SCOTUS Rules on Chicago Gun Ban

Thankfully, the SCOTUS ruled in a majority opinion that the Second Amendment is an individual right and allows for firearm ownership for the purpose of protecting one's self and property. This is the second affirmation that 2A applies to the individual and is not delegated to the states.

On another now, since the Chicago law has been ruled unconstitutional, Daley and the morons on the Chicago city council wasted no time in passing new legislation that further restricts gun ownership. Among the restrictions that are implemented in the new law are a requirement that residents can own no more than one gun and that said gun must be disabled when taken from the home.

This is yet another instance of the left thumbing their noses at the rulings of SCOTUS. One must wonder how much money the residents of Chicago have spent on defending the agenda of their mayor and council. Do those in charge really think that this latest law won't end up being overturned as well?

Yet another bow to a foreign leader...

Is there anyone that BHO won't bow down to other than his employers, the American taxpayers. Seems that BHO hasn't quite caught on that he is supposed to be the leader of the free world not to mention the United States and he should never bow to anyone. Here is a shot of BHO now bowing to Premier of the Communist Leader of China, Hu Jintao.

Congress passes a bill they considered flawed

Yesterday was a historic day. It is a day that will rival 12/7/1941 and 9/11/2001 in infamy. March 21, 2010 will forever be remembered as the day that socialism came home to roost in the United States.

The Democratic side of the aisle passed legislation that was so flawed, in less than an hour they felt it was necessary to immediately try to revise said legislation. How screwed up is that? This bill was won by back room deals, promises of Executive Orders and secrecy. How can this be justified in any way at all?

Now I realize that some view our Constitution as an outdated piece of paper. However, it is the foundation for our country. A foundation that has survived and thrived since the founding of this great nation. Our country was founded on a firm belief that our rights were granted to us by our Creator, not by the government. The reason for this was simple, if a government grants you a right, that same government can take that right away from you. A right granted by our Creator can only be taken from us by Him and not by our elected officials.

Going back to the health care bill...

Although our government servants are very short on logic, even someone with basic math skills can tell that this process will only end up as another version of Medicare over time. The progressives have every intention of implementing a single payer system on the road to fully socialized medicine. They are going to accomplish this by making it impossible for the private industry to provide health care insurance and stay in business.

Insurance, by definition, is the pooling of resources and risks. The idea is that the resources will exceed the need for services. As the level of risk and subsequent need for money increase, the insurance company must raise the rates across the pool of individuals in order to maintain the same level of reserves.

As more higher risks individuals enter the group and the costs rise a cap on rate increases decreases the ability of the insurance company to meet the financial obligations of the insured. In short, the money runs out. As with any business, once the money is gone, bankruptcy will follow. That is unless the government steps in again to support the insurance companies as they did with AIG. The goverment will provide a bailout for those companies in exchange for a stake in that company witness the auto industry, the bank and even parts of the insurance industry in just the last year.

As more companies fail, there is little option left to the government other than to implement a single payer system with fully socialized medicine covering every citizen in America. After all, health care is now a "right" granted to us by the socialists. Therefore, that "right" will be protected at all costs by the socialists.

I can see companies that offer health insurance beginning to spin off those divisions in order to insulate themselves from bankruptcy. This will allow the health care side of the business to fail without impacting the remainder of the company. The government can then step in and take over those divisions in order to preserve the "right" of health care until they can be rolled into the new solcislized medicine plan.

Same old story, same old song and dance...

While I was in the Navy, there was an acronym used often that indicated things were not going to be going as we expected. The acronym was BOHICA which stood for Bend Over Here It Comes Again.

Well America, BOHICA. The Democrats (or should we just call them Progressives) are getting ready to ram one home in the form of "reconciliation" of the heath care bill. Amazing that the Senate bill could not garner enough support to pass in the House previously but now Pelosi figures she can round up enough idiots to pass it now.

Do as I say...

Our fearless leader (Yes, that is a Rocky and Bullwinkle reference) is currently visiting Las Vegas trying to drum up support for Reid's campaign. What I find most ironic about this trip are the past comments by BHO regarding Vegas and spending money there.

Twice since he has taken office, BHO has slammed visiting Vegas as a sign of excess. Here are the quotes:

"When times are tough, you tighten your belts," he told the forum." You don’t go buying a boat when you can barely pay your mortgage. You don’t blow a bunch of cash in Vegas when you’re trying to save for college."

"You can't get corporate jets. You can't go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayers' dime. There's got to be some accountability and some responsibility.”

Now, I will agree that blowing the college tuition on a trip to Vegas may be irresponsible. However, as a private citizen, what I choose to spend my money on is my business. With the second quote, Obama was berating the banking industry for attending a convention in Las Vegas "on the taxpayers dime". Ironic isn't it that BHO is doing the same thing that he took the bankers to task for?

His trip to Vegas is for the sole purpose of trying to stop the bleeding in Reid's campaign. This visit to Vegas also includes BHO informing Nevada of the governmental pork that will be spent in the state. The trip has already negatively impacted tour flights in and around Vegas as tighter security measures were put in place for the visit. (Review Journal article)

Back in 2006, a report was put together for Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA) as he attempted to recoup costs from Bush for campaign travel. The report outlines the costs of flying Air Force One per hour and the cargo plane that accompanies the president on his jaunts around the country.

