The Sheep dog Rag - 3rd ed. - August 15-2009

The Sheep dog Rag
Inspired by Dave Grossman
THIRD Edition-August 15-2009
Slim@outdrs.net


Greetings and salutations my friend. Welcome to the third edition of the Sheep Dog Rag! you will return again and again. We also hope that if you like what we have to say, you will share it with many others. If you do not like what we have to say, share this with others anyway. We respect your freedom to not agree with us, however we demand the same respect from you. We are all Sheep Dogs here. The first two editions contained the story of the sheep, wolves and sheep dogs and is a full explanation or where we are coming from. If you did not get to read this there are two ways, at present, to get a copy of it. E-mail at the address on the front page and leave your address, slow or e, and we will get you a copy post haste. The other is to, on your search engine - On Sheep Wolves and Sheep Dogs by David Grossman. Or to get most of what he has written just Dave Grossman. He is very inspirational and you will find who and what he is. He has explained fully something that my Father tried to explain to me when I was very young and he did not understand it fully enough to fill the whole thing in for me. However I remember the conversation well. This is just one of the many things he taught me that has served me well down through the years. His wisdom was a wisdom of a different time but it is just as valid today as it was in or about 1950. He was a good and honest man and well loved by all who really knew him.
Anyway, this is a free publication put out there simply because we are Sheep Dogs. Though I have help, this is financed entirely by me. It is mostly edited by me. Others who help may from time to time also comment here. I am on a limited income and old. I see my beloved country in trouble and I am starting to learn why. Therefore I will try to get information out to everyone I can as to what is really going on. Stuff that the mainstream media will not tell you. Mark Twain once said, “those who do not read the newspaper are not informed. Those who do read the paper are misinformed.” So it is not a new thing by any means.
What has really happened is that for a very long time the news people not only lie to us directly but by not telling us the truth. Besides that they slant what they must print or deliver by using advertising media tricks. They slant things using wording that deliberately biases the reader or listener. You will see examples pointed out to you in every issue of this rag.
For instance, how about Saturday Night specials? They do not exist and never have. How about Cop Killer Bullets? They do not exist and never have. How about assault weapons? They do not exist and never have. These three things are mere made up terms used to inflame people against guns in general. For instance, the Saturday night special, as the description was worded in the mid to late 50’s included even the revolvers then popular with all the police forces. It was used to make a de-facto ban on low priced hand guns, and a farce in the name of public safety. Pure BS. Then the cop killer bullets made their debut! Wow!! What horrible items! Somebody trying to help the cops, who were outgunned by the bad guys, be better able to win a gunfight. These bullets were Teflon coated. The purpose was to make them slick and thereby attain a greater velocity because there was less friction in the barrel of a gun. Since they were so slick it also allowed them to penetrate better in all materials. Before the advent of this bullet, a bad guy could hide behind a car door and be relatively safe from being shot. Not any more. Thus they would also defeat light body armor also. The media got aholt of this and aired it on national TV. The police begged them not to do so. At the time nobody but special units of the police had access to this bullet. It was never used to kill a cop. So now everyone, including the bad guys know about it. I think this resulted in a ban of such bullets. It was all a grand hoax by a media with an agenda. Now we get to assault weapons. The closest relation to anything vaguely resembling what is described as an assault weapon is a rifle that either is select fire or full automatic sometimes used by our combat troops. It is against the law for anyone else to possess one of those without a very expensive special permit. The media plays on peoples misunderstanding and fears because these so called assault weapons are mostly not very pretty to look at. They are not meant to be. They are built for utility and handle like the rifles our GI’s used in Nam so they are more comfortable with them. And what has that got to do with a clip that holds 2 or 3 more rounds for a hand gun????? You wish to know the truth? Google “Gun Facts” especially go to the second page and see Gun Facts 5.0. This is a very well documented file that covers all the myths about guns the media is feeding you and it offers proof. It uses government furnished facts, figures and statistics. Did you know your child is 7 times more likely to drown in a swimming pool than by a gunshot? Not according to the lying media and other hypocrites. Love from an OLD sheep dog. Wag wag.
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
This is an article I got from the site of The Conservative Free Press (CFP)
By JB Williams Sunday, May 17, 2009
It’s now clear to most Americans that their country is not only headed in the wrong direction, but on the brink of complete extinction. In just the last six months, every major economic sector is speeding towards bankruptcy and the Fed has spent trillions in printed funny money, in an unbridled and ill-fated effort to buy up (not bail out) America’s free- market economic system, leaving the nation, its currency, its people - and yes - FREEDOM, headed towards imminent total collapse.
Opinions about how to save American freedom and liberty are plentiful. But without a proper fact based diagnosis, there is no way to know which remedy will save the day, and which might kill the patient. Before we can discuss a cure, we must carefully assess the illness…
The Cycle behind the Downward Spiral
Money, power and influence over government are indeed at the root of the problem. However, we must separate political spin from fiscal reality in order to properly identify the real culprits. The cycle of corruption must be broken and Americans must identify and attack the greatest offenders first. If they fail to go after the kingpins of government corruption, they will waste a lot of time and resources chasing their tails in pursuit of mere pawns, or even worse, the wrong guys.
The cycle is simple, but not easy to break...
Money is used to buy politicians who then - once in power - return taxpayer funds to those who got them elected. Every modern politician campaigns for office on the promise to end this cycle. Yet to get elected, they must participate in that cycle, and once elected, they must complete that cycle by repaying the favor.
Understanding What Makes Your Government Tick
In short, money talks and all else walks! Ever heard the phrase “put your money where your mouth is...” or “he with the gold makes the rules...” - ? I suspect that these famous one-liners originated in a government lobbying meeting. No voice is louder than your wallet. Your public protests, petitions and vote are no match for those who are truly serious about their agenda, - serious enough to “put their money where their mouths are...”
EXAMPLE: Statistically speaking, more than 70% of Americans oppose abortion on demand. But we have abortion on demand because the pro- abortion lobby is willing to “put their money where their mouths are...” Over the last ten years alone, the pro-life lobby has spent $6,445,047 - 95% of it with Republican law makers. It wasn’t enough… The pro-abortion lobby spent $18,177,404 during the same period – 82% of it with Democrats. Why are Republicans pro-life while Democrats are pro-abortion? Why is the pro-abortion lobby winning the debate? Look at those numbers again.
Here’s another example with the same outcome… Second Amendment Rights exist only because the pro-gun lobby spent $20,780,715 (85% with Republicans) over the last ten years while the gun-control lobby spent only $1,785,042 (94% with Democrats) in their effort to take your guns away. Republican lawmakers are pro-gun because they get paid to be pro-gun. Democrats are anti-gun because they are fearful of gun toting American patriots. The Second Amendment is winning at the moment only because the pro-gun lobby outspends the gun-control lobby 10 - 1… The examples are consistent and endless. Enough said?
The BIGGEST Culprits in America Today
Due to massive volumes of intentional misinformation, the average American has come to believe that public enemy #1 is “capitalism” and public enemy #2 is the “lobbyists” who attempt to promote their capitalist interests in Washington DC. It is FALSE! “Lobbyists” are public enemy #2 not because they have that much influence, but because they lobby on behalf of free-market interest, aka “capitalism.” However, they are not even a major player in Washington DC today. So why do they get so much attention? Over the last ten years, lobbyists account for a whopping $155,169,482 in political campaign contributions and according to Democrats, they own Republicans. How can that be when 52% of lobbyist funds go to Democrats? Besides, this is an embarrassing drop in the bucket when compared to the real culprits who own Washington DC today… and that’s why free-market capitalism and freedom itself are losing the battle for America at present.
The single largest and most powerful political lobby in Washington DC today is, ready… drum roll please… our nations lawyers.... who lead the way with their cool $1,015,397,309 investment in political corruption over the last ten years, 73% of it invested in Democrats! Next time you are wondering how the judicial branch became a nine member oligarchy, look at this number again… For those who truly hate political corruption in DC, this would have to make trial lawyers public enemy #1 as no group on earth can even come close to competing with this group.
Public enemy #2 would have to be the labor unions, which combined, invested over $478,058,579 over the last ten years, and once again, giving 90% of that money and power to Democrats. Why is today’s Fed a believer in “collectivism” and “the greater communal good?” Hmmm.... Imagine that! They think and act just like the labor unions! Are you familiar with the “ proletariat” movement? “(in Marxist theory) the class of workers, esp. industrial wage earners, who do not possess capital or property and must sell
their labor to survive.” Socio-economic ambulance chasers run Washington DC for the price of a cool billion in campaign contributions. If you don’t think corruption pays, count the number of lawyers at the head of every branch of the federal government today.
But the labor unions not only set a Marxist proletariat policy in DC, they reap the rewards from trillions in (union bid only) federal contracts, funded by the American taxpayer, 90% of whom are not union members and stand opposed to union thugery in the work place and in Washington DC.
Freedom and free-market capitalism are simply out-gunned in Washington DC. Elitist lawyers and corrupt labor unions operating under Marxist principles, rule the roost today, all at great expense to American taxpayers and American freedom. If Obama passes pending “Card check” legislation forcing anti-union employees to vote against unionizing in public, half of the nation will need federal witness protection just to outrun union thugs.
The Worst Offender Today!
Whenever the topic of corrupt labor unions comes up, most Americans think of the most infamous, the AFL-CIO and its 13,000,000 members. But these guys, despite their huge member base, are NOT the biggest problem in Washington politics anymore. No, that title now belongs to the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees. In other words, the people who make their living on the government dole, whose paycheck and livelihood comes directly from the American taxpayer, is now the single most powerful union labor lobby in Washington DC.
Through their labor union, 1.4 million government (taxpayer funded) employees are now the biggest union lobby organization in America, giving an astounding $40,690,630 in political contributions over the last ten years, and yes, you are right, - 98% of it to Democrats!
As a result, your tax dollars employ 1.4 million government shirkers who are not happy with the work conditions and wages you offered them, so they formed a union to squeeze more out of the taxpayer. A percentage of the wages you pay as a taxpayer, go to the union which in turn invested 98% of $40 million with the Democrats, who guarantee “union only federal contracts” and grow the size and scope of government employment for benefit of their financial political partners, the government employees. The cycle is complete.... and free-market Americans are cut out of the equation.
How America lost its freedom
America lost its freedom to elitist lawyers and the Marxist proletariat movement represented by a plethora of labor unions, none more powerful than the government employees union reaching ever deeper into to pockets of the American taxpayer. To save freedom, this cycle of corruption and destruction of freedom must be broken.
What Americans must do
First, don’t expect union members to help you do it, because they are profiting by this corrupt cycle, as are lawyers and their clients in search of the brass ring now offered by the liberal courts. Neither of
these groups is on the side of the American taxpayer today, which means they are not on the side of American freedom and liberty either. Both of these groups benefit from an ever larger, more intrusive and more expensive government. Their agenda is to keep the cycle intact at any cost!
By now you are seeing what a massive financial juggernaut has its death grip on American freedom in Washington DC. You must be wondering what in the world the rest of America, specifically the American taxpayer, can do to break this monumental cycle of anti-American corruption and destruction....
More than 59,934,814 Americans voted against the current administration and all it stands for in November of 2008. What if every last one of these voters reached deep into their pockets and committed $100 on a one-time basis, for the sole purpose of taking immediate actions to break the cycle of corruption which now defines Washington DC?
What could 59 million American patriots do with a $59 BILLION war chest, focused solely on ending the leftist cycle of political corruption which so clearly has a death grip on Washington DC and our beloved nation today?
The fact is, $10 from each, or $5.9 BILLION would get the job done, if 100% participated. As we know, 100% will NOT participate. 10% participation is the best we can hope for, realistically. 90% will
complain, but will never step up!
Many around the globe seem to understand what too many Americans no longer understand. A reader from Canada recently wrote me; “If America falls to the Global socialists, we all fall. America represents freedom to people world wide. Please don’t let that dream die.”
Is the future of freedom and our nation worth $100 each? - If it isn’t, we deserve to lose it...! Never again ask “what can I do?” This, every American patriot CAN do! Will you?
If your answer is yes, let me know. If the people have this kind of will, together, we can find a way.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

