Last update: 1:06 a.m. EDT Oct. 15, 2008
CHICAGO, Oct 15, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- The following is the text of an open letter to the nation's hunters and sportsmen issued today by Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson:
Fellow Sportsman,
Hello, my name is Rich Pearson and I have been active in the firearm rights movement for over 40 years. For the past 15 years, I have served in the Illinois state capitol as the chief lobbyist for the Illinois State Rifle Association.
I lobbied Barack Obama extensively while he was an Illinois State Senator. As a result of that experience, I know Obama's attitudes toward guns and gun owners better than anyone. The truth be told, in all my years in the Capitol I have never met a legislator who harbors more contempt for the law-abiding firearm owner than does Barack Obama.
Although Obama claims to be an advocate for the 2nd Amendment, his voting record in the Illinois Senate paints a very different picture. While a state senator, Obama voted for a bill that would ban nearly every hunting rifle, shotgun and target rifle owned by Illinois citizens. That same bill would authorize the state police to raid homes of gun owners to forcibly confiscate banned guns. Obama supported a bill that would shut down law-abiding firearm manufacturers including Springfield Armory, Armalite, Rock River Arms and Les Baer. Obama also voted for a bill that would prohibit law-abiding citizens from purchasing more than one gun per month.
Without a doubt, Barack Obama has proven himself to be an enemy of the law abiding firearm owner. At the same time, Obama has proven himself to be a friend to the hardened criminal. While a state senator, Obama voted 4 times against legislation that would allow a homeowner to use a firearm in defense of home and family.
Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a "friend" of the law-abiding gun owner?
And speaking of friends, you can always tell a person by the company they keep. Obama counts among his friends the Rev. Michael Pfleger - a renegade Chicago priest who has openly called for the murder of gun shop owners and pro-gun legislators. Then there is his buddy Richard Daley, the mayor of Chicago who has declared that if it were up to him, nobody would be allowed to own a gun. And let's not forget Obama's pal George Soros - the guy who has pumped millions of dollars into the UN's international effort to disarm law-abiding citizens.
Obama has shown that he is more than willing to use other people's money to fund his campaign to take your guns away from you. While a board member of the leftist Joyce Foundation, Barack Obama wrote checks for tens of millions of dollars to extremist gun control organizations such as the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence and the Violence Policy Center.
Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a "friend" of the law-abiding gun owner?
By now, I'm sure that many of you have received mailings from an organization called "American Hunters and Shooters Association(AHSA)" talking about what a swell fellow Obama is and how he honors the 2nd Amendment and how you will never have to worry about Obama coming to take your guns. Let me make it perfectly clear - everything the AHSA says about Obama is pure hogwash. The AHSA is headed by a group of left-wing elitists who subscribe to the British view of hunting and shooting. That is, a state of affairs where hunting and shooting are reserved for the wealthy upper-crust who can afford guided hunts on exclusive private reserves. The AHSA is not your friend, never will be.
In closing, I'd like to remind you that I'm a guy who has actually gone nose to nose with Obama on gun rights issues. The Obama I know cannot even begin to identify with this nation's outdoor traditions. The Obama I know sees you, the law abiding gun owner, as nothing but a low-class lummox who is easily swayed by the flash of a smile and a ration of rosy rhetoric. The Obama I know is a stony-faced liar who has honed his skill at getting what he wants - so long as people are willing to give it to him.
That's the Barack Obama I know.
The ISRA is the state's leading advocate of safe, lawful and responsible firearms ownership. Founded in 1903, the ISRA has represented the interests of millions of law-abiding Illinois firearm owners.
WEB SITE: http://www.isra.org
SOURCE Illinois State Rifle Association
http://www.isra.org
Monday, October 27, 2008
GUNS and NObama
Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson Issues Open Letter to Nation's Sportsmen Regarding Obama's History in the Illinois Senate
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
TRUST by John Ringo
"Now we get to the subject of ‘trust.’ Trust, as a society, is something
that most people understand poorly. Trust is vital for a society to
function. It’s not hard to explain, though. Trust means that if you loan
your lawn-mower to a neighbor, you’ve got a pretty good chance of
getting it back. There’s an implied contract. I let you use the
lawnmower. You return it in pretty much the same condition you got it.
