Why do I see images of Princess Laya, Han Solo and Darth Vader suddenly. lol
Printable View
Why do I see images of Princess Laya, Han Solo and Darth Vader suddenly. lol
What are the odds that the establishment, the men behind the curtain, are utilizing Anonymous to foment civil war on American soil? Just a question worth pondering. Maybe I just need a vacation instead.
That is what I was thinking too.
CW2 may have already started, but not the shooting war against Government agencies.
Fox, Rush, Levin, Savage, and a few others need to be squelched or reprogrammed first.
Maybe they're culling the top of the list first before the main event.
Then they will be justifiably free to openly go after their enemies.
Faces.... Watch for something to happen to someone else who's got a "face" out there, and has been vocal, perhaps loudly vocal and clear on his (or her) principles and lines in the sand. "Not one more inch" seems to be a phrase that more than one of us has taken up lately.
I mentioned this in another thread earlier today.
A group of operatives wouldn't "take out" Rush, Levin, Hannity, Savage, or Ted Nugent. No, that's TOO obvious. But grabbing and killing the number two guy on YouTube who's pro-secon, pro-gun? Why not? He's a "nobody". Ain't got no political clout, doesn't speak to the President or the Governor (or for them). How about a Best Selling SEAL? Why not? He's "nobody" but a "war hero" and you know, "lived by the sword" (as it was put by Ron Paul) so it's only "ironic".
But the rest of us "get it". We know what happened or at least think we do, and it's a severe warning to the rest of us to back off. If this crap, car accident, bullet to the brain, a hanging, can happen to them it can happen to ANY of us, right?
Any one of us with a lick of sense now will be armed where we can be, and usually will be even when we're not supposed to be.
Don't trust people who you think have ANY connection with the Left.
Don't BELIEVE that everyone is your friend now.
But then, sowing the seeds of mistrust is another method of making people uneasy, scared and forces them to lose confidence in themselves and friends - thus, you have to remember who is TRULY your friend.
I guess it comes down to the battle is engaged; but, it's not what anyone expected.
Classic divide and conquer. Trust no one. The product? No unity. No significant opposition.Quote:
But then, sowing the seeds of mistrust is another method of making people uneasy, scared and forces them to lose confidence in themselves and friends - thus, you have to remember who is TRULY your friend.
Here's the difference today though, and something we need to realize.
We are known, we are unified, and we are Americans. We're also going to stand up to these people whether they LIKE it or NOT and we're not going away and will be replaced by our children.
I'm not hiding from anyone, and I know they don't like that.
None of us should hide, and none of us should be afraid.
We are right, they are in the wrong.
Agreed. Not one more inch.
The Balkanization continues...
High School Food Fight Turns Into Violent 'Race Riot' Leaving Three Students And A Member Of Staff Hospitalized
February 14, 2013
What started out as a lunchtime food fight in a Minneapolis high school ended in a massive brawl involving hundreds of students and police officers wielding canisters of Mace.
Minneapolis South High School was placed on lockdown shortly before 1pm Thursday after violence broke out during third-period lunch inside the cafeteria between Muslim and black students.
The fight involved 200-300 students and lasted about 15 minutes, leaving four people injured. Teaching continued as usual during the lockdown, but students had to remain in their classrooms.
Students were let out at 3pm as usual, and parents were not asked to pick up their children. After-school activities proceeded as scheduled, CBS Minnesota reported.
According to a message posted Thursday afternoon on the school's website, the incident began unfolding at around 12.45pm and quickly escalated into a large-scale physical confrontation.
More than 20 staff members and two school resource officers responded immediately and attempted to break up the fight, but were unable to handle the situation and called the Minneapolis Police Department for help.
Dozens of police officers who arrived on the scene tried to disperse the crowd of brawling teenagers, but to no avail.
They then formed a human chain often used during crowd control situation and called on the brawlers to stand down, but when that failed, police sprayed Mace into the air above the crowd.
Four people, including three students and one staff member who was hit in the head with a bottle, were sent to a hospital. Police said no weapons were used in the altercation, and the teens' unspecified injuries were not related to the fight.
A dozen people also complained of suffering from side effects related to the chemical agent sprayed by police. They were treated on the scene for Mace inhalation.
Student Abdi Sheik told CBS that the fight escalated into a 'big riot' over racial hostilities that have long been bubbling under the surface.
According to witnesses, an initial fight happened during the first lunch period when one student threw a milk carton at another. By the time the third period came around, the situation spiraled out of control, with boys hitting girls and some students lying on the floor and covering their faces in surrender.
Some members of the South High School community said that the violent incident was the culmination of ongoing tensions between the eight per cent of Muslim students of Somali decent and the 20 per cent who are African Americans.
'I don't feel safe here,' senior Guled Omar told the Minneapolis Star Tribune. 'This is something that has been going on [for at least two years].'
In a statement posted on the school's website, district spokesperson Stan Alleyne wrote: 'South is a very diverse high school.
'It is a microcosm of the city. Students function together at a high level every day. That is the strength of this school. Our students live diversity every day.'
So far, no charges have been filed but police said students involved in the melee could potentially face assault, riot, and other counts.
Suburbs Secede From Atlanta
March 11, 2013
As Detroit – beset by violence, debt and social woes – prepares to undergo a historic takeover by the Michigan state government, the city of Atlanta could be sliding toward a similar fate.
Some are quietly wondering whether Atlanta is in danger of becoming “the Detroit of the South.”
The city has experienced an ongoing succession of government scandals, ranging from a massive cheating racket to corruption, bribery, school-board incompetence and now the potential loss of accreditation for the local DeKalb County school system.
For several years, problems of this sort have fueled political reforms, including the creation of new cities in northern Atlanta suburbs. Due to the intensification of corruption scandals in DeKalb, some state-level reform proposals could become national news very soon.
‘Super-white majority’ cities
As a result of the unsavory politics in urban Atlanta, northern suburban communities acted to distance themselves. Beginning in 2005, many communities began the process of incorporating into cities.