By Chad Pergram FOXNews.com Monday, July 20, 2009
President Obama has invited a small group of fiscally-conscious House Democrats -- known as the "Blue Dogs" -- to the White House Tuesday morning in an effort to win their support for his controversial health care reform package, FOX News has learned. "We're just not there yet," said Rep. Baron Hill, D-Ind., one of the lawmakers invited to the session with Mr. Obama. "We're getting there." When asked what the main concern was, Hill responded, "Time."
Hill is a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, a key panel struggling to approve a health reform bill. Many conservative Democrats on the committee are already shell-shocked from criticism they've heard for voting for a climate and energy bill in June. Many of those lawmakers are reluctant to take a tough vote again. Hill's rural, southwest Indiana district is a case study in the red-blue divide. His winning percentages reflect the tenuous grasp he has on his seat and the vulnerabilities he faces on contentious issues. Voters first elected Hill to the House in 1998 with 51 percent of the vote. He then narrowly defeated Republican Mike Sodrel with 51 percent in 2002. But in 2004, Sodrel rallied to unseat Hill by a mere 1,500 votes. Hill returned the favor two years later, capturing 50 percent of the tally against Sodrel in a three-way contest. He again beat Sodrel in 2008.
To secure his vote on health care, Hill said he's seeking specific cost-cutting and wants a better understanding about how "bundling" health care dollars would work. Under the current fee-for-service system, health insurance companies divide up payments among doctors, technicians and nurses. Bundling would tie all payments together. "He hasn't taken anything off the table," Hill said of the president. The Indiana Democrat signaled that there are about 12 policy areas that need alteration to satisfy the Blue Dogs.
The Blue Dogs are moderate to conservative Democrats who represent historically Republican turf. They advocate low taxes and restraint in government spending, and the Blue Dog Coalition is particularly spooked about the trillion dollar price tag of the president's health care proposal and a ballooning of the federal deficit by $236 billion. They dislike tax increases which would soak the rich and feel that Democratic leaders are racing to okay a bill by the August recess. "It's clear in the fact that they don't have the votes with the language they've got now," said fellow Blue Dog Rep. Allen Boyd, D-Fla.
Boyd said he'd like to see the House take a break on health care and punt to the Senate. The reason is that political chasms over health care are much wider in the Senate than they are in the House. The thinking is that any Senate-passed bill would stand a better chance of scoring approval in the House. "Stop. Let them work. See what they can do," Boyd said of the Senate. But despite Boyd's skepticism, he's not ready to quit on health reform. "Any thing can happen," he said. "This place is known for miracles."
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
Democratic Governors Accuse NGA Staff of Misleading Them on Costs of Health Care Reform
By Serafin Gomez FOXNews.com Monday, July 20, 2009
The majority who gathered at the National Governors Association meeting this weekend had publicly agreed with their GOP colleagues that the health care bill would turn into unfunded mandates and would squeeze their already depleted state budgets. But after meeting for an hour Sunday night with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, several Democratic governors accused NGA staff of misleading them on the cost of the bill.
"Yesterday the NGA staff gave us some information that was not exactly correct so we're working through to find out what the real numbers are," Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer told FOX News on Monday. "Currently the House version does not shift any liability to the states. If that's the version that's ultimately passed, well be happy with it." "Once Kathleen Sebelius talked with the governors we came to understand that we were given bad information by NGA staff," added Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley. O'Malley said that according to the House bill, "The federal government has not shifted cost. The federal government is taking care of its obligations. Which was really good news for the governors. Whatever fears were around this place because of bad information we got from the NGA, that's greatly dissipated." NGA staff did not respond to a request for comment on the accusation aides had misled the chief executives.
Despite Sebelius' alleviating some of the governors' concerns, others said her description relies only on the bill in the House of Representatives, and they remain wary of the final outcome once it leaves the Senate. "That's the message that is being sent: Please work within the House frame of Congress being able to take care of that within the confines of the federal budget and not putting it on the back of state budgets," said Gov. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who was named the new vice chairman of the NGA during the four-day conference that wraps up on Monday. "We're concerned that there might be other mandates coming down," Manchin said.
Clinton Calls De Facto Honduran Leader To Demand President's Return
By Nina Donaghy FOXNews.com Monday, July 20, 2009
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called de factor Honduran leader Roberto Micheletto to warn him about the consequences for his country if it does not permit ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya to return to power, the State Department said Monday. Clinton called Micheletti on Sunday from New Delhi, where she is meeting with Indian officials on climate change. It is the first call from Clinton since she met with Zelaya in Washington two weeks ago following his removal from power for trying to hold a referendum in defiance of an order by the nation's Supreme Court. The United States supports Zelaya's return to office.
State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley described Clinton's conversation with Micheletti as "tough," and said that Clinton warned him the longterm relationship between the U.S. and Honduras could suffer. She explicitly mentioned U.S. aid, Crowley said. The European Union already has suspended $90 million in aid to Honduras.
Talks between Zelaya and Micheletti have been suspended for 72 hours, U.S. officials said, downplaying reports that negotiations to return Zelaya to his home country have irrevocably collapsed. The talks broke down amid disagreement over whether Zelaya can return to his position but with limited powers, or whether he would have to stand trial for his alleged crimes. Though the talks, mediated by Costa Rican President Oscar Arias, are on hold, the United States is still pressing for a diplomatic resolution, Crowley told reporters.
He said the United States is backing new Honduran elections as soon as possible and wants Zelaya to be reinstated to complete the six months remaining in his term. However, Zelaya has been warned by U.S. officials not to return to Honduras before talks have reached a resolution. He remains in Nicaragua. Crowley said despite reports the two sides are miles apart, they are still trying to find a resolution.
"Through the weekend, you did have movement from the positions that both sides took, coming into the negotiation, which is not to say that we are at a successful conclusion yet," he said.
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
U.S. Delays Key Terror Detainee Reports
AP Monday, July 20, 2009
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration on Monday pushed back its own deadline for devising new anti-terrorism policies. The decision had been expected, as presidentially appointed task forces have failed to meet a six-month schedule for making policy recommendations on how terror suspects should be interrogated, held in custody or handed over to other countries. Senior administration officials said Monday that the report on detention will be delayed six months and the report on interrogation and transfer policy will be delayed two months. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the issue on the record.
As the administration quietly acknowledged the delay, a task force sent Attorney General Eric Holder and Defense Secretary Robert Gates a preliminary report summarizing their legal goals for handling terror suspects in the future. "Where appropriate, prosecution of those responsible must occur as soon as possible, whether in federal court or before a military commission," according to the five-page

