Category: Liberty


U.S. Appeals Court Expands Gun Rights

 

 

 

” In the first legal ruling of its type, a federal appeals court in Cincinnati on Thursday deemed unconstitutional a federal law that kept a Michigan man who was briefly committed to a mental institution decades ago from owning a gun.

  A three-judge panel of the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that the federal ban on gun ownership for anyone who has been “adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution” violated the Second Amendment rights of Clifford Charles Tyler, a 73-year-old Hillsdale County man.

“ The government’s interest in keeping firearms out of the hands of the mentally ill is not sufficiently related to depriving the mentally healthy, who had a distant episode of commitment, of their constitutional rights,” wrote Judge Danny Boggs, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, for the panel.

  Lucas McCarthy, Mr. Tyler’s lawyer, called the ruling “a forceful decision to protect Second Amendment rights,” and said he hoped it that it would have “a significant impact on the jurisprudence in the area of gun rights.” 

  Mr. Tyler recently attempted to buy a gun, but was denied on grounds that he had been committed by a court to a mental institution in 1986 after emotional problems associated with a divorce, Thursday’s opinion said. His commitment lasted less than a month.”

 

Wall Street Journal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About these ads

Cops Illegally Nailed Webcam To Utility Pole For 6 Weeks To Spy On House

 

 

 

” A federal judge on Monday tossed evidence that was gathered by a webcam—turned on for six weeks—that the authorities nailed to a utility pole 100 yards from a suspected drug dealer’s rural Washington state house.

  The Justice Department contended that the webcam, with pan-and-zoom capabilities that were operated from afar, was no different from a police officer’s observation from the public right-of-way.

The government argued (PDF):

  The advantage of a police camera to law enforcement is that it saves the time and manpower required to conduct around the clock surveillance. As in this case, law enforcement is authorized to use the pole camera only to record activities that are otherwise open to public view, and not protected by the 4th Amendment.

  US District Judge Edward Shea disagreed and ruled (PDF) that a warrant was necessary to spy on Leonel Vargas via a webcam controlled by local police.”

 

 

Somehow this little tidbit doesn’t surprise us:

 

 

” Strangely, the judge noted, when the authorities raided the house in May 2013, the camera was panned on nearby sagebrush and not the house.”

 

 

ArsTechnica

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York Flags 278 Gun Owners As “Mentally Unstable”

 

 

 

 

” New York State’s tough new SAFE Act gun control law has flagged 278 gun owners who could lose their weapons because they have been deemed mentally unstable, a new report shows.

  Gov. Andrew Cuomo urged lawmakers to pass the SAFE Act quickly after the 2012 mass shooting at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Conn.

  The Syracuse Post-Standard reported last week that since the law’s enactment, the state has collected 38,718 names in a database of individuals who have been found at-risk for owning guns by psychiatrists and other health professionals.

  The paper said when the database was checked against a list of pistol permit holders in the state, there were 278 matches, less than 1 percent.

  Monroe County had the most matches at 36, followed by Westchester, 17, Suffolk, 16 and Dutchess, 14. “

 

Fox News

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cops Are Scanning Social Media To Assign You A “Threat Rating”

police-social-media-threat-rating

 

 

” Online activity, purchases, and “comments that could be construed as offensive,” all contribute to your threat score.

  Imagine the following scenario: You are on your way home from work, driving down the road, when you notice police lights in your rear view mirror. You are being pulled over.

  As you sit there, on the shoulder, adrenaline rushing, simultaneously angry and nervous, the police officer, in his patrol car behind you, is sizing you up based on an algorithm that determines your “threat rating.” 

  The officer enters your license plate into a mobile application on his laptop. In a matter of seconds, this application crawls over billions of records in commercial and public databases, including all available social media engagement, recent purchases and “any comments that could be construed as offensive.” The application then determines if your “threat rating” is green, yellow, or red.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

” Imagine that you are one of our informed and frequent readers and understand the importance of police accountability and are unafraid to voice your completely peaceful, yet strong opinion about police misconduct. Imagine that you left a comment on Facebook this morning about a particular officer’s misconduct; imagine that it is this particular officer who just pulled you over.

  Up until this point, you have never committed a crime, you have never been violent, you have never even so much as run a stop sign. However, this police officer now knows that you made a comment about him punching the (insert handcuffed and helpless victim example here) on Facebook, and he literally sees red (your threat rating).

  What happens next? Does a routine traffic stop for driving 10 miles over the speed limit morph into a situation in which you now have a Smith and Wesson M&P 9mm pistol with Streamlight TLR-2s laser site being aimed just above your left ear?

  Do you receive multiple erroneous citations because this officer now has access to your personal life? Do you get cited where the officer would have otherwise let someone else go?

  Or, maybe you are a cop or a judge, or the mayor, but this application confuses you with someone else and marks you as “red,” then what? What if you are driving someone else’s car?

  The reality is, that any number of unimaginable things can and would happen next. And now, thanks to a particularly ominous product, by a company named Intrado, and the Orwellian nature of police in this country, those unimaginable situations are now a reality.

Read more at The Free Thought Project

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prof: ‘Elf On The Shelf’ Conditions Kids To Accept Surveillance State

 

 

 

 

Could there be something more sinister behind the little elf sitting on the shelf who returns to the North Pole each night?

  Yes, says Laura Pinto, a digital technology professor at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology.

  She recently published a paper titled “Who’s the Boss” on the doll, saying the idea of it reporting back to Santa each night on the child’s behavior “sets up children for dangerous, uncritical acceptance of power structures,” according to insideHalton.com.

  From her paper:

  When children enter the play world of The Elf on the Shelf, they accept a series of practices and rules associated with the larger story. This, of course, is not unique to The Elf on the Shelf. Many children’s games, including board games and video games, require children to participate while following a prescribed set of rules. The difference, however, is that in other games, the child role-plays a character, or the child imagines herself within a play-world of the game, but the role play does not enter the child’s real world as part of the game. As well, in most games, the time of play is delineated (while the game goes on), and the play to which the rules apply typically does not overlap with the child’s real world.

“  You’re teaching (kids) a bigger lesson, which is that it’s OK for other people to spy on you and you’re not entitled to privacy,” she tells the Toronto Star. “

 

Read the rest

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nothing Succeeds Like Liberal Secession: Blue America Without Red America Would Be A Basket Case

 

 

 

” The July 4, 2019, ceremony marking the final dissolution of the United States of America was quite amicable compared to the anger and bitterness of the preceding five years. The 2014 election results created a map clearly defining “Red America” and “Blue America,” and it sparked a debate, unlike any in the last 150 years, over whether the United States should remain united. For many in the leftist coastal states – their progressivism constrained by the overwhelming Congressional advantage of the conservative interior states – the answer was, “No.”

  As liberal thought leader Michael Tomasky wrote of the South, “Practically the whole region has rejected nearly everything that’s good about this country and has become just one big nuclear waste site of choleric, and extremely racialized, resentment…. Forget about the whole fetid place. Write it off. Let the GOP have it and run it and turn it into Free-Market Jesus Paradise. The Democrats don’t need it anyway.”

  Soon, it became an article of faith within the liberal elite that it was not only their party that did not need the rest of America. Blue America itself, they argued, did not need Red America, economically, intellectually or morally. It was not long until newly-elected Governor De Blasio of New York demanded a national convention to discuss a parting of the ways. The President, her health poor and her heart firmly with the Blue America, half-heartedly tried to stop the movement, but more and more high profile Democrat politicians joined the chorus. The President yielded and called for a “national conversation on the way forward as separate nations.” Red America, furious at her continuation of Barack Obama’s rule by decree and interference in its affairs, agreed to attend.

  Two years later, President De Blasio, elected leader of the Democratic States of North America, and President Abbott of the Republic of America, stood together on the platform on the border at St. Louis to sign the Dissolution Pact. The countries split the national debt and apportioned federal assets, while agreeing to temporarily share the currency. They divided the military (along with all nuclear capabilities), but signed a mutual defense agreement. There would be free travel between and through the new nations. “We will remain good neighbors,” President De Blasio remarked, “Even if we are no longer brothers, sisters, or differently-gendered siblings.” President Abbott politely maintained a poker face.

