A very interesting process is at work in NY State and it does have consequences even for the real America outside of our oppressed state. Gov. Cuomo, standing for reenthronement this year, is being challenged from his very left by one Cynthia Nixon, late of tawdry fashionable TV. Much as 18th and 19th century armies painfully probed and searched for their opponent's flank, it must be difficult to find purchase left of Andrew Cuomo. I mean, what leftist with a lick of common sense ( assuming there is such a creature) could find fault in Andrew? The outcome of this grotesque engagement has national implications because success for Andrew could prompt his all out commitment to a Presidential race. And that we must hope for; Andrew cannot abide the real America and that will be obvious if he ventures, with trepidation, into it, to his confusion. His father knew such a foray was untenable. He doesn't. Of course, should Ms. Nixon prevail,she might consider it too. A plague on both their houses! And as a New Yorker I admit to the rest of the country, sans CA, MD, Conn and the like, my shame. Believe me, most of our state is with you but we cannot outvote that malignant mass at the mouth of the Hudson .
Anyway, Andrew has two current priorities. The first he has expressed as a determination, even unto executive fiat, bypassing inconveniently empowered elected legislators, to restore to most paroled felons in NYS, a right to vote. He says that the present disenfranchisement of such model citizens reflects badly on our "criminal justice" (justice for criminals) system and begs justice, justice he says! Uh, he also seeks to ensure votes aplenty for the criminal apologist Democrat party which, I assure you, is very popular in the NYS prison world.
I worked in the NYS corrections system for 20 years and frankly, I saw some fairly unsavory souls restored to society via the parole system (in which, comically in a sense, thugs pledge to be good). The "parole game" is a celebrated institution in state prisons. For example, a prospective parolee to whom I had sent an overdue book notice threatened to cut my throat but was freed nonetheless two days later. Well, I'm just saying, you know. But Andrew passes sleepless nights agonizing about these people's "rights".
But gee, he doesn't think the same of lawful gun owners (actually one of the most law abiding factions outside of lala land) .To those of that pariah faction who have objected strenuously to his earnest efforts to have them pay the bill for the insane and left wing generated amoralism which drives mass murderers and tells the victimizers that they are ok, really, they are OK, he expectorates: "you are just a vocal minority (the only minority I would dare criticize) and you should leave my state because you don't belong here". OK, we got the message.
Take it from us, America. We are probably saddled with this dude or something even more extreme; we usually cannot outvote those leftist NYC types, although it can happen. But learn from our travails and , I urge you, see it for what it is: an accurate preview of what ANY Democrat party candidate will bring your way. Jack
Friday, April 27, 2018
Saturday, April 21, 2018
Political conciliation in the U.S.; is it possible?
I think not, short of one side destroying the other. A former Presidential press secretary lamented on air that we "must" find a way to "work together" and subordinate our special interests to the national good. Our working democracy does that to a very appreciable degree; Donald Trump has not been summarily deposed; atypical New York and California were not able to dictate the 2016 choice of President; Charles Schumer and Rand Paul have of necessity to nonviolently deal with each other in the Senate but. . .
Since 1972 American national politics have been an existential struggle with one faction - that dominated by the far left - with the indispensable help of the teeming and tragically naive leftist baby boomers (not those boomers who remained loyal) - determined to exterminate the real America and replace it with a totalitarian entity of some sort and with the other consisting of the common sense majority and its slow awakening to its mortal danger. The main philosophical difference consists first in the far left's conviction that America's political, legal, economic ,social and foreign relations spheres are all fundamentally flawed and require punishment and "fundamental transformation". The inadvertently honest Marxist Obama confirmed as much in his campaign promise to that effect and did as much in office as he could get away with to advance it (eg. his incomplete radicalization of the Federal judiciary). The far left is most motivated by its faith in goals and ideals based in the unknowable future, for which no empirical evidence is available. That's because, well, they look only to the future and disingenuously ignore the recent past in which leftists in power slew some one hundred million of their own citizens in ultimately fruitless efforts to satisfy the psychotic perfectionism which defines all radicals. And it allows them limitless dreamy license in arrogating the draconian measures they yet enact at will (eg. in North Korea) when they have the power.
The real America, defined by its painful acknowledgement of the considerable regretable aspects of our past, confirmed in affirmative remedial action such as three hundred thousand Union deaths in the Civil War, the, yes, fundamental political change embodied in civil rights decisions and legislation, in the present virtually universal social ,professional and often legal excoriation and disenfranchisement of those of mindless prejudice against racial minorities and the election and reelection of a black President in the private and anonymous election booth, maintains that this country is fundamentally good and sound and undeserving of destruction. Its philosophical basis is in comparing and contrasting contemporary America to both its past and to that of the world in its considerable variety of humane, workable systems and their demonstrably inhuman antitheses.