memo on detention policy sent to the White House. "Justice cannot be done, however, unless those who are accused of crimes are proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law that affords them a full and fair opportunity to contest the charges against them," the memo concludes.
The Obama administration has reached the halfway mark in its self-imposed goal to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility by January 2010. Six months after President Barack Obama signed the closure order, fewer than 20 of about 245 inmates have been transferred out of the U.S. military base in Cuba. Currently, there are 229 detainees at Guantanamo, and the administration, by its own clock, has six months more to remove them.
Government lawyers are reviewing each case individually and have so far finished the reviews of more than half of the detainees. More than 50 suspects have been cleared for transfer to other countries. A senior administration official has said the Justice Department is considering prosecuting about 30 others in federal courts, and another 30 or so could face trial by military commissions. A final group will be held indefinitely without charge, subject to occasional judicial review, the administration has said.


Why do you want my gun?
BY FACELESS Sat Jul 18, 2009 at 01:01:19 AM PDT
Back in 1993, I was 21 years old and worked as a clerk in a 7-11 convenience store. One evening, while working the swing shift, I was robbed at gunpoint. At about 6:30pm, these two guys (teenagers) came into the store. They got beer and hot dogs. When they came up to the register to pay for it, BOTH of them pulled out semi-automatic handguns. One of them put the gun to my head and the other put it to my stomach. They ordered me to open the cash drawer and they grabbed all the cash. Before they left, one of the guys sprayed me with pepper spray and told me that if I called the police they would come back and kill me. The whole thing was over in a couple minutes.
Now, just to give you some backdrop... this store is located in a quiet residential neighborhood with almost no history of violent crime. About five minutes prior to the two men coming into the store, one of our police officers had stopped in for a free cup of coffee (we always gave the cops free coffee).
I was so scared that I didn't even realize I had been sprayed with pepper spray until the cops showed up and were having trouble breathing. About half an hour later, the burning started to hit me. Apparently I had been in shock.
If you've ever been unlucky enough to be held at gunpoint by a stranger, you'll understand the enormous amount of fear that you experience. I wasn't able to return to work because I was too scared they would come back. Up until that point, I had been a solid supporter of gun control. However, things changed overnight. I wasn't able to sleep for more than an hour or two at a time because I was having nightmares about it. I would wake up feeling completely panicked and scared. I have never felt that way in my life prior to this incident.
After a few nights of nightmares, I decided that I needed a gun just to feel safe. I went to the local gun store, picked out a handgun, filled out all kinds of forms... and then was told I had to wait for seven days. Let me tell you, that was the longest seven days of my life. Finally, the wait was over and I was able to bring the gun home. I purchased an electronic gun safe and put it right next to my bed. I practiced opening that safe until I could have it open within two seconds. From then on, I slept a lot better. That gun safe is still next to my bed with a loaded .45 in it. Every six months or so I check the battery and make sure everything works okay. For years, I have kept that gun there because it makes me sleep better at night. Some of you probably think I'm nuts. That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion.
Fast forward to 2004. It's about 3:30am. My son is sleeping in his room and I am sleeping in my room. My wife and two daughters were actually away on a girl scout sleepover at the local zoo (I couldn't make that up if I tried). Anyway, I get woken up by my son who is scared shitless. He's told me he heard voices and some noises down in our basement. Trying to calm him down, I start to tell him that he was probably dreaming... but then suddenly I heard something too. There was no doubt about it. Someone was in our home.
Without thinking, I reached for my gun, closed my bedroom door and held my son close to me. I had the lights off and pointed the gun right at the door. There were voices... male voices. I could hear them whispering but couldn't quite make out what they were saying. Then I heard them start to climb the stairs from the basement. Holy shit, I thought. This is it.