  Of course, back home in the Blue America’s capital, New York City, President De Blasio was less charitable. “We are no longer held back by the reactionary, racist policies of the past,” he thundered. “Together, we will build a new dawn of progress that places people before profits and promotes peace instead of perpetual war!” Blue America – New England and the mid-Atlantic seaboard, back through Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, the West Coast and Hawaii, immediately set to drafting a new constitution. It featured 216 new affirmative rights, including “the right to a living wage,” “the right to abortion upon demand at government expense,” and “the right to define one’s own life experience in terms of race and gender.” Embarrassingly, the rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion did not make the leaked initial draft; they were hastily added, but there was no right to keep and bear arms. In fact, the first law the new People’s Assembly passed was to confiscate all privately-owned weapons. The second was to legalize all illegal aliens, and the third to triple welfare payments.

  Red America reaffirmed the United States Constitution. Then the Congress began a review of all existing laws, statutes and regulations, repealing thousands of them. It also limited social spending dramatically, making known the expectation that able-bodied adults would support themselves and their families. The resulting non-military federal government in Red America was about one quarter the size of Blue America’s.

  The world was unsure how to deal with the new reality. The international elite and its lapdog media quickly took to portraying Red America with the same kind of venom as Blue American liberals. President De Blasio was taped at a private confab at the United Nations – which remained in New York – telling the foreigners that Blue America, “feels a greater kinship to our progressive friends in Europe than those redneck, racist, Jesus freaks next door.”

  Red America stopped paying its UN dues and sent John Bolton to be its ambassador. After Israel, Red America became the most investigated and censured of any UN member state.

  Blue America had little use for the military it inherited. Though the Pact had stipulated that both new nations would maintain a certain level of combat readiness, in Blue America the services were first in line to be cut. Forced to meet America’s defense needs alone, Red America slashed non-military spending and instituted two years of mandatory military service for every citizen as the only way to meet the need for manpower.

  Many left Red America, some to avoid the draft and a larger number to collect the enhanced welfare benefits Blue America was giving away. Yet, many more came in from Blue America. By casting off useless regulations and cutting taxes (Blue America’s “Fair Share Act” increased the top income tax rate to 74.5% on earnings over $250,000), Red America unleashed a whirlwind of economic activity. Red America, already prosperous, grew even richer.

  Fracking was outlawed in Blue America; Red America became the world’s number one petroleum exporter. Blue America laws banning nuclear and coal power led to the “Kentucky Line” of coal plants running parallel the state’s northern border with Blue Ohio, selling Blue America the power it refused to generate itself. The ban on GMO crops and many pesticides cratered Blue American food production, a void Red American farmers were happy to fill. All the while, Denver, Dallas, Atlanta and other cities grew their own tech and entertainment industries built on refugees from Silicon Valley and Hollywood looking for an environment where success was not penalized. Red America began to supply itself with what Blue America used to provide.

  Blue America’s deficit exploded even as Red America balanced its budget, per the one new amendment it had added to the Constitution. But Red America’s budget was strained when the nation had to send its military to support Israel after the Jewish state came under massive attack for destroying Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Blue America not only refused to assist, but refused to let Red forces use its bases or ports. The rumors that Red American pilots in B-2 bombers and F-22 fighters flew many of the original anti-nuke missions over Iran alongside the Israeli Air Force were never confirmed.

  With its economy slowing to a standstill, and riots erupting in Chicago and Philadelphia, the liberal ruling elite found itself a convenient scapegoat for Blue America’s woes – its neighbor. “Red plants pollute our skies, Red corporations exploit the land, and Red bankers steal our wealth!” Vice President Warren charged. “We need to fight back against the Red wreckers!”

  The middle class and job creators were abandoning Blue America for opportunities in Red America, and they were taking their money with them. Hundreds of billions of dollars flowed out of Blue America into its neighbor. Frustrated by Red America’s refusal to provide banking information on these “tax cheats” – or to allow Red tax officials to collect unpaid taxes deposited in Red banks – Blue America breached the Dissolution Pact by outlawing the free transit of people and currency into Red America.

  Red America was hardly blind – it saw the trends long before Blue America would admit to itself that it was headed toward disaster. Red America expected the migration and had already ensured that Blue newcomers would not be allowed to vote into effect the same liberal policies they had abandoned by requiring all aspiring citizens to serve their military obligation before being allowed a ballot. Few did, and the “Heinlein Act” succeeded by ensuring that every voting Red American citizen had “skin in the game.”

  When Blue America broke the Pact by securing the internal borders and barring its citizens’ exit, Red America acted – quietly. Within 24 hours, its forces were manning the border too, turning back every truck and train carrying food or fuel into Blue America. At the same time, every power station feeding Blue America went offline. Then Red America waited.

  It took 12 days, seven less than President Abbott’s National Security Council had estimated, before President De Blasio used the hotline to call and cave. There had been a lot of talk in the New York Times and other Blue media about surviving on “alternative power” and “utilizing green growing techniques in urban spaces” to meet the country’s energy and food needs. But it was early November, and it was cold. The grocery store shelves went bare with terrifying speed. The limousine liberals would always be warm, well-fed and safe in their gated communities, but no one else would be. The lie that was the liberal promise was there for all to see.

“ Sure, Mr. President, we can talk about going back to how it was,” President Abbott said gently. “You’ll be honoring our deal from here on, right? Good. Oh, and I’m going to need you to do one more thing for me. No, it’s nothing too big. Just an apology. By you, on live television, with no hedging, about how sorry you and your friends are for those unkind things you said over the years about us redneck, racist, Jesus freaks who feed you, fuel you and keep your sorry asses safe. Oh, I’m serious as a heart attack. Well, I’ll look forward to watching it. Good-bye now, and God bless y’all.”

 

Thanks to Kurt Schlichter and Townhall for this great article

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sandy Hook Families File Lawsuit Against Gun Manufacturer

 

 

 

 

 

” Nine families of victims killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School and one survivor filed a wrongful-death lawsuit Saturday against the manufacturer of the rifle used in the shooting in Newtown, Conn.

  Adam Lanza shot and killed 20 schoolchildren and six staff members using a Bushmaster Model XM15-E2S rifle on Dec. 14, 2012. The rifle was lawfully purchased by Nancy Lanza, Mr. Lanza’s mother, according to law-enforcement officials.

  The lawsuit, which has been reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, was hand-delivered to a Connecticut state marshal, according to a spokeswoman for the families. The marshal now has 30 days to serve the defendants named in the lawsuit. The lawsuit will be heard in Superior Court in Bridgeport, Conn.

  The suit names as defendants Bushmaster Firearms International, which is owned by Remington Outdoor Co.; Camfour, a company that distributes Bushmaster products; and Riverview Gun Sales, an East Windsor, Conn., gun shop that sold the rifle to Ms. Lanza.

  The lawsuit claims the gun maker, the firearms distributor, and the store that sold firearm are liable for producing and selling a weapon unfit for civilian use.”

 

Wall Street Journal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gun-Friendly Texas Prepares To Roll Back Ban On Open Carry Of Firearms

 

 

 

 

 

” Long depicted as the capital of American gun culture, Texas is actually one of the few states to ban outright the open carrying of handguns.

  That could change in 2015, when the Republican-dominated state legislature and governor-elect Greg Abbott are expected to push for expanded gun rights.

“ If open carry is good enough for Massachusetts, it’s good enough for the state of Texas,” Abbott said the day after his election, last month.

  If Texas, which allows concealed handguns, embraces open carry – rolling back a 140-year ban – it would be the largest state to have done so.

  Open carry drew wide support in the 2014 statewide election, and at least six bills have been filed for the upcoming session, which starts in January. Abbott has pledged to sign one into law if sent to his desk.

  Coni Ross, a 63-year-old rancher in Blanco, carries a handgun in her purse for personal protection and said she would like the option to carry it openly on her belt if she could. She already does when she is on her ranch and feels comfortable with her gun by her side.

“ In one-and-a-half seconds, a man can run 25ft with a knife in his hands and stab you before you get your gun out,” Ross said. “If your weapon is concealed you’re dead.” “

 

The Guardian

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Spy Drone Hacks WiFi Networks, Listens To Calls

 

 

WIFI Hacking Drone

 

 

” It’s small. It’s bright yellow, and it’s capable of cracking Wi-Fi passwords, eavesdropping on your cell phone calls and reading your text messages. It’s an unmanned spy drone and it just landed in Washington, D.C.

  Long-time friends and former Air Force buddies, Mike Tassey and Rich Perkins, describe their state-of-the-art cyber drone as hard to take down, hard to see and virtually hard to detect.”

