*VIDEO* Say, Remember When Joe Biden Thought Government Collection Of Phone Records Was A Bad Idea?

.

How the Left defines immorality. Anything that holds back their agenda

Joe Biden proves once again that the Left judges morality on the basis of their own agenda. If something helps them further their agenda, it is moral. If it hurts their push for more Leftism, then it is immoral.

Via Politico:

Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday bashed voting rights requirements — calling them “immoral, callous” — and warned of political consequences for those who try to impose barriers to casting a ballot.

“To me it is the most immoral, callous thing that can be done, the idea of making it more difficult to vote,” Biden said at the annual gala dinner of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a minority-focused public policy organization.

The vice president pointed to data indicating that in 2011 and 2012 at least 180 bills in 41 states were introduced that aimed to stiffen requirements for voting — voter identification measures, for example.

“If there’s one thing people who want to restrict the vote didn’t understand, they didn’t understand what it means when you tell someone, ‘I’m going to make it difficult for you to vote,’” Biden said, appearing to take a swipe at Republicans. “It means, and I was certain and Barack and I talked about it, you did too, that it guaranteed people would show. The more they attempt to restrict the right of minorities, the greater the determination and the stronger the will to turn out, and that’s exactly what everyone saw in 2012.”

 

Oh GOOD GRIEF! Here comes the Nanny Staters again!

Taxing “violent images”? Anyone who favors giving the government that type of power is an idiot!

Via Politico:

[T]hose present for the meeting included Franklin Graham, son of the evangelist Billy Graham and CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, and Barrett Duke, the vice president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, the Southern Baptist Convention’s public policy arm.

Graham, two people in the meeting said, told Biden the government should consider taxing media companies that broadcast violent images and produce violent video games.

“He floated ideas like the idea that violence should be taxed so that those proceeds would go to help victims and their families,” said Rabbi Julie Schonfeld, the executive vice president of the Rabbinical Assembly.

Biden told Graham that there was “no restriction on the ability to do that, there’s no legal reason why they couldn’t” tax violent images, Clark added.

Franklin Graham, another Overly Social Conservative who seemingly has no clue what liberty is. What a douche nozzle. Guess what Graham, when you give government to tax “violence” you also give them the authority to determine what “violence” is.

Roger Ailes: Obama Is Lazy, Biden Dumb As an Ashtray

Well, I do not know about that Biden crack I think ash trays might have higher IQ’s

Fox News chief Roger Ailes says President Barack Obama is “lazy’’ and claims the commander-in-chief “never worked a day in his life,’’ a controversial new book claims.

Ailes also takes shots at Vice President Joe Biden, saying, “he’s as dumb as an ashtray,” and at Newt Gingrich, who he says is a “sore loser.”

“Obama’s the one who never worked a day in his life. He never earned a penny that wasn’t public money,’’ Ailes said, according to Chafets.

“How many fundraisers does he attend every week? How often does he play basketball and golf? I wish I had that kind of time. … He’s lazy, but the media won’t report that.” 

Ouch! What he says is true though. What jobs has Obama held? And no, community organizing agitating does not count

 

Colorado Communists, er Democrats Trying to Ban Shotgun Used for Hunting

What would Joe Biden shoot people through his door with? 

Colorado Democrats are proposing legislation that will ban the the most popular selling firearm for hunting. The pump or semi-automatic shotgun is the gun most hunters in Colorado use and will be banned by the legislation. 

CBS Local reported:

A popular hunting shotgun could be banned under one of the bills moving through the state Capitol.

A pump or semi-automatic shotgun is the gun most hunters in Colorado use. It’s a gun state Sen. Greg Brophy, R-Wray, says could be banned under a bill that’s already passed the House and Gov. John Hickenlooper says he’ll sign.

“They’re coming after the standard shotgun,” Brophy told CBS4 Political Specialist Shaun Boyd.

Brophy says if Democrats succeed in passing a bill limiting large capacity magazines in Colorado, they’ll outlaw the most popular selling firearm for hunting

Those Colorado Democrats REALLY hate guns don’t they?

Sheriff Debunks Gun Magazine Fallacies, Calls Joe Biden’s Shotgun Advice Silly (Video)

Sheriff Debunks Gun Magazine ‘Fallacies’ In This Viral Vid (Plus: His Response To Biden’s Shotgun Advice) – The Blaze

A video featuring Sheriff Ken Campbell of Boone County, Ind., is capturing the attention of gun enthusiasts who have consistently argued that capping magazine sizes will do very little to save American lives. In a 14-minute instructional and debunk clip, Campbell narrates why a ban on high-capacity magazine sizes is ineffective, showcasing – through examples – the idea’s purported deficiencies. In an interview with TheBlaze, he explained the video’s purpose and detailed his views on the current gun control debate.