These views are incompatible. The far left determined on its course in the '60's, empowered by myriad baby boomers entranced by theretofore shunned Marxist professors in the colleges to which they flocked (I know, I was there as a freshman) in 1965 , who enlightened them on tragic and tawdry aspects of our history to which they had not been exposed. Trouble was, their teachers cynically gave them to believe that these outrages defined and condemned their country and, lacking the wisdom their parents had, with transcendent pain, learned through their travails in the Depression and WWII and from which they had lovingly protected their children, far to many of the boomers bought it.
The clash continues apace. The far left which dominates, motivates and dictates to, the Democrat party, has been at this since the 60's. Since the real America woke up to what they intend, since the nominations or empowerment of McGovern, Dukakis, the Clintons and Obama, we have known that this is a battle to the death. For that reason, conciliation is an impossibility. Jack
Since 1972 American national politics have been an existential struggle with one faction - that dominated by the far left - with the indispensable help of the teeming and tragically naive leftist baby boomers (not those boomers who remained loyal) - determined to exterminate the real America and replace it with a totalitarian entity of some sort and with the other consisting of the common sense majority and its slow awakening to its mortal danger. The main philosophical difference consists first in the far left's conviction that America's political, legal, economic ,social and foreign relations spheres are all fundamentally flawed and require punishment and "fundamental transformation". The inadvertently honest Marxist Obama confirmed as much in his campaign promise to that effect and did as much in office as he could get away with to advance it (eg. his incomplete radicalization of the Federal judiciary). The far left is most motivated by its faith in goals and ideals based in the unknowable future, for which no empirical evidence is available. That's because, well, they look only to the future and disingenuously ignore the recent past in which leftists in power slew some one hundred million of their own citizens in ultimately fruitless efforts to satisfy the psychotic perfectionism which defines all radicals. And it allows them limitless dreamy license in arrogating the draconian measures they yet enact at will (eg. in North Korea) when they have the power.
The real America, defined by its painful acknowledgement of the considerable regretable aspects of our past, confirmed in affirmative remedial action such as three hundred thousand Union deaths in the Civil War, the, yes, fundamental political change embodied in civil rights decisions and legislation, in the present virtually universal social ,professional and often legal excoriation and disenfranchisement of those of mindless prejudice against racial minorities and the election and reelection of a black President in the private and anonymous election booth, maintains that this country is fundamentally good and sound and undeserving of destruction. Its philosophical basis is in comparing and contrasting contemporary America to both its past and to that of the world in its considerable variety of humane, workable systems and their demonstrably inhuman antitheses.
These views are incompatible. The far left determined on its course in the '60's, empowered by myriad baby boomers entranced by theretofore shunned Marxist professors in the colleges to which they flocked (I know, I was there as a freshman) in 1965 , who enlightened them on tragic and tawdry aspects of our history to which they had not been exposed. Trouble was, their teachers cynically gave them to believe that these outrages defined and condemned their country and, lacking the wisdom their parents had, with transcendent pain, learned through their travails in the Depression and WWII and from which they had lovingly protected their children, far to many of the boomers bought it.
The clash continues apace. The far left which dominates, motivates and dictates to, the Democrat party, has been at this since the 60's. Since the real America woke up to what they intend, since the nominations or empowerment of McGovern, Dukakis, the Clintons and Obama, we have known that this is a battle to the death. For that reason, conciliation is an impossibility. Jack
Tuesday, April 10, 2018
Gun control
When prominent leftists use the term "gun control" they mean eventual disarming of all law abiding Americans. Their eyes glaze over and roll around and they sneer when this opinion is expressed to them but one of their own is in the process of confirming it. Even if you reside in a state where the 2nd Amendment lives, best take notice; its what will happen when you elect Democrats at any level. Good old local Democrats have in the end to answer to Nancy Pelosi, Charles Schumer and their subordinates at all levels or they get shut out.
Because of a political deal made last week, our Governor in NY, Andrew Cuomo, who called gun rights advocates "just a vocal minority", may have won complete control of the NY state legislature.Five years ago he rammed the "NY Safe Act" through, by using a legislative maneuver reserved for measures the enactment of which is deemed immediately necessary. It is filled with since proven unworkable, unlawful and useless sanctions based on the assumption that severely limiting gun rights shows potential mass murderers the "light" (eg. background checks for ammo purchases, limit of seven rounds in ten round magazines, a ban on "scary" looking guns). "That's OK" said the truck using crowd killer in Manhattan a couple years ago, "I'll manage." The Act included a handgun permit renewal requirement set five years in the future (that's immediately necessary?). The law has been condemned by almost every county in common sense Upstate NY but we cannot out vote the political tumor at the mouth of the Hudson from which the Monumental Mouth, Cuomo ,draws his power. Frankly, he's driving us crazy with this ill considered law which is virtually impossible to administer or understand. Its main purpose is, after all, the discouragement of gun ownership and if possible the exit from Cuomo's state of those (gun owners)"who don't belong in NY".