Thus far, Milton, Sandy Springs, Brookhaven, Dunwoody, Chattahoochee Hills and Johns Creek have done so.
These cities, after breaking away politically from urban Atlanta, have become so successful that a libertarian think tank, the Reason Foundation, has featured Sandy Springs as a model of effective government. The Economist has also applauded the northern Atlanta cities for solving the problem of unfunded government pension liability and avoiding the bankruptcy that looms over some urban areas. The new cities may soon be able to create their own school districts, which would free them even further from the issues besetting Atlanta.
While incorporation has been popular with residents of the new cities, not all of Atlanta is as satisfied. The Georgia Legislative Black Caucus filed a lawsuit in 2011 to dissolve the new cities, claiming they were a “super-white majority” and diluting the voting power of minorities.
A key leader in the black community and a driving force in support of the lawsuit, who wishes to remain anonymous, bemoaned the “disturbing tendency of black electorates to not elect the smartest and brightest, or even the cleverest.”
Nonetheless, he believes that there is a social contract between the northern and southern parts of the county.
“So when you allow powerful groups of citizens to opt out of a social contract, and form their own, it may benefit the group opting out, but it hurts the larger collective,” he said.
The lawsuit would have canceled incorporation and tied the cities back into the very county that they purposefully left.
State Rep. Lynne Riley, a Republican who represents one of the new cities, called the lawsuit “frivilous” and “disrespectful to the citizens of these cities who are most satisfied with their government.”
The federal trial court rejected the lawsuit, and the court of appeals affirmed the dismissal. However, an attorney for the Black Caucus plans to file an amended lawsuit.
Meanwhile, the same concerns that spurred incorporation continue to mount.
Failing schools
DeKalb County contributed to what the New York Times called “the biggest standardized test cheating scandal in the country’s history” in 2011.
Now, the county is faced with losing its regional accreditation. Losing regional accreditation is, by any objective measure, a devastating indictment of a school board, with severe consequences for students and families within the district.
When nearby Clayton County, Ga., lost its regional accreditation in 2008, it was the first school system in the country to do so in 40 years.
The result in Clayton, according to the Pew Foundation, was that thousands of students left county schools, the district lost millions of dollars and hundreds of teachers were fired.
In response to the Clayton County crisis, after witnessing the fallout and the harm to the state’s reputation, the legislature acted to prevent a repeat. In 2011, the Georgia legislature essentially gave the governor authority to remove board of education members when a district was placed on probation by the accreditation agency.
Last December, DeKalb was placed on probation. Then, in January, the governor of Georgia used his new authority and removed six members of the nine-member DeKalb Board of Education.
This year, well after the accreditation issue broke open, DeKalb school board elections were held. Four of nine board members were up for reelection. Voters in one of the four districts returned their incumbent board member for another term, despite knowing that accreditation was at risk.
This week, a federal judge sided with the governor and agreed that the six suspended board members can be replaced. The decision places the dispute into the Georgia Supreme Court’s purview.
As the issue looms, the mere mention of losing accreditation has impacted the housing market in DeKalb, with at least one potential buyer directing his realtor not to search for homes in the county.
School leadership
Recently, at the helm of the DeKalb school system stood Crawford Lewis. The former superintendent has been indicted on racketeering charges.
Along with several of his associates, Lewis is accused by the DeKalb DA of fraud, theft by a government employee, bribery and a web of racketeering. The charges arose out of Lewis’ practice of steering lucrative government contracts toward favored companies.
According to the indictment, Lewis also used government funds to pay for a hotel room, which he used as the venue for an affair. Lewis had this affair with a person who held the position of “Executive Director of the Office of School Improvement.”
One of the numerous complaints about the DeKalb school board was that it voted to pay for Lewis’ legal defense. There had been a $100,000 cap on the costs allowed for legal defense, but the school board waived it for Lewis’ benefit.
The CEO in charge
At the very top, the head of DeKalb’s government is the position of CEO. The current CEO, Burrell Ellis, is being investigated for a list of concerns, including alleged bid rigging. Police searched Ellis’s home and office recently, and local news outlets report that while no charges have been filed, search warrants are reportedly aimed toward potential extortion, bribery, theft, conspiracy, and wire fraud in connection with private vendors who contract with the county.
Most recently, Ellis sought approval from the county ethics board to establish a legal defense fund to benefit himself. The board rebuffed the request.
A corrupt school board becomes a civil rights issue
Instead of being treated as a story about rampant, inexcusable corruption, the school board fiasco has morphed into a civil rights issue. Atlanta’s NBC affiliate reports that the Georgia NAACP “accused Republican Governor Nathan Deal of being part of an alleged conspiracy to get rid of black office holders and deprive black voters of their rights.”
State Rep. Tyrone Books pointed out that criticism of the governor needed to include a word about black politicians who supported the governor’s removal authority.
“How can we complain about him when we have black folks standing there embracing the removal of black officials?” asked Brooks, D-Atlanta.
The state legislature is trying to prevent public funds from being used in the legal defense of the ousted board members. Because the ousted board members see their positions as a civil rights entitlement, the attorney’s fees required for their defense will quickly rise, unless legislation puts an end to the entitlement.
One of the suspended board members, Eugene Walker, responded to the judge’s ruling with a familiar appeal: “Minorities should not feel secure if contrived allegations from anonymous sources with hidden agendas can go to private agencies and to have their civil rights stolen away.”
DeKalb has changed from majority white to majority black over the last several decades. As the Atlanta Journal Constitution gingerly put it: “The county’s transition from majority white to majority minority was politically rocky .”
http://i49.tinypic.com/k30k5s.jpg
Texas takes step toward secession with Rick Perry’s plan to hoard gold
March 22, 2013
http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/mp/akw8bvApfu7m.jpg
Source: RawStory
Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) and freshman state Rep. Giovanni Capriglione have a plan to create a “Fort Knox of Texas” so that the state can start hoarding gold.
