Shall be Infringed. A discussion on open carry.

“A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”  The second amendment as written and intended, died years and years ago.  The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could restrict firearms ownership.  Machine guns now require a federal license.  Fighter jets and tanks are tightly controlled and always unarmed.

Last year, Arkansas passed a law intended to clear up the language in the law allowing carrying a firearm in a vehicle.  It has & is legal to transport if unloaded & the ammo stored separate where it cannot be loaded quickly or easily, and you are on a journey.  (or any other lawful reason to have a firearm) (1)   Poor wording of the revision led many county attorney generals to interpret it as allowing open carry as a constitutional right.  The Arkansas State Police have issued their own opinion that open carry is not legal and they will arrest any and all that make that attempt.

Sadly, I find myself conflicted.  I lean libertarian & want as few laws and restrictions as possible.  I am a strong supporter in the second amendment and especially the right to defend yourself.  But I do not want to see open carry expanded.  Arkansas, along with Texas, South Carolina and  Oklahoma  restricted open carry during the post-Civil war Reconstruction era.  About a dozen states allow open carry of handguns without requiring a permit.  Another dozen allow with a permit similar to a concealed carry permit.  Some states also allow open carry of long guns such as shotguns or rifles.

Notice, I do not ask for any restrictions or new laws be passed in these open carry states.  I simply do not think it wise to push for more open carry.  My concern is it will be used to commit a crime.  Be it a terrorist, foreign or domestic that parades into a crowded event, heavily armed, and attempts a massacre.  Or peaceful protesters, such as in Ferguson, are infiltrated by armed thugs, intent on violence.  If open carry is legal in that state, any attempt by police to ascertain the legality of the armed individuals will be decried racist.  And after blood is shed, they will blame the police for failing to protect the public.

And my fear is some on the left want such an occurrence to promote more restrictive national gun laws.  Ronald Ritchie,(2) the “witness” who reported John Crawford to 911, insisting he was a threat, later recanted his story.  Anti-gun activists are advocating reporting of any open carry. (3) Was John Crawford “Swatted”?

And some will say, why insist on restricting our freedoms on what if’s?  I will agree they have a point.  I will also point out, in the 90’s, a man was wondering “what if” I can get some of my followers to hijack an airplane and fly it into a skyscraper….  So what if we all agree there are threats in today’s world.  What is the best way to combat them while allowing the most freedom?

And just now, a terrorist attack in Paris.  France has very tough gun control laws.  “They were armed with Kalashnikov rifles and are also believed to have had a rocket-propelled grenade.” 

1.  How did they get their weapons?

2.  What other laws would have prevented this?

3.  Would open carry help or hinder the police & government?

(1)  http://media.law.uark.edu/arklawnotes/2014/02/13/open-carry-in-arkansas-an-ambiguous-statute/

(2) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/07/ohio-black-man-killed-by-police-walmart-doubts-cast-witnesss-account

(3)  https://www.nraila.org/articles/20141003/gun-control-supporters-advocate-swating-of-gun-owners

A Nation Divided

Liberals claimed Obama would bring us together.  I think he made those same claims.  With his record before the election, today’s reality should surprise only the gullible.  America is more divided on race, the economy, health care, foreign relations and on nearly every issue.  Pick one and tell me it’s better now than under Bush or Clinton?  We just looked at Ferguson and the race/violence issue.  How about a look at foreign affairs.

First, what is Obama’s policy?  Damned if I Know?  Our military announced a shift to Asia, meaning possible confrontations with China.  Meanwhile things are going to “ell in the Middle East & with Russia.  At the same time, defense spending has been cut while entitlement spending is increased.. 

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/08/hillary_clintons_foreign_policy_failures.html

 

The new immigrants being distributed throughout the US are claiming benefits in what should be a surprising manner.  Register & go to school.  Tell them you are 16 or 17.  SO what if you have gray hair & wrinkles & no one will believe you are a teenager.  It doesn’t matter how old you are if the federal government say’s you get to go to school & collect, just take the money and welcome to America….