When asked whether capping magazine sizes would saves lives, Campbell was forthright in sharing his views with TheBlaze.

“I think it’s a great fallacy to believe that it would,” he said candidly. “You’ve got a standard capacity versus a 10 round. From a citizen standpoint… all we’re doing is making it more difficult for [people] to defend themselves against bad guys.”

The sheriff also took aim at recent comments uttered by Vice President Joe Biden. While Campbell said he respects the politician, Biden’s statements about shotguns were simply silly, he argued.

“You don’t fire rounds of a shotgun in the air – and you don’t shoot them through a door. Where I come from that’s called crime,” he said of the vice-president’s controversial recommendations.

………

Campbell also noted that bullets “aren’t magic” and that it could take more than 10 to stop a bad guy, particularly one who is fervent and dedicated to committing his or her crime. He said that those who break the law aren’t concerned with abiding by regulations, so creating magazine capacity restrictions simply doesn’t make sense. The law abiding will follow, but criminals, naturally, won’t.

“By limiting the access to standard magazines… I think you are restricting a good American’s opportunity to protect himself and his family,” the sheriff continued.

Additionally, Campbell defended the U.S. Constitution and said that the Framers were smart men who had the ability to profoundly look into the future. He dismissed arguments centered around the idea that Americans were never intended to have AR-15s and other such weapons.

The law enforcement professional compared improved gun technologies to advancement in free-speech tools like Twitter and Facebook. While the Founders couldn’t have imagined such progressed social media tools, the First Amendment surely still covers them just as he believes the Second protects so-called assault rifles.

“Our constitution has stood its test for more than 200 years and I think it can go for 200 more if we leave it alone and follow it,” he said.

If you can’t yet tell, Campbell, who also instructs firearms courses at Gunsite Academy in Paulden, Ariz., is a passionate proponent of the Second Amendment. So, when he was asked to narrate the aforementioned video project (produced by the Defense Small Arms Advisory Council) he was happy to oblige.

The goal of the video, which is divided into two sections – one focuses on magazine sizes and the other on so-called assault weapons – is to dispel gun fallacies and misconceptions. The second portion of the project has not yet been released.

It attempts to address apparent magazine capacity myths, while also providing practical examples surrounding why these initiatives aren’t as beneficial as some politicians claim. The clip opens by introducing the issue with some text slides, then it moves into video evidence, showing what happens when different guns and magazine sizes are used.

Of particular note, it seems to debunk – or at least challenge – the notion that a reload of magazines (pending a cap on the number of bullets one can hold) opens a window of opportunity for someone to tackle an assailant. Experienced shooters are shown to be too quick to allow for enough time for a tackle. However, some would argue that an inexperienced gunman might struggle more with this, providing a wider opening for action.

The clip concludes by noting that proposed magazine size changes don’t truly pass “the common sense test.” Watch it for yourself, below:

.

.
Funded by Mark Westrom, owner of ArmaLite, a gun manufacturer, the video was filmed in Feb. Campbell, a police officer since 1979, made it a point to note that he wasn’t paid for the project and that he narrated the video out of love for the Second Amendment. He hopes that viewers will watch it and, based on the information, make an educated decision for themselves regarding the magazine capacity issue.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

Bob Owens: Why does Joe Biden Hate Girl Scouts?

I hope no Girl Scouts try to sell Crazy Uncle Joe any cookies, his door can be damned dangerous

I’m glad the Girl Scouts are almost done with cookie sales for the year. Thanks to Joe Biden, selling Thin Mints door-to-door could get you killed.

A Virginia man who followed Vice President Joe Biden’s advice to fire through doors isnow facing criminal charges.

Vice President Joe Biden told Field & Stream magazine in an interview published Monday, “[if] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door.”

Coincidentally, a 22-year-old man in Virginia Beach, Va., was charged Monday with reckless handling of a firearm after doing just that a couple days earlier.

Local TV station WAVY 10 reports that the man observed two masked men leaning into his bedroom window. The men allegedly had weapons and told him to close his bedroom door. He stepped outside of his bedroom and did as instructed, then fired his shotgun through the closed door and then several more times at the window.

Had Trevor Lamont Snowden actually hit anyone, his charges could have been upgraded to felonies.

