Recent Articles

Let’s Punish The Deniers

Particularly those who deny that classified information went through a home brew server and ended up putting our nation at risk. Or those who deny what actually happened in Benghazi and blame it all on an internet video…

Michael E Kraft, a professor emeritus at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, has penned (really typed) an article advocating that fossil fuel companies be punished for denying climate change. He states that the companies denied what used to be called global warming even though their own studies showed that they were wrong. He likens this effort to the punishment tobacco companies received for denying that tobacco caused illness even though their research showed it did.

The American Medical Association was not punished even though doctors at one time advertised in favor of smoking.

There is a problem with asserting that anyone is denying established science since the science is not established or settled. The claim that 90 some percent of scientists agree is extremely misleading since a large number of the scientists surveyed were not climate scientists. The reports used were flawed, data were manipulated and some items were omitted in order to present the desired outcome. In this article Kraft claims:

Those who intentionally misled the public about climate change should be held accountable.

Indeed! We should start with the climate change Chicken Littles and punish them severely for misleading the public on this issue. Remember, we should all be burning up right now, at least if they were right with their predictions. Climate change is a way for activists and scientists to get money. Researchers get more to do research and people like Al Gore get rich snookering others.

As for the fossil fuel companies, is there any evidence that their own research showed something different than what they claimed? If this is the case then perhaps they need new research. In reality Kraft discusses advocacy groups paid by fossil fuel companies to produce reports contrary to the alleged established science. So which is it? How can they be saying something different than what their research shows if they are paying for research that gives the result they want?

Kraft says governments are acting but not sufficiently and he cites the Obama regime as one of them. This would be the same Obama who uses many modes of transportation that burn huge quantities of fossil fuels and produces tons of carbon. The same Obama whose family travels the world producing tons of carbon as well.

I digress.

There is no doubt the climate changes. It has been doing that since long before man arrived on the scene and long before the period of fossil fuel use. Carbon levels were much higher long ago than they are now and somehow the planet survived. It is cyclic and influenced by the activity of the sun.

But some folks will do anything to get money.

The climate change fanatics are using the same bullying tactics many other liberal groups use. Identify what they want to be a problem, demand costly change and then attack and threaten those who do not agree. This is what you see when groups yell racist, sexist or any other “ist” to stifle debate.

The climate folks have declared that what they say is true and if you do not agree you should be punished.

I do not agree. Come and get me Mike…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Anti-Bullying? Start With The Feds

For some time now we have had anti-bullying campaigns to stop bullying. It can be for legitimate bullying like schoolyard hooligans or it can be for wussy stuff like trauma over a vote Trump sign. While I think the best way to deal with bullies is to beat the snot out of them I can see value in teaching children not to be bullies (and they will not grow up to be bullies).

The anti-bullying campaign needs to start with the federal government and by that I do not mean they should be leading the charge. I mean that the campaign should be directed at them.

The federal government is a huge bully that uses its size and resources to force states to comply with things that states do not like and that are not in the realm of the feds. The feds force states to do things like ignore immigration laws, they force states to take refugees and they force states to follow laws regarding gay marriage and abortion even though those things are not in the Constitution and do not belong under federal control.

In the latest example of bullying the federal government is trying to force [bankrupt] North Carolina to reverse its position on allowing people of one sex in the public restrooms of the opposite sex. To coin a phrase from the left, the law in question is a common sense law that will help keep perverts out of places they do not belong.

It is bad enough we have to worry about some child molester of the same sex attacking our children but now the feds want us to allow anyone to use any restroom so perverts will have unfettered access to our wives and daughters.

Several federal agencies are threatening to withhold federal money if NC does not change its ways and allow open restrooms. The government confiscates our money and then uses it to extort things from us.

Perhaps it is time to take a stand. NC should not allow any federal agencies inside its border. It should use its resources to close down federal buildings or force the feds to pay for having them there. The NC governor should declare that all businesses must submit federal taxes withheld to the state. The state should hold that money in escrow and use it to pay for whatever the feds cut. The money could also be held until the feds give in. Perhaps NC can erect toll booths on federal roads to pay the state for their use.

