Absurdity to the nth degree

OK. What are they drinking in Washington? They need some purple Kool-Aid, I think to clear the benches and start again, but ...

News today: the Department of Homeland Security at the request of law-enforcement agencies has paid $2 million to make new training targets of a non-traditional type. Pregnant women, senior citizens, protective mothers, children in playgrounds. Yes, seriously, all of the above:

WHAT POSSIBLE KIND OF THREAT DO THESE PEOPLE PRESENT?

As far as I am concerned, they are just regular people standing their ground to protect themselves and their families. A "hostile young mother depicting a threat on a playground"? The guys that thought these up suffer from severe craniorectal inversion disorder!! Of course, with that 2 billion rounds of hollowpoint .40 caliber and 9mm ammunition that the DHS bought for training purposes, the desk clerks to whom those automatic pistols have been issued are going to need something to practice on. What better than these realistic targets of the great threat to our country: informed citizens protecting themselves from a government that has become destructive of the inalienable rights among which are quite obviously life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I guess they do not count any more under the current administration and their game rules. Obviously the Consitution and the law-making process are insignificant, since so many Executive Orders and recess actions are being taken and made.

Like I say - arm up so when they take you out you can at least take two with you.

Guns, God and Politics - hey, what else do we need?

I ran into anssemblage of reasonable commentary about guns and religion. Worth a look.
Also interestingly humorous, from the Vice President, Mr. Biden:  "We need more gun laws because we don’t have time to enforce the ones we have"

And, in the inevitable, a study of: To what political party did mass murderers belong over the last 10 years. For you purists: this is a secondary source, but contains a link to the primary source, a video.

Finally, I was blessed today with the Short Devotion's selection. First, it has one of my favorite optical illusions. I see it infrequently enough that when I see it it takes me a while to see the "other" image, although my first impression will, of course, hit me right away. That being the case, it always tells me, when I see it, what my underlying mood is despite how I might say I feel. This morning I felt yucky, but as I looked at:
the first thing I saw was the cute young woman. It took, as a matter of fact, considerable effort to find the old lady with a somewhat ugly nose and non-attractive countenance.

I then read the devotion on John 9:1-3. "that works of God might be displayed in Him" - a simple phrase of deep meaning and complex interpretation and application, to understate the obvious.

In God’s wisdom, he has decided to not divulge too much of where evil comes from or it’s origin (Deuteronomy 29:29). ...[P]eople ...  never forgive God for an event they feel he is to blame for (they focus on the one part of the picture and forget to see it for the beautiful young girl). But, we do know that all things work together for the good of those that love God (Romans 8:28). [ Here let me comment that 8:28 is the most commonly quoted, misquoted, misinterpreted and complicated verse about good and bad that we usually run into. I have written blogs about this. Don't think for a minute it is that easy!!!] Instead of focusing on the “disease”, we should be focusing on the cure that is Jesus.

Yeah, I have to admit it! Just like Paul Hoganmächer has said, not part of the disease but part of the cure, in our pain His grace is made perfect.

After a good night's sleep, I read the news. oops

Items well worth reading. The first is straight data and analysis, no bleeding heart plea from either side. The rest are recent articles from online.
Here is the only known scientific study, covering a span of 20 years, of multiple victim public shootings and the effects on them of legislation.

Multiple Victim Public Shootings

John R. Lott Jr.
William M. Landes
University of Maryland Foundation, University of Maryland
University of Chicago Law School; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
October 19, 2000
Abstract:     
Few events obtain the same instant worldwide news coverage as multiple victim public shootings. These crimes allow us to study the alternative methods used to kill a large number of people (e.g., shootings versus bombings), marginal deterrence and the severity of the crime, substitutability of penalties, private versus public methods of deterrence and incapacitation, and whether attacks produce "copycats." The criminals who commit these crimes are also fairly unusual, recent evidence suggests that about half of these criminals have received a "formal diagnosis of mental illness, often schizophrenia." Yet, economists have not studied multiple victim shootings. Using data that extends until 1999 and includes the recent public school shootings, our results are surprising and dramatic. While arrest or conviction rates and the death penalty reduce "normal" murder rates and these attacks lead to new calls from more gun control, our results find that the only policy factor to have a consistently significant influence on multiple victim public shootings is the passage of concealed handgun laws. We explain why public shootings are more sensitive than other violent crimes to concealed handguns, why the laws reduce the number of shootings and have an even greater effect on their severity.



Obama himself actually signed into law the NDAA which authorizes secret assassinations of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil. Instead of the red list being “conspiracy theory,” it appears to be a key component of Obama’s domestic policy. It's not an urban legend, it's the law!


Something’s fishy with all this. It’s becoming increasingly apparent that an order has come down from the very top to destroy, silence, threaten or execute true American patriots. OK, think of that as an alarmist statement, then read these two links, again holding facts, not innuendo:

Regis Giles
summarizes and includes a link to naturalnews.com discussing "Prominent rifle manufacturer killed in mysterious car crash days after posting psych drug link to school shooters" addressing the possible use of psycho drugs by school shooters and the lack of any picture from Sandy Hook of Adam Lanza holding a rifle. Then a list of amazing coincidences.