 

 

Mike Tassey, Rich Perkins: Wireless Ariel Surveillance

 

 

” They built it in a garage, using off the shelf electronics to prove a drone can be used to launch cyber-attacks.

  It needs a human for take-off and landing but once airborne, it can fly any pre-programmed route posing as a cell phone tower and tricking wireless cell phones.

” We passed telephone calls, hacked into networks, cracked the encryption on Wi-Fi access points all of that sort of evilness is possible,” said Tassey.”

 

 

Read more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Congress Has Just Overruled Your 1st, 4th And 5th Amendment Rights

 

 

 

” As of today, Bill HR4681 has passed the house and senate, and is currently undergoing arbitration before being sent to the President for his signature in to law. The law says that the intelligence community can collect, retain, and disseminate all electronic communications including voice calls [without any constitutional restrictions] on all US citizens and everyone else in the world.  And they have 5 years before they are supposed to destroy the records.  However, they can keep them indefinitely if they fall into several categories of interest.

  It is all out in the open now.  Your 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendment protections are gone.  This act gives new meaning to ‘land of the free, home of the brave.’  The intelligence community isn’t doing anything in secret any more.  Americans are now living in an environment much like the days of the old Stalinist Soviet Union, where the presumption was that all conversations were monitored and one takes measures to have a ‘private’ conversations. 

  So turn up your radio or turn the water on in the sink and watch what you say on the phone or Facebook, even casual remarks on twitter may come back to haunt you in the future.  Don’t believe me, I have pasted the relevant parts of the bill below this story. Still don’t believe it? Just go to www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/4681/text and read it from the horse’s mouth.

What are you willing to do about it?

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

 

[H.R. 4681 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

H.R.4681

One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

of the

United States of America

TITLE III–GENERAL PROVISIONS

Subtitle A–General Matters

Sec. 309. Procedures for the retention of incidentally acquired

communications.

SEC. 309. PROCEDURES FOR THE RETENTION OF INCIDENTALLY ACQUIRED

COMMUNICATIONS.

(a) Definitions.–In this section:

(1) Covered communication.–The term “covered communication”

means any nonpublic telephone or electronic communication acquired

without the consent of a person who is a party to the

communication, including communications in electronic storage.

(2) Head of an element of the intelligence community.–The term

“head of an element of the intelligence community” means, as

appropriate–

(A) the head of an element of the intelligence community;

or

(B) the head of the department or agency containing such

element.

(3) United states person.–The term “United States person”

has the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Foreign

Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801).

(b) Procedures for Covered Communications.–

(1) Requirement to adopt.–Not later than 2 years after the

date of the enactment of this Act each head of an element of the

intelligence community shall adopt procedures approved by the

Attorney General for such element that ensure compliance with the

requirements of paragraph (3).

(2) Coordination and approval.–The procedures required by

paragraph (1) shall be–

(A) prepared in coordination with the Director of National

Intelligence; and

(B) approved by the Attorney General prior to issuance.

(3) Procedures.–

(A) Application.–The procedures required by paragraph (1)

shall apply to any intelligence collection activity not

otherwise authorized by court order (including an order or

certification issued by a court established under subsection

(a) or (b) of section 103 of the Foreign Intelligence

Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1803)), subpoena, or

similar legal process that is reasonably anticipated to result

in the acquisition of a covered communication to or from a

United States person and shall permit the acquisition,

retention, and dissemination of covered communications subject

to the limitation in subparagraph (B).

(B) Limitation on retention.–A covered communication shall

not be retained in excess of 5 years, unless–

(i) the communication has been affirmatively

determined, in whole or in part, to constitute foreign

intelligence or counterintelligence or is necessary to

understand or assess foreign intelligence or

counterintelligence;

(ii) the communication is reasonably believed to

constitute evidence of a crime and is retained by a law

enforcement agency;

(iii) the communication is enciphered or reasonably

believed to have a secret meaning;

(iv) all parties to the communication are reasonably

believed to be non-United States persons;

(v) retention is necessary to protect against an

imminent threat to human life, in which case both the

nature of the threat and the information to be retained

shall be reported to the congressional intelligence

committees not later than 30 days after the date such

retention is extended under this clause;

(vi) retention is necessary for technical assurance or

compliance purposes, including a court order or discovery

obligation, in which case access to information retained

for technical assurance or compliance purposes shall be

reported to the congressional intelligence committees on an

annual basis; or

(vii) retention for a period in excess of 5 years is

approved by the head of the element of the intelligence

community responsible for such retention, based on a

determination that retention is necessary to protect the

national security of the United States, in which case the

head of such element shall provide to the congressional

intelligence committees a written certification

describing–

 

(I) the reasons extended retention is necessary to

protect the national security of the United States;

(II) the duration for which the head of the element

is authorizing retention;

(III) the particular information to be retained;

and

(IV) the measures the element of the intelligence

community is taking to protect the privacy interests of

United States persons or persons located inside the

United States. “

 

 

 

 

 

   Many thanks to Universal Free Press for providing this story . Below the reader can see who voted to rob you of your rights and who voted against Statism …

 

 

 

 

 