This is the second time in days that the Vice President has advised citizens to commit crimes—potentially felony crimes—by dangerously and recklessly discharging firearms.

In the first instance, he advised firing “two blasts” into the air, despite the fact that shots fired into the air must come back to earth, and when they do they have the power to kill. Four-year-old Marquel Peters was killed by someone firing a bullet into the air, as was 15-year-old Rachel Yoder. Yoder’s killer was charged with reckless homicide.

In the second instance, Biden advised firing shots through doors. Firing through doors, without knowing who or what is on the other side, is grounds for homicide charges in every state in the union and in nearly every country overseas.  Olympian Oscar Pistorius has been charged with murder in South Africa, after firing shots through an interior door that killed his girlfriend. He likely would have faced murder charges even if the person on the other side of the door had been an intruder.

If anyone could possibly be a worse spokesman than Biden for gun control, I cannot imagine who it would be. The man is  a buffoon, a walking, talking gaffe factory. But, what else can you expect when you ask anyone to defend a position like the gun grabbing Left takes? They are trying to seem as non-threatening to gun owners as possible. That is a scam of course, we know what the Left wants, and that is to take American’s guns away. We know this because that is what Leftism ALWAYS does. It disarms the people. But, they send idiots like Joe Biden out there to say things that make them look like they want to defend the right to both own guns and defend yourself, when, in truth they want the exact opposite. So, of course Biden will stick both feet and part of his left arm in his mouth, how can he help but do that?

While we are at it, let me remind all of you that when police chiefs talk about the need for tighter gun restrictions remember that they are politicians, not real cops! They are no more than tools of the Left, here is a classic example

Latest Moonbat outburst- Women will be Beaten Because of GOP

That these nimrods spout such nonsense is bad. That a significant number of Americans believe them is far worse

Via CNS News:

Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.) said that if the sequester goes into effect, women who are victims of domestic violence will be “forced to stay in their homes with their abuser” at the “hands of the GOP.”

The automatic across-the-board cuts, known as the sequester, are set to take effect on Friday – a 1.2% reduction in increased federal spending in 2013, or about $44 billion out of $3.6 trillion.

“The harm is real,” Edwards said.  “230,000 victims will be calling crisis hotlines and those calls will go unanswered.  230,000 calls to crisis hotlines around the country.”

“So can you imagine that in the middle of the night a woman is being battered, she has her two children, she wants to get to safety, she places a phone call to a hotline and that line goes unanswered,” she said.  “That’s what sequestration means to victims of domestic violence.”

Of course, the sequestration is a reduction, a 1% reduction in spending INCREASES, that is not really a cut in spending at all. The Democrats are trying to scare all of us into panic mode. And, when the dire calamities they predict do not happen? It will not matter, the Democrats will just go on saying they DID happen because of those evil Republicans.

Maxine Waters Challenges Joe Biden For Title Of Dumbest Person In The Federal Government (Video)

Maxine Waters: Sequester Could Cause ‘170 Million Jobs’ To Be Lost – National Review

Maxine Waters (D., Calif.), in an attempt to outdo President Obama’s claims that even minor cuts will bring the republic’s long run to an ignominious end, warned today that the sequester could cause “over 170 million jobs” to be lost:

.

.
134 million people have jobs in America.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

——————————————————————————————————————————-

Related video:

.

.

More Advice From Joe Biden: ‘Just Fire The Shotgun Through The Door’

More Advice From Joe Biden: ‘Just Fire The Shotgun Through The Door’ – Washington Examiner

In an interview with Field & Stream magazine on Monday, Vice President Joe Biden once again touted shotguns as the best weapon for self-defense, offering advice similar to the questionable instructions he gave during a Facebook town hall last week.

During that interview, Biden explained his suggestion to his wife Jill for handling an intruder.

“If there’s ever a problem,” Biden said he told his wife, “just walk out on the balcony here— walk out, put that double barrel shot gun and fire two blasts outside the house.”

The problem with Biden’s advice is that it would empty the shotgun and possibly get the shooter in trouble with the law.

Undaunted, Biden gave similar advice in his interview with the hunting and fishing magazine.

Field & Stream asked the Vice President whether so-called assault rifles and high-capacity clips, which the administration wants banned, should be allowed for self-defense and target practice.

Well, the way in which we measure it is—I think most scholars would say—is that as long as you have a weapon sufficient to be able to provide your self-defense,” Biden said. “I did one of these town-hall meetings on the Internet and one guy said, “Well, what happens when the end days come? What happens when there’s the earthquake? I live in California, and I have to protect myself.”

