To All United States Troops - Thank You

This was posted on Jerry Pournelle's, CHAOS MANOR site, the link is on the right hand side of the blog. Dr. Pournelle site is the prototype for every blog since Al Gore invented the internet ;^) If you want to catch up on the education your government school neglected to provide it is a "must read". BTW I'm so glad to hear the medico's report that Dr. Pournelle will be around to enlighten us still, great news.

I'm a Air Force brat/camp follower TSgt Sutter, my dad, retired after we just got out of Iran in 78. My Uncle Brad was Army and at Chosin Reservoir, Uncle Jerry a Marine in Korea also. My Uncle Norm and Aunt Glo Navy and my Uncle George Army. My soon to be son-in-law is undergoing training up in D.C to be a Tomb Guard at the Tomb of the Unknown. His brother-in-law is Army also, back from Iraq missing a leg. Most people have no idea the dedication of these men who stand on the wall thousands of miles from Home and Family and keep us safe day and night.

Think about these men and women as you read this.

Present Arms

FROM Maj. Gene Duncan.

I want to preface this by saying I don't have a thing against Heath Ledger. In fact, until yesterday, I didn't even know who he was. I'm not a movie buff and don't spend much time watching them.

But today at lunch, I happened to be in a restaurant in which a news program was running on one of the TVs. And, of course, his story came up. The coverage was extensive, interviews with fellow actors were conducted, his dad spoke, and everyone was obviously saddened by his loss.

I guess the irony came as I happened to look away from the TV and onto the page of the USA Today I was reading. Page 8A. A small box in the middle of the page which held 4 names. Names of troops killed in Iraq. One name caught my eye. SSG Justin R. Whiting, 27, of Hancock, NY.

The reason his name caught my eye initially was his age. He was a year younger than Heath Ledger. I read the short description in the box for Justin Whiting.

"died Saturday in Mosul from wounds suffered when his vehicle struck an improvised explosive device; 5th Special Forces Group (Airborne)."

That's it. That's all. Page 1D and 4D in the paper were all about Heath Ledger. Whiting got a sentence.

But that sentence said a lot about Justin Whiting. A 27 year old SSG, he was one sharp soldier. That's a fairly young age to make that rank. And, of course he was a paratrooper. In fact, I'd bet my bottom dollar he had served with either the 82nd Airborne Division or the 173rd Airborne Brigade - or both.

And he was Special Forces. He had earned and wore the coveted green beret. He was quite a young man and I know all of that from that one simple sentence, because I know what it took to be where he was, wearing the rank and beret he wore at his age.

I don't begrudge Heath Ledger his fame. I'm sure he was a fine actor. I certainly am sorry about his death. But I often think back to what Henry Fonda is credited with saying about being honored for his acting. He said he was surprised by all the hoopla because, in reality, all he did was pretend to be someone else who had actually done something. Perhaps if Ledger had lived he might have found his greatest role playing Jason Whiting in some future movie.

Order Arms

Thank You and God's Peace to you SSG Justin R. Whiting, and God Bless your family.

VOTE, VOTE, PLEASE VOTE

VOTE, DO NOT LET YOUR REPUBLICAN PRIMARY PASS WITHOUT VOTING.

MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD AT THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE.

FORCE THE R.N.C TO GIVE US A "NEW CONTRACT WITH AMERICA"

Like many of you I am disappointed at the lack of Conservative values represented in the leading Republican Presidential Candidate, John McCain. I had this problem a few day ago during our Primary here in Florida, I cast my vote for the most conservative left on the ticket. Even though my personal choice had already left the race.

My reasoning is to show the R.N.C. the backing for dedicated Conservative principals. I do not want 65% Conservatives running my party, and by all of us getting out to vote for any other candidate left on the ballot we will send a huge message to the Party bigwigs. It does not matter if they win, the fact that we went out and Voted. The number crunchers at the R.N.C. can read and McCain may well have the nomination wrapped up. But if the VOTERS can still put up 30 or 40% to anybody else we will make a huge statement to 'said' Candidate and the National Committee. They will have to make a solid binding commitment to the Conservative base of our Party, or take the real risk of those same Core Conservatives sitting it out in November.

We have a big tent in the Republican Party and I can vote in November for McCain, without holding my nose, be cause I know in my heart he is a honorable man and will defend this Country to the death. But I wont vote for him if I feel he will run roughshod the party I have been a member of for 29 years.