Now, before I go any further, I want you to understand one very important thing. Never before in my entire life was I so thankful to have a loaded gun in my hand as I was at that moment. Why? Because it gave my son and I a decent chance of getting out of this predicament alive.
I'm not sure why, but whomever was coming up the stairs decided against it. Within another minute or two, I felt confident they had left. I held my son and just cried.
Since owning a gun, I have met other people with similar stories. I am convinced that gun ownership is absolutely essential to a family's safety. That's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.
You take what you want from this diary, but let me just tell you this...When you advocate for
handgun bans and gun control, I just shake my head. Obviously, you've never had to deal with a stranger threatening to take your life or the life of your family. Now, those kids that held me up at 7-11... I seriously doubt they got those guns through any legal channels. All a handgun ban would do is disarm me from protecting my family.
So, excuse me if I don't seem enthusiastic about your cause. Maybe if you were in my shoes, you'd understand. Thanks for reading.
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- --
SDR editors note: The above story strikes me as false. It reads just like the hundreds of e-mailed stuff I have gotten over several years. It bothers me a lot when I get stuff like this. The truth does not need a lie to be convincing. Lies destroy ones veracity. Let the bad guys tell the lies. Truth will out!
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
The hysteria over so-called "assault weapons" is intentional.
Those behind it rely on media ignorance to spread public confusion. Case in point, Violence Policy Center instigator Josh Sugarmann wrote: "The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons, anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun, can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few people can envision a practical use for these guns."
What this results in are calls to ban semi-automatic firearms because of convenience or appearance features, not because they function any differently from other semi-autos, that is, one shot per trigger squeeze. We get ignorant anti-gun politicians like Carolyn McCarthy calling for banning safety features like barrel shrouds, when she clearly doesn't even know what they are. And we get opportunists like Jersey City Police Chief Thomas Comey, who would extend the "assault weapon" definition to include pump-action shotguns.
Years ago, some friends in the now-defunct The Lawyer's Second Amendment Society came up with a poster intending to highlight the absurdity of cosmetic gun bans. This parody piece really brings home how ridiculous they are: Happy building!
Welcome, Chicago Gun Rights Examiner
Don Gwinn has joined our lineup as the Chicago Gun Rights Examiner. Among other things, he'll bring us a needed insider's perspective on one of the most politically anti-gun areas of the country.
Don...has moderated The Firing Line and The High Road forums and serves as a Director of Illinois Carry, the only Illinois gun-rights organization dedicated to winning shall-issue right-to-carry for Illinois. Don also blogs at The Armed School Teacher and answers all email sent to: dongwinnATthefiringlineDOTcom. I'll make sure to add his most current offering to the "Check out the latest" promo box I place at the bottom of each column.
I once was blind but now I see...
Austin Gun Rights Examiner Howard Nemerov is looking for interview subjects who share his experience of converting from an anti-gun position. I'll let him explain.
"I would like to interview people from all walks of life who, like me, used to believe that only the government should have guns, but had an enlightening experience which led to their conversion to pro-self-defense. You can help broaden our outreach effort across all social, religious, ethnic, etc. backgrounds to induce the politicians to leave our rights and freedoms alone. If you, a friend, or neighbor, fit this description, please contact me." Do so at: AustinGunRightsATaustin.rrDOTcom
- - - - - - - - - - An Open Letter To All Montana Federal Firearms Licenses
U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Assistant Director
BATFE
Montana - -(AmmoLand.com)- The purpose of this letter is to provide guidance on your obligations as a Federal firearms licensee (FFL). The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is dedicated to your success in meeting requirements as a Federal Firearms licensee.
The passage of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, House Bill 246 (Act), effective, October 1, 2009, has generated questions from industry members as to how this State law may affect them while engaged in firearms business activity. The Act purports to exempt personal firearms, firearms accessories and ammunition manufactured in the State, from most Federal Firearms laws and regulations. However, because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and regulations, Federal law supercedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply.
As you may know, Federal law requires a license to engage in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition, or to deal in firearms, even if the firearms or ammunition remain in the state. All firearms manufactured by a licensee must be properly marked. Additionally, each licensee must record the type, model, caliber or gauge and serial number of each firearm manufactured or otherwise, and the date such manufacture or other acquistion was made. Firearms transaction records and NICS background checks

must be conducted prior to disposition of firearms to unlicensed persons. These, as well as other Federal requirements and prohibitions, apply whether or not the firearms or ammunitions have crossed state lines.
If you have any questions regarding the Federal firearms laws and regulations, please contact your local ATF office. ATF works closely with the firearms industry and appreciates the important role the industry plays in combating violent crime. A listing of phone numbers can be found at :http://www.atf.gov/contact/field.htm
It is signed by Carson W. Carroll Assistant Director (Enforcement Programs and Services) http://www.atf.gov/firearms/071709-montana-openletter.pdf
About:
ATF – Is a unique law enforcement agency in the United States Department of Justice that protects our communities from violent criminals, criminal organizations, the illegal use and trafficking of firearms, the illegal use and storage of explosives, acts of arson and bombings, acts of terrorism, and the illegal diversion of alcohol and tobacco products.
We partner with communities, industries, law enforcement and public safety agencies to safeguard the public we serve through information sharing, training, research, and use of technology.
6 Responses to “An Open Letter To All Montana Federal Firearms Licenses” The Empire Strikes Back. Counterstrike in the offing? This is going to be very interesting.
Comments from readers
PrimEvil on July 20th, 2009 at 2:18 pm Yo, ATF. You misspelled “supersedes.”
Mikke on July 20th, 2009 at 5:16 pm
I see two things here: 1. Federal Firearms License holders cannot sell contrary to federal law. So, if they only want to sell Montana guns, they shouldn’t have an FFL. 2. The ATF saying Federal Law applies in
the States makes it harder for Sotomayor to say that the Second Amendment can be abrogated by states, just not the Feds. Seems to me you can’t have it both ways.
donw on July 20th, 2009 at 5:32 pm Bring it on ATF. I can only die once but eternity waits for me. Hell waits for the ATF.
Kenton Barlow on July 20th, 2009 at 7:51 pm Movin to Montana soon….
John Thisell on July 20th, 2009 at 8:05 pm Is the ATF going to protect us like they did in Waco Texas?? In order to save us from the Davidians the ATF did an armed assault on unarmed women and children!
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution
Posted on 18 July 2009 by Bryce Shonka
A line was drawn in the sand last week - a response by the Federal Government to the State of Tennessee and their assertion of sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution.(Editor’s note: A similar response was sent to Montana Firearms licenses on 07-16-09 as well) Part of a series of moves by states seeking to utilize the Tenth Amendment as a limit on Federal Power, the Tennessee State Senate approved Senate Bill 1610 (SB1610), the Tennesse Firearms Freedom Act, by a vote of 22-7. The House companion bill, HB1796 previously passed the House by a vote of 87-1.Governor Breseden allowed the bill to become law without signing.
The law states that “federal laws and regulations do not apply to personal firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition that is manufactured in Tennessee and remains in Tennessee. The limitation on federal law and regulation stated in this bill applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured using basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported into this state.”
At the time of passage through the TN House and Senate, Judiciary Chairman Mae Beavers had this to say-“Be it the federal government mandating changes in order for states to receive federal funds or the federal government telling us how to regulate commerce contained completely within this state – enough is enough. Our founders fought too hard to ensure states’ sovereignty and I am sick and tired of activist federal officials and judges sticking their noses where they don’t belong.”
The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own view of the Tenth Amendment this week when it issued an open letter to ‘all Tennessee Federal Firearms Licensees’ in which it denounced the opinion of Beavers and the Tennessee legislature. ATF assistant director Carson W. Carroll wrote that ‘Federal law supersedes the Act’, and thus the ATF considers it meaningless.
Constitutional historian Kevin R.C. Gutzman sees this as something far removed from the founders’ vision of constitutional government: “The letter says, in part, ‘because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and regulations, Federal law supersedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply.’ That is precisely what I predicted the Federal Government’s response to the Tennessee act would be. As I told Judge Andrew Napolitano on Fox News’s Glenn Beck Program on June 5, 2009, federal officials don’t care about a good historical argument concerning the meaning of the Constitution.” “Their view is that the states exist for the administrative convenience of the Federal Government, and so of course any conflict between state and federal policy must be resolved in favor of the latter.”
“This is another way of saying that the Tenth Amendment is not binding on the Federal Government. Of course, that amounts to saying that federal officials have decided to ignore the Constitution when it doesn’t suit them.” The Federal Government has regularly claimed that the commerce clause of the constitution, which gives DC authority to regulate commerce between the states, gives them authority to regulate or add prohibitions on items that never cross state lines.
One notable use of the commerce clause in this manner can be found in the 2005 decision by the Supreme Court in ‘Gonzales vs. Raich’, where the court contended that consuming one’s locally grown marijuana for medical purposes affects the interstate market of marijuana, and hence that the federal government may regulate—and prohibit—such consumption. They used this claim, even though at the same time they made it clear that no legal market for marijuana exists.
One key aspect of the ATF’s letter is that it was only sent out to existing Federal Firearms Licensees, those generally already in compliance with federal regulations - and who likely would not have participated in the TN Firearms Freedom act anyway, according to sources close to Tenth Amendment Center.
Ultimately what the letter represents is another move in the chess match being played out between the states and the Federal Government, the resolution of which may not be seen for quite some time.
Below is the full text of the letter sent last week by the ATF: “U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Assistant Director
OPEN LETTER TO ALL TENNESSEE FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES
The purpose of this letter is to provide guidance on your obligations as a Federal firearms licensee (”FFL”). The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (”ATF”) is dedicated to your success in meeting your requirements as a Federal firearms licensee. The following guidance is intended to assist you in accomplishing this goal.
The passage of the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act, H.B. 1796, 106th Leg. (Tenn. 2009) 1796 (”Act”), effective June 19, 2009, has generated questions from industry members as to how this State law may affect them while engaged in a firearms business activity. The Act purports to exempt personal firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition manufactured in the State, and which remain in the State, from most Federal firearms laws and regulations. However, because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and regulations, Federal law supersedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply.
As you may know, Federal law requires a license to engage in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition, or to deal in firearms, even if the firearms or ammunition remain within the same state. All firearms manufactured by a licensee must be properly marked. Additionally, each licensee must record the type, model, caliber or gauge, and serial number of each firearm manufactured or otherwise acquired, and the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made. The information required must be recorded in the licensee’s records not later than the seventh day following the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made. Firearms transaction records and NICS background checks must be conducted prior to disposition of firearms to unlicensed persons. These, as well as other Federal requirements and prohibitions, apply whether or not the firearms or ammunition have crossed state lines.
If you have any questions regarding the Federal firearms laws and regulations, please contact your local ATF office. ATF works closely with the firearms industry and appreciates the important role the industry plays in combating violent crime. A listing of ATF office phone numbers can be found at http://www.atf.gov/contact/field.htm. Carson W. Carroll, Assistant Director (Enforcement Programs and Services)”