I said, “Well, you know, my shotgun will do better for you than your AR-15, because you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door.” Most people can handle a shotgun a hell of a lot better than they can a semiautomatic weapon in terms of both their aim and in terms of their ability to deter people coming. We can argue whether that’s true or not, but it is no argument that, for example, a shotgun could do the same job of protecting you. Now, granted, you can come back and say, “Well, a machine gun could do a better job of protecting me.” No one’s arguing we should make machine guns legal.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

Video-World’s dumbest politician says Americans are not worried about the economy anymore

Good Freaking Grief

You have heard of people who do not know anything? Well Crazy Uncle Joe doesn’t even suspect anything

*VIDEO* Biden: “If There’s Ever A Problem, Just Walk Out On The Balcony… Put That Double-Barrel Shotgun & Fire 2 Blasts”

.

Biden to go on gun control tour?

Well, someone get a Gaffe-O-Meter ready, but I find this interesting because this the rhetoric Biden is talking

Vice President Biden delivered a message for rural America: He’s coming to talk about gun violence.

“I’m coming, I’m coming,” Biden said here after saying he’d read a skeptical comment in the local newspaper about the White House outreach to rural areas. “The one thing I want to make clear is this is, this message of rational gun safety is a message that will be embraced by rural communities as well as urban communities simply because it makes sense. But we cannot wait. The still voices of those children require us, requires us to speak now.”

And this is what the American people think about theeffectiveness of gun control laws

Via Breitbart:

In a Pew Research Poll listing 21 things the public believes should be government priorities for 2013, passing more gun laws is number 18 out of 21.

The majority of Americans simply do not see gun control as a pressing concern problem like President Obama and the Democrats do.

Instead, the American people are worried about the economy (first on the list), jobs (second), the deficit (third), and terrorism (fourth).

So, maybe it is not about the will of the people, but the fetish for control that Democrats have. Speaking of control, guess which issue is dead last on the list. Go on, guess, here is a hint, Al Gore would be very upset.

Captain Gaffetastic strikes again!

Good old Joe Biden, sometimes his gaffes are simply him letting the truth slip out!

Via Beltway Confidential:

Vice President Joe Biden was perhaps a little too candid on the subject of new gun control laws when talking to reporters Thursday after a meeting with Senate Democrats in the Capitol.

“Nothing we’re going to do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down to a thousand a year from what we’re at now,” Biden said, according to a Politico report.

From the mouths of babes and morons……

 

Your Sunday Best

Smitty has video of Ted Nugent. I cannot agree more Ted

Zilla has an appreciation for gun appreciation

Allergic to Bull mocks Time Warner’s double standards

Steve: The population control nuts are back

1389: Muslim Thuggery

 

Ted sums up Mayor Bloomberg: That’s funny.  Most people I know are not Socialist Elitist Power Mad Authoritarians with around the clock armed bodyguards.

Donald Douglas has a video with an incredibly sexy Marina Lambrini Diamandis singing in the shower with a bunch of Metrosexuals

Bob Belvedere honors Emmanuelle Chriqui

Matt debunks the false racial narrative

Matt also has this cartoon

Bill Quick: Some idiots should not have guns

Doug Ross: Eric Holder, a gun-runner pursuing himself

EBL has the naughty Anna Kendrick

Gateway Pundit has your demagogue of the day

BC is not a fan of Michelle Obama’s new do

 

Feral Irishman has one cool pooch

Maggie: It is not the guns, it is the lax sentencing

William Teach has his Blogelss Pin Up Post

Randy: If Joe Biden donated his brain to science….

Proof has your links 

Reaganite Republican: That Miss Croatia makes me feel funny

Rio Norte. Liberals really are that ignorant!

That Mr. G Guy: Media Malpractice

Classic Liberal: PORK

Last Tradition has Rush saying what I have been saying for weeks now

Lonely Conservative: Newsweek still sucks

The Right Scoop: God Bless General Lee

Theo: TOTTY

 

Troglopundit: I still love BJ and the Bear

 

Milton Wolf goes Napolean Dynamite on Manti and Barack

Wyblog: When Liberals face the truth of “free”

Zion’s Trumpet: Schuck you Senator Fumer!

 

Bob Belvedere on the vital role of state sovereignty

Read what Bob has to say, then I have some comments

It lies in state and county and local officials taking their oaths to The Constitution seriously.