VOTE PARTY REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT
Alabama
YEA   R   Byrne, Bradley AL 1st
YEA   R   Roby, Martha AL 2nd
YEA   R   Rogers, Mike AL 3rd
YEA   R   Aderholt, Robert AL 4th
NAY   R   Brooks, Mo AL 5th
YEA   R   Bachus, Spencer AL 6th
YEA   D   Sewell, Terri AL 7th
Alaska
YEA   R   Young, Don AK
Arizona
YEA   D   Kirkpatrick, Ann AZ 1st
YEA   D   Barber, Ron AZ 2nd
NAY   D   Grijalva, Raúl AZ 3rd
NAY   R   Gosar, Paul AZ 4th
NAY   R   Salmon, Matt AZ 5th
YEA   R   Schweikert, David AZ 6th
YEA   D   Pastor, Ed AZ 7th
YEA   R   Franks, Trent AZ 8th
YEA   D   Sinema, Kyrsten AZ 9th
Arkansas
YEA   R   Crawford, Eric AR 1st
YEA   R   Griffin, Tim AR 2nd
YEA   R   Womack, Steve AR 3rd
YEA   R   Cotton, Tom AR 4th
California
YEA   R   LaMalfa, Doug CA 1st
NAY   D   Huffman, Jared CA 2nd
NAY   D   Garamendi, John CA 3rd
NAY   R   McClintock, Tom CA 4th
YEA   D   Thompson, Mike CA 5th
NAY   D   Matsui, Doris CA 6th
YEA   D   Bera, Ami CA 7th
YEA   R   Cook, Paul CA 8th
YEA   D   McNerney, Jerry CA 9th
YEA   R   Denham, Jeff CA 10th
YEA   D   Miller, George CA 11th
YEA   D   Pelosi, Nancy CA 12th
NAY   D   Lee, Barbara CA 13th
NAY   D   Speier, Jackie CA 14th
NAY   D   Swalwell, Eric CA 15th
YEA   D   Costa, Jim CA 16th
NAY   D   Honda, Mike CA 17th
NAY   D   Eshoo, Anna CA 18th
NAY   D   Lofgren, Zoe CA 19th
NAY   D   Farr, Sam CA 20th
YEA   R   Valadao, David CA 21st
YEA   R   Nunes, Devin CA 22nd
YEA   R   McCarthy, Kevin CA 23rd
YEA   D   Capps, Lois CA 24th
YEA   R   McKeon, Buck CA 25th
YEA   D   Brownley, Julia CA 26th
NAY   D   Chu, Judy CA 27th
YEA   D   Schiff, Adam CA 28th
YEA   D   Cárdenas, Tony CA 29th
YEA   D   Sherman, Brad CA 30th
NO VOTE   R   Miller, Gary CA 31st
YEA   D   Napolitano, Grace CA 32nd
YEA   D   Waxman, Henry CA 33rd
YEA   D   Becerra, Xavier CA 34th
NO VOTE   D   Negrete McLeod, Gloria CA 35th
YEA   D   Ruiz, Raul CA 36th
NAY   D   Bass, Karen CA 37th
YEA   D   Sánchez, Linda CA 38th
YEA   R   Royce, Ed CA 39th
YEA   D   Roybal-Allard, Lucille CA 40th
NAY   D   Takano, Mark CA 41st
YEA   R   Calvert, Ken CA 42nd
NAY   D   Waters, Maxine CA 43rd
NAY   D   Hahn, Janice CA 44th
NO VOTE   R   Campbell, John CA 45th
YEA   D   Sanchez, Loretta CA 46th
NAY   D   Lowenthal, Alan CA 47th
NAY   R   Rohrabacher, Dana CA 48th
YEA   R   Issa, Darrell CA 49th
YEA   R   Hunter, Duncan CA 50th
YEA   D   Vargas, Juan CA 51st
YEA   D   Peters, Scott CA 52nd
YEA   D   Davis, Susan CA 53rd
Colorado
YEA   D   DeGette, Diana CO 1st
NAY   D   Polis, Jared CO 2nd
NAY   R   Tipton, Scott CO 3rd
YEA   R   Gardner, Cory CO 4th
YEA   R   Lamborn, Doug CO 5th
YEA   R   Coffman, Mike CO 6th
YEA   D   Perlmutter, Ed CO 7th
Connecticut
YEA   D   Larson, John CT 1st
YEA   D   Courtney, Joe CT 2nd
YEA   D   DeLauro, Rosa CT 3rd
YEA   D   Himes, James CT 4th
YEA   D   Esty, Elizabeth CT 5th
Delaware
YEA   D   Carney, John DE
Florida
NO VOTE   R   Miller, Jeff FL 1st
YEA   R   Southerland, Steve FL 2nd
NAY   R   Yoho, Ted FL 3rd
YEA   R   Crenshaw, Ander FL 4th
YEA   D   Brown, Corrine FL 5th
YEA   R   DeSantis, Ron FL 6th
NAY   R   Mica, John FL 7th
NAY   R   Posey, Bill FL 8th
NAY   D   Grayson, Alan FL 9th
YEA   R   Webster, Daniel FL 10th
NAY   R   Nugent, Richard FL 11th
YEA   R   Bilirakis, Gus FL 12th
YEA   R   Jolly, David FL 13th
YEA   D   Castor, Kathy FL 14th
YEA   R   Ross, Dennis FL 15th
YEA   R   Buchanan, Vern FL 16th
YEA   R   Rooney, Thomas FL 17th
YEA   D   Murphy, Patrick FL 18th
NAY   R   Clawson, Curt FL 19th
NAY   D   Hastings, Alcee FL 20th
YEA   D   Deutch, Theodore FL 21st
YEA   D   Frankel, Lois FL 22nd
YEA   D   Wasserman Schultz, Debbie FL 23rd
YEA   D   Wilson, Frederica FL 24th
YEA   R   Diaz-Balart, Mario FL 25th
NAY   D   Garcia, Joe FL 26th
YEA   R   Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana FL 27th
Georgia
NAY   R   Kingston, Jack GA 1st
YEA   D   Bishop, Sanford GA 2nd
YEA   R   Westmoreland, Lynn GA 3rd
YEA   D   Johnson, Hank GA 4th
NAY   D   Lewis, John GA 5th
YEA   R   Price, Tom GA 6th
NAY   R   Woodall, Rob GA 7th
NAY   R   Scott, Austin GA 8th
YEA   R   Collins, Doug GA 9th
NAY   R   Broun, Paul GA 10th
YEA   R   Gingrey, Phil GA 11th
YEA   D   Barrow, John GA 12th
YEA   D   Scott, David GA 13th
NAY   R   Graves, Tom GA 14th
Hawaii
NAY   D   Hanabusa, Colleen HI 1st
YEA   D   Gabbard, Tulsi HI 2nd
Idaho
NAY   R   Labrador, Raúl ID 1st
YEA   R   Simpson, Mike ID 2nd
Illinois
YEA   D   Rush, Bobby IL 1st
YEA   D   Kelly, Robin IL 2nd
YEA   D   Lipinski, Daniel IL 3rd
NAY   D   Gutiérrez, Luis IL 4th
YEA   D   Quigley, Mike IL 5th
YEA   R   Roskam, Peter IL 6th
YEA   D   Davis, Danny IL 7th
NO VOTE   D   Duckworth, Tammy IL 8th
NAY   D   Schakowsky, Jan IL 9th
YEA   D   Schneider, Bradley IL 10th
YEA   D   Foster, Bill IL 11th
YEA   D   Enyart, William IL 12th
YEA   R   Davis, Rodney IL 13th
YEA   R   Hultgren, Randy IL 14th
YEA   R   Shimkus, John IL 15th
YEA   R   Kinzinger, Adam IL 16th
YEA   D   Bustos, Cheri IL 17th
VOTE PARTY REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT
YEA   R   Schock, Aaron IL 18th
Indiana
YEA   D   Visclosky, Peter IN 1st
YEA   R   Walorski, Jackie IN 2nd
YEA   R   Stutzman, Marlin IN 3rd
YEA   R   Rokita, Todd IN 4th
YEA   R   Brooks, Susan IN 5th
YEA   R   Messer, Luke IN 6th
YEA   D   Carson, André IN 7th
YEA   R   Bucshon, Larry IN 8th
YEA   R   Young, Todd IN 9th
Iowa
YEA   D   Braley, Bruce IA 1st
YEA   D   Loebsack, David IA 2nd
YEA   R   Latham, Tom IA 3rd
YEA   R   King, Steve IA 4th
Kansas
NAY   R   Huelskamp, Tim KS 1st
YEA   R   Jenkins, Lynn KS 2nd
YEA   R   Yoder, Kevin KS 3rd
YEA   R   Pompeo, Mike KS 4th
Kentucky
YEA   R   Whitfield, Ed KY 1st
YEA   R   Guthrie, Brett KY 2nd
NAY   D   Yarmuth, John KY 3rd
NAY   R   Massie, Thomas KY 4th
YEA   R   Rogers, Hal KY 5th
YEA   R   Barr, Andy KY 6th
Louisiana
YEA   R   Scalise, Steve LA 1st
YEA   D   Richmond, Cedric LA 2nd
YEA   R   Boustany, Charles LA 3rd
YEA   R   Fleming, John LA 4th
YEA   R   McAllister, Vance LA 5th
YEA   R   Cassidy, Bill LA 6th
Maine
YEA   D   Pingree, Chellie ME 1st
YEA   D   Michaud, Michael ME 2nd
Maryland
YEA   R   Harris, Andy MD 1st
YEA   D   Ruppersberger, A. Dutch MD 2nd
YEA   D   Sarbanes, John MD 3rd
YEA   D   Edwards, Donna MD 4th
YEA   D   Hoyer, Steny MD 5th
YEA   D   Delaney, John MD 6th
NAY   D   Cummings, Elijah MD 7th
YEA   D   Van Hollen, Chris MD 8th
Massachusetts
YEA   D   Neal, Richard MA 1st
NAY   D   McGovern, Jim MA 2nd
YEA   D   Tsongas, Niki MA 3rd
YEA   D   Kennedy, Joseph MA 4th
NAY   D   Clark, Katherine MA 5th
NAY   D   Tierney, John MA 6th
NO VOTE   D   Capuano, Michael MA 7th
YEA   D   Lynch, Stephen MA 8th
YEA   D   Keating, William MA 9th
Michigan
YEA   R   Benishek, Dan MI 1st
YEA   R   Huizenga, Bill MI 2nd
NAY   R   Amash, Justin MI 3rd
YEA   R   Camp, Dave MI 4th
NAY   D   Kildee, Daniel MI 5th
YEA   R   Upton, Fred MI 6th
YEA   R   Walberg, Tim MI 7th
YEA   R   Rogers, Mike MI 8th
YEA   D   Levin, Sander MI 9th
YEA   R   Miller, Candice MI 10th
NAY   R   Bentivolio, Kerry MI 11th
YEA   D   Dingell, John MI 12th
NAY   D   Conyers, John MI 13th
YEA   D   Peters, Gary MI 14th
Minnesota
YEA   D   Walz, Timothy MN 1st
YEA   R   Kline, John MN 2nd
YEA   R   Paulsen, Erik MN 3rd
NAY   D   McCollum, Betty MN 4th