Schumer Threatens Filibuster Over Concealed Carry Reciprocity
New York State - -(AmmoLand.com)-
New York Sen. Charles Schumer announced Friday that he would do all it takes to prevent Bill S. 845 — a bill that will establish concealed carry reciprocity amongst the majority of US states, from passing the Senate including a filibuster. “To say that someone who gets a license in another state can then take their gun into Central Park or into Eisenhower Park without any checking with local law enforcement is appalling and could affect our safety,” Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a recent interview.
Schumer, estimated the amendment has the support of about 55 senators and pledged a filibuster to prevent a vote on the amendment if necessary. In typical gun banner rhetoric Shumer is portraying this bill as trampling the existing gun laws of states like NY when the fact is this bill clearly spells out that all concealed carry holders when visiting a state other than their own would be bound by gun laws of that state.
This bill will do nothing more than allow CCW holder from other states the confidence to know that any state with reciprocity will honor their CW permit from their home state.
Action:
Residents of New York should ask the Senator to support their second amendment rights and their right to self defense and either Vote for or at least do not impede the process of this bill through the Senate.
Sample Letter ———————————————————————————
Please support the Thune/Vitter amendment to the Department of Defense authorization bill. This amendment will protect the right of citizens to carry firearms outside of their home state without violating the rights of the other states. Thus, the reciprocity language masterfully protects the principle of federalism while also promoting Second Amendment rights. If you find that you can not support this bill I ask that you do not hinder the process in fairness to the citizen of New York state that believe in the right to self defense of themselves and their family. A person’s right to defend himself and his family should not end at the border of his state.
I urge you to vote for the Thune/Vitter concealed carry amendment and to oppose any modifying actions that seek to weaken their amendment.
Sincerely ______________:
Please contact Charles Shumer on his Senate website: http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/contact.cfm
or on the NRA-ILA website: http://www.capwiz.com/nra/dbq/officials/
Filed under: Pro Gun News by AmmoLand 12 Comments » | Leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
12 Responses to “Schumer Threatens Filibuster Over Concealed Carry Reciprocity” [...] Schumer is threatening a filibuster. [...]
SayUncle» National reciprocity for handgun carry on July 20th, 2009 at 8:29 am of about 55 senators and pledged a filibuster to prevent a vote on the amendment if necessary. Schumer Threatens Filibuster Over Concealed Carry Reciprocity, "One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without violence. NY Senator Schumer threatens to Filibuster National Conceal Carry. on July 20th, 2009 at 9:12 am I think it is time for New York residents to band together and get rid of this obstructionist Senator. He is of his own considered opinion that he knows what’s best for New York and ignores any input that is not of his own thinking. He has forgotten that he is in place to represent all of the people of New York. He was voted in, he should be voted out.
George C Atknson on July 20th, 2009 at 9:36 am. Can someone answer a question?? Does this Schumer guy have armed agents on his protection detail?? And if so, how safe would he feel if they were not armed?? If he has armed agents to protect him, how comes he does not want the people he represents to be armed. So they can protect themselves. What is good for the Goose should also be good for the Gander.
Bluestone, PhD on July 20th, 2009 at 12:12 pm His actions as a senator not only threaten New Yorkers, but ALL of America. This is not just a local streets jobs thing, its our combined safety thingee.
Like wise, my senators effect all New Yorkers too. Has any one noticed how (California) Pelosi has effected all of America. We need to pay attention beyond our state borders ,Schumer does.
Don Holmes on July 20th, 2009 at 1:38 pm Pelosi has not effected all America! She, Shumer, and their ilk have INFECTED all America!
Dale Parker on July 20th, 2009 at 5:46 pm He has a full carry permit in N.Y.C. can you imagine that.?

Hector L. Sanchez on July 20th, 2009 at 6:33 pm And this from a state where if a citizen is issued a carry permit in the state capitol of Albany, it is worthless in NYC. NYC is like it’s own country within a state, and somehow seems to dictate how the state will be governed. To obtain a carry permit in NYC you must have money or influence. It has nothing to do with the need to protect yourself or your family. I don’t think that Mr. Shumer needs to worry about someone from the midwest with a carry permit representing a threat in Central Park or Eisenhower Park. The threat generally resides in NYC! Wake up NY!
Gary on July 20th, 2009 at 9:53 pm Schumer is typical of those who have been running New York State to their own whims, and feel the rest of the country should do the same. People of his ilk are what forced me to leave that state, never again looking back to their tyrannical rules for the sake of the “city” The police are only their to clean up the mess, not prevent it from happening. They have no desire
or responsibility to protect you under any circumstances. In fact, they are there to arrest you and incarcerate you if they have figure a way to pull it off. “protect and serve” is utter fallacy. What makes Schumer so special that he can carry a handgun in NYC , and other LAW ABIDING citizens cannot? NYC tourism is a joke as well. Come to NYC so our criminals can rob you without fear of retaliation, since you can’t carry any self defense weapons.
William Munn on July 20th, 2009 at 9:59 pm So the right to carry a concealed weapon should carry to a state that doesn’t provide that right because states’ rights would trump. Is that what you’re saying. So conversely are you saying that you would agree that DOMA should be struck down because if a state like Massachusetts has gay marriage it won’t transfer to a state like Florida because gay marriage is illegal in its constitution? The GOP advocates of Bill S, 845 are thus hypocrites.
Franc on July 21st, 2009 at 7:21 am – You have no idea what you are talking about. It only applies to states that issue CCW or LTC permits.
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
Nationwide Concealed Firearms System Weighed by Senate
Monday July 20, 2009
Legislation currently being debated in the U.S. Senate would create a system of interstate cooperation that would allow properly licensed individuals to carry concealed firearms virtually anywhere in the United States.
Under Amendment No. 1618 (formerly S. 371) to the FY 2010 Defense Authorization bill (S. 1390), introduced by Senator John Thune (R-South Dakota), citizens who hold a valid permit to carry a
concealed weapon – typically called a CCW (Concealed Carry Weapons) permit – issued by their home state would be allowed to carry a concealed weapon in any other U.S. state that also issues concealed carry permits. According to the National Rifle Association, 40 states currently issue some form of concealed carry permit. The states of Illinois and Wisconsin completely ban the carrying of concealed weapons.
As you can imagine, both sides of the gun control versus gun rights debate have weighed in on Sen. Thune’s amendment. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence says the amendment “would allow the carrying of loaded, concealed handguns outside a person’s home state, even by persons legally barred from possessing guns in the state where the carrying occurs. It would effectively allow the concealed carry laws of one state to nullify the restrictions on gun possession in other states,” and contends that, “Multiple studies have shown that laws allowing the carrying of concealed firearms have not reduced crime and, if anything, have increased violent crime, including murder and robbery.”
The National Rifle Association (NRA) says, “Now is the time for Congress to acknowledge these changes in state laws and recognize that the right to self-defense does not end at state lines,” and that, “Expanding Right-to-Carry will enhance public safety, and certainly poses no threat to the public. The Thune-Vitter amendment recognizes that competent, responsible, law-abiding Americans still deserve our trust and confidence when they cross state lines. Passing interstate Right-to-Carry legislation will help further reduce crime by deterring criminals, and—most important of all—will protect the right of honest Americans to protect themselves when deterrence fails.”
Sen. Thune’s amendment, along with the rest of the bill authorizing the expenditure of $681 billion to run the Department of Defense for another year, is currently being debated by the Senate, with a final vote possible this week.
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
Bombshell:
A U.S. Army Reserve major from Florida scheduled to report for deployment to Afghanistan

