has actually done since the election is consistent with his radical-leftist record and not with the lies promises he made to the subjects citizens who elected him to rule serve this country.

Some of us are not one bit surprised. But then we were paying attention.

How Obama Got Elected

By now, it should be painfully obvious that 52% of American voters were not paying attention earlier this month. The truth was out there, but they could not be bothered to see beyond what filmmaker John Ziegler calls "media malpractice."

His new website is providing insight into exactly what level of ingnorance was involved:

"On November 4th, 2008 millions of Americans were shocked that a man of Barack Obama's limited experience, extreme liberal positions and radical political alliances could be elected President of the United States. For many of these Americans, the explanation was rather simple... the news media, completely enamored with Obama, simply refused to do their job."

His upcoming film, Media Malpractice... How Obama Got Elected, should prove very interesting indeed. Dare we hope the people who really need to watch it actually do?

Horsemanship Is Horsemanship

More than a few riders in the various equestrian disciplines can be very, shall we say, condescending toward folks in other disciplines. So I was delighted to find, from Germany, a video of a pas de deux with a dressage rider on a Warmblood and a stock-seat rider on a reining Quarter Horse.

And then they switch horses.

Just awesome.