I hope NC gets tough and beats back the tyrants in DC.

Let’s put an end to bullying by the federal government by beating the snot out of the bully.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Was Trump Right About Breaking The Law?

Donald Trump is apparently in hot water over a comment he made about a woman getting an abortion. Trump was asked if abortion were made illegal and a woman got one should she be punished under the law? Trump stated that if she broke the law by getting one she should be punished.

The media reported this as Trump saying women who get abortions should be punished.

This hypothetical question was designed to trip him up and it is obvious by the way it was reported that the media deliberately deceived people.

Trump was correct in his answer. If abortion were made illegal then anyone getting one or performing one would be in violation of the law and would be subject to punishment. For what its worth, Trump handled this question terribly and could have done a much better job considering the media and all liberals (and a lot of Republicans) are out to get him. For a guy who is supposed to be media savvy he blew this one.

The reality is that anyone who knowingly does something illegal has broken the law. People can argue if, in this scenario, she should get in trouble and that is for a court to decide. No matter what the outcome she broke the law and if found guilty should be punished.

If a drug dealer sells illegal drugs to a junkie they are both guilty of a crime. No one would argue that the buyer was a victim in this scenario…

The interviewer also asked Trump if the man who impregnated the woman should be punished and he said no. In most cases, getting someone pregnant is not against the law. But if the guy took her to get the abortion and was part of the process then I think he should be punished as well. The liberal media folks discussing this had a hard time grasping any of it and indicated that Trump had some kind of double standard when it came to punishing women and men.

Trump’s answer has nothing to do with abortion. It is simply a matter of the law. In the case of the interviewer however, this was about abortion and finding a way to trip up Trump.

I guess Trump just has more regard for the law than all those folks screaming about what he said (or what they were told he said). To those folks the woman did nothing wrong in obtaining an illegal abortion.

Sort of like how they all find nothing wrong with a woman running her own private email server and risking classified information, in violation of the law.

As an aside I saw an interview (it could have been excerpts of a speech) with Clinton and she was all over Trump for what he said, you know, women’s issues and all that. Keep in mind Trump never said he would make abortion illegal, just that if it were (part of the question) the woman should be punished if she got one. Given Hillary’s blatant law breaking and her flagrant disregard for the law it should not be surprising to learn she would not punish a lawbreaker.

I think Trump changed his opinion five times in the last day but that is neither here nor there. The damage by the media assassins has already been done.

They will continue until they can get rid of him and clear a path for their lawbreaker to win the presidency.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Donald To Get Trumped By Rules Committee?

The GOP is working very hard not to suffer a self inflicted wound but if they repair the damage done the cure will likely fracture the party.

You see, the Republicans do not trust you, the voters, and they set rules so that they can select who they want to run for the presidency. Last cycle they imposed rules that were specifically designed to keep Ron Paul out of the process. Even though they have had four years to change it they have not done so.

If things ended today Donald Trump would be the only candidate, under the Romney rules of four years ago, who qualifies for the nomination.

The rule they wrote to exclude one they did not desire will likely force them to accept one they do not desire.

Here are some excerpts from the linked article. They come from people who will sit on the rules committee. I will translate them so you will know exactly what your task masters are saying:

“I’m not a big fan of the eight-state threshold. I think that’s an artificial number,” said David Wheeler, a rules committee member from South Dakota. “It was designed to prevent Ron Paul delegates — their votes from being counted. I don’t think it’s necessary to do that this year.”

Interpretation: We used this process to deny a candidate and his supporters from having their voices heard because we, your elitist masters, did not want Ron Paul’s delegates to be counted. Your vote means nothing to us.

“We don’t want to give the impression that we are leaning one way or the other in support or trying to hold somebody else back,” said Sandye Kading, the other South Dakota delegate on the rules committee.

Interpretation: We definitely are leaning for anyone but Trump but we don’t want it to look like that so we will play games and tallk about fairness and placate his supporters but we do not favor him and want anyone but him so much so we might all vote Democrat if Trump wins.