Giovanni has filed a bill to establish a Texas Bullion Depository to store the $1 billion worth of gold bars that are owned by University of Texas Investment Management Co. (UTIMCO), which are currently being housed by the U.S. Federal Reserve.
Speaking to conservative radio host Glenn Beck on Tuesday, Perry said that lawmakers were in the process of “bringing gold that belongs to the state of Texas back into the state.” Beck has been a longtime paid spokesperson for the precious metal seller Goldline, which agreed to refund up to $4.5 million to former customers last year after being sued for marking up gold more than 50 percent.
“If we own it, I will suggest to you that that’s not someone else’s determination whether we can take possession of it back or not,” Perry told Beck.
Former Rep. Ron Paul on Thursday explained to The Texas Tribune that the gold would be safer in the hands of Texans. “If you think gold is a hedge, or a protection, you always want it as close to the individual and the entity as possible,” Paul said. “Texas is better served if it knows exactly where the gold is rather than depending on the security of the Federal Reserve.”
For his part, Capriglione said that he had gotten the idea while attending a tea party rally with Perry in Tarrant County earlier this year.
“Something on the scorecards of a lot of these businesses in deciding whether they want to come to Texas is stability and gold as being one of those items,” Capriglione insisted. “I think it’s been in his consciousness for a while in trying to get some sort of depository in the state of Texas.”
“We don’t want just the certificates. We want our gold. And if you’re the state of Texas, you should be able to get your gold.”
Tangent Capital Partners senior managing director Jim Rickards speculated to Yahoo Finance on Thursday that creating a “Fort Knox of Texas” could be a step in Texas creating its own currency and eventually moving to secede.
“This bill contains a provision that says to the federal government that you, the federal government, purport to confiscate this Texas gold, we, the state of Texas, consider that to be null and void,” Rickards pointed out. “And under the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution, they have that power.”
Earlier this year, more than 100,000 people signed a petition on the White House website calling on President Barack Obama’s administration to allow the state to secede.
White House Office of Public Engagement Director Jon Carson responded by noting that the Supreme Court in 1869 that states do not have a right to secede.
Carson noted that the Founding Fathers established a Constitution and “enshrined in that document the right to change our national government through the power of the ballot — a right that generations of Americans have fought to secure for all. But they did not provide a right to walk away from it.”
In a 2009 interview, Perry had joked that Texas was “thinking about” becoming an independent republic, but he dismissed the call to secede last year.
State considers bringing gold home
Texas has $1B in physical gold
Updated: Friday, 22 Mar 2013, 10:35 PM CDT
Published : Friday, 22 Mar 2013, 7:23 PM CDT
Governor Perry is showing support for a bill to bring home rare and precious metals the state already owns.
Republican Rep. Giovanni Capriglione of Southlake introduced House Bill 35-05. It would create the Texas Bullion Depository, which would house the physical gold bars the state owns.
The Texas Tribune reports the state has a billion dollars in physical gold, which is owned by the University of Texas Investment Management Company.
The gold is currently stored in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
"If we can securely store this gold in Texas and do it at a lower cost to the state than where it is currently stored then we should take a look at that," the Governor said in a statement from his press office to KXAN on Friday. "Number one priority is that it is securely stored."
The Federal Reserve in New York is a strong building from the outside. The gold vault itself is all the way on the basement floor.
Built in the early 1920s, there is only one way into the vault. The 90-ton steel "cylinder door" is set in a 140-ton steel and concrete frame.
Inside, gold bars are housed in individually numbered lockers which are all secured by three locks. The vault housed 530,000 gold bars that weigh close to 6,700 tons.
The Texas Tribune says Capriglione's motive behind the bill is to show businesses that Texas has the financial security in the event of an international or national crisis.
What if Texas really did secede?
Posted Sunday, Mar. 24, 2013
By John HenrySpecial to the Star-Telegram
http://media.star-telegram.com/smedi...1R0.St.58.jpeg
Some 177 years after a violent divorce from Mexico, some unhappy Texans are again touting separation from the motherland, this time after a presidential election didn't favor one of the reddest states in the country.
Perhaps it's no surprise. Texas is the only state that has twice tried breakaways, experiencing the spoils of victory in 1836 but the torment of defeat in 1865.
"Let each go her own way," Peter Morrison, Hardin County's Republican treasurer, wrote in a recent Tea Party newsletter, calling those who voted to re-elect President Barack Obama "maggots." Critics consider that sentiment nothing but bravado.
Still, the state's Republican leaders are in no mood to repair a fractured relationship with the federal government.
Rep. Giovanni Capriglione, R-Southlake, has filed a bill designed to move $1 billion worth of Texas-owned gold bars from the Federal Reserve in New York to a Texas Bullion Depository.
Gov. Rick Perry quickly expressed his support for reclaiming the gold as only a Texan can: We'll come and take it.
"If we own it," Perry said on a radio program last week, "I will suggest to you that that's not someone else's determination whether we can take possession of it back or not."
But, gold standards aside, is secession a realistic option for the second-most-populous state?
Most experts say no.
The Constitution doesn't ban secession, but the question was essentially settled more than 140 years ago in Texas v. White. The post-Civil War Supreme Court ruled secession illegal, saying states could leave only with the consent of the other states, meaning it would likely take an act of Congress.
But stubborn advocates of breaking away, including more than 100,000 who signed a petition on the White House website, say the time is right.
Texas sent $198 billion to Washington for the federal cause in 2011-12. The state got back roughly 90 cents of every dollar. Theoretically, if all that money went to Austin instead, as part of a new Republic of Texas, citizens would get a 10 percent tax break.
The calculation, of course, isn't that simple.
Massive resources
Bob Smiley, a Los Angeles-based writer, has a bit of fun with a separate Texas in his comedic novel Don't Mess With Travis, which sort of qualifies him to speak on a topic that only a relative few take seriously.
"Of all the states which have talked about secession, the strength of the Texas economy mixed with the wealth of its resources make the Lone Star State uniquely qualified to actually have a fighting chance of pulling it off," he said.