It lies in people like Sheriff Tim Mueller of Linn County Oregon.

From CNN, Ed Payne and Ric Ward reporting [tip of the fedora to Wombat-Socho's Live At Five]:

An Oregon sheriff says he will not enforce any federal regulation that President Barack Obama lays out in his package of gun control proposals Wednesday. Linn County Sheriff Tim Mueller joins several other public officials across the nation who have decided to square off with the White House even before it outlines what its plans are for expanded measures.

Mueller sent a letter to Vice President Joe Biden this week saying he won’t enforce any federal regulation “offending the constitutional rights of my citizens.” He won’t permit federal officers to come to his county to enforce such laws either, he said.

Mueller’s defiant stand exploded into a groundswell of support. His letter — posted on the department’s Facebook page — earned more than 59,000 likes and shares — and was growing by the minute.

Bravo, sir.

It lies in thinking like this:

In Texas, a lawmaker said this week that he will introduce legislation that would make it illegal to enforce a federal gun ban.

“At some point there needs to be a showdown between the states and the federal government over the Supremacy Clause,” Republican Rep. Steve Toth told WOAI 1200-AM. “It is our responsibility to push back when those laws are infringed by King Obama.”

Indeed, it is time for a showdown between the forces that want to aggregate to the national government more powers than those that are enumerated in The Constitution and those of us who believe that it should be followed to the letter.

I could not agree more, it is all our duty to honor the Constitution. The federal government has, over the history of this nation grown far past the intent of the Founders. The Constitution constrained not the people, but the federal government. It enumerated certain rights, natural rights as Franklin called them that neither come from government, or can be restricted by government. That IS the most critical founding principle of this nation. And that principle has been under attack since the very birth of the United States. Alexander Hamilton fought against it, Madison and Jefferson battled for it.

The idea that States have a right to ignore, or even nullify certain federal laws originated after President John Adams signed into law the Alien and Sedition Acts, which, in part criminalized speech critical of the government. It was, again, Madison and Jefferson who fought against these laws, writing the Virginia Resolution, which Madison wrote, and the Kentucky Resolution, which Jefferson wrote. Anyone who questions the patriotism of those who still think the States are and ought to be sovereign should read these two pieces of our history

From The Kentucky Resolution

1. Resolved, That the several States composing, the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes — delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force: that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral part, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.

2. Resolved, That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations, and no other crimes, whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, not prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” therefore the act of Congress, passed on the 14th day of July, 1798, and intituled “An Act in addition to the act intituled An Act for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States,” as also the act passed by them on the — day of June, 1798, intituled “An Act to punish frauds committed on the bank of the United States,” (and all their other acts which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution,) are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory.

3. Resolved, That it is true as a general principle, and is also expressly declared by one of the amendments to the Constitutions, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, our prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”; and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, and were reserved to the States or the people: that thus was manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot be separated from their use should be tolerated, rather than the use be destroyed. And thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the United States of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the same, as this State, by a law passed on the general demand of its citizens, had already protected them from all human restraint or interference. And that in addition to this general principle and express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to the Constitution, which expressly declares, that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press”: thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch, that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others, arid that libels, falsehood, and defamation, equally with heresy and false religion, are withheld from the cognizance of federal tribunals. That, therefore, the act of Congress of the United States, passed on the 14th day of July, 1798, intituled “An Act in addition to the act intituled An Act for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States,” which does abridge the freedom of the press, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force.

4. Resolved, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the — day of July, 1798, intituled “An Act concerning aliens,” which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force.

5. Resolved. That in addition to the general principle, as well as the express declaration, that powers not delegated are reserved, another and more special provision, inserted in the Constitution from abundant caution, has declared that “the migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year 1808” that this commonwealth does admit the migration of alien friends, described as the subject of the said act concerning aliens: that a provision against prohibiting their migration, is a provision against all acts equivalent thereto, or it would be nugatory: that to remove them when migrated, is equivalent to a prohibition of their migration, and is, therefore, contrary to the said provision of the Constitution, and void.

