Tag Archives: freedom

Works for Me

Posted on by
Reply

Senator Chris Murphy (D, CT) has his gun control panties all knotted up because lots of county sheriffs have said they won’t enforce intrinsically unconstitutional gun control laws.

I think we have to have a conversation about whether we can continue to fund law enforcement in states where they are refusing to implement these gun laws[.]

I’ve addressed whether local and county jurisdictions should accept State funding for this or that purpose or whether they, instead, should decline the funds and free themselves from higher government’s controlling strings.

At the national level, Murphy’s terms are acceptable.

In Which a Judge Gets It (Mostly) Right

Posted on by
Reply

Judge Reed O’Connor of the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled at the end of the summer that the Obamacare requirement that health coverage providers must provide coverage for particular aspects of health care—and do so at no cost to the individual being covered—was unconstitutional. He’s currently considering whether to make his ruling permanent and if so, whether to make his ruling applicable only to the litigants in the particular case or to make it nationwide. (As an aside, I have trouble seeing how a ruling of unconstitutionality can have any range less than national.)

Michael Cannon, Cato Institute’s Director of Health Policy Studies, testified as an expert witness in the case that

People have a right to choose whether and what kind of health insurance they need and want. The government shouldn’t be requiring people to buy coverage of any service, whether preventive or otherwise.

O’Connor’s ruling to that extent would be partially correct. However, Government also shouldn’t be dictating to private companies what they must or must not produce. That’s textbook fascism.

There’s also no authority in our Constitution for government to determine what private companies can and cannot produce.

A Deliberate Move by the Progressive-Democratic Party

Posted on by
Reply

…against American citizenship and American citizens.

The Progressive-Democratic Party-backed Washington, DC, city council voted 12-1 (!) to allow anyone resident in the city for at least 30 days to vote in city elections. DC Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) didn’t have the courage to take an open position, one way or the other, on the bill; she allowed it to become the law of the city by simply not signing it. The new city law is so broadly written that illegal aliens and foreign college students would be able to vote, and

There’s nothing in this measure to prevent employees at embassies of governments that are openly hostile to the United States from casting ballots.

Now, courtesy of Bowser and her city council, anyone in the Russian, or the PRC, or the Venezuelan, or the… embassies can vote to choose the city’s elected officials up to and including the Mayor. To hell with what American citizen voters resident in the city want or vote for (or against).

Now the matter goes to Congress—the city being a Federal enclave—and those worthies have 30 days to vote it down. It’ll be instructive to see whether there are enough Party politicians in each house of Congress with enough understanding of the meaning of patriotism, and especially of the meaning of “American citizen,” to strike down this bill. As The Wall Street Journal editors put it, Let’s see the roll call.

A Plan for the Winter

Posted on by
Reply

Mark Kimmitt (USA Brig Gen, ret) has one for the Ukrainian military that centers on resting and refitting for a major spring offensive. The thought has some merit, but I disagree.

Rather than using the winter to refit for a spring offensive, the Ukrainian army should use refitting-in-progress to mount a winter offensive along one or two fronts.

A drive through Melitopol’ to the Azov Sea coast would be one useful front; a drive to liberate Severodonetsk and though Kramatorsk would be another.

It’s true enough that the Ukrainian forces are tired and their equipage is degrading, but the situation is far worse for the barbarian hordes in Ukraine, and the disparity is greatly magnified by the winter conditions. This is no time to pause and let the barbarians rest and refit and get their balance back.

Harden defensive positions along the current frontlines….

No. Let the barbarians do that. But before they can, the Ukrainians should attack, not letting the barbarians disengage, and go through them like….

Of course this also puts a large premium on Kimmett’s other suggestions:

  • [West should] continue to resupply crucial equipment and ammunition, Himars rockets, and air-defense assets
  • West should beef up its support for Ukraine’s deep-fires campaign against supply depots, logistical routes, command centers, and second-echelon support units well beyond Russian [Kimmetts’ term] frontlines

And his diplomatic and economic suggestions, as well, which center on Europe holding the line against the barbarian’s assault on European energy and on tightening economic sanctions against barbarian Russia.

An Illustration of Why…

Posted on by
Reply

…we have a 2nd Amendment and of why Government has no business, or legitimate authority, to dictate to us our needs for firearms or our purposes in keep[ing] and bear[ing] Arms of any type.

A report issued last year by the watchdog group Open The Books, The Militarization of The U.S. Executive Agencies, found that more than 200,000 federal bureaucrats now have been granted the authority to carry guns and make arrests—more than the 186,000 Americans serving in the US Marine Corps.

And [emphasis added]

One hundred three executive agencies outside of the Department of Defense spent $2.7 billion on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment between fiscal years 2006 and 2019 (inflation adjusted). Nearly $1 billion ($944.9 million) was spent between fiscal years 2015 and 2019 alone.

The Federal government has no business arming itself so heavily against the very citizens for whom that government works.

Full stop.