YEA   D   Ellison, Keith MN 5th
YEA   R   Bachmann, Michele MN 6th
YEA   D   Peterson, Collin MN 7th
YEA   D   Nolan, Richard MN 8th
Mississippi
YEA   R   Nunnelee, Alan MS 1st
YEA   D   Thompson, Bennie MS 2nd
YEA   R   Harper, Gregg MS 3rd
YEA   R   Palazzo, Steven MS 4th
Missouri
YEA   D   Clay, Lacy MO 1st
YEA   R   Wagner, Ann MO 2nd
YEA   R   Luetkemeyer, Blaine MO 3rd
YEA   R   Hartzler, Vicky MO 4th
YEA   D   Cleaver, Emanuel MO 5th
YEA   R   Graves, Sam MO 6th
YEA   R   Long, Billy MO 7th
YEA   R   Smith, Jason MO 8th
Montana
YEA   R   Daines, Steve MT
Nebraska
YEA   R   Fortenberry, Jeff NE 1st
YEA   R   Terry, Lee NE 2nd
YEA   R   Smith, Adrian NE 3rd
Nevada
YEA   D   Titus, Dina NV 1st
YEA   R   Amodei, Mark NV 2nd
YEA   R   Heck, Joseph NV 3rd
YEA   D   Horsford, Steven NV 4th
New Hampshire
YEA   D   Shea-Porter, Carol NH 1st
YEA   D   Kuster, Ann NH 2nd
New Jersey
YEA   D   Norcross, Donald NJ 1st
YEA   R   LoBiondo, Frank NJ 2nd
YEA   R   Runyan, Jon NJ 3rd
YEA   R   Smith, Chris NJ 4th
NAY   R   Garrett, Scott NJ 5th
NAY   D   Pallone, Frank NJ 6th
YEA   R   Lance, Leonard NJ 7th
YEA   D   Sires, Albio NJ 8th
YEA   D   Pascrell, Bill NJ 9th
YEA   D   Payne, Donald NJ 10th
YEA   R   Frelinghuysen, Rodney NJ 11th
NAY   D   Holt, Rush NJ 12th
New Mexico
YEA   D   Lujan Grisham, Michelle NM 1st
YEA   R   Pearce, Steve NM 2nd
YEA   D   Luján, Ben NM 3rd
New York
YEA   D   Bishop, Timothy NY 1st
YEA   R   King, Pete NY 2nd
YEA   D   Israel, Steve NY 3rd
YEA   D   McCarthy, Carolyn NY 4th
YEA   D   Meeks, Gregory NY 5th
YEA   D   Meng, Grace NY 6th
NAY   D   Velázquez, Nydia NY 7th
YEA   D   Jeffries, Hakeem NY 8th
NAY   D   Clarke, Yvette NY 9th
NAY   D   Nadler, Jerrold NY 10th
YEA   R   Grimm, Michael NY 11th
YEA   D   Maloney, Carolyn NY 12th
NAY   D   Rangel, Charles NY 13th
YEA   D   Crowley, Joseph NY 14th
NAY   D   Serrano, José NY 15th
YEA   D   Engel, Eliot NY 16th
YEA   D   Lowey, Nita NY 17th
YEA   D   Maloney, Sean NY 18th
NAY   R   Gibson, Christopher NY 19th
YEA   D   Tonko, Paul NY 20th
YEA   D   Owens, William NY 21st
YEA   R   Hanna, Richard NY 22nd
YEA   R   Reed, Tom NY 23rd
YEA   D   Maffei, Daniel NY 24th
YEA   D   Slaughter, Louise NY 25th
YEA   D   Higgins, Brian NY 26th
YEA   R   Collins, Chris NY 27th
North Carolina
YEA   D   Butterfield, G.K. NC 1st
YEA   R   Ellmers, Renee NC 2nd
NAY   R   Jones, Walter NC 3rd
YEA   D   Price, David NC 4th
YEA   R   Foxx, Virginia NC 5th
YEA   R   Coble, Howard NC 6th
YEA   D   McIntyre, Mike NC 7th
VOTE PARTY REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT
YEA   R   Hudson, Richard NC 8th
YEA   R   Pittenger, Robert NC 9th
YEA   R   McHenry, Patrick NC 10th
NAY   R   Meadows, Mark NC 11th
YEA   D   Adams, Alma NC 12th
YEA   R   Holding, George NC 13th
North Dakota
YEA   R   Cramer, Kevin ND
Ohio
YEA   R   Chabot, Steve OH 1st
YEA   R   Wenstrup, Brad OH 2nd
YEA   D   Beatty, Joyce OH 3rd
NAY   R   Jordan, Jim OH 4th
YEA   R   Latta, Robert OH 5th
YEA   R   Johnson, Bill OH 6th
YEA   R   Gibbs, Bob OH 7th
NAY   D   Kaptur, Marcy OH 9th
YEA   R   Turner, Michael OH 10th
YEA   D   Fudge, Marcia OH 11th
YEA   R   Tiberi, Pat OH 12th
YEA   D   Ryan, Tim OH 13th
YEA   R   Joyce, David OH 14th
YEA   R   Stivers, Steve OH 15th
YEA   R   Renacci, James OH 16th
Oklahoma
NAY   R   Bridenstine, Jim OK 1st
YEA   R   Mullin, Markwayne OK 2nd
YEA   R   Lucas, Frank OK 3rd
YEA   R   Cole, Tom OK 4th
YEA   R   Lankford, James OK 5th
Oregon
NAY   D   Bonamici, Suzanne OR 1st
YEA   R   Walden, Greg OR 2nd
NAY   D   Blumenauer, Earl OR 3rd
NAY   D   DeFazio, Peter OR 4th
NO VOTE   D   Schrader, Kurt OR 5th
Pennsylvania
YEA   D   Brady, Robert PA 1st
YEA   D   Fattah, Chaka PA 2nd
YEA   R   Kelly, Mike PA 3rd
NAY   R   Perry, Scott PA 4th
YEA   R   Thompson, Glenn PA 5th
YEA   R   Gerlach, Jim PA 6th
YEA   R   Meehan, Patrick PA 7th
YEA   R   Fitzpatrick, Michael PA 8th
YEA   R   Shuster, Bill PA 9th
YEA   R   Marino, Tom PA 10th
YEA   R   Barletta, Lou PA 11th
YEA   R   Rothfus, Keith PA 12th
YEA   D   Schwartz, Allyson PA 13th
NAY   D   Doyle, Mike PA 14th
YEA   R   Dent, Charles PA 15th
YEA   R   Pitts, Joseph PA 16th
YEA   D   Cartwright, Matthew PA 17th
YEA   R   Murphy, Tim PA 18th
Rhode Island
YEA   D   Cicilline, David RI 1st
YEA   D   Langevin, Jim RI 2nd
South Carolina
NAY   R   Sanford, Mark SC 1st
YEA   R   Wilson, Joe SC 2nd
NAY   R   Duncan, Jeff SC 3rd
NAY   R   Gowdy, Trey SC 4th
NAY   R   Mulvaney, Mick SC 5th
YEA   D   Clyburn, Jim SC 6th
YEA   R   Rice, Tom SC 7th
South Dakota
YEA   R   Noem, Kristi SD
Tennessee
NAY   R   Roe, Phil TN 1st
NAY   R   Duncan, John TN 2nd
YEA   R   Fleischmann, Chuck TN 3rd
NAY   R   DesJarlais, Scott TN 4th
YEA   D   Cooper, Jim TN 5th
YEA   R   Black, Diane TN 6th
YEA   R   Blackburn, Marsha TN 7th
YEA   R   Fincher, Stephen TN 8th
NAY   D   Cohen, Steve TN 9th
Texas
NAY   R   Gohmert, Louie TX 1st
NAY   R   Poe, Ted TX 2nd
YEA   R   Johnson, Sam TX 3rd
NO VOTE   R   Hall, Ralph TX 4th
YEA   R   Hensarling, Jeb TX 5th
YEA   R   Barton, Joe TX 6th
YEA   R   Culberson, John TX 7th
YEA   R   Brady, Kevin TX 8th
YEA   D   Green, Al TX 9th
YEA   R   McCaul, Michael TX 10th
YEA   R   Conaway, Michael TX 11th
YEA   R   Granger, Kay TX 12th
YEA   R   Thornberry, Mac TX 13th
NAY   R   Weber, Randy TX 14th
YEA   D   Hinojosa, Rubén TX 15th
NAY   D   O’Rourke, Beto TX 16th
YEA   R   Flores, Bill TX 17th
NAY   D   Jackson Lee, Sheila TX 18th
YEA   R   Neugebauer, Randy TX 19th
YEA   D   Castro, Joaquin TX 20th
YEA   R   Smith, Lamar TX 21st
YEA   R   Olson, Pete TX 22nd
YEA   D   Gallego, Pete TX 23rd
YEA   R   Marchant, Kenny TX 24th
YEA   R   Williams, Roger TX 25th
NAY   R   Burgess, Michael TX 26th
YEA   R   Farenthold, Blake TX 27th
YEA   D   Cuellar, Henry TX 28th
YEA   D   Green, Gene TX 29th
YEA   D   Johnson, Eddie TX 30th
YEA   R   Carter, John TX 31st
YEA   R   Sessions, Pete TX 32nd
YEA   D   Veasey, Marc TX 33rd
YEA   D   Vela, Filemon TX 34th
NAY   D   Doggett, Lloyd TX 35th
NAY   R   Stockman, Steve TX 36th
Utah
YEA   R   Bishop, Rob UT 1st
YEA   R   Stewart, Chris UT 2nd
YEA   R   Chaffetz, Jason UT 3rd
YEA   D   Matheson, Jim UT 4th
Vermont
NAY   D   Welch, Peter VT
Virginia
YEA   R   Wittman, Robert VA 1st
YEA   R   Rigell, Scott VA 2nd
YEA   D   Scott, Bobby VA 3rd
YEA   R   Forbes, Randy VA 4th
YEA   R   Hurt, Robert VA 5th
YEA   R   Goodlatte, Bob VA 6th
NAY   R   Brat, Dave VA 7th
YEA   D   Moran, Jim VA 8th
NAY   R   Griffith, Morgan VA 9th
YEA   R   Wolf, Frank VA 10th
YEA   D   Connolly, Gerald VA 11th
Washington
NAY   D   DelBene, Suzan WA 1st
YEA   D   Larsen, Rick WA 2nd
YEA   R   Herrera Beutler, Jaime WA 3rd
YEA   R   Hastings, Doc WA 4th
YEA   R   McMorris Rodgers, Cathy WA 5th
YEA   D   Kilmer, Derek WA 6th
NAY   D   McDermott, Jim WA 7th
YEA   R   Reichert, David WA 8th
NO VOTE   D   Smith, Adam WA 9th
NAY   D   Heck, Denny WA 10th
West Virginia
YEA   R   McKinley, David WV 1st
YEA   R   Capito, Shelley WV 2nd
YEA   D   Rahall, Nick WV 3rd
Wisconsin
YEA   R   Ryan, Paul WI 1st
NAY   D   Pocan, Mark WI 2nd
YEA   D   Kind, Ron WI 3rd
NAY   D   Moore, Gwen WI 4th
NAY   R   Sensenbrenner, James WI 5th
YEA   R   Petri, Tom WI 6th
YEA   R   Duffy, Sean WI 7th
NAY   R   Ribble, Reid WI 8th
Wyoming
NAY   R   Lummis, Cynthia