Here is a breakdown of just what the flight from Washington DC to Vegas is costing the taxpayers based on 2006 costs:

Distance Washington DC to Las Vegas: 2060 miles

Air Force One
Cost per hour: $56,518
Flight time to Vegas: 3.26 hours
Sub total: $184,248.68

Cargo Plane
Cost per hour: $6,609
Flight time to Vegas: 3.97 hours
Sub total: $27,631

Total plane costs for one-way trip Washington DC to Las Vegas: $211,879.68
Round Trip cost (planes only) : $423,759.36

Let us not forget the additional costs associated with the travel of the president. Here is a quick list of expenses that the taxpayers will foot the bill for:

• Advance security team (air fare, hotels, food)
• Las Vegas police department (additional security/overtime)
  
• Entourage and BHO's hotel rooms and meals
• Rental vehicles, etc for transport of the entourage

Mr. President, who is paying for your flight on Air Force One, your security details and the other logistics associated with this little family vacation and campaign trip? Is it not the taxpayers? Should you not be held accountable for how you spend my money as well?

Global Warming??

OK, I have heard about enough of this bull. I sit here in north Texas, just outside of Dallas and we have almost 6" of snow on the ground and more on the way. The picture below is one of my chickens and Cabrito the goat in the background trying to figure out what this white stuff is all over the ground.

OK, I know those that maintain we are actually warming up this planet have stated that the reason for the snowfall on the eastern seaboard and now here in Texas is a result of the warmer air holding more moisture. So... I may be swayed into believing the "warmers" on the fact that warm air holds more moisture. However, on the local news yesterday, it was stated that our high temperature was 20, yes 20 degrees colder than the normal average for this day each year. Since the high hit a whopping 39 degrees, that means the normal temperature should be in the high 50's and I should be out riding my motorcycle.

Now forgive me if my logic is a bit messy here...but, since we were 20 degrees colder yesterday than normal and now have 6" of snow on the ground, would it not be logical to deduce that if the planet is warming than the temperature would have been higher or at least close to the normal high? Stay with me here... if the temperature is higher AND the air is holding more moisture, then would we not be getting rain instead of snow?

For some reason, this is just not making sense to me. Here in north Texas, the snowfall for today is the most snow in one day for over 30 years. Temperatures are 20 degrees below normal. Now it's looking like I am going to have to go find a snow shovel to make it to the mailbox.

Now, let's take a little trip down memory lane... Being the old curmudgeon that I am, I was in elementary school back in the 70's when the old Pitch In campaign was being force fed to me in public school. We had the joy of sitting through hours of movies on the environment and all of the damage that humans were causing. Back then, the word was if we didn't change our ways, we would experience another ice age because temperatures were falling. Iron Eyes Cody was seen crying on television ads about the sad state of America. How can we forget Woodsy the Owl and the catch phrase "Give a Hoot, Don't Pollute". Now the campaign did have some benefits, we did clean things up somewhat and there is less trash in our waterways and the air is cleaner. However, that ice age cry still sticks with me today as an example of faulty science.

Now the one thing I find strangest about the Pitch In movement of the 70's and the dire predictions of that time are the parallels with the "warmers" of today. The doomsday cries of global climate change for one. In the 70's it was another ice age, now 30 plus years later, it's global warming. Strangely, the 70's campaign has all but disappeared from view today. I have scoured the Internet trying to locate some of the "studies" that were done back then and have had problems finding a real mention of any of them outside of a blurb here and there. Apparently they are no longer relevant, or maybe they just weren't accurate assessments even at that time.

Now let's move forward to today. First we have garbage science that is using articles from environmental activists (spell that nut jobs) from a magazine devoted to climbing and supposition by other "scientists" on the melting of glaciers and representing those as facts. Of course we cannot forget the email scandal with faked information on global warming.

To me, I find it hard to believe much of anything, first we have only been tracking weather on a semi-large scale for about 150 years. Everyone knows that Earth has experienced at least five major ice ages that came and went long before humans were polluting the air and the planet. How can we, with so little actual data, determine that the changes to the environment (if there really are any) are anything more than normal fluctuations? Hell, even the local meteorologist can't get the weather right for three days from now. What warmed the planet back up at the end of the ice ages? Fred Flintsone's car ran on foot power, not fossil fuels.

I'll anxiously await some environmental egghead's response to my questions. Right now, I have to go dig my chicken out of the global warming event before she freezes to death.

I don't believe it....

Or then again, I guess I do. The picture above is a shot of BHO bowing to yet another "official". The original captions is: President Obama bows to Tampa Mayor Pam Iorio at MacDill Air Force Base on Thursday, Jan. 28, 2010 in Tampa, Fla.

Back in November 2009, BHO decided that the emperor of Japan deserved a bow as well:

This bow was inappropriate according to Japanese customs. According to Wikipedia, "Generally speaking, an inferior bows longer, more deeply and more frequently than a superior. A superior addressing an inferior will generally only nod the head slightly, while some superiors may not bow at all and an inferior will bend forward slightly from the waist". Notice who is in the lower bow? Our dear president.

Now customs aside, it was certainly inappropriate for the leader of the nation that defeated Japan in World War II to be bowing to a representative of that country. How soon we forget our history.

And before we forget, a few months before the Japan bow, BHO was caught bowing to the Saudi King.

Holy crap! What's next? Maybe BHO needs some simple etiquette lessons. Allow me to educate the Harvard grad here... Mr. President, you are the leader of this country, you are also (or at least should be) the leader of the free world. You represent the greatest nation on this planet. Why the hell are you bowing to anyone? Have you no pride in yourself or this country?

The mayor is not royalty, nor clerical, you are not a subject of the Saudi king or the Japanese Emperor . What is wrong with you? Or maybe, this is an example of how you should greet every taxpayer in this country instead, in other words, your employers?

Mr. President, I am available for a groveling session any time your busy schedule permits. I would love to have you bow to me and beg my forgiveness for screwing this country up as bad as you have in the last year.