Are your rights dependent on what I, as a taxpayer have to say? Really?

I listened to what former Atty General Gonzales had to say on the Geraldo Rivera program and once again was treated to the mindset of those who believe that ones access to their rights depends on what the cost is, monetarily to another citizen. Got that? Yeah I know, what does that mean right? Well the concept is that if the taxpayer in Maryland is going to have to pay for some cost incured by them being held responsible for the health and welfare of a person in California then they get to say what the person in California does. Sort of like a giant crowd of conjoined twins. If one happens to be a tea totaler and his conjoined brother happens to be given to having a drink occasionally? Should the one who drinks be allowed to indulge? Do you see something wrong with the concept? Well the analogy from where I stand is spot on but the concept when it comes to reference to a Nation is terribly flawed. You nor I are ever intended to be the conjoined twins of any other group of persons so that the decision as to whether one person or the other is allowed to enjoy their God Given rights is based on the effect it has on you when the reason for that effect is caused by an unnatural and wrong relationship. Of course another person is not empowered with the right to cause you harm by what they do if what they do is obviously wrong or depraved. But what about if that person over indulges in drink and becomes an alcoholic? What if they never do any harm to you out of intoxication? What if they just get sick and die? Okay you and I will not be able to stand by and let a person who is ill, be ill without some kind of aid from us. But should we be compelled to render such aid by the federal government and because of the cost incurred by that compulsion feel as though we should interfere with that persons right to control of their own life? What if they never become an alcoholic what if they consistently use alcohol responsibly. Then what? Should the fact that some ne'r do well does drink way to excess to the point that he becomes a useless drunk dictate what a responsible person does? How about marijuana? Yes that subject again. How about it?


Atty Gonzales contends that there are cosequences to the long term use of marijuana and because of the cost incured to other citizens by ones long term use of marijuana the plant should remain illegal and the federal government should interject itself into the rights of the states and the citizens and enforce its ban. I won't get into the "scientific" studies on marijuana except to say that yes if one does overuse it it does have ill effects. But the wrong use of aspirin can lead to Reyes syndrome and the wrong use of food can lead to obesity and death. But should aspirin be taken off the shelves and should Mayor Bloomberg get into the business of telling us what we can eat? Mayor of New York,Bloomberg is involved at present in outlawing anything over 16 oz, it is 16 ox isn't it, of sugary drinks. Well I'm a diabetic so whether the "Route 44" size of drink from Sonic is available in Topeka means nothing to me. I can't drink it anyway. I do however drink the BIG sized Diet Dr Pepper. And how long before someone finds a problem with over indulgence in the artificial sweetener in that? Then what? Does the Federal Government get into regulating Diet Dr. Pepper? What if I come home on Friday eve and my wife and dog and I get into the SUV and turn on the tunes and go cruise Topeka sipping on a "Route 44" Vanilla Diet Dr. Pepper? Should the DEA arrest us and prosecute us for drinking artificial sweetener? How about if I come home on Friday and drop a drop or two of hash oil into my Diet Dr. Pepper. No I'm not going driving. But at the rate I would be using it I would not become very intoxicated and there would be no long term effect. I'm not even going to get into the medical use of herbs including marijuana. Because of the lack of investigation of the federal government there is deemed to be no use, whether it has uses or not. The cause for alarm is not there. Not if one isn't becoming over intoxicated and trying to drive or spending their time intoxicated and robbing people. Which can occur even if a person is just plain lazy and wants to be taken care of. And of course the outlawing of anything that can possibly be misused to cause harm is not only insulting to the individual. Does the federal government really have more sense than you? Look at their economic abilities! Really! So, tell me if they outlaw magazines with capacities above 15 rounds in Colorado does that mean that no one can shoot anybody? Huh! So tell me if I want to carry a magazine of 30 rounds and the law says that I can only have a magazine of 15 rounds then what do I do. You've got it I just carry two magazines and swap out. If I want a 32 oz drink of pop and Nanny State says I can't buy one then I just buy two 16 oz drinks. If I want to smoke pot and the feds say no, well I have no feds here now, if I was a pot head I would just light up and not worry about it. A person can, and many do simply grow a plant or two by the back fence or in the hall closet. No I don't have closets and I grow tomatoes and peppers and the like not columbian gold so you can take a "chill pill" Officer Friendly. Just like people Bootleg booze into dry counties and brew moonshine in the woods folks will just extend the middle finger and grow their own.