The part-time crossing guard in Yonkers revealed to be a gun owner and now treated like a sex offender.
“Communism begins where atheism begins…” - Karl Marx Friends, distorting American history is a deliberate lie, and lying is not permissible by law.

2 shot at California high school, suspect in custody READ MORE AT FOXNEWS.COM A 16-year-old student armed with a shotgun (not an assault rifle or "automatic" weapon ) walked into class in a rural California high school on Thursday and shot one student, fired at another and missed, and then was talked into surrendering by a teacher and another staff member, officials said.

Virginia voters favor armed guards in schools Two-thirds of Virginia voters say they want armed guards in schools.
[This color is "Hokie Red". In case you ever wondered, a hokie is actually a poor farmer or a neutered turkey, even though we go as the fighting gobblers. When I attended and was on the faculty at Virginia Tech no one worried about gun violence on campus, probably because concealed carry was allowed and everybody knew it. Heck, it's the Corps of Cadets, for goodness sake, for whom military training is a big part. Likewise when I taught at Colorado Mines I feared no evil because there were students in the mining department who OPEN carried - go Blue and Silver Orediggers].

The Second Amendment Foundation, which was formed to guard gun owners’ legal rights, was not invited, even though they asked to come.
As we know now, that was no big deal because the Vice President pretty much ignored the NRA and, instead, lectured them a la' Des Moines Register columnist Donald Kaul [Kaul: Nation needs a new agenda on guns. This time, the debate has to be about more than not offending the NRA's sensibilities.] The column advocated, in case you missed this crowning jewel of journalism defended as sarcasm but accepted by many as sincerity:

• Repeal the Second Amendment, the part about guns anyway. It’s badly written, confusing and more trouble than it’s worth. It offers an absolute right to gun ownership, but it puts it in the context of the need for a “well-regulated militia.” We don’t make our militia bring their own guns to battles. And surely the Founders couldn’t have envisioned weapons like those used in the Newtown shooting when they guaranteed gun rights. Owning a gun should be a privilege, not a right.
• Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. Hey! We did it to the Communist Party, and the NRA has led to the deaths of more of us than American Commies ever did. (I would also raze the organization’s headquarters, clear the rubble and salt the earth, but that’s optional.) Make ownership of unlicensed assault rifles a felony. If some people refused to give up their guns, that “prying the guns from their cold, dead hands” thing works for me.
• Then I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control.
And if that didn’t work, I’d adopt radical measures. None of that is going to happen, of course. But I’ll bet gun sales will rise.

In contrast, one of the good old guys, a rational, level, salt of the earth Iowan, John Carlson, retired editorial writer, did give us this to the point article, "It’s hard to have a conversation about guns if everyone’s yelling".

Me? I'm more worried about watching our government than I am about watching anyone's guns. Read how they are scrambling to find a scapegoat for yet another serious security leak.

And now, it's time for breakfast.

When the toast is burned
And all the milk has turned
And Cap'n Crunch is wavin' farewell
When the big one finds you
Let this song remind you:
They don't serve breakfast in hell!

The Golden Rule, revisited

"O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone; and you have no longer an aristocratical, no longer a democratical spirit. Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation, brought about by the punishment of those in power, inflicted by those who had no power at all?" --Patrick Henry, speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1788

Patrick Henry's comments regarding benevolence and arms specifically, but overall regarding power, remind me of the Golden Rule of Arts and Sciences:

He who has the gold makes the rules

or, in the case of our government today, he who makes the rules has the gold.

HERE'S THE POINT:

The government will never change, the Congress will never do their job, the President will not be able to do his job, unless the people have power to punish, to alter or abolish, those in charge who fail to do their job. Such a government will just continue whittling away at rights that are not the government's to infringe until one day we wake up and find all of our rights gone.

Obviously there is little, if any, fear with today's politicians of being re-elected or not, and with the pensions they get they really shouldn't care about losing their job anyway unless they are (1) dedicated servants who stand no chance of losing their job, or (2) otherwise incompetent but power-hungry miscreants who will do anything to keep carving the pork to get their own ham. The choice of the people must be to decide that this phrase must be emphatically re-applied:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Remember: rights existed before government. Some governments are established in such a way that they control all rights - monarchy, dictatorship, plutocracy, etc. But, in a republic the people are the government and in our republic we have said that anything not specifically in the Constitution is up to the people, or the states, to control. Further, the Bill of Rights identified certain rights that were definitely NOT to be controlled by the Government - the Bill did not grant any rights at all, it merely lists as sacred certain rights that, again, pre-existed government because all men possess them until they are given away or taken.

Wisdom

My cousin Norma and I have been emailing about wisdom lately. As a Christian writer, she runs a ministry, 2MeFromHim, a blog-based internet presentation of a daily thought. Lately, it has been wisdom and Proverbs, and today we were joined by my favorite TV preacher, Charles Stanley, with his presentation based on Proverbs 4 and covering pretty specifically this one of my favorite passages:

5 Acquire wisdom! Acquire understanding!
Do not forget nor turn away from the words of my mouth.
6 “Do not forsake her, and she will guard you;
Love her, and she will watch over you.
7 “The beginning of wisdom is: Acquire wisdom;
And with all your acquiring, get understanding.
8 “Prize her, and she will exalt you;
She will honor you if you embrace her.
9 “She will place on your head a garland of grace;
She will present you with a crown of beauty.”

