Liberal or Conservative, you must admit that there are problems with our two-party system that were forewarned by our founding father

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition

“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 opinion of the Supreme Court may be found here:

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Sections/NEWS/PDFs/16716940.pdf

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the peoples right to "keep and bear arms", or in modern parlance "possess and carry", subject to reasonable restrictions. It found that the District of Columbia's policy that made it unlawful to carry or possess an unlicensed firearm, and it's refusal to then issue licenses, UNREASONABLE.

It found that in the context of the constitution, written in a time and place where the majority owned firearms and carried them not only in the furtherance of their livelihood but in self-defense, that our founding fathers meant what they said... the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Certainly the British would have had a much easier time at Lexington and Concord, not to mention Bunker Hill, had the Massachusetts colony implemented the same laws and policies as our modern capitol. After all, was not Lexington and Concord simply the British attempt to seize "unlawful", by their standard, arms?


"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State", is a prefatory clause, not limiting the following clause, but stating a purpose.

The operative clause being: "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The court pointing out that in referring to "the people" the constitution refers to it's citizens, not it's army or any other organization. "the right of the people peaceably to assemble" does not imply membership in some sanctioned organization... it being impossible for an individual to assemble without others.

By all means, read the court's opinion... it's a bit lengthy (157 pages in the pdf version) but well worth the read, and one could argue, a civic duty.

What I find most difficult to understand is the dissenting opinion, how taking the constitution into the context of it's times, one could argue that the amendment merely protects the right to be in a militia, is beyond my grasp. Either we've been doing it wrong since day one, given the history of our behavior, or more likely we are ignoring history and context in the attempt to justify our own position in the furtherance of our own agenda.

Interpreting the right as a right to join a (the?) militia would certainly have major implications, would citizens then have the right to join regardless of the current military standards for fitness? What impact would a constitutional right to serve have on the current 'don't ask, don't tell' policy. Although for some reason I get the feeling that that would be perfectly okay with those who want to ban gun ownership.

Well at least our rights are secure for the moment.

~Finntann~

Monday, June 23, 2008

Up on the roof

George Carlin, renowned comic, died yesterday at the age of 71. It's not that I can't believe he died... it's that I can't believe he was 71.

Best known for the Milwaukee Seven, or the Seven Words You Can Never Say on TV and it's associated Supreme Court case, George Carlin was a case study in the exercise of the Freedom of Speech, and sometimes beyond. While I never really held the same beliefs or politics, one can't argue that the man wasn't funny.

From Ed Sullivan to the Tonight Show, from Saturday Night Live to his HBO specials, George always kept us laughing and like any court jester, he was not only funny, he was astute. Quite often his subjects were cutting edge, forcing us not only to laugh, but to think.

So for the founder of Frisbeetarianism; The belief that when one dies, ones soul flies up onto the roof and gets stuck.

Here's to you George, you, and your humor, will be missed.

Thursday, June 19, 2008

It's the price of gas, stupid!

State governors promise to block attempts to tap offshore petroleum reserves.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25252119/

"As Governor of California, I will do everything in my power to fight the federal government on this issue and prevent any new offshore drilling," Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a McCain supporter, said Wednesday. “We are in this situation because of our dependence on traditional petroleum-based oil.”

Unfortunately, attempts to run the California state vehicle fleet on Arnold's dusty supply of posing oil have failed, Arnold could offer no other commercially viable alternative. It's real sweet that the 'governah' of the state with the second highest oil consumption, 656,863,000 barrels a year (while producing only 240,206 barrels) is against drilling, and we wonder why gas is $4 a gallon.

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/ene_pet_con-energy-oil-consumption
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/ene_pet_pro-energy-oil-production

Fortunately, I have a solution... we lower the price of gas in the other states to $2 a gallon and raise the price of gas in California to $6 (before state taxes are added in of course, and imposing a $4 surcharge to gas purchases for vehicles with CA tags in other states).