After the deal was announced, Cuomo said "now we have the power to fight our common enemy". Now who might he mean by that? President Trump, who has unforgiveably achieved what Andrew comically believes assured for him - the Presidency? But gee, millions even in NY voted for Trump so he must mean them too. Since all of Upstate NY disdains his "Safe Act" ( safe from trucks Andrew?) its reasonable to think they voted against totalitarian gun grabber Hillary and are on Andrew's s---list . Oh, who knows?
But one thing is for sure, Andrew intends even tighter gun control enabled by his now perhaps dictatorial sway. That I expect after reading objective commentary, considering what I was told by a powerful legislator and common sense. "Why, how foolish of you to think that we are after your guns and how unnecessary are the machinations of your NRA" pronounces Andrew and others of his ilk like Charles Schumer. Such statements from them are deliberate falsehoods. As soon as he has the power, Andrew hastens to take us one step closer to confiscation and in doing so gives us ample notice of what he truly wishes for: our guns on the junk pile and our lives under his thumb. Take heed America; Andrew is like a frantic child, he is hard put to restrain his impulses but he fairly predicts what prominent leftists like him intend for all of America. Their vehicle is the Democrat party; so if you value your freedom, don't vote for Dems anywhere at any time. Consider what is happening in NY and California and foresee your future if you trust them. Jack
Because of a political deal made last week, our Governor in NY, Andrew Cuomo, who called gun rights advocates "just a vocal minority", may have won complete control of the NY state legislature.Five years ago he rammed the "NY Safe Act" through, by using a legislative maneuver reserved for measures the enactment of which is deemed immediately necessary. It is filled with since proven unworkable, unlawful and useless sanctions based on the assumption that severely limiting gun rights shows potential mass murderers the "light" (eg. background checks for ammo purchases, limit of seven rounds in ten round magazines, a ban on "scary" looking guns). "That's OK" said the truck using crowd killer in Manhattan a couple years ago, "I'll manage." The Act included a handgun permit renewal requirement set five years in the future (that's immediately necessary?). The law has been condemned by almost every county in common sense Upstate NY but we cannot out vote the political tumor at the mouth of the Hudson from which the Monumental Mouth, Cuomo ,draws his power. Frankly, he's driving us crazy with this ill considered law which is virtually impossible to administer or understand. Its main purpose is, after all, the discouragement of gun ownership and if possible the exit from Cuomo's state of those (gun owners)"who don't belong in NY".
After the deal was announced, Cuomo said "now we have the power to fight our common enemy". Now who might he mean by that? President Trump, who has unforgiveably achieved what Andrew comically believes assured for him - the Presidency? But gee, millions even in NY voted for Trump so he must mean them too. Since all of Upstate NY disdains his "Safe Act" ( safe from trucks Andrew?) its reasonable to think they voted against totalitarian gun grabber Hillary and are on Andrew's s---list . Oh, who knows?
But one thing is for sure, Andrew intends even tighter gun control enabled by his now perhaps dictatorial sway. That I expect after reading objective commentary, considering what I was told by a powerful legislator and common sense. "Why, how foolish of you to think that we are after your guns and how unnecessary are the machinations of your NRA" pronounces Andrew and others of his ilk like Charles Schumer. Such statements from them are deliberate falsehoods. As soon as he has the power, Andrew hastens to take us one step closer to confiscation and in doing so gives us ample notice of what he truly wishes for: our guns on the junk pile and our lives under his thumb. Take heed America; Andrew is like a frantic child, he is hard put to restrain his impulses but he fairly predicts what prominent leftists like him intend for all of America. Their vehicle is the Democrat party; so if you value your freedom, don't vote for Dems anywhere at any time. Consider what is happening in NY and California and foresee your future if you trust them. Jack
Thursday, April 5, 2018
Assault rifles
WWII proved that modern infantry needed to be armed with rifles which had an automatic fire function which could be selected. This was the origin of the assault rifle. Automatic fire means as long as you hold the trigger down, the gun will continue to fire. In the most widely used military arms today the guns have a semiautomatic function too. Semiautomatic means the gun will fire once only for each time the trigger is pulled; it is used to save ammo and for more precise or longer range fire. The American M-16 and M-4's and the Soviet AKs are examples of such arms. A modern military giving its infantry only semiautomatics would be disastrously outgunned. Assault rifles , by definition, must be capable of automatic fire.