6. Resolved, That the imprisonment of a person under the protection of the laws of this commonwealth, on his failure to obey the simple order of the President to depart out of the United States, as is undertaken by said act intituled “An Act concerning aliens” is contrary to the Constitution, one amendment to which has provided that “no person shalt be deprived of liberty without due progress of law”; and that another having provided that “in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to public trial by an impartial jury, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, to be confronted with the witnesses against him, to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense;” the same act, undertaking to authorize the President to remove a person out of the United States, who is under the protection of the law, on his own suspicion, without accusation, without jury, without public trial, without confrontation of the witnesses against him, without heating witnesses in his favor, without defense, without counsel, is contrary to the provision also of the Constitution, is therefore not law, but utterly void, and of no force: that transferring the power of judging any person, who is under the protection of the laws from the courts, to the President of the United States, as is undertaken by the same act concerning aliens, is against the article of the Constitution which provides that “the judicial power of the United States shall be vested in courts, the judges of which shall hold their offices during good behavior”; and that the said act is void for that reason also. And it is further to be noted, that this transfer of judiciary power is to that magistrate of the general government who already possesses all the Executive, and a negative on all Legislative powers.

7. Resolved, That the construction applied by the General Government (as is evidenced by sundry of their proceedings) to those parts of the Constitution of the United States which delegate to Congress a power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” and “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution, the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof,” goes to the destruction of all limits prescribed to their powers by the Constitution: that words meant by the instrument to be subsidiary only to the execution of limited powers, ought not to be so construed as themselves to give unlimited powers, nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that instrument: that the proceedings of the General Government under color of these articles, will be a fit and necessary subject of revisal and correction, at a time of greater tranquillity, while those specified in the preceding resolutions call for immediate redress.

8th. Resolved, That a committee of conference and correspondence be appointed, who shall have in charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to the Legislatures of the several States: to assure them that this commonwealth continues in the same esteem of their friendship and union which it has manifested from that moment at which a common danger first suggested a common union: that it considers union, for specified national purposes, and particularly to those specified in their late federal compact, to be friendly, to the peace, happiness and prosperity of all the States: that faithful to that compact, according to the plain intent and meaning in which it was understood and acceded to by the several parties, it is sincerely anxious for its preservation: that it does also believe, that to take from the States all the powers of self-government and transfer them to a general and consolidated government, without regard to the special delegations and reservations solemnly agreed to in that compact, is not for the peace, happiness or prosperity of these States; and that therefore this commonwealth is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the general government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non fœderis) to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them: that nevertheless, this commonwealth, from motives of regard and respect for its co States, has wished to communicate with them on the subject: that with them alone it is proper to communicate, they alone being parties to the compact, and solely authorized to judge in the last resort of the powers exercised under it, Congress being not a party, but merely the creature of the compact, and subject as to its assumptions of power to the final judgment of those by whom, and for whose use itself and its powers were all created and modified: that if the acts before specified should stand, these conclusions would flow from them; that the general government may place any act they think proper on the list of crimes and punish it themselves whether enumerated or not enumerated by the constitution as cognizable by them: that they may transfer its cognizance to the President, or any other person, who may himself be the accuser, counsel, judge and jury, whose suspicions may be the evidence, his order the sentence, his officer the executioner, and his breast the sole record of the transaction: that a very numerous and valuable description of the inhabitants of these States being, by this precedent, reduced, as outlaws, to the absolute dominion of one man, and the barrier of the Constitution thus swept away from us all, no ramparts now remains against the passions and the powers of a majority in Congress to protect from a like exportation, or other more grievous punishment, the minority of the same body, the legislatures, judges, governors and counsellors of the States, nor their other peaceable inhabitants, who may venture to reclaim the constitutional rights and liberties of the States and people, or who for other causes, good or bad, may be obnoxious to the views, or marked by the suspicions of the President, or be thought dangerous to his or their election, or other interests, public or personal; that the friendless alien has indeed been selected as the safest subject of a first experiment; but the citizen will soon follow, or rather, has already followed, for already has a sedition act marked him as its prey: that these and successive acts of the same character, unless arrested at the threshold, necessarily drive these States into revolution and blood and will furnish new calumnies against republican government, and new pretexts for those who wish it to be believed that man cannot be governed but by a rod of iron: that it would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism — free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go; and let the honest advocate of confidence read the Alien and Sedition acts, and say if the Constitution has not been wise in fixing limits to the government it created, and whether we should be wise in destroying those limits, Let him say what the government is, if it be not a tyranny, which the men of our choice have con erred on our President, and the President of our choice has assented to, and accepted over the friendly stranger to whom the mild spirit of our country and its law have pledged hospitality and protection: that the men of our choice have more respected the bare suspicion of the President, than the solid right of innocence, the claims of justification, the sacred force of truth, and the forms and substance of law and justice. In questions of powers, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. That this commonwealth does therefore call on its co-States for an expression of their sentiments on the acts concerning aliens and for the punishment of certain crimes herein before specified, plainly declaring whether these acts are or are not authorized by the federal compact. And it doubts not that their sense will be so announced as to prove their attachment unaltered to limited government, weather general or particular. And that the rights and liberties of their co-States will be exposed to no dangers by remaining embarked in a common bottom with their own. That they will concur with this commonwealth in considering the said acts as so palpably against the Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration that that compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the General Government, but that it will proceed in the exercise over these States, of all powers whatsoever: that they will view this as seizing the rights of the States, and consolidating them in the hands of the General Government, with a power assumed to bind the States (not merely as the cases made federal, casus fœderis but), in all cases whatsoever, by laws made, not with their consent, but by others against their consent: that this would be to surrender the form of government we have chosen, and live under one deriving its powers from its own will, and not from our authority; and that the co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal, will concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each take measures of its own for providing that neither these acts, nor any others of the General Government not plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shalt be exercised within their respective territories.