“They’ve created these goofy, bogus primaries out of whole cloth,” said Haugland, who argues that conventions are largely irrelevant if the party’s delegates are meant to slavishly follow the results of primaries and caucuses.

Interpretation: We have these primaries and it gives people the idea that their vote matters. We should not be bound by their votes and delegates should be free to vote for whom they want regardless of the outcome of the primary contests. The primaries are bogus because we should have the final say and not have to worry about the results of some sham elections. We know what is best for you.

The news today discussed the Democrat Primary process and their super delegates. They are delegates that are not bound to any election result or candidate. These are used to ensure the party picks the nominee and not a bunch of rube voters.

It appears as if the Republicans have their own process to disenfranchise voters in their party.

If the Republicans change the rules to keep Trump from getting the nomination then all hell will break loose and the party will pretty much be over. Millions of people will sit out the November election and the Democrat will win. We will have a Socialist as our president if this happens.

The party will scream that it is not right and that vows were made to support whomever the nominee ended up being. They will say these things without seeing the irony in what they are doing with their rules change.

But that’s alright. You have no say in the matter now shut up and go vote for whom we tell you.

Just for transparency, I am not a Trump supporter (or anyone else right now). I am listening and watching and I will decide by the time my primary rolls around. Having written that I do not want to see him screwed by the party. If he wins then he should be on the ballot and there should be no rule changes or games played to manipulate the process.

If that happens I see a few possibilities. Trump runs as a third party candidate and the Democrat wins. Millions od disenfranchised Republican voters stay home in protest and the Democrat wins. None of the candidates is deemed worthy so a person who never ran or one who dropped out is selected by the committee. In that case people stay home and the Democrat wins.

Playing games with the rules is what got them in this mess. They changed them to harm Ron Paul and now they want to change them to harm Trump and to avoid a problem of their own making. They had four years to do it but then again, no one knew a guy like Trump would run.

Or take the lead.

Or might actually win.

Now they are scrambling to undo the damage they caused.

And these people want to lead us.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Why I Would Not Sign The Petition

There is a petition that is circulating to allow people with concealed carry permits to carry inside the arena during the Republican Convention. The Secret Service has said no guns will be allowed and they have the authority to do that. I do not agree with their authority and think their ability to institute such a ban undermines government.

The people with permits have passed very extensive background checks that involve all sorts of government agencies. People with permits have been vetted better than any politician the secret service protects. By banning the firearms the Secret Service is basically stating that government can’t be trusted.

Perhaps they are onto something…

The Secret Service is like the rest of the government. They are not against guns they are against YOU having them. If you are SS or law enforcement (other government people) then they are fine with you carrying a firearm. Who knows, maybe they are worried they will have to work harder and have less time for booze and hookers…

So by now you are confused. If I feel this way then why would I not sign such a petition?

It is quite simple. While I believe in the absolute right to keep and bear arms, meaning that you can carry them as you see fit (assuming you are a law abiding citizen), I also know that this event is a private event and the event organizers are in charge of the security and what takes place there. They have as much right to disallow guns at their private event as law abiding citizens have to carry those guns. But it is their event and they get to make the rules.

Your neighbor has the right to say you can’t carry your firearm on his property as do private businesses across this nation.

If you do not like the rule then don’t go there. Many people with carry permits will not patronize any establishment that does not allow firearms. That is their right and they are free to do so (and it is a position with which I agree). There are plenty of firearm friendly businesses where people can spend their money.

If the Republicans do not want people carrying firearms then that is their right. If you don’t like it don’t go.

I find it strange that the people who claim to be pro Second Amendment would have a problem with law abiding people carrying firearms and perhaps that says a lot right there.

In any event maybe those who have tickets should just not show up. Sell the tickets at a profit (if that is legal) or keep them to prevent others from attending. That will push the numbers down.

The petition will not have an effect since the SS has the final say no matter what but at least the RNC could come out in support of the idea..

In the long run though, it is a private event and those running it can do as they see fit even if they do sound like the anti gun folks on the left…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.