 

 

   This is a despicable vote and all the Republicans that voted in favor of this bill should hang their heads in shame . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Paul Revere’s 1795 Time Capsule Unearthed

 

 

 

 

 

” Paul Revere hasn’t stirred up this much anticipation in Boston since his midnight ride from Charlestown to Lexington.

  More than two centuries later, a recently unearthed time capsule he buried with fellow revolutionary Samuel Adams — the man whom Revere was riding to see that night to warn that the British were coming — has got his former city, state and most of the Internet abuzz.

  The artifact was unearthed Thursday thanks to a water leak near its resting place inside a cornerstone at the Massachusetts State House in Boston.

  When workers investigating the leak stumbled upon it, Secretary of State William Galvin, who heads the state historical commission, called Pamela Hatchfield, the head of object conservation at Boston’s Museum of Fine Arts.

” There was a big discussion about whether or not it should be removed,” Hatchfield told Brooke Baldwin on “CNN Newsroom” on Friday. “(But) because there was water infiltration in that area of the building, it was decided that we’d try to see if we could find it, investigate and see whether the box was still intact.”

  Hatchfield spent seven hours Thursday delicately and painstakingly chipping away at the stone to extricate it.

” The contents are of concern, but the plaster that held the box in place is in good condition,” Galvin said.

  According to Galvin, the box-shaped capsule was placed by the Revolutionary-era duo in 1795, a year when Adams was governor and when construction began on the State House and its iconic dome, which would eventually be overlaid with copper by Revere.

  Both he and Hatchfield said that based on historical records, the box is believed to contain coins, a plate and a Revere-inscribed plaque — but no one knows for sure. “

CNN

Here are some other links to the story :

 

Time capsule buried by Paul Revere, Samuel Adams sees light of day

Paul Revere’s Time Capsule From 1795 Unearthed In Boston

Time Capsule from Paul Revere and Samuel Adams …

1795 time capsule found in Boston capitol

Paul Revere and Samuel Adams Time Capsule Found :People.com

Paul Revere’s and Sam Adams’s centuries-old time …

Revere-Era Time Capsule Uncovered at The State House …

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fox News Poll: 70 Percent Want Congress To Keep Probing IRS

 

 

 

 

” Call it a “kumbaya” question, as majorities of Democrats (60 percent), independents (75 percent) and Republicans (78 percent) support lawmakers continuing to dig. 

  The new poll also asked why the White House is refusing to release thousands of pages of documents related to the IRS targeting.  By nearly three-to-one people think it’s because the administration wants to keep its role in the scandal secret (63 percent) rather than to keep taxpayer information confidential (22 percent). 

  Even Democrats are more likely to say the Obama White House is withholding documents to hide its involvement (45 percent) rather than to protect taxpayers (35 percent).  Another 20 percent is unsure. 

  Many of the tax-exempt groups the IRS targeted for special scrutiny have “tea party” in their name.  For those who consider themselves part of that movement, 87 percent want the congressional investigation to continue, and another 91 percent feel the Obama administration is covering up its role by withholding documents.”

 

Fox News has more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How Current Events Might Play Into America’s Shift In Favor Of Gun Rights

 

Two Years After Newtown, A Shift in Favor of Gun Rights

 

 

” For the first time, a Pew survey found more support for gun ownership than gun control among Americans. Current events like the Michael Brown case may be accelerating the trend, a gun control advocate says.

  A dramatic swing in public opinion when it comes to guns and gun control may be driven by current events – particularly high-profile police killings in Staten Island, N.Y., and Ferguson, Mo., a gun control advocate says.

  In 2012, 48 percent of Americans in a Pew survey said guns do more to protect people than place them at risk. According to a survey released Wednesday, that number has increased to 57 percent.”

 

 

More Conservative Republicans, African Americans Say Gun Ownership Protects People From Crime

 

 

” The shift was even more substantial among African-Americans, going from 29 percent in early 2013 to 54 percent now (though with a margin of error of almost 10 percent due to a small sample size). 

  In addition, Pew said that for the first time, it found more support for gun ownership than gun control in more than two decades of conducting the surveys.”

 

 

Pew Gun Control

 

 

Read it all at the Christian Science Monitor  . Of particular note is this telling paragraph: 

 

 

The shift in views makes for grim reading for gun control advocates, who, according to Pew, have lost support among every demographic except Hispanics and liberal Democrats. City-dwellers, women, and blacks moved particularly hard toward a view put forth by pro-gun rights researcher John Lott: that an armed society is a polite society.”

 

 

The poll itself , which The Monitor did not see fit to provide a link to , is even more informative than the article and  can be read here . Needless to say , it is not good news for the Statist gun-grabbers among the Democratic party .

 

HT/Instapundit

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Food For Thought

 

 

 

 

 

 

    The government controls our water supplies  , food supplies , medical supplies , the media , our education system , the police and military and the most horrifying weapons on earth … this in the “Land Of Liberty” … See anything wrong ?

   The Founders would be appalled …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lerner Met With DOJ Month Before 2010 Elections

 

 

 

 

” Judicial Watch, a constitutionally conservative, non-profit educational foundation, has new evidence against Lois Lerner in the IRS Tea Party targeting case.   
    
  Documents they’ve just obtained from the Department of Justice show that the former IRS official met with Department of Justice’s Election Crimes Division one month before the 2010 elections.
      
  The Justice Department has withheld more than 800 pages of documents in the Lerner investigation, citing “taxpayer privacy” and “deliberative privilege.”
   
These new documents dramatically show how the Justice Department is up to its neck in the IRS scandal and can’t be trusted to investigate crimes associated with the IRS abuses that targeted Obama’s critics. And it is of particular concern that the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section, which would ordinarily investigate the IRS abuses, is now implicated in the IRS crimes,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.