9th. Resolved, That the said committee be authorized to communicate by writing or personal conference, at any times or places whatever, with any person or persons who may be appointed by any one or more co-States to correspond or confer with them; and that they lay their proceedings before the next session of Assembly.

From the Virginia Resolutions

RESOLVED, That the General Assembly of Virginia, doth unequivocably express a firm resolution to maintain and defend the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of this State, against every aggression either foreign or domestic, and that they will support the government of the United States in all measures warranted by the former.

That this assembly most solemnly declares a warm attachment to the Union of the States, to maintain which it pledges all its powers; and that for this end, it is their duty to watch over and oppose every infraction of those principles which constitute the only basis of that Union, because a faithful observance of them, can alone secure it’s existence and the public happiness.

That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.

That the General Assembly doth also express its deep regret, that a spirit has in sundry instances, been manifested by the federal government, to enlarge its powers by forced constructions of the constitutional charter which defines them; and that implications have appeared of a design to expound certain general phrases (which having been copied from the very limited grant of power, in the former articles of confederation were the less liable to be misconstrued) so as to destroy the meaning and effect, of the particular enumeration which necessarily explains and limits the general phrases; and so as to consolidate the states by degrees, into one sovereignty, the obvious tendency and inevitable consequence of which would be, to transform the present republican system of the United States, into an absolute, or at best a mixed monarchy.

That the General Assembly doth particularly protest against the palpable and alarming infractions of the Constitution, in the two late cases of the “Alien and Sedition Acts” passed at the last session of Congress; the first of which exercises a power no where delegated to the federal government, and which by uniting legislative and judicial powers to those of executive, subverts the general principles of free government; as well as the particular organization, and positive provisions of the federal constitution; and the other of which acts, exercises in like manner, a power not delegated by the constitution, but on the contrary, expressly and positively forbidden by one of the amendments thereto; a power, which more than any other, ought to produce universal alarm, because it is levelled against that right of freely examining public characters and measures, and of free communication among the people thereon, which has ever been justly deemed, the only effectual guardian of every other right.

That this state having by its Convention, which ratified the federal Constitution, expressly declared, that among other essential rights, “the Liberty of Conscience and of the Press cannot be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified by any authority of the United States,” and from its extreme anxiety to guard these rights from every possible attack of sophistry or ambition, having with other states, recommended an amendment for that purpose, which amendment was, in due time, annexed to the Constitution; it would mark a reproachable inconsistency, and criminal degeneracy, if an indifference were now shewn, to the most palpable violation of one of the Rights, thus declared and secured; and to the establishment of a precedent which may be fatal to the other.

That the good people of this commonwealth, having ever felt, and continuing to feel, the most sincere affection for their brethren of the other states; the truest anxiety for establishing and perpetuating the union of all; and the most scrupulous fidelity to that constitution, which is the pledge of mutual friendship, and the instrument of mutual happiness; the General Assembly doth solemnly appeal to the like dispositions of the other states, in confidence that they will concur with this commonwealth in declaring, as it does hereby declare, that the acts aforesaid, are unconstitutional; and that the necessary and proper measures will be taken by each, for co-operating with this state, in maintaining the Authorities, Rights, and Liberties, referred to the States respectively, or to the people.

That the Governor be desired, to transmit a copy of the foregoing Resolutions to the executive authority of each of the other states, with a request that the same may be communicated to the Legislature thereof; and that a copy be furnished to each of the Senators and Representatives representing this state in the Congress of the United States.

