Sunday, August 21, 2016

Sheboygan County DA interview highlights

Let me explain this to him. The 2nd amendment is not about fun or hunting or even personal protection. The 2nd amendment is to dissuade the state from becoming tyrannical.
""As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms." (Tench Coxe in ‘Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution' under the Pseudonym ‘A Pennsylvanian' in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1) ""The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American.... [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." (Tench Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.)"
The Constitution does not grant rights. It recognizes them. It restrains the legislature from restricting our God given, self evident, unalienable rights. It is also about the duty of the people to maintain the republic. Law enforcement is not supposed to be better armed than the citizenry. They are a part of the community. They are to work in partnership with the community. They should be able to call upon the citizens of the community for assistance should THEY need it It is to the benefit of all to train all citizens in the handling of firearms and in their duties as citizens. (Yes, BLM, I'm talking to you. You complain that the people in your communities are treated like thugs. Are YOU, as individuals, acting like thugs and criminals? When your neighbor commits a crime, do you report them? Do you stand as a witness? Do you do those things that are necessary to let your neighbors know that you are a law abiding citizen and you expect the same courtesy from them? Or do you just shake your heads and ignore it until the crime is against you or yours and then wonder why no one else will help you and why the police don't do "something" to make your neighborhood better? ) What scares me is that this man thinks the legislature may remove or restrict - beyond their natural limitations - any God given, self evident, unalienable right. And he is the DA. Now that's scary. It is scary because it indicates that he (along with most of those currently in government) wish to think of citizens as the children of the government, to be protected from the realities of life. When the reality of the American form of government is that We The People are to be self reliant, personally responsible adults who are also to be in charge of the government. That we are to limit the government to the absolute minimum of control over our lives that is compatible with a stable society and which provides for the greatest amount of personal liberty within that stable society boundary. And, truthfully, we have done a poor job in that regard. Today's citizenry turns to government to solve their problems with distressing ease. And that is how governments become tyrannical. It is one thing to request enforcement of the law by the government - that is one of the responsibilities of government after all. It is quite another to expect the government to see to your daily needs, to provide you with housing or food or education. (Although, I do approve of government provided education so long as the curricula and all other aspects of it are controlled on the local level. Parents, community and employers are the best judges of what a child needs to learn.) As Christ said : "If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all".When done in the correct spirit, this is a good thing. When done as a way to steal power and expertise and volition from those who are served, it is evil. And that is what government does when it limits our liberty (liberty- not license) while purporting to keep us safe. It makes of us children who cannot be trusted with responsibility for their own provision or defense. And by allowing it, we cede our liberty and lose our safety.

The world is not a safe place. We have enemies at the borders and in the halls of government. Now is not the time for the citizenry to remain complacent in the notion that the government will "take care of us". In point of fact it has NEVER been the job of government to take care of us. It is, was and always has been the job of the individual to take care of themselves and whomever they should claim as their own. It is time now to grow up, re-learn the skills of self sufficiency and .like adults, take measures to protect our own. And it is time for government to remember that they are an unruly child and not the parent.




"33 And he came to Capernaum: and being in the house he asked them, What was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way?

34 But they held their peace: for by the way they had disputed among themselves, who should be the greatest.

35 And he sat down, and called the twelve, and saith unto them, If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all." Mark 9:33-35

Tunisian v logger "Destroy Islam" 1080p

Friday, August 12, 2016

Monday, August 8, 2016

Wednesday, August 3, 2016

Political Pistachio: Unenumerated Rights: Corona Constitution Class

Political Pistachio: Unenumerated Rights: Corona Constitution Class: The Founders expected the people to protect their own rights through self-government. With freedom comes responsibility, therefore the people, when it came to their rights, should be governed by their conscience, not government. This concept tasked the people, with their individual judgment, to be civil, and to not encroach on one another's freedoms. If citizens were guilty of violating someone else's rights, the civil court system in each State would address the issue. Local courts were controlled by juries, and left all issues regarding rights at the local level.

The very notion of the federal government putting itself into a position of encroaching on the rights of the people was seen as tyrannical, and dangerous. After all, how could a centralized, far removed, governmental power that is unfamiliar with local customs and laws properly administer private rights issues?

Tuesday, August 2, 2016

Political Pistachio: Khizr Muazzam Khan Misquotes U.S. Constitution about Immigration

"During the Iran Hostage Crisis in 1979, Congress banned Iranians from immigrating into the United States, and the law was signed by Democrat President Jimmy Carter.  The ban was not put into place because the U.S. Government was trying to be insensitive, nor was it about being racist.  We simply could not separate the good Iranian immigrants from the bad ones.


Islam, regardless of whether or not there are peaceful Muslims who stand against the jihad, has declared war on the United States.  Terrorism is a problem that has been accompanying Muslim refugees in Europe, and is beginning to rear its ugly head here, as well.  Jihadists poison the refugee population, therefore, until we can figure out a way to absolutely determine who is good, and who is bad, a ban on all Muslims may be necessary." 
Read the rest here: Political Pistachio: Khizr Muazzam Khan Misquotes U.S. Constitution about Immigration