Among the natural resources are 16 ports whose economic impact on the United States totals in the billions. For the past decade, Texas has been the top state for foreign exports. Last year, they totaled $265 billion, according to data from the Commerce Department and the Port of Houston, the nation's busiest port for foreign trade.
The state had a gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property -- of $1.2 trillion in 2011, according to figures obtained by the Texas comptroller's office. That would rank as the 14th-largest economy in the world. Houston by itself would be the 25th-largest.
Smiley noted that Texas possesses one-fourth of the nation's oil reserves and one-third of its natural gas reserves.
Texas' leverage is heightened by the fact that 95 percent of the United States receives its oil and gas from pipelines that begin in the Lone Star State.
All of that is indeed an advantage, said Jason Sorens, a professor of political science at the University of Buffalo who specializes in the study of separatist movements.
Locations that have net fiscal transfers, like Catalonia in Spain, or larger regions in terms of population have stronger independence movements, said Sorens, a Yale-trained researcher with a recently published book titled Secessionism: Identity, Interest, and Strategy.
"Frankly, Texas does seem more viable, as long as we're going with an extreme hypothetical," Sorens said. "It has the population, which makes it, at least from that perspective, more viable. It has the fiscal resources."
That doesn't mean it's feasible. Texas almost certainly will not leave the union.
But, what if ...
Secession vote
Texas' vote for secession in 1860 came despite an impassioned plea from Gov. Sam Houston.
The "Constitution and the Union were to be perpetual blessings to the human race," Houston said. "That the success of the experiment of our fathers was beyond dispute, and that whether under the banner of the Lone Star or that many-starred banner of the Union, I could point to the land of Washington, Jefferson and Jackson as the land blessed beyond all other lands, where freedom would be eternal and Union unbroken."
The North would win, Houston predicted, and the South and Texas would be crushed.
Times are different.
"There are a wide range of possible responses," Sorens said, "but I think we're long past deciding things that way."
Sorens, remember, was speaking about an "extreme hypothetical." But for some Texans, the debate is real.
Among the options bandied about by secession advocates is invoking the right under the U.S. Resolution of Annexation of 1845 to divide into five states. If that move succeeded, some say, the U.S. Senate would gladly vote to allow Texas to leave rather than tolerate eight more "Texas" senators in Washington.
But if the legislative branch -- or an established method of leaving, such as something akin to amending the Constitution -- did not consent to Texas' exit, the federal government would likely flex its political and economic muscle and exert pressure on the misbehaving state, Sorens said.
As for money, Capriglione's bill could be described as a starter kit for establishing a Texas currency.
Battling in court
Building a military and guarding borders and ports seem simple costs compared with untangling the massive social safety nets shared by Texas and the federal government.
A formal separation request would seem to be the precursor to a long and convoluted legal entanglement, as both entities would need clear language on how to settle compensation for Social Security and Medicare insurance benefits paid upfront.
Medicaid and CHIP payments paid out to the 4.8 million Texans on the rolls amounted to $23 billion in 2009, of which $16 billion was paid by the federal government.
Almost 3.2 million Texans are at least partly insured through the federal Medicare program, and even more are in its prescription drug coverage plans.
How would Texas' share of the national debt be resolved? Who would be responsible for disabled and aging veterans?
Federal loan guarantees worth $3.3 billion have helped with badly needed infrastructure and transportation projects, including the North Tarrant Express. What is the cost of federally owned property, such as air bases and the Army's Fort Hood and Fort Bliss?
Like the miserable married couple, the numbers should make any practical person step back and reassess, if not the measure of love, then the cost of divorce.
The numbers, however, also make the case for separation, advocates say.
Look how big and inefficient this nation is, they say. Half the world's countries have populations smaller than that of Massachusetts, said Harvard economics professor Alberto Alesina, who argues that austerity leads to growth.
For the majority, the legal and practical hurdles to secession make such talk nothing but a distraction. Still, when Texans talk, other people seem to listen.
"Secession is a deeply American principle," former Texas Congressman Ron Paul said, writing about the subject on his website. "This country was born through secession. Some felt it was treasonous to secede from England, but those 'traitors' became our country's greatest patriots."
I'd have a look should it come to pass. I wouldn't think the Obama administration would give up the economic boost given regularly by the State of Texas, though. Not without a fight. Seems like a viable concept, nonetheless.
Americans Are Migrating To More Free Republican States
March 28, 2013
http://www.investors.com/image/Web2c0328.gif.cms
Americans are migrating from less-free liberal states to more-free conservative states, where they are doing better economically, according to a new study published Thursday by George Mason University's Mercatus Center.
The "Freedom in the 50 States" study measured economic and personal freedom using a wide range of criteria, including tax rates, government spending and debt, regulatory burdens, and state laws covering land use, union organizing, gun control, education choice and more.
It found that the freest states tended to be conservative "red" states, while the least free were liberal "blue" states.
The freest state overall, the researchers concluded, was North Dakota, followed by South Dakota, Tennessee, New Hampshire and Oklahoma. The least free state by far was New York, followed by California, New Jersey, Hawaii and Rhode Island.
The study also compared its measures of economic and personal freedom to population shifts and income growth, and found that freer states tend to do better on both scores than those less free.
For example, it found a strong correlation between a state's freedom ranking and migration, which means that Americans are gravitating toward states that have less-intrusive governments.
Escape From New York, L.A.
New York, for example, saw a net migration of -9.2% between 2000 and 2011, and California's was -4.2%. In contrast, Tennessee gained 4.4%, and Oklahoma gained 1.3%.
An IBD analysis of the data found that "red" states — those voting for Republican presidential candidates in the past two elections — saw an overall net migration of 2.2%, while "blue" states saw an overall average net migration of -0.3%.
"People are voting for places with greater freedom," said William Ruger, a political scientist at Texas State University and one of the co-authors of the study. That was true, he said, even after controlling for things like weather and amenities that might attract people to states independent of these freedom measures.
The study also found that states with more freedom tended to see stronger income growth. This was particularly true in states with more regulatory freedom.