I am not a Suicide Voter and some Conservatives would call me a RINO, because I am pro-choice. I might said the same thing, a time or to, in the heat of an argument about someone's lack of support for the 2nd Amendment. But I feel I could pass anyone's "Conservative Test" with at least a 90% or better and I won't vote for someone to represent me if I believe he will cause hurt to my family or my country.

So what will it take to convince me, simple, a NEW CONTRACT WITH AMERICA, signed by him. Nothing fancy, 2 pages double spaced with bullets, probably 25 or 30 points that tell me absolutely where he will stand and who his running mate will be. I want to see a little "straight talk", then I will decide. If he passes muster and I will put my time and money behind him. If he doesn't pass muster I will give him nothing, absolutly nothing not even the time to check off a Vote in the booth.

I will still vote on the rest of the ballot for my state and local races, but I will not support someone who will lessen me.

hasiii aka"Stoneknives"

BARRY GOLDWATER 1979

"My faith in the future rests squarely on the belief that man, if he doesn't first destroy himself, will find new answers in the universe, new technologies, new disciplines, which will contribute to a vastly different and better world in the twenty-first century.
Recalling what has happened in my short lifetime in the fields of communication and transportation and the life sciences, I marvel at the pessimists who tell us that we have reached the end of our productive capacity, who project a future of primarily dividing up what we now have and making do with less.
To my mind the single essential element on which all discoveries will be dependent is human freedom."

Barry Goldwater

Principals Matter

MY CHOICE FOR PRESIDENT FOR THE 2008 FLORIDA PRIMARY
IS
DR. RON PAUL

The Primary's and Caucus's are the time to vote with your core values.
It is not the time to compromise.
Your values must be put forth to the National Party.
Your voice must be heard loud and clear.
You will have plenty of time later to, pray, "hold your nose" and cast a vote for the consensus choice later.
VOTE NOW WITH YOUR HEART.

UNDECIDED IN FLORIDA '08

I’m in a quandary here about who to vote for on Tuesday. I am/was a Fred Thompson supporter and I am now in a larch. On my personal scale using a range of 0 to 100 Thompson scored a 96.36%, the next closest is Dr. Ron Paul scoring a 89.1%, then Mike Huckabee scoring a 78.2%.
Logic dictates that I vote for Paul but my gut feeling is that he don't have a snowballs chance in hell. But he's got money enough to stick it out for a while and that might be a real good thing for the Libertarian message.

Huckabee, on the other hand, has a fair to middlin' chance to get the nomination, but they are cash poor and thats a bad thing in 21st Century politics.

So I'm Looking for Ideas.......

NOTA

Term Limits NO

None of the Above YES

I have issues with Term Limits, especially in light of the fact that to get to one of the seats of power , you have to have seniority. This is one of the main criteria for all the important chairs and committees. But implementing Term Limits guarantees you less representation for your state in Washington D.C..

Believe me I understand wanting to get these entrenched “folks” out of D.C. and in many areas the opposition party cant put up a competitive opposition candidate. Other times the candidate owns the local party machine and quashes any replacement choices. Term limits fixes these problems and “throws the bum's out” but it also kills the good guy's too.

It a “baby with the bathwater” analog. and the way to repair the problem is called “None of the Above”. On every ballot for every elected position you add a box for “None of the Above”.

From the NOTA web site ( www.nota.org ) NONE OF THE ABOVE

• All legitimate consent requires the ability to withhold consent; "None of the Above" gives the voter the ballot option to withhold consent from an election to office, just as voters can cast a "No" vote on a ballot question.

• Would end the "must hire" elections where voters are often forced to vote for the least unacceptable candidate, the all too familiar "lesser evil."

• A candidate must obtain voter consent to be elected, even if running unopposed.

• Voters would decide the fate of the political parties' choices, instead of the parties deciding the voters' choices.

• It should reduce negative campaigning by encouraging candidates to campaign for their own candidacy rather than against their opponent's candidacy.

• Many voters and non voters, who now register their disapproval of all candidates for an office by not voting, could cast a meaningful vote.

• Provides an effective alternative to the increasing voter practice of writing-in frivolous names, the so-called “Mickey Mouse” option.

• The meaning of elections should become more clear, since voters would no longer be tempted to vote for a presumed losing candidate, with whom they really do not agree, as a protest vote.

• Establishes flexible, voter controlled term limits of one term for every office, as the framers of the U.S. Constitution intended.

• Campaign contributors who give to all candidates to insure "access" would no longer be sure they backed the winner; in general, buying elections should become a more uncertain enterprise.

• Improves checks and balances between voters and political parties, especially needed in jurisdictions with one dominant political party or nearly identical alternatives.