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/382483/adult-illegal-immigrants-posing-children-enroll-high-school-ryan-lovelace

Speaking the UnSpeakable

I do try to not make judgements on issues until the smoke clears & a clear picture emerges.  I mostly ignored the Zimmerman story for a couple of days.  I have tried to do so on Ferguson until enough facts emerged to form an intelligent opinion.  First fact, the MO Govern is a total tool & should be recalled, impeached or just shipped to Iraq to directly head negotiations with ISIS.  (OK, not a fact, just a strongly expressed opinion)

On Tuesday, August 19, Governor Jay Nixon (D-Mo.) called for the “vigorous prosecution” of Darren Wilson, the Missouri police officer who shot and killed Michael Brown last week. 

Despite the highly charged rhetoric by the state’s Democratic governor, NBC’s Today was the only network morning show to acknowledge Nixon’s comments, giving it a mere 41 seconds on its Wednesday morning broadcast.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz3B24u8XPJ

So what do you think?  Calling for vigorous prosecution before even determining if he committed a crime?  I have a different perspective.  Officer Darren Wilson should be awarded the highest awards available to a law enforcement officer for his actions.  By several accounts, Michael Brown & another male were walking down the middle of a city street, disrupting traffic.  (This was soon after the report of a robbery in that area.)  Officer Wilson yelled at them to get out of the street.  (this is a LEGAL order!  The ideal that this is a free country does not mean there are not laws such as those that restrict the streets to vehicles, not pedestrians.  Police also have the authority to enforce those laws thru tickets, arrest or whatever level of force is required)  Brown walking down the middle of the street after committing a strong arm robbery (battery) shows he was intent on violence, on provoking a confrontation. 

Officer Wilson ordered him out of the street.  Brown ignored him.  Officer Wilson started to exit his vehicle but was stopped by Brown & his accomplice, who shoved him back into the police car.  Brown then punched officer Wilson several times resulting in significant to severe injuries.  There are reports the struggled for Wilson’s gun.  Brown stepped away & Wilson exited the car.  Brown then taunted Wilson, “What you gonna do, shoot me”?  Brown then began an aggressive run at Wilson, who then shot Brown six times.

Reports indicate Wilson suffered a fractured eye socket from Browns attack.  A few days ago, I criticized Wilson’s marksmanship.  I was wrong.   While Brown was struck four times in the right arm, two went thru and struck the upper body.  Wilson was aiming center mass, exactly as police officers are trained.  That he was this accurate after a brutal beating, impaired vision and possible concussion or concussion like symptoms shows focus, restraint and professionalism of the highest order.  Brown had shown himself intent on violence and unwilling to submit to arrest.  Had Wilson allowed him to escape, who would have been his next victim?  Wilson, as a police officer, is entrusted with authority & powers not shared with the general public.  He is expected to protect the general public from violence.  Had Brown continued to walk away, Wilson would still be expected to stop Brown.  Compare that to you or I.  If we had been beaten & they walk away, we cannot legally shoot them or use lethal force.  Once the threat to our or others safety passes, we cannot legally engage even a violent criminal.  But in this encounter, we & officer Wilson have the clear right to self defense.  Brown reversed direction and began a fast approach toward Wilson.  He died an aggressor.  He died because he choose to attack others.  Wilson was injured doing his job stopping people like Brown.

And while I am happy to praise Officer Wilson, I think it should be contrasted with some criticism.  A few years back there was a shooting in Time Square.  I am still waiting for reports on what happened to the officers who shot innocent bystanders.  In California, during the Dorner manhunt, police twice fired on mistakenly identified vehicles, shooting one man & injuring two others.  Two separate incidents where two different police organizations violated the law & their legally recognized procedures.  If shoot on sight orders had been issued, they would have to have identified the suspect.  The first incident involved two women.  The second a small build white male.  Dorner was a large, black male.  NY could be excused, that they had to stop a threat to the public at large, even if it meant injuring innocent bystanders present at that time.  (I don’t agree with this, but acknowledge a case can be made)  But no such defense can be offered for the illegal actions in California.  One thing shared by both is the lack of accountability.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/15/justice/times-square-police-shooting/index.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/07/lapd-shooting-at-innocent-people_n_2638701.html

 

And like many, I share a distrust over the militarization of our police forces and that displayed in Ferguson, I also see a disconnect.  Violent rioters are nightly looting and attacking.  A large, civil disturbance that was the justification for acquiring such equipment.  The real question should be, why isn’t it being used?  Why are the violent people still one the streets?  Why haven’t they arrested dozens or hundreds?  Why aren’t they protecting the innocent citizens of Ferguson and their property?  It can only be politics.  The politics of Eric Holder, who ordered the Ferguson police to not release the video of Brown’s attacking a man in a store minutes before being shot.  The police chief defied Holder and obeyed the law, releasing the video as required by a freedom of information request.  And again, compare this to Zimmerman, where a firearm was used legally to defend against a violent attack.  Is this what Holder, Obama & the liberal press are trying to smear?  The right to self defense?