"Adam Smith was right," Ruger said. "If you have economic freedom, you will have economic growth."
IBD has previously reported that red states saw stronger job growth, lower unemployment and bigger gains in per capita income than blue states during the economic recovery. For example, IBD found that in the first three years of the recovery, red states saw 1.9% job growth compared with 1.2% for blue states.
That is just one reason I left California, Ryan.
Anne Arundel County, Maryland Delegate Don Dwyer Calls For 'Militia' As Gun Control Vote Nears
April 4, 2013
As the House of Delegates debated Gov. Martin O’Malley’s gun control initiative Wednesday afternoon, Del. Don Dwyer was using social media to call for creation of a volunteer militia around the state.
In a Facebook post at 4 p.m., Dwyer, R-Pasadena, issued a call for help from “Maryland patriots.”
“I was certain that the time would come when there would be a need to organize the ‘voluntary militia.’ That time has come.
“The voluntary militia is recognized in the Maryland Constitution under Article 9, Section 1, and the Declaration of Rights under Article 28 that notes ‘a well regulated militia is the proper and natural defense of a free government.’”
Dwyer did not specifically link the militia to the gun control debate. Lousia Baucom, his legislative aide, confirmed Dwyer was on the House floor during the debate over gun control but said he would not comment Wednesday on his call for volunteers.
Dwyer has been an outspoken critic of the gun control measures working their way through the General Assembly.
Delegates are expected to pass the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, an amended version of Senate Bill 281. The bill will then head back to the Senate with any changes. Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill by Monday, the scheduled last day of the General Assembly’s 90-day session.
Under the bill, Maryland would have some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, banning the sale of assault weapons, limiting magazines to 10 bullets and requiring more extensive training and a license for new gun owners.
“Please know that I am not calling for insurrection of any kind, I am simply calling for you to join me in establishing an organized effort to establish a voluntary militia in every county of the state,” Dwyer wrote in his posting.
Dwyer urged volunteers to contact him for information how they can serve in the militia.
This is the second time in recent weeks that Dwyer has used his Facebook page to launch a campaign. Late last month, he said he is considering a change of party to help oust “hard left” liberals from the Democratic primaries.
Too late... lol
There are organized militias in 50% of the counties in the country now.
Maybe, but this is interesting coming from an elected official.
A lot of elected officials are involved and not saying things publicly. I can tell you that for a fact.
lol
They didn't ask us....
Missouri Declares Itself a Free State
Posted on May 9, 2013 by Robert Farago
http://ttag.zippykidcdn.com/wp-conte...ge-mo.gov_.jpg
America is no longer split between Democrat and Republican. It’s now divided between citizens who believe in big government and those who consider small government the key to personal liberty. Social unity vs. individual rights. Economic dependency vs. financial self-sufficiency. Not to put too fine a point on it, it’s a struggle between slavery and freedom. The battle over the natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms has thrown this Great Divide into high relief. We’re once again a nation of slave states (e.g., California, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island), free states (e.g., Texas, Kansas, Arizona, Wyoming, Utah, Montana) and states moving one way or the other (e.g., Colorado, New Mexico, Illinois). And now Missouri has declared its status . . .
The Missouri Legislature sent the governor a bill Wednesday that would expand gun rights and declare all federal gun regulations unenforceable, in a response to President Obama’s push for gun control legislation.Aside from nullification—a movement to which Kansas recently ascribed (much to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s chagrin)—the new bill expands Missourians’ existing gun rights.
In addition to declaring federal gun laws unenforceable, the bill would allow concealed weapons to be carried by designated school personnel in school buildings. It would allow appointed “protection officers” to carry concealed weapons as long as they have a valid permit and register with the state Department of Public Safety. The officers would also be required to complete a training course.And if that’s not enough—and it may well not be, considering the AG’s hard-on for Kansas and the Supreme Court’s fondness for considering sneezing interstate commerce—the Show-Me State is considering an amendment to their constitution that would make residents’ right to keep and bear arms an “inalienable” right.
The bill would also allow people with a firearms permit to openly carry weapons less than 16 inches in length even in localities that prohibit open-carry of firearms . . .
The legislation passed Wednesday would prevent people from publishing any identifying information on gun owners. A person who publishes such information would be guilty of a class A misdemeanor. It also would prevent doctors or nurses from being required to ask patients about firearm ownership.
The measure would also lower the minimum age required to obtain a concealed weapons permit from 21 to 19.
The tension between the two Americas continues to build . . .
I'd say America has been "split" in two for more than five years now
As a certain Internet persona said years ago, just look at the map of the last election.
I do note that Virginia seems to never make the news as far as this issue and I suspect its because the commonwealth already has a comprehensive buyer check law from shops. Private party sales are not regulated as far as I know and that is the way a reporter slammed our state claiming the small guns he or she was able to buy private sale were some great loophole. I mean, a true gun holder who may sell privately tends to have some discretion and a reporter seeming to be a responsible person, as they likely are, is no red flag.
Oklahoma joins 21 other states with petition for secession from the Union
- Sececession
- November 12, 2012
- By: Emma Riley Sutton
http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/def...?itok=Ln7d074m
Almost half of the 50 states are petitioning to leave the Union since the re-election of Barack Obama.
Credits: Mark Wilson/Getty
" Oklahoma has joined at least 21 other states to secede from the United States. It was reported on Nov. 12 that Oklahoma residents are signing a petition, asking for permission to no longer be part of the United States.
WebProNews also reported on Nov. 12 that there is no mention of the Nov. 6 presidential election, despite all the petitions being started after Barack Obama was re-elected as the president.
“I can certainly understand not wanting to be part of America for at least the next four years,” Clara Whitestone, from Oklahoma City, said. “That joke known as ObamaCare is enough to send real Americans running. Add on to that the fiscal cliff that we are about to jump off of and all the places where marijuana and gay marriage is now legal and sane people will be signing petitions all over the country.”