Among the states opposed to drilling is also #7 New Jersey consuming 225,683,000 and not even making the list of 31 top producers and #11 North Carolina consuming 178,544,000 and also not making the production list. You know, if we do this right, we could get the price of gas in the rest of the country back down to about $1.50, maybe lower.

"Our $35 billion economy is driven by tourism and the use of the shore," said New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine. Well Jon... what do you think the impact to tourism is with $4 per gallon gas... think your gonna get a lot of beachgoers when it hits $6? New Jersey constantly suffers beach closures due to raw sewage, garbage, and medical waste washups (Earth News) and they're worried about a little petroleum? Might actually cut down on the E. Coli count. I grew up back east and spent a lot of time at the Jersey shore... you could stick a drilling derrick on the end of the steel pier and I doubt anyone would even notice.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for conservation, energy-alternatives, and other eco-friendly things... but unless you're going to start distributing syntholine at $1 a gallon, shut your pie-hole and get with the program, I'm tired of the "I want to have my cake and eat it too" crowd bending the rest of us over.

Unfortunately our economy and oil are tightly intertwined, those of you dissatisfied with the current state of the economy would be foolish to tolerate this behavior, less oil isn't going to help. Sen McCain proposes adding 45 new nuclear reactors to the 104 we already have (which he claims produces 20% of our electrical needs), you got your math wrong John, that means we don't need 45... we need 416 new nuclear reactors...which would not only go a long way towards reducing our dependence on foreign oil, but would virtually solve our carbon emission problems. The US is 8th in Uranium production and Canada is #1... wouldn't you rather see your energy dollars going to Canada than Saudi Arabia?

Wonder what's wrong with our country? It's not the Iraq war, the price of oil, or gay weddings... it's our schizophrenic government (local, state, and federal) actions and policies. If you think I'm wrong, check out some of the symptoms for schizophrenia:

Impaired perception of reality, disorganized thinking, significant occupational dysfunction...

To paraphrase an aging cliche... It's the price of gas, stupid!

A man, dying of thirst in a desert, will cut a Prebles jumping mouse in half with a shovel while digging for water without a second thought.

No oil = No food for 300 million people... who ought to be on the endangered species list now? Of course that is an extreme example, but really... we ought to get some perspective folks.

My suggestion? Need a vacation spot? Cross California and New Jersey off your lists and go and visit Texas, they at least are helping somewhat in this petroleum predicament.

~Finntann~

Sunday, June 15, 2008

You've got to be kidding....right?



Perhaps you are wondering why I have the flag of Ohio and that of Cuba above, hmm, vaguely similar, no?

I take a short well deserved vacation, and look what happens!

Merits of the case aside, I point you to the photograph by Tony Dejak, AP of Ohio Common Pleas Judge James Burke.

For God's sake... the man has CHE GUEVARA and BARACK OBAMA posters hanging on the wall over his head.

Now the Obama poster is one thing, but then again it is his, (presumably?) private office and not his chambers, in which case it could possibly be construed as a state endorsement of a particular candidate (god...let's hope it's his private office).

But Che? CHE? Depending on your political perspective he is at best an idealistic Marxist-Maoist-Socialist revolutionary, at worst... the butcher of La Cabana.

Let's ignore the latter and simply ask the question:

What is a poster of a Marxist-Maoist-Socialist revolutionary doing hanging on the wall of an Ohio judge?

Good people of Ohio... please feel free to opine, as I certainly 'don't get it', and one might say am flabbergasted.

Update: A simple google search of Obama and Che Guevara leads to many links to this Fox 26 news story:

http://www.myfoxhouston.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=5700252&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1

Which in and of itself would be unremarkable aside from the Cuban flag with an image of Che superimposed upon it hanging upon the wall in an Obama campaign office. Keep in mind that this is not an official campaign HQ office, but one funded by the volunteers.

I wouldn't generally be considered a conspiracy theorist... but these people are beginning to scare me.

How far to the left do we intend to go?

~Finntann~