You don’t loan it to your cousin who then uses it to cut his
client’s yards. You don’t break it and give it back and then insist you
didn’t break it. You don’t sell it. You give it back in pretty much the
same condition you got it.
There are several different types of societal trust but they really
boil down into two major groups. Familial and general. Familial is the
society where if you loan your lawn mower to your cousin, he’ll give it
back. But if you loan it to your neighbor, who is not your cousin, you
don’t know if he’ll give it back or not. So you don’t loan it to your
neighbor. You don’t do anything for anyone if you can possibly help it.
You don’t trust the cop unless he’s a cousin. You don’t trust the banker
unless he’s a cousin.
If you’ve ever been overseas (or, hell, in certain areas in the US)
and had someone say ‘I have a cousin who…’ then you’re in a familial
trust society.
Then there are general trust societies. The US is, by and large,
(and we’ll get to Chicago, LA and Detroit in a second) a general trust
society. In most segments of American society you could loan your lawn
mower to your neighbor with a fair expectation of getting it back. If
you didn’t, you could take him to small claims court and the judge
wasn’t going to care about you or your neighbor, mostly, just about the
merits of the case.
Trust is vital in a society. If societal trust is too low, people
trust no-one. Except, maybe, their cousins.
This brings us to ‘multiculturalism.’
A study was done by a very liberal British sociologist back in the
mid-oughts. The study set out to prove that multicultural societies had
higher levels of societal trust than monoculture societies. It seems a
no-brainer that the reverse was the case, but at the time
multi-culturalism along with a bunch of other urban myths were the way
of the world.
However, it was a no-brainer. The study proved the exact opposite.
That is, the more diverse an area was in cultures, the less societal
trust there was.
Look, humans don’t trust ‘the other.’ The name every single
primitive tribe gives for ‘other’ translates as ‘enemy.’ Apache was the
Hopi name for the Apache tribes and that’s the exact translation:
Enemy.
But it’s more complex than that. Say you’re from a general trust
culture. A neighbor moves in next door who is from a familial trust
culture. You offer the use of your lawn-mower. It never comes back. You
point that out and eventually learn that it’s been used to cut about a
hundred lawns. If you get it back, it’s trashed.
The neighbor considers you a moron for loaning it to him in the
first place. And he doesn’t care if you think he’s a dick. He doesn’t
trust you anyway. You’re not family.
Actual real-world example I picked up on a forum. Group in one of
the most pre-Plague diverse neighborhoods in the US wanted to build a
play-area for their kids in the local park. They’d established a
‘multi-cultural neighborhood committee’ of ‘the entire rainbow.’ I got
this from the liberal ‘general trust’ side of the story. I’d have loved
to have gotten it from the rest of the cultures. If they could stop
laughing.
Anyway, this group of ‘let’s all sing kumbaya’ liberals got their
little brown brothers together and proposed they all build a play-ground
for their kids. There was a kinda run down park in the neighborhood.
Let’s build swings so our children can all play together. Kumbaya.
There were, indeed, little brown brothers and yellow and black. But…
Well, it’s kinda difficult to tell the difference between a Sikh and
a Moslem unless you know one’s turban looks cool and the other’s looks
like shit. (For general info, I can not only tell the difference between
a Moslem and a Sikh, I can 90% of the time tell the difference between
two tribes of Moslems. Yes, I may be a culturist SOB, but I’m a very
highly trained one. I can tell the difference between a Moslem and a
Sikh and talk about the history of conflict between the two groups.) And
Sikhs and Moslems can barely bring themselves to spit on each other much
less work side by side singing Kumbaya. The liberals had, apparently,
never noticed that the fucked-up-turban guys never went into the
cool-turban guy’s corner store.
The Hindus were willing to contribute some suggestions and a little
money, but the other Hindus would have to do the work. What other
Hindus? Oh, those people. And they would have to hand the money to the
Kumbaya guys both because handing it to the other Hindus would be
defiling and because, of course, it would just disappear.