The government has no right nor should it desire to become involved with the general health of its citizens beyond the encouragement to pursue a healthy life style. In fact when the government feels the need to protect us from our bad lifestyle choices it will also feel the need to control us and outlaw those choices that they deem bad for us. Kinda Like Sharia Law. Or like the alcohol prohibition we already tried and failed at.


When it comes to the idea of the government spending money the image of the Tv program "Border Wars" comes to mind. Those brave border guards and customs agents defending the border from well armed human and drug smugglers. Don't they already have enough to do to protect our borders from heroin and meth and cocaine and other seriously dengerous drugs without having to protect it from some weed? The market for that weed was created when our government decided to make pot illegal. Without going into the reasoning behind the outlawing of pot which I am told had much to do with the fact that it was used by Mexican migrant workers who were looked down upon along with their weed. The fact still remains that if those who had the desire to use pot could grow their own or obtain it from their neighbors it would not be very darn profitable to smuggle it north across our borders. Now would it? No the cartels would not collapse nor would the drug financed gang activity here dry up entirely. They would find another source of income. But the marijuana source would belong to the citizens of the USA legaly and not to the cartels and criminal gangs in the USA. The money spent to interdict the transport of a stupid weed could be used to stop the import of other drugs and humans. Just watch Colorado, if they do outlaw magazines with capacities above 15 rounds they will create a market for 20 and 30 round magazines and if I owned a gun shop in McKraken, Kanorado or Sharon Springs Kansas I would put extra 20 and 30 round mags on the shelves. Just like the counties neighboring the dry counties do a stiff trade in booze the trade in the illegal items for Colorado will increase. Are they going to try to enforce those dopey laws or are those laws going to be another round of do nothing feel good regulations designed to do nothing more than make criminals out of decent citizens?


America you really need to worry about the government that has no qualms about spending enough money to put your children and childrens children into debt, on worthless pursuits while trying to control you to the extent of passing law after law to control every aspect of your life from the number of bullets you have in your rifle to the size of the pop you can buy to whether or not you can smoke a joint or even a damn cigarette. The last government to worry about the diet of its citizens, other than starving them to death, and their smoking habits along with gun possesion was Nazi Germany. No kidding. Think about it. No I'm not kidding think about it! With the idea circulating among our DOJ officials that the cost incurred by the government for taking care of your health might be used to determine how you live your life legally along side of the Affordable care act "Obamacare", think of the possibilities!