These two wise men are, to me the best possible sources from which to draw on in this debate. The man who penned our Declaration of Independence, and the man who is known as the Father of our Constitution. Two men who were far different from the reactionary politicos we have too many of today. Two men who held the Constitution dear, two men who understood that a federal government, left unchecked, would soon rage out of control, and would subjugate both the States, and the people.

 

When your gun is not your gun-The Other McCain

Stacy McCain explains the “gun show loophole”

Your firearms are your private property and you have the right to sell your private property, right? Well, not if Joe Biden gets his way:

“[T]here is a surprising – so far – a surprising recurrence of suggestions that we have universal background checks. Not just close the gun show loophole but total, universal background checks, including private sales.”

Last week, I explained that when liberals talk about “closing the gun-show loophole,” they mean prohibiting inviduals from selling their own guns — so that your gun isn’t really your gun anymore.

Gun control=people control. And, once the guns are controlled……all your rights are in peril

 

Might President Obama try to bypass Congress and use executive orders to curtail gun rights?

I would pray not, but, would it surprise me, given this president’s record of ignoring the will of the people, and the letter of the Constitution, well……

Well, that is what this and several other reports say floating around on the web.  Here’s the Weekly Standard:

Vice President Joe Biden revealed that President Barack Obama might use an executive order to deal with guns.

 

“The president is going to act,” said Biden, giving some comments to the press before a meeting with victims of gun violence. “There are executives orders, there’s executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required.”

 

Biden said that this is a moral issue and that “it’s critically important that we act.”

Remember this folks, Obama is not worried about reelection now. He is not concerned with what the people say either. We saw how little value he and his fellow Leftists in the Democratic Party had for the will of the people when they shoved Obamacare down our throats. Now, though,unlike during the battle over Obamacare, the Republicans hold the House, so that would not succeed. There is some thought that the Senate might not even support gun registration. But, the threat of executive orders hangs over our heads, it is something I have worried about. Also recall that Obamacare was passed because the Democrats saw a chance to instill a “fundamental change” in America that they had been seeking for a long time. This time they see another opportunity to further alter the direction of America. 

 

Al Gore sells Current TV to al-Jazeera UPDATED! Al Gore does not pay his fair share!

I think they paid five dollars for it, but the price isn’t the issue, the ideology is. We all know al-Jazeera is heavily biased, and apparently, Al Gore found their ideology similar to his

Before pan-Arab broadcaster al-Jazeera bought Current TV, the fledgling cable news network founded by former Vice President Al Gore, conservative commentator Glenn Beck had pursued purchasing the company — and was rejected.

The Wall Street Journal revealed that when Beck’s TheBlaze TV sought ownership of the Current broadcasting network, the bid was rejected because the principles of Beck’s company did not align with those of Current.

“Other suitors who didn’t share Current’s ideology were rebuffed,” reporters Keach Hagey and John Jannarone wrote in the Wall Street Journal. “Glenn Beck’s TheBlaze approached Current about buying the channel last year, but was told that ‘the legacy of who the network goes to is important to us and we are sensitive to networks not aligned with our point of view,’” according to a person familiar with the negotiations.” 

The former vice president confirmed the sale Wednesday that reportedly netted $500 million, saying in a statement that Al-Jazeera shares Current TV’s mission “to give voice to those who are not typically heard; to speak truth to power; to provide independent and diverse points of view; and to tell the stories that no one else is telling.”

In other words, Gore is a Leftist, and that makes him far closer to a “news” outfit that carries water for terrorists than to American Conservatives. The mask slips a little more, revealing what the American Left really is.

UPDATE!! I guess Joe Biden might call Al Gore unpatriotic!

Liberal hypocrisy, thy name is Al:

Al Jazeera did not disclose the purchase price, but people with direct knowledge of the deal pegged it at around $500 million, indicating a $100 million payout for Mr. Gore, who owned 20 percent of Current. Mr. Gore and his partners were eager to complete the deal by Dec. 31, lest it be subject to higher tax rates that took effect on Jan. 1 . . .

Waiting for Team Obama to label Gore as greedy, and waiting, and waiting, and…….

 

President Obama at Daniel Innouye’s funeral: But enough about the dead guy, let’s talk about me

When I first heard accusation that Obama talked all about himself during the memorial service I thought perhaps some folks were just looking for something  to criticize. Well after watching this clip, I can say they were NOT wrong!

 

The video cuts off before Obama got to the girl he had a crush on in sixth grade. Good grief, it almost looked like he had no clue what to say