(At some point I need to talk about India. It is not the India today
that it was in 2019.)
When they actually got to work, finally, there were some little
black brothers helping. Then a different group of little black brothers
turned out and sat on the sidelines shouting suggestions until the first
group left. Then the ‘help’ left as well. Christian animists might soil
their hands for a community project but not if they’re getting shit from
Islamics. Sure, they’re just two different tribes that lived right next
to each other in Africa. Speaking of Kumbaya. But they’ve also been
slaughtering each other since before Stanley ever found Livingston
smoking his bong.
Trust. If you lived in a mostly white-bread suburb before the Time
of Suckage you just can’t get it. But when trust breaks down enough in a
society, nobody trusts anyone. Blacks don’t trust black cops. Whites
don’t trust white cops. Nobody trusts their mayor, nobody trusts their
boss. Nobody trusts nobody.
What the study found was that the more multi-cultural a society, the
lower the societal trust. (The professor, by the way, refused to accept
his own results. He sat on them for five years and even then spouted
bullshit about ‘education’ as the answer even though that was covered in
the study. The only way to get generalized trust was to blend the
societies and erase the differences. Back in the 1800s an Italian
wouldn’t be bothered to spit on an Irishman unless he’d just stuck a
knife in his back. These days the only way you can tell the difference
in the US is one has better food and the other better beer.)
So why does this matter to Ching Mao? Doesn’t, really, he was dead
and never really cared. But it mattered, a lot, to the response in
Chicago.
You see, by that time Chicago was a very multi-cultural area. Gone
were the days of it being pure white-bread and kielbasa. Only recent
immigrants, who didn’t recognize the local white guys as being anything
like Polish despite their names, spoke the Old Language. Where there had
once been mostly assimilated German and Polish and Russian Jew and a
smattering of Black communities there were now Serbian and Pakistani and
‘Persian’ and Assyrian not to be confused with Syrian and Iraqi and
Fusian who were not Manchu who were not Korean or anything like who were
definitely not Cambodian, damn it…
Each trusted the family group around them. To an extent they trusted
others who were ‘them.’ The few white-bread multi-cultural
true-believers trusted all their little rainbow brothers, of course,
until you got a few drinks in them and they started telling about their
experiences. “And I never did get my lawnmower back!”"
This is an excerpt from the JOHN RINGO book "THE LAST CENTURION"...... Ringo is always a "good read" pick up a couple or 12 of his books.
that most people understand poorly. Trust is vital for a society to
function. It’s not hard to explain, though. Trust means that if you loan
your lawn-mower to a neighbor, you’ve got a pretty good chance of
getting it back. There’s an implied contract. I let you use the
lawnmower. You return it in pretty much the same condition you got it.
You don’t loan it to your cousin who then uses it to cut his
client’s yards. You don’t break it and give it back and then insist you
didn’t break it. You don’t sell it. You give it back in pretty much the
same condition you got it.
There are several different types of societal trust but they really
boil down into two major groups. Familial and general. Familial is the
society where if you loan your lawn mower to your cousin, he’ll give it
back. But if you loan it to your neighbor, who is not your cousin, you
don’t know if he’ll give it back or not. So you don’t loan it to your
neighbor. You don’t do anything for anyone if you can possibly help it.
You don’t trust the cop unless he’s a cousin. You don’t trust the banker
unless he’s a cousin.
If you’ve ever been overseas (or, hell, in certain areas in the US)
and had someone say ‘I have a cousin who…’ then you’re in a familial
trust society.
Then there are general trust societies. The US is, by and large,
(and we’ll get to Chicago, LA and Detroit in a second) a general trust
society. In most segments of American society you could loan your lawn
mower to your neighbor with a fair expectation of getting it back. If
you didn’t, you could take him to small claims court and the judge
wasn’t going to care about you or your neighbor, mostly, just about the
merits of the case.
Trust is vital in a society. If societal trust is too low, people
trust no-one. Except, maybe, their cousins.