  Chris Farrell, director of research and investigations for Judicial Watch, talked more about the significance of these newly discovered DOJ meetings, on CBN News Today, Dec. 9. “

Thanks to CBN News

Thousands Of Cellphone Users Receive Government “Emergency Alert”

 

 

 

” Thousands of cellphone users in Kentucky were surprised to receive an “emergency alert” from the federal government warning them to “prepare for action,” a message local authorities later blamed on “human error” during testing.

  The alert, which was was sent out to people in the Corbin and London areas of Southern Kentucky earlier today, came from the Emergency Operations Center in Frankfort via the Federal Communication Commission’s Wireless Emergency Alert system.

  The messages are designed to warn local residents of immediate safety threats in their area, but some have criticized the “government alerts” as being invasive.

  Frankfort Emergency Operations spokesman Buddy Rogers said that the alert was mistakenly sent out “during testing” and was the result of “a computer error, followed by a human error.”

  Back in 2011, the FCC began to roll out emergency government alerts to cellphone users in major cities before the program was made mandatory on all new smartphones. Although a user can opt out of some of the alerts, presidential messages direct from the White House cannot be turned off.

  This is not the first time that erroneous messages sent out via the government’s emergency alert system have caused consternation. “

InfoWars

Law Puts Us All In Same Danger As Eric Garner

 

 

 

 

 

 

   Senator Rand Paul should be commended for sparking the conversation that has erupted over his statement , famously ridiculed by Jon Stewart , that cigarette taxes bear some responsibility for the NYPD killing of Eric Garner over a “crime” so trivial as selling loosies . That the discussion has quickly morphed from a concern about one revenue generating “law” that provided the impetus for Mr Garner’s death to the 300,000 some odd laws and regulations that have resulted in the “overcriminalization” of 70% of the populace .

This is a discussion that , while occupying billions of pixels in the libertarian world , has until now been one that has been arrogantly swept under the rug by the Statist supporters in the main stream media . This debate is long overdue and as the following articles make plain , offer much common ground between the Left and the Right and that common ground leads one inevitably to the libertarian view .

   Thank you Senator Paul and also to you Mr Stewart , however unintentional your help may have been .  

 

 

 

” On the opening day of law school, I always counsel my first-year students never to support a law they are not willing to kill to enforce. Usually they greet this advice with something between skepticism and puzzlement, until I remind them that the police go armed to enforce the will of the state, and if you resist, they might kill you.

  I wish this caution were only theoretical. It isn’t. Whatever your view on the refusal of a New York City grand jury to indict the police officer whose chokehold apparently led to the death of Eric Garner, it’s useful to remember the crime that Garner is alleged to have committed: He was selling individual cigarettes, or loosies, in violation of New York law.

  The obvious racial dynamics of the case — the police officer, Daniel Pantaleo, is white; Garner was black — have sparked understandable outrage. But, at least among libertarians, so has the law that was being enforced. Wrote Nick Gillespie in the Daily Beast, “Clearly something has gone horribly wrong when a man lies dead after being confronted for selling cigarettes to willing buyers.” Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, appearing on MSNBC, also blamed the statute: “Some politician put a tax of $5.85 on a pack of cigarettes, so they’ve driven cigarettes underground by making them so expensive.”

  The problem is actually broader. It’s not just cigarette tax laws that can lead to the death of those the police seek to arrest. It’s every law. Libertarians argue that we have far too many laws, and the Garner case offers evidence that they’re right. I often tell my students that there will never be a perfect technology of law enforcement, and therefore it is unavoidable that there will be situations where police err on the side of too much violence rather than too little. Better training won’t lead to perfection. But fewer laws would mean fewer opportunities for official violence to get out of hand.

  The legal scholar Douglas Husak, in his excellent 2009 book “ Overcriminalization: The Limits of the Criminal Law,” points out that federal law alone includes more than 3,000 crimes, fewer than half of which found in the Federal Criminal Code. The rest are scattered through other statutes. A citizen who wants to abide by the law has no quick and easy way to find out what the law actually is — a violation of the traditional principle that the state cannot punish without fair notice.

  In addition to these statutes, he writes, an astonishing 300,000 or more federal regulations may be enforceable through criminal punishment in the discretion of an administrative agency. Nobody knows the number for sure.

  Husak cites estimates that more than 70 percent of American adults have committed a crime that could lead to imprisonment. He quotes the legal scholar William Stuntz to the effect that we are moving toward “a world in which the law on the books makes everyone a felon.” Does this seem too dramatic? Husak points to studies suggesting that more than half of young people download music illegally from the Internet. That’s been a federal crime for almost 20 years. These kids, in theory, could all go to prison.”

 

 

 

    This Bloomberg View article by professor Stephen Carter of Yale must be read by all who have come to rue the evolution of the most liberty-minded system of government ever devised by the minds of man into the overwhelming Leviathan State that we , as Americans , face today .

   This piece is notable not only for the wisdom imparted by it’s own content , but for the discussion it has sparked in the likes of the Washington Post , Reason , EconomicLiberty and The Daily Beast , all three of which should also be read in their entirety .

As the illustrious Ilya Somin of the Volokh Conspiracy writes in the Post:

 

 

 

” Carter correctly points out that the massive growth of criminal and regulatory law means that almost anyone can potentially end up in the same situation as Eric Garner.”

 

 

 

    Professor Somin is joined in his agreement with professor Carter regarding the corrosive affect of “overcriminalization” and the danger that it imposes on the citizenry as a whole at Reason , where Robby Soave writes:

 

 

 

” You know what’s also a cause? Overcriminalization. And that one is on you, supporters of the regulatory super state. When a million things are highly regulated or outright illegal—from cigarettes to sodas of a certain size, unlicensed lemonade stands, raw milk, alcohol (for teens), marijuana, food trucks, taxicab alternatives, and even fishing supplies (in schools)—the unrestrained, often racist police force has a million reasons to pick on people. Punitive cigarette taxes, which disproportionately fall on the backs of the poorest of the poor, contribute to police brutality in the exact same way that the war on drugs does. Liberals readily admit the latter; why is the former any different? “

 

 

 

   And finally we come to the piece written by David Henderson of The Library Of Economics & Liberty who rightfully takes issue with Jon Stewart’s ridicule (see above video) of Rand Paul’s assertion that the cigarette tax played a role in Mr Garner’s death:

 

 

 

” In an otherwise excellent segment on the tragic Eric Garner case, in which some New York cops choked to death a man selling loose cigarettes, Jon Stewart, generally a smart man, either misunderstands or plays to his audience’s ignorance. Either way, it’s worthwhile correcting him because there is a very large point to be made about this case, a point beyond the already large point about police gone wild.

  The specific issue is a claim made by Senator Rand Paul. Here’s what the clip has Senator Paul saying:

  I think there’s something bigger than just the individual circumstances. . . . Some politicians put a tax of $5.85 on a pack of cigarettes. So they’ve driven cigarettes underground by making them so expensive. But then some politician also had to direct the police to say “Hey, we want you arresting people for selling a loose cigarette.”

  Stewart’s response? “What the f**k are you talking about?”

  Paul already said what he was talking about. Jon Stewart simply didn’t want to acknowledge the point. Stewart says correctly that the government can enforce laws without going to such extremes. Sure. It can. But one thing we have to be aware of whenever we advocate a law is that government agents who enforce it will sometimes go to extremes.”

 

 

 

 

As our title says … When everything is against the law , everyone is an outlaw.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cop Car Crashes

 

National Police Misconduct Reporting Project

 

 

 

From WJLA:

  They’re sworn to serve and protect. But police officers are not immune to causing harm, especially behind the wheel. An ABC7 I-Team investigation discovered police officers in the D.C. area have been found at fault in hundreds of accidents, causing deaths, injuries and thousands of dollars in damages….

  Some of the accidents also resulted in injuries, not just to officers, but also members of the public. In Montgomery County, which supplied the most detailed and comprehensive records, eight civilians have been injured since 2010 in police-involved accidents in which the officer was classified as responsible. Those incidents include a 2013 accident in which a person was hurt after being struck by an officer who didn’t see them walking through a parking garage.

  The video that details the last seconds of Ashley McIntosh’s life has logged more than 240,000 views on YouTube. But for the Fairfax County woman’s mother, Cindy Colasanto, seeing it just once was enough.

“I can’t even tell you how I felt, how devastating it was to see,” Colasanto said.