For the petitions to be entertained by Washington, D.C., each petition must have a minimum of 25,000 signatures. At the time of publication, only one state, Texas, has that amount. The petition from Texas has over 27,000 signatures. It is believed that the other states’ petitions only have about 4,000 signatures each.
“Talk about sour grapes,” Leticia Brown, from Warr Acres, said. “They don’t like having a black man as president so they want to start their own white country. All Tea Party racists that want to promote white people and keep all the blacks in chains.”
The states that have petitioned the government to secede are as follows: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas. Both Georgia and Missouri have at least two petitions. "
It is nearly always presumed those who dislike Obama get the moniker as racist. The name callers never actually listen to what those who dislike the man are saying. I for one always talk policy as race is a non issue for me as I know it is for most who dislike him. There will always be those who are racist, but to tag any group as all one thing is ignorant. I cannot say all democrats are any one thing, nor all republicans are all one thing. Individuals of a group will be different.
So, anyone can choose to call me racist for my dislike of Obama, but they will not hear me voicing any proof of the claim, since my view is based on facts about his terms and prior to the terms. I am just glad to see some of his tyrant rules are being combated with some success. The thing is, he has pushed so much damaging legislation and EO's that we can win a fight or several but still lose the battle. Sad times.
You mentioned Obama in a negative way, you racist!
lol
I think Mal (for one) took those insults (being called a racist for example) and converted it into serious sarcasm a long time ago.
Me, I don't like Obama because:
1) He is a Progressive/Communist,
2) who was raised by a Communist (his father),
3) was born in another country and isn't even an American (even though he CLAIMS Hawaii),
4) Lies out right constantly, Obfuscates the truth, lies by omission, misinforms the public, mis-characterizes the Right all the time, and did I mention "lies",
5) Surrounds himself with criminals (terrorists, tax evaders, and lying liars),
6) Wants to take MY money I EARNED for himself and his over-bearing, over-reaching, tyrannical government and claims people like me don't pay "our fair share",
7) Wants to shut down coal, oil and other natural fuel resources,
8) has tried to force "Green" energy and "Green" jobs on America but instead has shut down many industries,
9) Intentionally has shut down (using overbearing, overreaching bureaucracies) to over regulate everything you can think of,
10) Believes in Islam but lies about it,
11) Supports terrorist countries without thinking about it,
12) Is a Puppet of Putin (see "I'll have more flexibility after I'm re-elected",
13) has tried to BAN MY GUNS, AMMO etc (I'm a law abiding citizen, unlike his "son" Trayvon Martin, who was a criminal too) and thinks *I* am a criminal because I own guns;
14) has allowed the IRS to target Conservatives,
15) has allowed the Justice Department to target the media (in particular Fox news reporters),
16) Tried to go after guns with the "Fast and Furious" and "project Gun Walker" programs which got people KILLED (and still wants to blame ME for owning guns legally?),
17) has tried to re-define the word "racist" to mean "Anyone White"....
18) Pulls the race card every chance he gets....
--- and I could go on, and on, and on. But not ONE thing I've said is "racist". Nothing ANY of us have said is "racists". The assholes that use that phrase are just that, assholes that want to "re-define" words like racist. Blacks are some of the most racist people I've ever met.
I have never once in my life acted racist or called someone a bad name (like the "N" word for instance, a word I won't use anyway) and yet BECAUSE I am WHITE I'm called that name often (racist). People don't know me, my background, how I grew up or the distaste I have for people WHO are racist - and they would still call me a racist?
No, the truth of the matter is, Phil, I could care less what anyone thinks of me. But if they try to make me out to be something I am NOT, I'll fight. To the death. And if they want to MAKE me into a racist, all they have to do is keep up the name calling because people get one chance. I give them the benefit of doubt; once. If they treat me badly and continue to lie, I'll treat them the same way back.
In my time it was called "The Golden Rule". Do unto others as you would have them do unto thee.
But in these days, I'll call it Rick's Law. Do right back to them as what them does to you first....
Thank you Rick.
Well stated by you and Mal.
Even lefties are getting on board with a "two state solution' for their own misguided reasons...
Memo To The South: Go Ahead, Secede Already!
Let’s face it—on nearly every important issue, from gun control to immigration to gay marriage, red states are holding America back. Lee Siegel on why the South should get the hell out of the union.
April 30, 2013
Let’s not be fooled by all the bipartisan rhetoric that has been streaming out of the GOP since Romney’s self-destruction. Hundreds of thousands of petitioners in a handful of red states still want to secede? Well, don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
A solid block of Southern states continues to refuse to expand Medicaid, thus squashing one of the linchpins of the president’s health-care reform. The South will likely be the last and most stubborn battleground in the fight for gay marriage. Gun control? The more the two sides seem to get cozier with each other, the faster gun-control legislation gets watered down—and more and more red states are passing laws making it legal to carry a concealed weapon. As for immigration, the red states seem to be relaxing their anti-immigrant fervor, but nothing approaching new legislation is even on the horizon.
The sad truth is that “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” can only be achieved at this point if the nation is split in half. Far from being fanciful or fanatical, the proponents of secession have a stronger grasp of political reality than just about anyone else. In fact, there are serious reasons why the North itself should take the lead in a secessionist movement.
Just think what America would look like without its mostly Southern states. (We could retain “America”: they could call themselves “Smith & Wesson” or “Coca-Cola” or something like that.) Universal health care. No guns. Strong unions. A humane minimum wage. A humane immigration policy. High revenues from a fair tax structure. A massive public-works program. Legal gay marriage. A ban on carbon emissions. Electric cars. Stronger workplace protections. Extended family leave from work in case of pregnancy or illness. Longer unemployment benefits. In short, a society on a par with most of the rest of the industrialized world—a place whose politics have finally caught up with its social and economic realities.
But I don’t want to appear blindly partisan—a sundering of the union would make the other half of America equally fulfilled. The red-state republic could finally establish a theocracy in which the fundamentalist Christian church would legislate all the important aspects of civic life. It could either send its illegal and/or legal immigrants northward or reinstitute a reformed system of indenture whereby immigrants are purchased by bona fide citizens who have a fully modernized respect for private property. It could, taking the lead from the pioneering Kansas legislature, abolish the income tax, raising revenue from, for example, a “pay to work” program. It could ban abortion in all instances, including rape and incest, and use the growing population of orphans to establish an impressive standing army.