This brings us to ‘multiculturalism.’
A study was done by a very liberal British sociologist back in the
mid-oughts. The study set out to prove that multicultural societies had
higher levels of societal trust than monoculture societies. It seems a
no-brainer that the reverse was the case, but at the time
multi-culturalism along with a bunch of other urban myths were the way
of the world.
However, it was a no-brainer. The study proved the exact opposite.
That is, the more diverse an area was in cultures, the less societal
trust there was.
Look, humans don’t trust ‘the other.’ The name every single
primitive tribe gives for ‘other’ translates as ‘enemy.’ Apache was the
Hopi name for the Apache tribes and that’s the exact translation:
Enemy.
But it’s more complex than that. Say you’re from a general trust
culture. A neighbor moves in next door who is from a familial trust
culture. You offer the use of your lawn-mower. It never comes back. You
point that out and eventually learn that it’s been used to cut about a
hundred lawns. If you get it back, it’s trashed.
The neighbor considers you a moron for loaning it to him in the
first place. And he doesn’t care if you think he’s a dick. He doesn’t
trust you anyway. You’re not family.
Actual real-world example I picked up on a forum. Group in one of
the most pre-Plague diverse neighborhoods in the US wanted to build a
play-area for their kids in the local park. They’d established a
‘multi-cultural neighborhood committee’ of ‘the entire rainbow.’ I got
this from the liberal ‘general trust’ side of the story. I’d have loved
to have gotten it from the rest of the cultures. If they could stop
laughing.
Anyway, this group of ‘let’s all sing kumbaya’ liberals got their
little brown brothers together and proposed they all build a play-ground
for their kids. There was a kinda run down park in the neighborhood.
Let’s build swings so our children can all play together. Kumbaya.
There were, indeed, little brown brothers and yellow and black. But…
Well, it’s kinda difficult to tell the difference between a Sikh and
a Moslem unless you know one’s turban looks cool and the other’s looks
like shit. (For general info, I can not only tell the difference between
a Moslem and a Sikh, I can 90% of the time tell the difference between
two tribes of Moslems. Yes, I may be a culturist SOB, but I’m a very
highly trained one. I can tell the difference between a Moslem and a
Sikh and talk about the history of conflict between the two groups.) And
Sikhs and Moslems can barely bring themselves to spit on each other much
less work side by side singing Kumbaya. The liberals had, apparently,
never noticed that the fucked-up-turban guys never went into the
cool-turban guy’s corner store.
The Hindus were willing to contribute some suggestions and a little
money, but the other Hindus would have to do the work. What other
Hindus? Oh, those people. And they would have to hand the money to the
Kumbaya guys both because handing it to the other Hindus would be
defiling and because, of course, it would just disappear.
(At some point I need to talk about India. It is not the India today
that it was in 2019.)
When they actually got to work, finally, there were some little
black brothers helping. Then a different group of little black brothers
turned out and sat on the sidelines shouting suggestions until the first
group left. Then the ‘help’ left as well. Christian animists might soil
their hands for a community project but not if they’re getting shit from
Islamics. Sure, they’re just two different tribes that lived right next
to each other in Africa. Speaking of Kumbaya. But they’ve also been
slaughtering each other since before Stanley ever found Livingston
smoking his bong.
Trust. If you lived in a mostly white-bread suburb before the Time
of Suckage you just can’t get it. But when trust breaks down enough in a
society, nobody trusts anyone. Blacks don’t trust black cops. Whites
don’t trust white cops. Nobody trusts their mayor, nobody trusts their
boss. Nobody trusts nobody.
What the study found was that the more multi-cultural a society, the
lower the societal trust. (The professor, by the way, refused to accept
his own results. He sat on them for five years and even then spouted
bullshit about ‘education’ as the answer even though that was covered in
the study. The only way to get generalized trust was to blend the
societies and erase the differences. Back in the 1800s an Italian
wouldn’t be bothered to spit on an Irishman unless he’d just stuck a
knife in his back. These days the only way you can tell the difference
in the US is one has better food and the other better beer.)