• Political parties would nominate candidates knowing those candidates must be a better choice for voters than "None of the Above."

• Follow-up by-elections are far less costly than electing unacceptable candidates to office.

• Office holders, knowing they face "None of the Above" in the next election, would be encouraged to insure their re-election by focusing more on doing a good job in office and less on attempting to prevent the emergence of an effective opposition candidate.

• When pre-election polls include "None of the Above", the feedback from voters should help guide candidates and parties.

• Even when "None of the Above" does not win or is a non-binding NOTA, the reported NOTA vote would help identify those offices for which voters might be more receptive to new candidates in a future election as well as limits the winner's mandate.

• Provides a permanent option for voters to withhold consent that is independent of expensive and infrequent candidate based "reform" movements.

• Should make public service more attractive by improving the quality of those elected to office.

• Opportunities for election fraud should be reduced because fewer blank votes for an office would be cast.

• Applies to all candidates and parties equally.

• It is a relatively simple, fair, sensible, accomplishable and permanent improvement to our current system, hopefully making for a more democratic and ultimately stronger America.

This is something that everyone regardless of political their slant can get on board with. The only the political hacks ( most everyone at the DNC and RNC headquarters ) are going dig in their heels. Read up on NOTA that link again is www.nota.org .

Stoneknives

Thanks the Kick in the Ass..G.W.

FROM NEAL BOORTZ 15 JAN 2008

2ND AMENDMENT UPDATE

"The Bush administration’s chief lawyer before the Supreme Court filed a brief in the battle over the legality of the DC ban of handguns in homes. “Since ‘unrestricted’ private ownership of guns clearly threatens public safety, the 2nd Amendment can be interpreted to allow a variety of gun restrictions,” according to the Bush administration. Paul Clement suggested that gun rights are limited and subject to “reasonable regulation.” According to Clement, all federal limits on guns should be upheld.

What a shame. Thank you, George Bush, for yet another sterling defense of our Constitution. If this is any indication of how the Supreme Court may rule, we can at least hope that the DC handgun laws are said to have gone too far."

I voted for you twice Mr. Bush. The first time because, being from Tennessee, I knew what Al Gore would do. The second time because Kerry is at least an order of magnitude bigger dumb ass.

Thanks for not keeping your word, again .

Stoneknives

Property Rights and Deadly Force

Property Rights and Deadly Force

In most states a property owner is limited as to the circumstances under which he can use deadly force to protect his property. It's my contention that these laws are unjust toward the law o biding citizen.

Example : You own a truck a year old, nothing fancy, full size half ton club cab, so you can drop off the kids at school. It's big bucks for you 25k plus taxes of $1750. Now some lowlife jumps in and takes it while you are unloading grocery's in front of the house and it's gone. Sure you've got full coverage insurance from State Geko Mutual of Nebraska, but your babied truck with 9000 miles and a perfect bed is to them worth 18k. After wasting many hours providing documentation and speaking with a dozen minions of the insurance company you are basically told to F-off and go to arbitration (another month of TIME) or sue (the lawyer wants $3500 just to start and his free advice is “Insurance Co. Suck, and it will never pay to sue them”). So you take the money....

You are now officially out $ 8750.00 cash, plus the TIME and wages lost because of the Insurance. Rental Car, Police reports (437 ½ hours at your $20 per hour wage + TIME) We still haven't added up the TIME for you to go out and get a new vehicle to replace the stolen one. Thats 54.6+ working days of your life that you have had stolen from you. 11+ weeks of your sweat and toil because property laws. You had a rifle on hand, but you'r a good citizen and familiar with the law according to your State, and because the Thief wasn't threatening you directly you had to let him drive off.

But he did, his act directly threating you and your family's financial security. If the SOB locked you up in a warehouse for 54.6 day he would have done the same thing to your family's finances as sure as theft he perpetrated..

You had your TIME kidnapped from you.

You had your TIME stolen from you.

TIME that you will never have again.

What does the State do to criminals? It takes their TIME. Because TIME is the SECOND most valuable thing to a human on this planet and your LIFE is the FIRST (because it represents all of your TIME).

What makes Gold valuable ? The amount of TIME it takes to find it, move it and refine it.

PROPERTY to any citizen represents directly the TIME it took to earn it.

A property owner should be allowed to use whatever force is necessary, including deadly force, to protect his property regardless of whether or not the person stealing his property presents a threat to his personal health or safety.

My short TIME on Earth, a gift given by God, is extremely valuable to me.

What is your TIME worth ?

STONEKNIVES

PS: No government disability benefits if you just wound the SOB.