The red-state nation, giddy with new mobility, could make the 1958 Chevy its official car, and use the cutting-edge resources of cable television and the Internet to broadcast postwar situation comedies 24 hours a day. It could arm all of its citizens, and thus relieve itself of the financial burden of maintaining law-enforcement agencies. And without any type of regulation, it could finally compete with similarly unhampered societies all over the world. Without the FDA, a new red-state republic could use refined transfats to develop ever tastier delicacies, perhaps energizing its economy by instituting a toxic-food-for-toxic-toys program with China.
Bitter sarcasm aside, both regions of the country would, in a word, have conferred on them the fundamental freedoms they each believe the other side is denying them.
Instead, we are stuck living in an America whose politics hang suspended somewhere in the 1850s, when the almost symmetrical divide in the country kept one half of it mired in a barbaric system of slavery—itself rooted in ancient customs and conventions—and the other half moving quickly, along scientific and technological lines, into the modern era. Almost 150 years after the end of the Civil War, when it comes to basic issues and fundamental values, America is still split right down the middle.
Liberal pundits, especially, refuse to see this, perhaps because their livelihood depends on their ability to cheer readers and viewers through the deepening gloom with ever brighter optimistic prognostication. Nonetheless, the country is still as neatly divided as quinoa pilaf with mushrooms on one side and roasted pork belly on the other, and will continue to be. The presidency will swing one way and Congress—then, or two years later—will swing another. No matter the current state of the Republican Party, the iron law of “throw the bums out” will kick in, and the outsiders will once again have the White House. And still nothing will have changed.
It boggles the mind that, even as I write this, the so-called sequester, imposed by law in lieu of a balanced budget, has kicked in and is about to cause misery for millions of the most vulnerable Americans on both sides of the divide. Other countries suffer strife or war or anarchy or real economic terrors. We, on the other hand, the most prosperous and most powerful nation on the face of the earth, squabble like young newlyweds over how to pay the household bills.
The conventional, almost formulaic description of this political psychosis is that the Democrats and Republicans cannot “agree” on a solution, which they would be able to do if only the two sides would act rationally and “listen to” each other. The fact that they cannot “negotiate” results in a “stalemate,” which summons to mind the happy delusion of a demanding chess match at the end of which the two competing parties can at least take solace in a game beautifully and intelligently played. Or we hear on Fox that the Democrats are ideologically blind and fanatical in their pursuit of a totalitarian government. Or we hear on MSNBC that the Republicans are ideologically blind and fanatical in their pursuit of a Darwinian dystopia.
The. Country. Is. Split. Right. Down. The. Middle. May I, with the subtlety of cannonballs falling upon Fort Sumter, suggest that we stop using the anodyne categories of red and blue, and start calling the two sides “Confederate” and “Union,” which is what they really are?
The association of North with modernity and South with regression is so prominent, so visible, so all-encompassing that its familiarity has made it invisible. Here are the facts—with important exceptions in every category. The great research universities are in the blue states. So are the great medical schools, the great hospitals, and the great law schools. The great art and history museums are in the blue part of the country.
The most important popular and “high” art is produced by blue people, in blue places. Even the best comedians—with the exception of Stephen Colbert—are, you might say, from free as opposed to slave states.
By contrast, the South leads in all the negative trends. The South has the highest infant mortality rate. It has the most traffic deaths. It leads the country in gun deaths. It has the greatest number of obese people. It has the highest rate of diabetes. It has the largest number of people dying from stroke—a broad swath of the southeastern United States is known as the “stroke belt.” The South has the highest rates of cognitive decline.
Interestingly, though the South is home to the major tobacco companies and to carcinogenic Coca-Cola, the highest incidence of many types of cancer happens to be in the North. Which just proves that the stress of living alongside the Confederacy is now seriously affecting our health.
And the country’s great, recent Southern presidents? Jimmy Carter did more damage to the liberal agenda, which had been heroically advanced by that arch-fiend Richard Nixon, than any other modern president. In 1993, Arkansan Bill Clinton proposed a budget nearly devoid of social investment and almost identical to Reagan’s years earlier. Even when they find themselves in the vanguard of mainstream American politics, Southern politicians heed their atavistic instincts—and their gift for nimble expedience—and turn, like flowers straining toward the setting sun, back to the 19th century.
As for the great numbers of enlightened men and women in the South, let me cut through all the nuances of history and polemic and invite them all to flee northward. To paraphrase Swift, I am opposed to the Southern tribe as a voting, obstructing, retarding whole, but not to the countless individuals who make up the tribe, some of whom of course are exemplars of decency, humanity, wit, sophistication, and charm. Let them come north, and enrich us with their grace and charm. (And maybe if CNN moved their headquarters to New York or Philadelphia or Boston, the network could save its plummeting ratings simply by changing its employees’ diets.)
I used to take sharp issue with the argument, advanced by Tom Frank, that red-state citizens are rubes deceived into voting against their own material interests by wily Republican elites. My feeling was that people who lead a hardscrabble existence, like so many in the South, don’t define their lives in economic terms since the economy has failed them, and always will. Instead, they set the spiritual wealth of their cultural values—God and country—against the liberal domination of national culture; against liberal elites who are every bit as rich as their Republican counterparts but who seem to have no sympathy for the ordinary lives of the hard-pressed who abide by a different system of values.
By this point, I could care less about such people. All I know is that they stand opposed to every social and economic arrangement that would make an increasingly harsh and exponentially more complicated America more bearable for those with little or no material resources. I don’t really care what the matter is with the so-called average American. My attitude now is somewhat less cerebral. Fuck Kansas, and fuck the horse it rode (into the Union) on.