Just a Number

“To teachers I’m just another child”.  Can anyone not relate to that thought?  Seger has a gift for taking thoughts we’ve all had, putting them to paper & music and somehow they become profound.  An article on school bullying got my attention.  The CDC has done another study & there are dots we can connect.  Is that reporter speak for, I’ll tell you what I think this all means, don’t bother to read or research it for yourself (or to have an independent thought)  Unkind & maybe undeserved, but my read on this is a shift & emphasis on guns & school shootings.  “Bullying victims are sneaking hundreds of thousands of firearms, knives and clubs into U.S. high schools”.

 Direct from the CDC study:

School associated violent deaths are rare.1

• 17 homicides of school-age youth ages 5 to 18 years occurred at school during the 2009-2010 school year.

• Of all youth homicides, less than 2% occur at school, and this percentage has been stable for the past decade.

In 2010, there were about 828,000 nonfatal victimizations at school among students 12 to 18 years of age.1

Approximately 7% of teachers report that they have been threatened with injury or physically attacked by a student from their school.1

In 2009, about 20% of students ages 12–18 reported that gangs were present at their school during the school year.1

In a 2011 nationally representative sample of youth in grades 9-12:2

• 12% reported being in a physical fight on school property in the 12 months before the survey.

• 5.9% reported that they did not go to school on one or more days in the 30 days before the survey because they felt unsafe at school or on their way to or from school.

• 5.4% reported carrying a weapon (gun, knife or club) on school property on one or more days in the 30 days before the survey.

• 7.4% reported being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property one or more times in the 12 months before the survey.

• 20% reported being bullied on school property and 16% reported being bullied electronically during the 12 months before the survey.

OK, it’s not the reporters fault.  I am an @ss, quick to judge & frequently wrong.  I seem to remember President Obama assigning the CDC to study school shootings/violence.  It’s hard for me to look at this “study” where a

gun=knife=club.  In what world are they equal?  The CDC wants to talk about mass/school shootings.  Problem, the numbers do not help their cause.  My guess only, since they didn’t publish numbers of guns, knives or clubs separately.  I think they lump them together to inflate their hype on guns in schools.  According to the CDC, there are around 50 million students in K thru college.  There were 828,ooo instances of reported victimizations, ages 12-18.  Statistically, any school student is very safe.  Reality, as always, is not the same.

 “20% reported being bullied on school property ”  One/fifth of students are bullied in the survey year?  And this is after years of increasing anti-bullying laws, rules and soap box promises that politicians would END bullying & school violence once & for all!  But they haven’t fixed it, after all these years and studies and money spent.  Why can that be?  How can this keep happening?

Maybe because they don’t actually want to “fix” the problem.  The Obama administration/CDC is interested in promoting gun control.  This does not mean they want or support school shootings, but consider their efforts on bullying and compare it to energy spent on gun control.  Seems oblivious they only want to treat the symptom, not “cure” the cold.  There could and likely are other factors.

They have done studies on gun violence that discredit nearly every liberal talking point.  When the numbers are displayed broken down by neighborhood, not state, an overwhelming fact emerges.  There are no violent states, just small, violent area’s.  A correlation  between low income/gangs can be indicated, but again, who would want to cure a cold if they made their living off repeatedly treating that illness.

By the same token, are all schools violent?  Are all failing to stop bullying?  Or are some inner city schools overwhelmed?  What are the chances of a school in any of those violent neighborhoods being an oasis from gangs and violence?  Are those same schools heavily unionized?  Those are topics this administration does not want discussed.  Hence a “study” that leads to their desired conclusion, or at least, talking points.

Some personal experiences.

I attended a concert years ago.  The show was ruined for me & hundreds by three obnoxious drunks shouting over the music.  Several of us complained to several city police officers.  They nodded and did nothing.  I was sorely tempter to attack and fight them.  Frustrated beyond belief that the police would not do their job, but had I acted, I would be arrested, possibly sued by the drunks.