Many people of good will maintain that "military guns need not and should not be in the hands of civilians". When it comes to assault rifles, in the U.S. it is as they wish; only a very few civilians, with hard to obtain permits, may own a gun with an automatic fire capability. Civilian models of the M-16, known as the AR-15, and the AK's are widely available in the U.S. but they have only the semiautomatic function. They are not military guns; they are not assault rifles; our troops could not survive with them. Actually, there are many widely available semiautomatic sporting rifles that are more powerful than AR-15 or civilian AKs . If you gave them a fully automatic function they would be uncontrollable.
Lots of good people don't know these things. I'm not interested in hot cars and so I know little about them. Similarly, many people, not being interested in guns, know little about guns. But there are many influential and powerful people who despite knowing the difference between semiautomatic and automatic rifles refer to some of the the rifles available to the public as "assault rifles" identical to the ones carried by our military. They do this to harness the understandable outrage felt by those who think that most civilians are able to obtain true military assault rifles. Their intent is to ban these guns and when their ban fails to stop mass shootings, to outlaw an ever increasing number of privately owned firearms until they have completely disarmed law abiding Americans. Their goal is a far left America, which will by definition be a dictatorship, requiring a thoroughly cowed populace. Some examples of these people are NY and California Governors Cuomo and Brown and NY and California U.S. Senators Schumer and Feinstein (big surprise, eh?).
We've already heard Senator Feinstein express her heartfelt wish to "(make) Mr. and Mrs. America turn 'em all in" and we've heard Charles Schumer sneer at the values held dear by the real America many times. It is said that in aiding Clinton with his 1994 "Assault Weapons Ban" they referred to the popular publication Gun Digest and cynically picked out the "ickiest" looking ones for proscription. Congress wisely let that ban die ten years later. It did no good, nor was it meant to.
An example of true "common sense gun control" would be to ban bump stocks, which can bring a semiautomatic rifle close to automatic capability.
Violating the Constitution and recently institutionalized Constitutional case law; ignoring the fact that amoral monsters, increasingly enabled by a society far too much of which is recklessly contemptuous of traditional values, are the true causes of mass shootings; ignoring the fact that such outrages seldom occurred 60 years ago, when guns were far more readily available and the intimidating fear of the consequences of wrongdoing was real ,and blaming one of the most law abiding segments (and its organizations, notably NRA) of our nation for the murder of children; all of that, makes no "common" sense. Accordingly, we gun owners defy it and propose workable immediate solutions like the physical defense of all schools. Jack
Many people of good will maintain that "military guns need not and should not be in the hands of civilians". When it comes to assault rifles, in the U.S. it is as they wish; only a very few civilians, with hard to obtain permits, may own a gun with an automatic fire capability. Civilian models of the M-16, known as the AR-15, and the AK's are widely available in the U.S. but they have only the semiautomatic function. They are not military guns; they are not assault rifles; our troops could not survive with them. Actually, there are many widely available semiautomatic sporting rifles that are more powerful than AR-15 or civilian AKs . If you gave them a fully automatic function they would be uncontrollable.
Lots of good people don't know these things. I'm not interested in hot cars and so I know little about them. Similarly, many people, not being interested in guns, know little about guns. But there are many influential and powerful people who despite knowing the difference between semiautomatic and automatic rifles refer to some of the the rifles available to the public as "assault rifles" identical to the ones carried by our military. They do this to harness the understandable outrage felt by those who think that most civilians are able to obtain true military assault rifles. Their intent is to ban these guns and when their ban fails to stop mass shootings, to outlaw an ever increasing number of privately owned firearms until they have completely disarmed law abiding Americans. Their goal is a far left America, which will by definition be a dictatorship, requiring a thoroughly cowed populace. Some examples of these people are NY and California Governors Cuomo and Brown and NY and California U.S. Senators Schumer and Feinstein (big surprise, eh?).
We've already heard Senator Feinstein express her heartfelt wish to "(make) Mr. and Mrs. America turn 'em all in" and we've heard Charles Schumer sneer at the values held dear by the real America many times. It is said that in aiding Clinton with his 1994 "Assault Weapons Ban" they referred to the popular publication Gun Digest and cynically picked out the "ickiest" looking ones for proscription. Congress wisely let that ban die ten years later. It did no good, nor was it meant to.
An example of true "common sense gun control" would be to ban bump stocks, which can bring a semiautomatic rifle close to automatic capability.
Violating the Constitution and recently institutionalized Constitutional case law; ignoring the fact that amoral monsters, increasingly enabled by a society far too much of which is recklessly contemptuous of traditional values, are the true causes of mass shootings; ignoring the fact that such outrages seldom occurred 60 years ago, when guns were far more readily available and the intimidating fear of the consequences of wrongdoing was real ,and blaming one of the most law abiding segments (and its organizations, notably NRA) of our nation for the murder of children; all of that, makes no "common" sense. Accordingly, we gun owners defy it and propose workable immediate solutions like the physical defense of all schools. Jack
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)