within days has had his military orders revoked after he argued that he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven his legitimacy for office.
Though he has never released a long-form birth certificate, Obama claims to have been born Aug. 4, 1961, in an unnamed Honolulu hospital that has yet to take credit for the historic birth of the baby who would become America's first black president.
WND's SuperStore has designed and printed postcards for the occasion. The front of the card raises the question: "Where's the birth certificate?" The back is open for your personalized greetings. Starting at just $4 (free shipping!), packs of postcards are available in quantities of 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100. Supplies are limited, so order today.
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER
From the Desk of: David Martin, Executive Vice President 6/22/2009
Brent Bozell Message to the MRC Action Team Regarding ABC's ObamaCare Infomercial
President Obama is trying to put our nation on the fast track to socialized health care, and on June 24, the ABC network will help him sell this bill of goods to the American people.
Next Wednesday, ABC News will transform the White House into their newsroom for what has been described as an unabashed infomercial promoting the Democrat agenda? more specifically, government-run health care.
++ ABC News Emphatically Rejects Opposing Views
ABC News has abandoned all pretense of journalistic integrity in its bid to be the administration’s official salesman for ObamaCare. ABC flatly rejected Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay’s request to add opposition views to ensure all sides of the health care debate were represented in the ?town hall? forum. Not only that, ABC News Vice President Kerry Smith responded by saying, ?ABC News alone will select those who will be in the audience asking questions of the President.?
As if that wasn’t enough, ABC then rejected an ad from a conservative group trying to counter the liberal health care agenda. They clearly are not interested in a balanced presentation on this. Void of opposing views, this ‘news special’ becomes nothing more than an extended infomercial designed to scare
and manipulate the American people into supporting a trillion-dollar government takeover of the highest quality health care system in the world!
++ Hold ABC News Accountable
CLARENCE, health care is an issue of life and death. If you don’t want politicians and faceless bureaucrats making your personal health care decisions, which medical procedures you need, which treatments are affordable, which medications you can have then stand with us and demand the media present a balanced view on how to reform health care.
That’s why we are asking MRC Action team members to do two things TODAY. First, take a moment right now to call ABC News executives and demand balance in the health care debate. Ask them why they won’t allow the conservative point of view on this show.
Second, click here to submit questions to be asked at this ‘town hall’ on Wednesday questions the liberal media aren’t asking. Questions like: How much will your plan cost? How will it be paid for? Can you name one example of the government taking over an industry and the costs falling as a result?
Here is your contact information:

David Westin Anne Sweeney
President, ABC News President, ABC-Disney Television Group
(212) 456-6200 (818) 569-7700
anne.sweeney@disney.com ++ Alert your Friends and Family
A firestorm of protest can bring about quick change. That’s why after taking action, we’re asking you to forward this update to 25-30 friends and family members. Let them know what is happening, and how they can play a pivotal role by calling as well.
President Obama has already taken over the banks, and General Motors now he’s using ABC television to ram his socialist health care plan down our throats unabated. Make your calls, and forward this important message today!
`` Thank you in advance for taking action with the MRC.
David

NEWS RELEASE
Monday, July 13, 2009, 8:09 PM
DALEY’S BODYGUARD CATCHES KILLER; ‘WE SHOULD ALL BE SO LUCKY,’ SAYS SAF
BELLEVUE, WA – The capture of a convicted killer Monday near the Michigan vacation home
of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley proves that guns in the right hands are necessary for personal safety, the Second Amendment Foundation said today. “Mayor Daley is protected by an armed guard,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb, “but what about the citizens of his city, who have no such luxury? The mayor is a world class hypocrite, who has bodyguards with guns to protect him from escaped killers like Charles Smith. Yet he is continuing to stubbornly fight against average citizens who are willing to protect themselves, but unable to because of Daley’s deranged double standard about firearms and personal protection.” The Second Amendment Foundation is challenging Chicago’s handgun ban and the case may be headed for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Smith broke out of prison with two other men, a rapist and another murderer, in Michigan City, Indiana. At last report the other two were still at large, and one is believed to be in the Grand Beach, MI area where Daley’s summer home is located. Authorities there have been warning residents to stay inside. “While Daley can lounge in the protective shadow of armed bodyguards even when he is out of state,” Gottlieb added, “average citizens in Chicago and all over Illinois must contend with the mayor’s elitist attitude about gun ownership. Most people can’t afford armed bodyguards. “So long as Daley fights to keep his fellow citizens unarmed,” he observed, “he does not deserve the protection of men with guns. Daley’s self-importance is of little interest to the single mom who worries about an ex-boyfriend, or the shop keeper trying to make an honest living in a neighborhood ruled by gang bangers and drug users.
“Richard Daley’s arrogance has been revealed by this incident,” Gottlieb concluded. “Take away his bodyguards and just tell him to dial 9-1-1 like the rest of us. No public official should place his own safety above that of his constituents.”
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
Our Comrade Rules
The Obama administration is raising the stakes in a fight over states' rights and firearm ownership by arguing that new pro-gun laws in Montana and Tennessee are invalid.
In the last few months, a grass-roots, federalist revolt against Washington, D.C. has begun to spread through states that are home to politically active gun owners. Montana and Tennessee have enacted state laws saying that federal rules do not apply to firearms manufactured entirely within the state, and similar bills are pending in Texas, Alaska, Minnesota, and South Carolina. Yet the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, and Explosives now claims that that not only is such a state law invalid, but "because the act conflicts with federal firearms laws and regulations, federal law supersedes the act."
Tennessee's law already has taken effect. The BATF's letter on July 16 to firearms manufacturers and dealers in the state says "federal law requires a license to engage in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition, or to deal in firearms, even if the firearms or ammunition remain within the same state." A similar letter was sent to manufacturers and dealers in Montana, where the made-in-the-state law takes effect on October 1, 2009. Neither law permits certain large caliber weapons or machine guns, and both would bypass federal regulations including background checks for buyers and record-keeping requirements for sellers. While this federalism-inspired revolt has coalesced around gun rights, the broader goal is to dust off a section of the Bill of Rights that most Americans probably have paid scant attention to: the Tenth Amendment. It says that "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."
Read literally, the Tenth Amendment seems to suggest that the federal government's powers are limited only to what it has been "delegated," and the U.S. Supreme Court in 1918 confirmed that the amendment "carefully reserved" some authority "to the states." That view is echoed by statements made at the time the Constitution was adopted; New Hampshire explicitly said that states kept "all powers not expressly and particularly delegated" to the federal government.
More recently, federal courts have interpreted the Tenth Amendment narrowly, in a way that justifies almost any law on grounds that it intends to regulate interstate commerce. In the 2005 case of Gonzales v. Raich, for instance, the Supreme Court ruled that a person growing marijuana for her own medicinal use could have a "substantial effect on interstate commerce." (In an impassioned dissent at the

time, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote: "If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything -- and the federal government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers.")
Gary Marbut, president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association, said in an interview with CBSNews.com on Monday that he expects to be facing off against the Obama administration in court soon. "We will find the right test cases to get us in court," he said. Marbut believes that the letters weren't
that meaningful because they were addressed to gun manufacturers and dealers who already are licensed by the federal government. "Those people already are under the thumb of the Feds," he said. "We've assumed they wouldn't want to put their circumstances at risk in dabbling in the state-made guns business. The people who the letters are addressed to are pretty irrelevant to the whole discussion."
Translation: If you're a gunsmith talented enough to build a made-in-Montana gun under the state's forthcoming law, give Marbut a ring. Just don't be surprised if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, and Explosives is not entirely pleased.
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
In Russia, there is no right of the citizens to keep and bear privately held firearms. For the most part, only the police and the military have the right to arms in Russia.
An anti-gun advocate might think that without a Second Amendment-like right of the citizens to
keep and bear arms, that murders would be nearly unheard of. But alas, the truth is very enlightening. Of the top eighty three (83) countries in the world, Russia finds themselves in second (2nd) place in terms of
overall murders, with an alarming total of 28,904. Now one might say to me, sure Marc, but that's not a per capita rate. But I would remind the skeptic that Russia has a population of just 140.7 million, while the United States has a population of 303.8 million and is fifth (5th) in the world in total murders with 16,204.
Switzerland, which has nearly universal firearm ownership per household only had 213 total murders in the same year. Comparing the three countries, Russia, United States and Switzerland, you can clearly see that Switzerland is the safest, with one murder for every 35,211 citizens. The United States has one murder for every 18,748 citizens and Russia without a citizen's right to private arms appallingly sees one murder for every 4,867 citizens.
So Russians typically experience 245 more murders per week than the United States of America, with no right to keep and bear private arms, while having 163.1 million fewer citizens. The conclusion that we can glean from this is that a population without a right to keep and bear arms is not necessarily a safer one. Not by a long shot apparently.
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
This is just a made up joke that is not funny! It is too close to the truth to be funny!
A Harley rider is passing the zoo, when he sees a little girl leaning into the lion's cage. Suddenly, the lion grabs her by the cuff of her jacket and tries to pull her inside to slaughter her, under the eyes of her screaming parents. The biker jumps off his bike, runs to the cage and hits the lion square on the nose with a powerful punch. Whimpering from the pain the lion jumps back letting go of the girl, and the biker
brings her to her terrified parents, who thank him endlessly.
A New York Times reporter has watched the whole event. The reporter says, 'Sir, this was the most gallant and brave thing I saw a man do in my whole life.'
The biker replies, 'Why, it was nothing, really, the lion was behind bars. I just saw this little kid in danger, and acted as I felt right.'
The reporter says, 'Well, I'm a journalist from the New York Times, and tomorrow's paper will have this story on the front page... So, what do you do for a living and what political affiliation do you have?'
The biker replies, 'I'm a U.S. Marine and a Republican.' The following morning the biker buys The New York Times to see if it indeed brings news of his actions, and reads, on front page:
"U.S. MARINE ASSAULTS AFRICAN IMMIGRANT AND STEALS HIS LUNCH"
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
We've all seen the emails about Obama's citizenship. This is a new twist WE hadn't known. Interesting.
Date: Sat, 30 May 2009
More questions, and this time some good questions.
While I've little interest in getting in the middle of the Obama birth issue, Paul Hollrah at FSM did so yesterday and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question: What passport did he use when he was shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi ?
So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later? And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi , what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration?
It makes the debate over Obama's citizenship a rather short and simple one.
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A: Yes, by his own admission.
Q: What passport did he travel under?
A: There are only three possibilities. 1. He traveled with a U.S. Passport, 2. He traveled with a British passport, or 3.He traveled with an Indonesia passport.
Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department's "no travel" list in 1981.
Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport. If he was traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he was traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a "natural born" American citizen between 1981 and 2008. Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better. Count me in as one of those inquiring minds who'd at least like to know the answers to these easily answered (by Obama) questions.
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
Previously, I remarked, as editor, that the big mouth Democrats were all for war in Iraq. After Bush started “his war” here are some remarks by the Democrats……..
On the heels of the “White House -- CIA leak” investigation, which concluded that no laws were broken (but charged one administration staffer with perjury), liberals are attempting to parlay that non-starter into a much bigger political brawl. Their charges have no substance, and are completely contrived to keep Republicans off balance through next year’s midterm elections. (note: none of this was on the big three news. SDR Ed.)
Sens. Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid and Dick Durban have accused President George Bush of lying about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, insisting he “lied us into war”. they are even floating the suggestion that he be impeached.
Here are their accusations:
“The Bush administration misrepresented and distorted the intelligence to justify a war that America should never have fought.” Ted Kennedy (axis of idiots member)
“We all know the vice Presidents office was the nerve center of an operation designed to sell the war and discredit those who challenged it….the manipulation of intelligence to sell the war in Iraq…the vice President is behind that.” --Harry Reid (axis of idiots?)
“I seconded the motion Sen. Harry Reid made lost week. Republicans in congress have refused, despite repeated promises, to investigate the Bushes administration’s misuse of pre-war intelligence, so senate Democrats are standing up and demanding the truth.”--Dick Durbin, who recently compared US troops to the Nazis and Pol Pot (axis of idiots?)
Naturally, the Democrat’s media lemmings are reporting these charges as de facto truth. But there is considerable evidence that these Demo-gogues and their colleagues believed Iraq had WMD long before President George Bush came to Washington. Here is a small sample of that evidence from the Clinton years.
Bill Clinton: If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” (axis of idiots member)
Madeleine Albright, Clinton Secretary of state: “We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.” (candidate?)
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security and Classified Document Thief: “{Saddam will} use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has ten times since 1983.”
Harry Reid: “The problem is not nuclear testing; it is nuclear weapons…. The number of third World countries with nuclear capabilities seems to grow daily. Saddam Hussein’s near success with developing a nuclear weapon should be an eye-opener for us all.”
Dick Durbin: “one of the most compelling of threats we in this country face today is the proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction. Threat assessments regularly warn us of the possibility that…Iraq…my acquire or develop nuclear weapons.”
John Kerry: “if you don’t believe …Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn’t vote for me.”

John Edwards: Serving on the intelligence Committee and seeing day after day, week after week, briefings on Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction and his plans on using those weapons, he cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons, it’s just that simple. The whole world changes if Saddam ever has nuclear weapons.”
Nancy Pelosi: “Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons-inspection process.” (NUFF SAID? All of these people are members of the Axis Of Idiots SDR 2nd edition ED)
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
OBSERVATIONS
By Slim 7/23/09
Many years ago when I was a child, I was told by my father to not believe everything I read or hear. This was in a day when the news people had some ethics and reflected the morals of the majority of the citizens of a great country.
So I now pass on this very important advice. Do not believe everything you hear or read!!! This is so much more important today than it was even 60 years ago. The major mass media today is corrupted. They do not tell you the truth. They do not tell you everything. They tell you only what they want you to hear. They use catchwords and phrases to twist your perception of what you hear or read. Even the more honest Medias are guilty although not as blatantly. This distresses me even more. When one is trying to be truthful, a lie does not help the truth. Anything that is said or written that contains a lie is suspect. A mistaken statement that was believed at the time is bad enough but the truthfulness of the offender is enhanced by a confession that the statement was in error. So when I see or hear someone I have heretofore trusted tell a lie in fact, by omission or by slanting as it is called, I start to doubt everything that person says. Therefore if you are on the right side you never have to lie. You never wish to lie in any way. That just gives the wrong side ammunition against you. If you are against gun control for instance, use truth without exaggeration and use proofs or references to proof and challenge the reader or hearer to check it out. The gun control people lie to you. Just as the media has, gun control people also have. They know that what they say is mostly lies and do not care. Obama and other socialists know what they spout is lies. They do not care. You see, they all have an agenda. Just like Hitler. Just like the crooked horse trader or the confidence man. They lie because they want to steal something from you. They offer you pie in the sky and it is only the flung chunk------you know? Cow patties? Does bull shit ring a bell?
Truth is truth is truth---------. History is mostly truth. But what has been written as history is not always the truth. Historical writers are human and as human beings are subject to error. They even are guilty of, at best, writing their own wishful thoughts instead of facts only. Even those who have lived that history. I myself am not free from error or bias. I try to be but I am human. However there are those who are true scientists. They look for only provable facts. They follow those facts to their conclusion and report what they have found.
Other scientists start from a forgone conclusion and do not allow facts to get in their way. There are those like handgun control, PETA, ACORN, and such that have an agenda. That agenda does not bode well for our country. Or perhaps I must say that most of these fringe groups who are in fact extremists in themselves are not a real problem. It is the socialists in some of these groups that are a very real problem. These people are trying to destroy this country. YES THEY ARE!!! Honestly look at the constitution and the amendments. Honestly look at what the founders said when all this was written. All of the founders! Look honestly at what the great minds of history have said. All of them! Look at what the written histories of all the great countries that have been. What caused them to fall? It is right there. The same things that are happening here and now. How did their leaders come into power? Were they despotic or were they not.
I think that you will find that this country has the only existing government founded on the principles that it is founded on. This government has outlasted all other governments that have been. This government has furnished its people with more freedoms than any other government in history. This country has had more industrial power than any other country in the world. This country was founded upon, from get-go, Christian principles. Our basic law mirrors the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule almost to the letter. Our Constitution is the first law of the land. It cannot be changed without that change being ratified by the states. It separates the powers in government so that there may be checks and balances. In fact the Federal Government itself is just what it says. A federation of the various states which remain separate and sovereign. The constitution gives the federal government very limited powers. None of these powers is over the various states. The only power the federal government has over the state is what the state