A friend was called by the school years ago.  His son was hurt & needed to be taken to a doctor.  His son had a broken jaw.  Broken by a bully he had been complaining about for a while.  The bully sucker punched him outside the gym.  The bully was suspended for ten days.  The school did not call the police or an ambulance.  My friend did call the police, who were reluctant.  He ended up having to sue in civil court for damages.  Bullies are not expelled because of the thousands of dollars in funding they bring to the school.  Expel them & another school gets that funding.

Three or four years ago, the high school my kids are now attending had a bullying incident.  Three, black, Sr high girls severely beat a black, Jr high girl.  We were very interested in how the school would handle this incident.  We were considering switching to a private school.  We never could find out what was done.  Must protect a child’s privacy, we are told.  But then, college’s are very secretive when it comes to campus violence.  I understand no school wants a reputation for violence, but what about the public’s right to know?

Would you knowingly send your daughter to a school with a high number of rapes over the years?  How can colleges keep such secrets for so many years?  It seems to me there is a lot of money spent on education.  We hear tuition costs are jumping at headline making rates.  And all school loans now go thru the federal government and are exempt from bankruptcy protections…..

My how I’ve jumped around….but there is a concise thought & conclusion.  Schools are an artificial environment created for educating our young in a group of similar age.  Since this environment has been taken over by central government control it has been on a path to failure only staved off by diminishing results, standards and accountability.  Government does not cause this, but creates the environment where failure thrives.

Pity the students trapped in public schools being bullied and ignored.  Can any of the bureaucrats presiding make them or us believe they aren’t just numbers….

 

Feel Like A Number
Words and music by bob seger

I take my card and i stand in line
To make a buck i work overtime
Dear sir letters keep coming in the mail
I work my back till it’s racked with pain
The boss can’t even recall my name
I show up late and i’m docked
It never fails
I feel like just another
Spoke in a great big wheel
Like a tiny blade of grass
In a great big field
To workers i’m just another drone
To ma bell i’m just another phone
I’m just another statistic on a sheet
To teachers i’m just another child
To irs i’m just another file
I’m just another consensus on the street
Gonna cruise out of this city
Head down to the sea
Gonna shout out at the ocean
Hey it’s me
And i feel like a number
Feel like a number
Feel like a stranger
A stranger in this land
I feel like a number
I’m not a number
I’m not a number
Dammit i’m a man
I said i’m a man

 

And this is a decent article with links.  My main gripe is him going along with the CDC narrative without question.

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/bullied-students-sneak-thousands-guns-schools-n95781

 

Voter ID, Why Not?

The subject of voter ID has been around for awhile.  As most of you know, I think voting (in the Federal elections) is useless and a waste of time.  But that is for another day.  Requiring voters to have legal identification, however, just keeps rearing it’s head as a political issue.  I’m interested in getting some answers on this subject.  This will be an Open Mic Plus, as always so bring forward any subjects you choose.  Now for some questions.

1. For those against voter ID,  Why and what proof is there is “disenfranchisement” to support your side of the argument?

2.  For those who want voter ID, How much illegal activity in the voting process will this solve?  Please give proof of examples!

Let’s finally try and put this issue to rest, with PROOF, not political fairy tales.

Troubling Times Ahead?

There sure is a lot of things going on in the world, it’s hard to keep up with it all sometimes. Natural events like snowstorms, tornado’s, earthquakes, volcano’s and meteors to man made events like North Korea spouting off at the mouth, Syrian rebels using chemical weapons, strange economic solutions in Cyprus and Fukashima still spewing radioactive garbage into the air. One has to stay very busy to keep up with it all. There have also been many questions concerning the actions of our own government. Why does the DHS need all the firepower they are buying? Are drones a good idea over U.S. soil? Why are some states passing gun laws that are only going to be challenged in court, costing taxpayers millions?

At 7:02 am est, we welcomed Spring with a big hooray!  Then I looked outside to the blanket of snow  🙄  Bummer!  We will all keep moving ahead with whatever plans we have, just don’t slip on the ice!

Let’s start trying to find answers to the many questions that are out there.  It’s an increasingly crazy world, that may require increasingly difficult actions.