Women in Combat

So now the bright minds who have taken it upon themselves to guide our society in the way in which it should go have decided to open the “combat arms” military specialties to women. This will place them directly in combat. “If you read any ancient history, you know that centuries ago it was commonplace for women to fight side by side with men on the battlefield. This is not the stuff of mythology. It is fact. Today, in Iraq women are on the front lines again fighting side by side with their male counterparts. On a mission just south of Baghdad over the winter, a young soldier jumped into the gunner's turret of an armored Humvee and took control of the menacing .50-caliber machine gun. She was 19 years old, weighed barely 100 pounds and had a blond ponytail hanging out from under her Kevlar helmet. "This is what is different about this war," Lt. Col. Richard Rael, commander of the 515th Corps Support Battalion, said of the scene at the time. "Women are fighting it. Women under my command have confirmed kills. These little wisps of things are stronger than anyone could ever imagine and taking on more than most Americans could ever know." (1) Well this author is right . In Roman times a Briton Queen an Icenae known as Boudica was raped along with her daughters and saw her husband killed by Roman troops. The Celtic women were all skilled in the use of weapons anyway so it was not much out of character for her to strike back. And she did. Queen Boudica led the Icenae and several other Briton tribes against the Romans and fought the local legion to a standstill almost destroying them. Eventually Roman tactics won out and she was killed with her army. Who can forget those brave ladies in Corregidor who served under fire for so long before having to surrender to the Japanese. Then there were the women of the Soviet Union who fought the Nazis and the brave ladies of the Palmach many not yet old enough to be called women who stood against appalling odds in the Israeli war of independence. All through the Korean and Vietnam wars our women were caught up in combat. Since combat just seems to go and find you if you are in the area. There are however certain problems that the modern armies have encountered with using women in combat alongside of men and especially quartering them with men. “Thirty-six crew members of the USS Acadia were pregnant and had to be transferred during the supply ship's deployment to the Persian Gulf, naval officials said. More than half became pregnant after the ship was underway, but Navy spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Jeff Smallwood said there were no indications of improper fraternization between men and women on the ship.”(2) As this 1991 article says there was more than close quartering going on here. It is a problem that has always been there when women and men have been mixed into hazardous situations. In fact it is more than that. In a combat type situation privacy will necessarily go out the window. As a young Cavalry Scout I remember being able to take a break and placing my poncho on the ground and my steel helmet up on the side of my Armoured Personnel Carrier and filling it with water. I would strip naked and pull out my extra underclothes and socks and use the warm water in the helmet as an impromptu shower. I didn’t care that there were 7 or 8 other soldiers in the area in full view. Why should I we were all guys. We also shared latrine facilities and slept and did everything in close quarters. Privacy cannot be achieved or expected under such conditions. The fact is that after 4 or 5 days on patrol we would commonly return to the camp and hit the showers. What followed is very intimate. We checked every spot on our brothers bodies that they could not see to remove the ticks that got there. While I am sure that most male troopers would gladly offer to check the female ones somehow I just don’t see that as conducive to order. Sure separate facilities can be supplied and other female troops may be available but in many situations they just don’t exist and cannot be a concern. I got into a discussion with a gender feminist farmer once and of course she knew a farm wife who could work any man into the ground. They always do. But putting aside the 7’ tall 300lb farmwife who has six teats and four children on the teat. She never sleeps, can toss wet square cane bales all day and cook all night and feed a cutting crew and her 20 member family with one hand tied behind her back. It is just not her that will eventually be called to serve. It will be your little blue eyed Suzie cutie that will be called. Forget that argument about they will never draft. Yes they will and little 5’6” 120 lb Suzie will be training to try to kill 6’3” 210 lb men. She will be required to carry water supply and rations and ammo and weapon and all other gear in her pack that any male trooper will be required to carry. But she may not be ready for it. “Age may only be a number, especially in youth, but it has a major impact on physical capabilities, as does gender. Men are, generally speaking, stronger than women. In order to provide for all of the Army's needs for skilled personnel, the physical requirements are modified by age and gender, so as not to preclude skilled military personnel by unfair tests. At the same time, both men and women alike are pushed beyond their self-imposed limits while attending Army Basic Training.”