has chosen to give the federal government in the constitution. No power over the ten amendments has ever been given the federal government and so it has none. Free speech cannot be abridged legally anywhere. The right given by the 2nd amendment cannot be abridged in any way. And so it is with the other amendments to the constitution. The amendments were put there because the states wished to limit the powers of government so that it might not become tyrannical as governments are prone to become over time.
So far the federal government has abridged many of the amendments. Therefore the federal government as a whole has become the tyrant the founders feared. The people who we the people hired to support and protect THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES WHICH IS THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND are therefore guilty of treason. This government is of the people of the United States, for the people of the United States and by the people of the United States. WHEN ARE THE PEOPLE GOING TO INSIST THAT OUR HIRELINGS OBEY THE LAW OF THE LAND INSTEAD OF TWISTING AND BENDING IT. WE GOT A BUNCH OF SILVER TOUNGED LAWYERS DOING JUST THAT RIGHT NOW!
We are the boss! When are we going to make our employees quit abridging our civil rights! God forbid that it will take a war among our fellow citizens.
Send letters to the editors (thousands of them) telling them to start just printing the news as it is and as factual as they are able and without bias. Opinion belongs on the opinion page. Tell them if they do not do this we will quit advertising and buying their paper. Do this even if you think they are being truthful and unbiased in their reporting. When you see the results I think you will know the truth. Do the same for the TV people. Tell them you will refuse to watch them and call their sponsors and inform them of what you intend. Again you will soon learn the truth. Do this to all of the news sources if you will. They are all guilty of slant and so forth. I say and advocate this in order to SHOW the truth. However a lot of you will have to join me in order to do so. On the opinion page one can express his or her opinion. That is free speech. You can agree or not agree. That is your privilege and your right. The so called funny pages are okay. The want adds are to be just that. The obits and such are thus and such. However the rest of the paper is news. News is to be reported with facts and facts only. Emphasizing a word or phrase in order to sway opinion is not acceptable. That is expressing an opinion and belongs on the plainly marked opinion page only. Every story is to be complete. If there is any fact whatsoever pertinent to the story print it. Half truths are worse than lies. If a mistake is made and a fact is really not a fact say so in the next edition. Dedicate a section to such things. If these people are afraid that they will go out of business or such they will reform. If you like to be lied to don’t do this at all. If you believe that you are not being lied to do this and prove you are right. If you believe you are being lied to do this and save your country.
Just write to them and say: I think I am being lied to in your news stories. These lies include not telling the whole story and facts only, and twisting the story in various ways that obscure the truth or cause false sensation. Therefore I serve notice that if this problem is not corrected, I will never pay for an advertisement nor buy one of your papers again until your practices are changed. only on an opinion page or pages are opinions to be aired and those opinions plainly advertised as such.
If a large local newspaper gets say several hundred such letters, believe me they will take notice. A sudden drop in distribution will hit them very hard. I do not think they will push it with just a warning. However if they do, cancel your subscription or simply do not buy their paper. However do not steal their papers before they get sold or such. That is dishonesty. I do not wish to be associated with fighting dishonesty with dishonesty. Get your friends, neighbors and family members to do the same. This will either prove or disprove whether you are getting a bad deal for your money or not.
What’s more? Always remember that there is NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH! anything and everything you get that you have not earned by the sweat of your brow, will cost you something. Those who are living off another’s charity are, were, and will be paying in some way for it Thank you for giving this your honest consideration.
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
What did Hoover, Truman, and Eisenhower have in common?
Here is something that should be of great interest for you to pass around. I didn't know of this until it was pointed out to me.
Back during The Great Depression, President Herbert Hoover ordered the deportation of ALL illegal aliens in order to make jobs available to American citizens that desperately needed work..
Harry Truman deported over two million Illegal's after WWII to create jobs for returning veterans. And then again in 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower deported 3 million Mexican Nationals! The program was called 'Operation Wetback'. It was done so WWII and Korean Veterans would have a better chance at jobs. It took 2 Years, but they deported them!
Now...if they could deport the illegal's back then - they could sure do it today?
lf you have doubts about the veracity of this information, enter Operation Wetback into your favorite search engine and confirm it for yourself.
Reminder: Don't forget to pay your taxes... 12 million Illegal Aliens are depending on you!
- - - - - - - - - - -
Alert!! - H.R. 1388 was passed yesterday
Whether you are an Obama fan, or not, EVERYONE IN THE U. S. needs to know....
Something happened... H.R. 1388 was passed yesterday, behind our backs. You may want to read about it. It wasn't mentioned on the news... just went by on the ticker tape at the bottom of the CNN screen.
Obama funds $20M in tax payer dollars to immigrate Hamas Refugees to the USA . This is the news that didn't make the headlines...
By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in "migration assistance" to the Palestinian refugees and "conflict victims" in Gaza . The "presidential determination", which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States , was signed on January 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on February 4.
Few on Capitol Hill, or in the media, took note that the order provides a free ticket replete with housing and food allowances to individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support to the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the parliamentary election of January 2006.
His first call to any head of state, as president, was to Mahmoud Abbas, leader of Fatah party in the Palestinian territory.
His first one-on-one television interview with any news organization was with Al Arabia television.
His first executive order was to fund/facilitate abortion(s) not just here within the U. S. , but within the world, using U. S. tax payer funds.
He ordered Guantanamo Bay closed and all military trials of detainees halted.
He ordered overseas CIA interrogation centers closed.
He withdrew all charges against the masterminds behind the USS Cole and the "terror attack" on 9/11.
Now we learn that he is allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refuges to move to, and live in, the US at American taxpayer expense.
These important, and insightful, issues are being "lost" in the blinding bail-outs
and "stimulation" packages. Doubtful? To verify this for yourself: www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488
PLEASE PASS THIS ON... AMERICA NEEDS TO KNOW WE are losing this country at a rapid pace.
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
John Smith started the day early having set his alarm clock (MADE IN JAPAN ) for 6 am . While his coffeepot (MADE IN CHINA) was perking, he shaved with his electric razor (MADE IN HONG KONG) He put on a dress shirt (MADE IN SRI LANKA), designer jeans (MADE IN SINGAPORE) and Tennis shoes (MADE IN KOREA)
After cooking his breakfast in his new electric skillet (MADE IN INDIA) he sat down with his calculator (MADE IN MEXICO) to see how much he could spend today. After setting his watch (MADE IN TAIWAN ) to the radio (MADE IN INDIA ) he got in his car (MADE IN GERMANY ) filled it with GAS (from Saudi Arabia ) and continued his search for a good paying AMERICAN JOB.
At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day checking his Computer (made in MALAYSIA), John
decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals (MADE IN BRAZIL), poured himself a glass of wine (MADE IN FRANCE) and turned on his TV (MADE IN INDONESIA), and then wondered why he can't find a good paying job in
AMERICA AND NOW HE'S HOPING HE CAN GET HELP FROM A PRESIDENT MADE IN KENYA
-- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- --
That little skit was interesting. Now we come to the end of another long day at the typewriter and computer. I hope you found this publication interesting and informative. Listen to the radio talk shows all you can and search out Fox news. Either get to the recommended sites and download them or get someone to do it for you. Offer 25 cents per page (double sided like this) for a printout. It won’t break you. Gun facts 5.0 is 101 pages total by my count. (52 sheets of paper + ink). This item is copywriter but you can download it, print it and sell it for cost with no problem. I do not know about the sheep dog thing but I do not believe it is copy written. I see no copyright on The Backside of American History on my copy’s of both 1 and 2. The pages are not numbered in this item. However I guesstimate roughly 400 plus or over 200 sheets printed on both sides. Downloading to disk seems best.
Thank you and may God’s face shine upon you. See you in about 2 weeks.
Woah! Nobammaa Please Woah??!!