  Colasanto fought in Richmond to change laws requiring police lights and sirens after being forced to watch her daughter’s life end on a dash camera. McIntosh was killed by a police cruiser that slammed into her car. The officer had run a red light at a high rate of speed without using a siren.

Good reporting.”

 

Creative Commons License
This work by Cato Institute is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is The FBI Underreporting Killings By Police?

 

 

 

Published on Dec 6, 2014

” As the nation focused on Staten Island, Ferguson, and Cleveland in the last few weeks and the relationship between citizens and law enforcement, a recent Wall Street Journal investigation revealed that federal accounting for killings by police may be grossly miscalculated. Wall Street Journal reporter Rob Barry joins Hari Sreenivasan for more on that investigation. “

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NYT On Police Misconduct: Millions Of Americans Subjected To Intimidation

 

National Police Misconduct Reporting Project

 

 

New York Times editorial:

  The Justice Department report describes the Cleveland Police Department as something far closer to an occupying military force than a legitimate law enforcement agency. The officers, for example, seem to take a casual view of the use of deadly force, shooting at people who pose no threat of harm to the police or others. In one case in 2013, for example, they actually fired at a victim who had been held captive in a house — as he escaped, clad only in boxer shorts.

  The report cataloged numerous incidents of wanton violence, with officers beating, pepper-spraying and Tasering people who were unarmed or had already been restrained. Officers escalated encounters with citizens instead of defusing them, making force all but inevitable.

  The record in Cleveland is extreme. But aspects of illegal police conduct can be found in cities all over the country, subjecting millions to intimidation and fear that they could be killed for innocent actions.

Subjecting millions to intimidation.  Stop what you’re doing and think about that.”

 

***  Creative Commons License
This work by Cato Institute is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Texas Battle Over Confederate Flag License Plate Headed To Supreme Court

 

 

 

 

 

” A long-standing legal battle between the state and a veterans group vying for a Confederate flag license plate will get its day in the nation’s highest court.

  The U.S. Supreme Court announced Friday that it will hear oral arguments in a case involving Texas’ ability to choose the messages it allows on government-issued license plates.

  John McConnell, an attorney for the Sons of Confederate Veterans, said he fully expects the Supreme Court to uphold an appeals court ruling in favor of his group in what he calls a “simple case.”

“ When the state gets in the business of selling space … for an organization or nonprofit or what have you, they cannot discriminate,” he said. “They’re a government entity, not a private entity. They are constrained by the First Amendment.” “

 

Dallas News

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

American Inertia

 

 

” I’ve borrowed Kathy Shaidle’s headline because I think that sums up John Derbyshire’s column better than the one he and his editors chose: “The Impotent Eagle.” It’s not that we are incapable of doing anything, it’s that we can’t rouse ourselves to do anything.

  John was my colleague at National Review for many years, where I regarded him as a gloomier version of me, and he regarded me as a hopeless Pollyanna. Nevertheless, much of what he writes today will be familiar to readers of both After America and The [Un]documented Mark Steyn, personally autographed copies of which make kind and thoughtful Christmas presents and really aren’t as suicidally depressing as you might think. Derb’s mournful refrain was taken from a throwaway line a correspondent made re immigration:

Replied my friend:

‘I think that withdrawing birthright citizenship from the children of illegals would be a good move, and highly appropriate. I don’t see why we couldn’t do it going forward. But of course we won’t, because we can’t do anything.’

It was that closing phrase that stuck in my mind. We can’t do anything. It’s so damn true.

   John focuses on the big headlines: the Afghan war… immigration… law enforcement in Ferguson… America can’t win wars, enforce its borders, prevent looting. He could have added a bazillion others: build a flood barrier that prevents one measly not-so-Superstorm Sandy ruining people’s lives for years after… replace the dingy decrepit dump of LaGuardia with an airport that isn’t a total embarrassment to one of the world’s great cities… upgrade the most primitive bank cards in the developed world… stiffen Republican spines to come up with plans for debt reduction that kick in before the middle of the century…

  But I’m increasingly struck by how “we can’t do anything” applies to all the small stuff, too. If you’ve ever spent hours on the phone going round in circles with your health insurer over some nothing little thing, you’ll be aware that “we can’t do anything” is not a monopoly of the big geopolitical strategists. The whole joint seems to be seizing up, and it bothers me. Americans now have less health-care freedom and less banking freedom than many Continental Europeans. But let’s not get all comparative about this. In absolute terms – and certainly in comparison with the America that was – too much of daily life has become over-complicated and over-regulated and over-sclerotic, and too many people are content to string along with it. “

 

Mr Steyn’s piece is , of course , the mandatory read of the day 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Pentagon Finally Details Its Weapons-For-Cops Giveaway

 

 

DoD Weapons Giveaway

 

 

Click image and scroll down for an interactive , state by state and 
county by county accounting of the DoD weapons giveaway

 

 

 

” You may have heard that the image-conscious Los Angeles Unified School District chose to return the grenade launchers it received from the Defense Department’s surplus equipment program. You probably have not heard about some of the more obscure beneficiaries of the Pentagon giveaway:

  • Police in Johnston, R.I., with a population less than 29,000, acquired two bomb disposal robots, 10 tactical trucks, 35 assault rifles, more than 100 infrared gun sights and two pairs of footwear designed to protect against explosive mines. The Johnson police department has 67 sworn officers.
  • The parks division of Delaware’s Department of Natural Resources was given 20 M-16 rifles, while the fish and wildlife enforcement division obtained another 20 M-16s, plus eight M-14 rifles and ten .45-caliber automatic pistols.
  • Campus police at the University of Louisiana, Monroe, received 12 M-16s to help protect the 8,811 students there (or perhaps to keep them in line).
  • The warden service of Maine’s Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife received a small aircraft, 96 night vision goggles, 67 gun sights and seven M-14 rifles.

  For more than 20 years, the Pentagon program that distributes surplus weapons, aircraft and vehicles to police departments nationwide received little attention or scrutiny. Defense Department officials closely guarded the details of which agencies across the country received which items.

  Then, events in Ferguson propelled the 1033 program, as the surplus distribution is called, into the public eye.”

 

Total Value of Tactical Items Distributed by Department of Defense 1033 Program

 

 

    Readers should take note of when this program really took off … 2010 . It comes as no surprise that this disastrous policy truly came into it’s own during the current administration .

 

 

 

” Flooded with calls for greater transparency, in late November, the Pentagon quietly released data that details all tactical equipment distributed through the program, and for the first time identified the agencies that received items. The data is a national gift list of high-caliber weapons, armored vehicles, aircraft and similar military equipment, all delivered for the price of shipping and often with little civilian oversight.

  The program has doled out $5 billion in equipment since 1990. Most of it was general office and maintenance equipment – shovels, copiers, computers – but the Pentagon largesse included tactical military equipment worth more than $1.4 billion, disseminated in 203,000 transfers to about 7,500 agencies. Even after Ferguson, the program continues to chug along, transferring $28 million in tactical equipment in the past three months.”

 

 

     Read the entire accounting and be sure to click the interactive link to see exactly what type of military firepower that your local authorities have received from the Feds .

   See also , The Marshall Project’s companion piece, A Department Of Defense 2014 Gift Guide : 

 

 

” Shopping for holiday gifts for your local police department, park ranger or campus security team? How about an “interim fast attack vehicle”? Or a nice grenade launcher? These are just a few of the $5 billion dollars worth of surplus items that the Defense Department has distributed to law enforcement agencies and others in its Excess Property Program, also called the 1033 program. Below is a list of gifts culled from records that the department quietly made public last month. The values are based on what the Pentagon paid when it acquired the equipment. The recipients paid only shipping.”

 

 

 

MRAP Giveaway

 

 

God save us from our own government …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Judge Andrew Napolitano To Jon Stewart: Fear Makes People ‘Surrender Their Liberties For Safety’

 

 

 

Published on Dec 2, 2014

” By all rights, Jon Stewart’s Monday interview with Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano should have been awkward, given the smackdown of Fox News that Stewart had delivered earlier in last night’s Daily Show. But the topic was civil liberties, something Napolitano started out noting that he and Stewart basically agree on. The audience, too, judging from their reaction. “We need to know that our rights come from our humanity, not the government,” Napolitano said, earning a hearty round of applause from the audience. Stewart probed: “Is the problem really the government, or does it lie in us, and our desire for safety, and for law.”

HT/Against Crony Capitalism

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 6,947 other followers