A Different Vision

As I go through all the different news and opinion articles, it’s hard to not see just how bad things have become in our nation. We no longer control our government. There are two voices of government, as you all know. The Democrats (known as Liberals for some reason) and the Republicans (known as conservatives for some reason). We, as a people who are politically in tune, follow one or the other. The Democrats are considered left of center, the Republicans are right of center on the fantasy political scale.  I stand on the right of center, but I do not consider myself a Republican.  I attack those on the left, because I disagree with them.  It’s quite simple, really.  My beliefs really aren’t in agreement with the Right, either.  This is what will try and focus on in this article.  The Republicans are just as much the enemy as the Democrats in the United States of America!  This is my best attempt to prove that, so pay attention and open your minds!

Mid Week Discussion

After last night’s State of the Union Address, I’m sure that there should be some fairly good comments on Obama’s speech. While I had some fun with it last night, I need to go back and read what he said more closely.  Here is a link to the speech:   http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/12/transcript-obama-state-union-speech/

After the speech, Marco Rubio took over the TV screen (I missed this completely) with the GOP answer to Obama’s speech.  His comments can be found here:  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/13/rubio-obama-must-abandon-his-obsession-with-tax-hikes/

In other news, it appears that the Chris Dorner story has come to a smokey end.  He is believed to be dead in a burned out cabin in California, after shooting and killing one more cop going out.  The charred body must still be identified, but it looks like it will be Dorner.

A Government Lost

Trying to formulate an idea for an article here at SUFA is no easy task. It seems we have talked almost everything to death, we don’t need to keep shooting the dead horse anymore. That means it’s time to tackle some tougher issues that many people either want to ignore, are completely blind to this, or don’t want to talk about such a troubling subject.  I’m not going to hide the fact that I do not like Obama and what he stands for.  Many people may read what I’m going to write and look at this as just another Obama bashing.  But, it is far from it.  It is also about the next President and the next one after that and so on.  This is all based on facts, not a dislike for Liberals or any one person.  This is about our Federal Government, as a whole.  Both sides of the political spectrum, everyone included.  Our form of Federal Government is derived by the people.  WE THE PEOPLE are supposed to be in charge.  That’s the problem, we are not in charge of  “A Government Lost”.

Some Explanations are In Order…

Greetings SUFA! I know, you are wondering who is this stranger and why is he acting as if he knows us. But it is me. I am still alive. I figured that it was about time that I forced myself to sit down and offer some explanations as to why you haven’t seen very much of me over the last few months. I do honestly feel bad about it. Here I went and created this site and after three years of ranting and arguing, I up and practically disappear on you. There are several realities that have contributed to this and I am hoping to fill you all in on them today. I will also discuss the future of SUFA towards the end so that we can begin figuring out how to handle these new realities. Because what I don’t want to happen is for SUFA to go away. I believe that somehow breaking through the lack of critical thinking barrier that so many Americans are stuck behind is still way too important to give up now.

Fair Share….What Is It and Who Determines

“FAIR SHARE!”, shouts the POTUS from the pulpit of politics. Standing behind a podium with a Presidential Seal that allows this mantra to spew forth, the POTUS fixes his glance…it is not about Class Warfare (as he stifles the ever present snicker), it is math. This from the lips of a man that cannot add numbers to reach two much less understand the concepts of math. It is clear that he took the same math class that Warren Buffet has taken. BUT, class warfare is a subject of another time. So, what is exactly “fair share”?

Let’s Start With the Department of Education

I am baffled daily with the ridiculousness that masquerades as the United States Federal Government. I mean, really, is there a better example of elitist ass clowns who bleat on about fixing this and changing that all while completely ignoring all the obvious fixes and changes that need to happen? The debt debate has been a perfect example of the hopelessness that exists when one thinks that any of these fools are in the slightest bit interested in doing what needs to be done in Washington DC. The only thing that is more ridiculous than a DC politicians are the millions of Americans who play along with the charade, believing that this party or that party is really the one trying to fix things and the “other side” is a group of godless heathens intent on ruining the American way of life.

Technically, We Are Legal Ass Clowns

The last week or so has seen a growing call for the President to withdraw participation in the conflict in Libya. These calls, which I certainly echo given my “defensive only” posture on the use of our military forces, are currently being based on the fact that Obama did not seek or receive Congressional approval to conduct this particular military action. Well, in the official answer from the White House this week, we were told that, TECHNICALLY, he doesn’t need Congressional approval for what is happening in Libya. His reasoning is that the war in Libya is too small to require Congressional approval and that United Nations has approved the action anyway.