So why does this matter to Ching Mao? Doesn’t, really, he was dead
and never really cared. But it mattered, a lot, to the response in
Chicago.
You see, by that time Chicago was a very multi-cultural area. Gone
were the days of it being pure white-bread and kielbasa. Only recent
immigrants, who didn’t recognize the local white guys as being anything
like Polish despite their names, spoke the Old Language. Where there had
once been mostly assimilated German and Polish and Russian Jew and a
smattering of Black communities there were now Serbian and Pakistani and
‘Persian’ and Assyrian not to be confused with Syrian and Iraqi and
Fusian who were not Manchu who were not Korean or anything like who were
definitely not Cambodian, damn it…
Each trusted the family group around them. To an extent they trusted
others who were ‘them.’ The few white-bread multi-cultural
true-believers trusted all their little rainbow brothers, of course,
until you got a few drinks in them and they started telling about their
experiences. “And I never did get my lawnmower back!”"
This is an excerpt from the JOHN RINGO book "THE LAST CENTURION"...... Ringo is always a "good read" pick up a couple or 12 of his books.
Saturday, October 4, 2008
HR 1424 BAILOUT 3 Oct 2008
FLORIDA Congressional Delegation
FINAL VOTE on BAILOUT
Democrats -
Boyd, Y;
Brown, Corrine, Y;
Castor, N; THANK YOU
Hastings, Y;
Klein, Y;
Mahoney, Y;
Meek, Y;
Wasserman Schultz, Y;
Wexler, Y.
Republicans -
Bilirakis, N; THANK YOU
Brown-Waite, Ginny, N; THANK YOU
Buchanan, N; THANK YOU
Crenshaw, Y;
Diaz-Balart, L., N; THANK YOU
Diaz-Balart, M., N; THANK YOU
Feeney, N; THANK YOU
Keller, N; THANK YOU
Mack, N; THANK YOU
Mica, N; THANK YOU
Miller, N; THANK YOU
Putnam, Y;
Ros-Lehtinen, N; THANK YOU
Stearns, N; THANK YOU
Weldon, Y;
Young, N. THANK YOU
Remember these names in a few weeks when it comes time to VOTE. Remember the Representatives who tried to save your tax dollars from this illegal
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Where in the hell are Barak Obama old friends.
I have been pretty stingy with whom I call my friend, but those folks I consider my friends are in my heart for life. It's like this, if one of those I considered a true friend showed up at my house needing some cash and a gun, no question asked, they would more than likely get what they want.
So, if I were running for public office there would be plenty of my friends to vouch for my character (or lack their of) to any news media outlet on the planet. I mean, I see friends of McCain's from the Naval Academy, Biden's High School best friends and Palin's hockey Mom buddies. Friends out their from every stage of their lives, these candidates have from all over the nation. People the national media have spent time and money digging up these old buddies to get a insight to the true nature (re: dirt) of the candidates
But WHO WERE BARAK OBAMA'S OLD FRIENDS, I relize that he has lived in some unusual locations, but so have McCain and Palin and that hasn't stopped the news media from sending enough people to Alaska that they now qualify for an extra congressman.
So I ask “who are Obama's old friends” and if he has none isnt that something to ponder ? ?
A politician who has no one to vouch for him but other political animals is a sad thing to behold.
So, if I were running for public office there would be plenty of my friends to vouch for my character (or lack their of) to any news media outlet on the planet. I mean, I see friends of McCain's from the Naval Academy, Biden's High School best friends and Palin's hockey Mom buddies. Friends out their from every stage of their lives, these candidates have from all over the nation. People the national media have spent time and money digging up these old buddies to get a insight to the true nature (re: dirt) of the candidates
But WHO WERE BARAK OBAMA'S OLD FRIENDS, I relize that he has lived in some unusual locations, but so have McCain and Palin and that hasn't stopped the news media from sending enough people to Alaska that they now qualify for an extra congressman.
So I ask “who are Obama's old friends” and if he has none isnt that something to ponder ? ?
A politician who has no one to vouch for him but other political animals is a sad thing to behold.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)