The kicker in this passage has always, to me, been that the way to get wisdom is to get wisdom. It says, "the beginning of wisdom is: Acquire wisdom..." To me, that is sort of a "Well, duh!" moment. At least it was until I thought about it the first time I ever saw it and since then it has been everything but "well, duh!"

Dr. Stanley gave a very specific, detailed and, what I consider loaded sermon on the text, and his conclusion was simply that God has a plan for each and every one of us and if we have the wisdom to follow that plan we will follow "The Road to Life At Its Best." I like that title, and I like to think that is what God has in store for me, and I always pray and hope that I may be granted the wisdom to understand His way and follow the Way to that best of life.

The final point I want to make in today's blog is this: God never said it would be easy, but He did promise you would never be alone. Dr. Stanley paralleled this to his teaching that God says you will always reap what you sow, more than you sow, and after you sow; and, that's the way it is. If you sow a few wild oats, you reap, later, a lot of wild oats. If you sow good things, you later reap lots of good things. If we ask His guidance and help, then we make sure we are following His will and walking in His ways, and therefore we are more likely to be reaping good things from what we have sown.

So, go forth and sow good!

Norma Gail - 2MefromHim Ministries: 2MefromHim Proverb for the Day - Jan. 5

Norma Gail - 2MefromHim Ministries: 2MefromHim Proverb for the Day - Jan. 5: "My son, be attentive to my Wisdom [godly Wisdom learned by actual and costly experience], and incline your ear to my understanding [of what...

Norma is my cousin, and she frequently posts comments or verses about wisdom. Wisdom is a rough subject. You don't get it unless you get it - I mean, the Proverbs say that the way to get wisdom is to acquire wisdom. Try that one on philosophically.

Solomon was right to ask for wisdom. Nothing else is harder to achieve, nothing else is more worthwhile. My worst times have been when I lost my wisdom, at least momentarily, or it wasn't there to begin with. My best times have been when God leads me with His wisdom despite what I think about or do.

That's it - simple commentary. Maybe you can acquire wisdom from it; God only knows.

Limiting the Government or Granting a Right?

My gun girl, FateOfDestinee, posted a video as Professor Des today answering the question: does the Second Amendment grant the right to bear Arms or restrict Gun Control? I followed up with a few comments:

Back in ancient history, we "diagrammed" sentences in Junior High English. The Second Amendment's base sentence is: "A well-regulated Militia | shall not be infringed" AND is modified by an adverbial clause of explanation and description: "being necessary to the security of a Free State" AND IN PARALLEL the subject is also a noun phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms". So, it could be written "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed". So, Dr. Puzzle agrees that, just like Professor Des says, the right is not granted by the amendment but is recognized and the government, actually any person or organization, is specifically restricted from infringing on the specific right.

The kicker, that few people know or mention apparently, is that the Second Amendment AS RATIFIED BY THE STATES AND AUTHENTICATED BY Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State [in accordance with procedure and protocol and what actually is in the files, despite the handwritten in the original Bill of Rights] is: "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." [Young, David E., The Founders' View of the Right to Bear Arms, p.222.] Young book

Same bottom line, but even more clear!
Other things to check out:
Of Arms and the Law; commas in the Second Amendment

JOURNAL ON FIREARMS &PUBLIC POLICY.The American Revolutionary Era Origin of the Second Amendment's Clauses

On Second Opinion Blog 

Young's commentary summarized:

• Jefferson's Official Imprint
• As a final observation on these interesting Second Amendment variations, Thomas Jefferson as Secretary of State in the Washington Administration prepared an official printing of the amendments. This is the version that he authenticated as being the amendments proposed by Congress, ratified by the state legislatures, and made part of the Constitution under the ratification procedure set forth in Article V. Jefferson's official imprint of the Second Amendment has one middle comma with only the leading word, "A", of the sentence capitalized. [FVRBA pp.221-222]
• The argument from those who have insisted that the "original" copy of the Second Amendment from Congress containing three commas must be consulted to fully understand its intent is contradicted by these numerous official versions of the Second Amendment as ratified by the state legislatures as well as by Jefferson's printing. Clearly, Jefferson's official imprint, as the National Archives refers to it, is the official version of the ratified Second Amendment recognized and authenticated by the executive branch of the Federal government itself.
• Commas Don't Count
• The point here is that it is rather futile and potentially misleading to argue the intent of a sentence written at that time in history and based almost exclusively on how many commas it contained. Arguments about comma count within the "original" copy of the Second Amendment add no clarity to discussion of its intent and have often been used to divert attention away from the Second Amendment's actual Bill of Rights history and context. A full understanding of Second Amendment developmental history makes the meaning of its language very clear and helps avoid the pitfalls associated with deciding meaning based on the number of commas contained in the "original" version.