After the Fall: Part Two

Life has now quieted down a lot. The violence that occurred during the early stages of the fall, are non-existent now. Crime is almost unheard of, as people are working together to survive and pick up the pieces of their now very changed environment. Most people made it through with just some moderate problems, neighbors stepped up and helped those who were less prepared. The U.S. dollar is still here, but things sure cost more. Food is finally hitting the grocery stores, but not cheap at all. The cities are almost empty, as government crackdowns of civil disobedience turned deadly. Those who could fled, those who couldn’t were killed in the violence or later rounded up. Where they are is only a guess. Rumors have it that a Communist group is trying to take over and form a new government, time to start pushing a better plan, with a new constitution.

Crushing the Second Amendment

One small incident at a time. I was reading through the news today and stumbled upon a story about a man in Philadelphia that found out first hand that obeying the law isn’t good enough when dealing with the government representatives that we call the “police department”. The story struck me, but not because of the way that the man was, and continues to be, treated by the police officers. No, the story instead struck me because of the stance that the police department has taken in the months since the incident. They not only blatantly refuse to apologize for the way this man was treated, they have gone a step further. They issued a warning that anyone who undertakes a specific legal activity “will be inconvenienced” by the police officers going forward.  A prime example of government trampling our rights yet again.

Capitalism… Day Two

I have to tell you all how disappointed I was to not have time to participate in the discussions around the “Capitalism vs. Communism” article last week. Work intervened and I have failed over the last few weeks to maintain that work/life balance thing they way I should. But today I offer article number two around the idea of capitalism and do so with a caveat. I promised a short article that explained where I think capitalism falls short. And that is what I will offer. At the same time, in the comments below, I will try to offer some answers and replies to the comments from the previous article. There were some good points made, and there were also some ridiculous points made. I will attempt to offer what I can to both. So first, A few thoughts from me around where capitalism is falling short.

If Not Now…. When?

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I watched the countdown to the potential government shutdown last week with a jaded eye. I can touch on what I wanted to happen in a bit, but what I was watching for was to see how much further we would watch the talking heads go in demonizing their opponents and using emotional rhetoric to sway public opinion. I must say, I was not disappointed. As was true with every major policy debate in the political spectrum over the last few years, each side spouted more nonsense than could be fathomed. It’s just proof to all of you: When you set the proper expectations for those in the political landscape, they are very capable of meeting or exceeding your expectations. And BF has the audacity to say that politicians can’t meet our expectations…

Why Libya is An Extension of Suicidal Policy

The other day I was perusing through the comments here at SUFA and stumbled across a short and simple post from Mathius. He asked whether there was anyone here at Stand Up For America that agreed with what was happening in Libya, specifically, the US participation in that country. I don’t remember what the answer was from everyone who answered. What I distinctly remember is what I thought when I read his question….. No, but why? I most certainly don’t like what is happening in Libya, or what happened in Afghanistan or Iraq either, for that matter. Although I understood the the first foray and tolerated the second. But the real question I wanted everyone to answer, because it seemed as though most were answering “No”, was WHY are you opposed to what is happening in Libya?

More Red Causes Far Less Green

Perhaps after watching the abysmal game between North Carolina and Kentucky, some of you may have stayed on the channel and watched the 60 Minutes report on companies that have taken their operations out of the United States and deposited them in more tax friendly countries. I listened to the report with interest. As many of you know, I have for years been saying that the United State’s insistence on raping corporations in tax rates is one of the primary drivers of unemployment and fiscal difficulty in our country. True to form, the side supporting the such tax rates immediately fell back to an emotional appeal. But it falls on deaf ears in my case as I ask myself, “When will the United States Government wake up and realize that they cannot control the world and that they are committing suicide by continuing to arrogantly think that they can?”

Separation of Business and State

Yea, I know this one is not in the Constitution either. But maybe it should have been. The US has a long history of government interference in business and, perhaps even more so, business influence over government. It is one of the main areas of corruption in our government, and while it is worse than it used to be, it is not new. As in the previous article, the main philosophical reasoning for keeping business and state separate is the separation of power. Wealth is power, so is authority. Combining those two is a major magnification of power, and as we all know, power corrupts. Even if an individual can resist the corruption, the fact that a position of such power is available will attract corrupt people to it like flies to syrup.