Perhaps my newfound sense of explicit disgust with America’s backside is why I cannot join in the ongoing celebration of Abraham Lincoln that seems to have seized the country since Obama’s first election. Never mind the perhaps 1 million lives that Lincoln destroyed for the sake of preserving the Union—not for the sake of abolishing slavery, which was Lincoln’s sacred pretext. Slavery was an abomination and it had to be wiped out. But how many slaves would have been destroyed, spiritually or physically, by the time the South fell if it had been allowed to secede? Would it have been 1 million? Who has the audacity to compare agonies?
These days I sometimes fall into a counter-historical revelry in which Lincoln allowed the South to remove itself from the Union. Within months, hundreds of Underground Railroads would have sprung up, slowly draining the South of its shackled manpower. The thriving Northern economy, galvanized by technological advances, would have made it possible to boycott Southern goods that could then have been bought from other countries. Northern economic and political might would have purchased important foreign alliances, which could have been used to isolate the South. In maybe 10 years, with the help of Northern and foreign arms, Southern blacks would have overthrown a feeble, decaying government run mostly by alcoholics lost in a haze of deluded grandeur.
Who knows? By the 1870s, we might have had a black republic; by the 1880s, the first free and equal pair of interracial countries; by 1890, cool jazz. On the eve of the Second World War, the pact between the North American nation and the Southern American nation might have established such a powerful and enlightened pair of biracial republics that Nazi and Japanese theories of racial superiority would never have gotten off the ground.
Or not.
But it hardly matters what might have been. What exists now is unworkable, untenable, and damn near unendurable. We are living in a permanently forked land. If you’re reading this website, you’re most likely one of “us.” And what “we” often write about, with scathing exasperation, is the retrograde stubbornness of “them.” Just as the German playwright Gustav Freitag famously reduced all drama to a single five-act structure, all of “our” political writing can be reduced to a few themes or tropes. We are for high taxes. They are for no taxes. We are for prohibiting, in various degrees, the private ownership of guns. They are for the universal ownership of guns. We are for choice on abortion. They are against it. We are for stem-cell research. They are against it. We are for universal health care paid for by taxes. They are for excluding government from health care (except when it comes to Medicare). We are for legal immigration in generous numbers. They are for a small trickle of legal immigration. We are for a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, materialist, rationalist, secular society in which gay people marry and raise adopted children, and women more often than not rule a roost that has two electric cars in every garage and a small bottle of morning-after pills in every purse. How about them?
Let us, along with the secessionists, get real. Maybe, by turning our unacknowledged, absolute division into a recognized aggression—by liberating the two irreconcilable halves of the country into two frankly contending rivals—just maybe, we can, at last, play ball.
Little Czechoslovakia split itself in two; why can’t we?
Hahahahahahahaha
They fail to understand the true ramifications of secession to themselves.
Being "held back" isn't the biggest issue either. It's how many of them will be denied access to the "Southern States".
Umm, bullshit.Quote:
The process will be daunting. Voters in each county would need to vote for the idea. Then statehood would need to be approved by the state legislature, the governor and Congress.
The Congress has nothing to do with Session. The Governor of a State can't do jack about it if the state legislature says "We go". The state can't do crap if the majority of citizens (and I think it will be close to 99% of them in those counties) want to leave.
There is no "government approval" required to secede from the USA. Sorry. That article is WRONG.
I think they were referring to the process of official statehood which is laid out in the US Constitution.
You're right about general secession though I'm not sure what all that would entail versus statehood.
Statehood requires congressional approval, plus a ratification process by all states if I recall. (I'd have to look it up, after all we haven't added to our "57" states since Hawaii).
I'm really not sure where those missing 7 states are either......
This is particularly interesting to me. I live in Weld County, Colorado.
:D
a
I still plan to jettison out when the opportunity arises. This goose is on a simmer and coming close to done. While I know we are still better off in many ways than most of the world, it really depends on what one requires. I do not need much as things go. I need a simple set of laws, oh like our constitution is which is relegated to pulp. I know of a country or few that are actually quite simple for living yet have the main amenities to ours, just without the bullshit.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...orth-colorado/
Colorado Counties mull forming new state, North Colorado.
GREELEY, COLO. – Officials in eight northern Colorado counties united in opposition to the state's new gun control laws and oil and gas regulations are reportedly considering forming a 51st U.S. state called North Colorado.
The Denver Post reports that a proposal to separate Weld, Morgan, Logan, Sedgwick, Phillips, Washington, Yuma and Kit Carson counties from the rest of the state was hatched at a meeting of county commissioners last week.
Weld County commissioners Sean Conway, Mike Freeman and Doug Rademacher said they will conduct public meetings and decide whether to draft a ballot measure by Aug. 1., according to a report in The Greeley Tribune.
The U.S. Constitution requires that Legislatures must first approve any state that is to be created within its jurisdiction.
Commissioners said Thursday that failed legislative efforts to crack down on oil and gas, as well as increases in rural renewable energy standards were "the straws that broke the camel's back."
Conway told the Tribune that Weld County's main economic drivers, agriculture and energy, are under attack, even though those sectors contribute significantly to the state's economy. He said the county's return on its financial contributions to the state are minimal.
Commissioners are also concerned about the lack of funding for infrastructure and education and believe the split would allow them to leverage financial investments from energy companies in the region, the newspaper reported.
Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., whose district would be included in the split, said in a statement last week that he is sympathetic to the commissioners' concerns and doesn't blame them for wanting to form a new state, The Tribune reported.
"The people of rural Colorado are mad, and they have every right to be," Gardner said. "The governor and his Democrat colleagues in the statehouse have assaulted our way of life, and I don't blame these people one bit for feeling attacked and unrepresented by the leaders of our state."
Gov. John Hickenlooper's spokesman Eric Brown said in a statement obtained by the paper that "background checks on gun sales, increasing renewable energy and supporting responsible development of oil and gas are popular with rural and urban voters."
Already posted here - http://www.transasianaxis.com/showth...l=1#post109642
:D
Just merge em :)
Nice to have a reminder lol
Oops - sorry. I even looked around too.