(3) I will never malign a woman’s ability with a weapon or her capability in unarmed combat if properly trained but reality is reality. Sure when we shot Modified Combat matches in the Army we dreaded shooting against the WAC that would occasionally show up at those matches. Women never came out of these things on a whim. They were always skilled and they had biological advantage. Yes they did! Find your favourite woman and lead her to the wall, have her face the wall a few feet from it. Place a chair sidewise against the wall. Have her walk up to the chair until she touches it. Then have her Bend at the waist and put her head against the wall. She needs to reach down now and pick up the chair. Yes she really will do it. Now you big brute, you do it. You probably can’t. She’s made for carrying babies she is built for balance and power in positions that you aren’t. But despite her ability to easily shoot the pants off of most men, like my wife does with me, and her innate ability to excel at Tae Kwon Do and Tai Chi and some other martial arts and her ability to double time till a man drops and some other built in specialties, she is still smaller and lighter. All things being equal a man of 6’ and 200 lbs will use her for a wet mop if he so pleases. The military has known this from the start. This reality has it’s problems. “Rape in civilian life is already unacceptably common. One in six women is raped or sexually assaulted in her lifetime, according to the National Institute of Justice, a number so high it should be considered an epidemic. In the military, however, the situation is even worse. Rape is almost twice as frequent as it is among civilians, especially in wartime. Soldiers are taught to regard one another as family, so military rape resembles incest. And most of the soldiers who rape are older and of higher rank than their victims, so are taking advantage of their authority to attack the very people they are supposed to protect. Department of Defense reports show that nearly 90 percent of rape victims in the Army are junior-ranking women, whose average age is 21, while most of the assailants are non-commissioned officers or junior men, whose average age is 28. This sexual violence persists in spite of strict laws against rape in the military and a concerted Pentagon effort in 2005 to reform procedures for reporting the crime. Unfortunately, neither the press nor the many teams of psychologists and sociologists who study veterans ever seem to ask why. The answer appears to lie in a confluence of military culture, the psychology of the assailants and the nature of war“.(4) When it comes to the dubious talent of killing other people it just helps allot if you have a certain mentality and an extra “Y” chromosome would help too. Soldiers do not take to sensitivity training well. They will sit politely and listen and parrot back what was told to them if necessary but it is in their nature to hunt and hurt and kill. Hopefully this nature is tempered by a code of etiquette and is brought under control to be used only against ones enemies. The man who is highly motivated in this end and is highly skilled in whatever his specialty is and can be directed by his superiors will do well as a military man. Unfortunately it is also connected to the sex drive which is made doubly hard to control when you dangle a tasty snack in front of the wolf. No excuses it should not happen and must not be tolerated but there should be no shock when the situation is rigged so as to encourage such behaviour. Bad, intolerable but reality. It is and has always been my opinion and many others that the female psyche is best suited to and should be used for the nurture of children. Now this is generally speaking. I realize that today’s woman has been through a concentrated education designed to eradicate so far as possible the mother instinct. Yet we have to admit that we still need it. I also believe that intentionally injecting a woman into the daily stress of combat and exposing her to the blood and gore of that worst of men’s pursuits is debilitating to the female psyche in ways that a man cannot understand. As a believer in God and his design in creation I believe that the woman is and has always been intended to be the bearer of life and man if need be has the duty to hunt and kill and to protect that bringer of life that he so loves. But what if this being that was designed to give birth and bring forth and nurture life is exposed to horror beyond what she is intended to behold? “we are starting see the effects women fighting on the front lines and studies are indicating that more women are suffering from more debilitating forms of PTSD. According to Paula Schnurr, a lead researcher for a 6 million dollar study on the effects of PTSD in women, “data indicate that female military personnel are far more likely than their male counterparts to have been exposed to some kind of trauma or multiple traumas before joining the military or being deployed in combat. That may include physical assault, sexual abuse or rape.” (5) Yes the fact is supported by the VA Hospitals that women are more affected by the things that tend to warp men. And I know it is popular for the social engineers to spout off with “Well men can be sodomized too”. The fact is that in modern times yes some male prisoners of war have been sodomized but it is far more common for women to be raped by their captors who tend to be men. Yes we fight men. And no they don’t all go to sensitivity meetings and concentrate on how to be caring and thoughtful toward their female captives. They don’t give a damn. Yes that little pony tailed M2B princess jumped right in there and pushed the thumb lever down on that machine gun and drove off the bad guys. I could train a spider monkey to do that. Heck I trained new troops to do it. But in a fight it’s different. Someday that pony tailed barely 100lb darling that the Col. Spoke off will be alone and advancing on a stairwell looking to gain an advantage to see if she can spot her unit so as to rejoin them if possible. She comes around a corner and meets Mustafa a 6’ 195 lb Taliban tribesman who grabs her by the shirt and takes the M4 out of her hands and throws it aside. She is barely 100 lbs right well Mustafa’s lunch weighs more than that. Poor little gal gets stomped and raped and thrown off of the rooftop. Then I and a bunch of old veterans have to go and burry her because she just plain was not suited to the job. It happens and when it does we have to bury the evidence. The big media doesn’t tell you. Sure Women can do all sorts of things but just because they can why in God’ name should they? The mission of the Military is to break things and kill people not to achieve new social restructuring no matter how progressive it seems. (1)Democratic underground.com (2)Washington Post, April 30 1991 (3)Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/3193862 Christine A. Harman (4)Helen Benedict “In These Times” (5)Women in Combat, More Prone to PTSD 21 March 2005

No Guns = Safe right?

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.