Our government handed out land to rail companies nearly two centuries ago, they initially backed corrupt CEOs by sending troops to put down worker strikes rather than have the companies be forced to deal with worker demands. More recently they have abused imminent domain to hand out land to companies and handed over billions in taxpayer funds to bail out companies deemed “too big to fail”. All that in addition to consistent subsidies to various companies like the modern railroad companies and corporate farms, massive overspending by the military and other government agencies, and a host of other handouts and tax breaks done with backdoor deals in exchange for campaign support, perks, and perpetuation of power.

Political Reality

This morning you wake up to the first in a two-part series. Which is ironic, because as you wake up to this article you are doing the exact opposite of what the majority of US citizens are doing. This part One is a bit longer than I would have preferred. But that was necessary. There are a ton of political realities that just screamed out to be highlighted. And before we can get to part two, we have to recognize and understand these political realities. Many of you may wish to deny what you read here today. But don’t waste your time trying. Instead, give some serious thought to what you are reading. Because while it may not be happening with the active readers that come to SUFA to exercise their brain each day, the reality is…….

Facebook Becomes Job Killer

Here we are back at a lovely Monday morning. Is it me or do the weekends move entirely too fast? Now that I have a new schedule that allows me to spend more time with Mrs. Weapon, it seems like we get to doing stuff and before I know it the weekend is gone. But I did get a lot accomplished. I attended the gun show here locally, which was a lot of fun. And both of our vehicles are sparkly clean, which was way overdue. In keeping with what I am transitioning to, I present another article that won’t be too overly long. I will still have the occasionally long article where needed, but stuff like this where I pull an article and give some quick thoughts or ideas to spark debate will become more common. And of course we will start seeing more of the articles from the new SUFA writing staff! This week I am planning on having BF, G-Man, and possibly LOI all presenting articles! Exciting!

Don’t Reduce… Eliminate

The hot button topic these days in Washington DC seems to be deficit reduction. I have followed this banter back and forth between the two parties for a long, long time in terms of spending and where to make cuts. It seems to flow in a cyclical pattern, as all political issues tend to do. Every 8-10 years we seem to have the “level of spending in Washington” as a primary issue and each time the leaders within the two parties pay lip service to the issue in an attempt to appease the voters just enough to get them to move on to some other issue that will require new organization and alignment. It has been a convenient plan for Congress. Let the issue build. Allow the “movement” to organize and rally to a level where something must be done. Then do as little as necessary and repeat the process with a new issue. There are probably a total of 50 or so “hot button issues” that just wax and wane in DC. And each Congress claims to have done something about each one each time they arise. What we rarely see from Congress is a true fundamental change meant to eliminate the issue from coming back up in the future.

The Death of Personal Responsibility Revisited

The other day on the open mic thread I posted an article that was a pure emotional appeal from the Huffington Post. The story focused on an unemployed woman who sadly had to tell her child that Santa was cutting back a little bit this year. The article was a blatant play on emotion in order to make a case for the extension of yet more unemployment benefits in our increasingly government dependent society. I was roundly criticized by some folks for the “guesses” that I threw out there for the subject of the article. I can understand that criticism. However, I made it clear these were my guesses, not facts. While I may be wrong on this particular woman’s story (and I may be 100% right, for the record), I think I put forth a fairly common set of circumstances as a reasonable possibility. I will discuss those circumstances more here. Sadly, some of you completely missed the point of what I was saying about the emotional ploys used. Believe what you want about that particular woman, the point was that the left leaning media was doing exactly what they always do, relying on emotion and pity to make a case for political action.

Congress Lifts Its Skirt Again

As I seem to be doing on a fairly regular basis at the moment, I must again apologize for the randomness of my posting schedule lately. As it turns out, time is such a limited commodity currently. But soon my tenure as a two job employee will be at an end. There is little doubt that the topic of the day seems to be the deal struck between the President and the Republicans in Congress to extend the Bush tax cuts for all Americans in exchange for an extension of the unemployment benefits for those who need them. I have to say that the world of Washington DC as I know it appears to be “Bizarro World”. The Democrats are lambasting the President and spouting off about standing up for their principles. The Republicans are lambasting the President and spouting off about standing up for their principles. Well, now USWeapon is going to NOT lambast the President and point out the lack of principle in Washington DC. What a bunch of hypocritical children we have in Congress.

Guest Commentary – Fantasy Candidate Part 4

Tonight we delve back into the fantasy candidate series from Jon Smith. For those who read Jon’s site as well as this one, he has already posted this article there. However, there are quite a few of you here that do not regularly frequent Jon’s site, so I wanted to make sure that this gets seen by all of you as well. Tonight we delve into the positions that Jon’s fantasy candidate would take on existing legislation that we should be working to repeal. I have tried to think about everything on the list and I don’t see any of these that would be bad to repeal. But I do absolutely agree with Jon that on many of them we would have to take a slow approach that allows the pain from elimination to be minimal. I think that this part of the series will perhaps be the one that has the most constructive discussion around it. I will be interested in seeing what areas you think he missed, or what areas that he hit that you disagree with. I know that some of them seem to be simply “anti-Democrat” positions, such as health care, but if you are against repealing it, please explain why. I will do my best to be involved in the discussion on this article over the next few days as well.

Guest Commentary – Fantasy Candidate Part 3

And a hearty good evening to all of SUFA. I must again apologize for my sporadic posting lately. To say that things are hectic right now is an understatement. I have a lot of things that are transitioning which has made my schedule chocked full for the majority of the last month. I don’t see it really slowing down for another month for reasons that I will share later. As promised earlier this week, I tonight offer the third installment from Jon Smith’s fantasy candidate series. Tonight’s addition deals with new legislation that should be proposed, but not including anything that would be a repeal of current law, as that will come in a later section. I highly encourage everyone to talk out the proposals that Jon offers below. Would they work? Are they the best step in each of their respective areas? Are there other forms of legislation that should be offered that Jon has missed. With a government as bloated as the US federal government, there should be no shortage of legislation necessary to start paring things down.

Guest Commentary – Creating the Fantasy Candidate

Tonight we have another guest commentary from one of the more frequent contributors to Stand Up For America. Jon Smith has regularly offered his insight and thoughts to just about every conversation that we have here. And on more than one occasion has offered up his thoughts in the form of an article for guest commentary. It is for this reason that I am working towards having Jon be a regular writer here at SUFA. As much as he writes for us here, he might as well be on the virtual payroll (because a real payroll doesn’t exist 😉  ). This particular article is a little bit different. This will be the first in a multi-part article that explores a single pursuit, developing the perfect candidate based on the needs of the country. It appears that Jon sees this as a six part series, so it will be running over the course of the next few weeks. I have already seen the drafts for the first four parts and the series is good, and more important, relevant to where we are in our political world. The reason that I think it becomes so relevant is that when discussing the concepts and ideas with others over the last few years, I have become more convinced that most people wouldn’t recognize the candidate that matches their ideals if they saw them!

New Era of Financial Responsibility: Day Two

I am going to be trying this particular tactic out for a couple of weeks and see how it works out. As it typically has worked out these days, I write my article, fully hoping to engage in discussion, only to go to work the next day and not be able to discuss the topic that I wrote about! For example the only comment I got in today was a response to Charlie during my lunch break. So what I am going to do is take two days for the discussion from Monday morning. As it stands I have been posting an article Monday morning around 2:00am and then allowing discussion for two days and doing open mic Wednesday morning. Rather than post no article on Monday night / Tuesday morning, I am going to write a follow up that answers some of the comments from the discussion of that day. Since the Monday morning article is usually the “heavy” one for the week, it will help to ensure that I continue to follow up on my thoughts and engage those of you that take the time to comment on my articles. Plus I can take a bit more time and answer a thought or two more thoroughly. I will start tonight with the idea of de-regulation.

A New Era of Financial Responsibility

Whew… A long week for me last week. Traveling, working, and spending time with my son. It left me little time to pursue my passion of writing here at SUFA. But now I am back to work on the site for a couple weeks until I have to travel again for two weeks. Tonight I want to talk about something that I have been wanting to talk about all week. I want to tread into the realm of financial reform and financial responsibility as put forth by our federal government. This article is going to address some things, mostly done by the Obama administration, but really simply pertains to our federal government in general. To be honest, the words fiscal and responsibility should not even be allowed to be used in the same sentence with federal government, unless it is done to point out a lack of it. The sheer magnitude of fiscal ineptitude displayed by the federal government is staggering, and it has now pushed us both to the edge of financial disaster and to the brink of full government control over the private industry in the United States. This is both infuriating and scary as hell. And I have to say that I have taken one step closer to believing a rebellion is the only answer.