Wounded Warrior Project Fundraiser

For those who missed out on a chance to support a worthy cause (and also possibly win some great prizes), you have another chance to do so. "A Girl and Her Gun" is having a raffle and will be donating the proceeds to the Wounded Warrior Project.

Please support this worthy effort.

Newbius

Ten Years Later

Today marks the 10th anniversary of the act of war against our country by rich, spoiled, fanatical, Saudi Arabian Wahhabist terrorists aligned with Al Queda. My good friend OldNFO asked for reminisces the other day on his blog. What follows is my comment from there, unedited:

I was at home, getting ready to go to work. After the WTC was hit, I went to the basement and began cleaning guns. Then my neighbor came over, crying. The Pentagon had just been hit, and she couldn't make contact with her husband (who worked near the Pentagon impact site). We eventually connected with him. He had been one corridor North of the impact and had spent the day doing SAR in the burning section of the building before being sent home. He and I spent the evening quietly with a bottle of Jack Daniels, while he worked through what he had seen. One man to another, sharing the pain.

I will never forget. I will not forgive. There is not enough oil in the Middle East to justify appeasing those lying bastards. The proper response would have been to turn Riyadh into a smoking sheet of glass...it still is.

We have become a nation of appeasers, more interested in being inoffensive than in being right. Once upon a time, we were a nation of leaders who cared not what the other nations of the world thought. Once upon a time, the rest of the world either feared us or wanted to be us. Now, they only ridicule us while using our own wealth against us. Wealth stolen by spineless politicians and given to the socialists in the UN, or paid to Middle-East radicals in exchange for energy we shouldn't have to import.

Ponder that while you watch and listen to the national dirge, on every channel your TeeVee can receive. Ponder that, and ask yourself if this is the nation your were raised in. Ponder that, and ask yourself why you willingly accept the chains and shackles of an out-of-control government staffed with lifetime civil servants who hate your remaining Liberties and envy your remaining abilities.

Then, DO SOMETHING about it. It is past time to re-engage as CITIZENS. It is past time to take your country back.

Newbius
|||

July 4, 2011

This is the document that birthed our nation:

This is the document that defines the limits of our government:

This is how our elite media views this document today:

Does it still matter?

Yes.

For if we believe that it does not, then we consign ourselves to a situation where the rule of law is no longer. We consign ourselves to the rule of men. In that fight, might makes right. The strong will overrun the weak. The nation will cease to be.

There are some who will posit that we are already at that place in our history. If this is the case, then we should take heed and review our past. We should reread the wisdom of the men who put quill and ink to parchment and who drafted the first document. We should reread the reasons why we fought to bring this nation into being. We should then compare those reasons to what is going on all around us, and what is being done in our name against our own people, in the name of governance.

Tick Tock, Tick Tock. What time is it, on Claire Wolfe's Clock?

Look around you. See what is hiding in plain sight. Prepare.

July 4, 1776 was the match being held to the powder-keg. We exploded into existence because the ideals of Freedom and Liberty could not be repressed forever. Yet, we have allowed those ideas to decay and wither. Stifled by the rot of Socialism, whose high and noble ideals smother the spirit and crush the spark of individuals under the jackboots of conformity and oppression.

Wake up. Then, awaken your neighbors and friends. Learn your history, then teach it. Time is short. We know what happened in 1776. What will July 4, 2011 bring?

Newbius

Elections will not save us...

A quick follow-up post to clarify my statement below. As JayG points out here, nothing has really changed in the last hundred years or so.

I don't mean to argue with my good friend Newbius, but please. Elections won't save us? They haven't done a damn bit of good the past hundred or so years - why should now be any different? Our government is lying to us? This is different from the past two hundred plus years how? The only thing that has changed in the past two decades is that the information is not as tightly controlled - just because we're hearing about more now doesn't mean that more is happening now.

I say, "not true". The institutions that daily mold our opinions, thought processes, and candidate selection have all been corrupted and co-opted from within. The Liberal Communist Left has gradually assumed control of our institutions of higher learning (focusing on History, Sociology, and Education), the media (to control WHAT gets published), and our electoral process (to determine WHO gets put before us every two years).

For us to restore our Nation to the original vision, we need to take back (as Utah is doing) our political parties at the grassroots level, take back our school boards, take back our Media, and force out the cancer of Tenured Communist professors at Universities throughout our nation. While we were being mollified, pacified, indoctrinated, and told not to worry about local politics, our foundational institutions were taken over. The bastards went after our children, and we just complained instead of fighting.

How many of you know who is on your school board? How many of you know who the local movers and shakers are in your county political parties? How many of you attend the caucuses, straw polls, party meetings, school board meetings, et cetera? Most people don't even bother to attend their HOA meetings...

This stuff is IMPORTANT, people! If you are complaining about the quality of the candidates at the state and national levels, ask yourself HOW they got to be at that level in the first place. WHO put them there? Answer: the local party reps did. Do you want to have an impact? Take over the local party. Take over ALL of the local parties in your state. Don't think it will work? Ask Senator Bob Bennett (R-UT) how he likes retirement. It works, but YOU have to get involved.

As long as THEY (the cronies, the bought-and-paid-for stooges, the local elite, and the insiders) still control the local levers, then you will get candidates that only appeal to THEIR interests and not yours. Voting for more of the same will just continue to give you...more of the same. So change who gets to be on the ballot, before there is a ballot to vote on. It is how THEY do it. Until we Patriots re-engage in the political process, and get off of our asses and get involved (instead of whining about the quality of the people we get to choose from), then elections will not save us.

RIGHT NOW is when the local party offices are looking for participants. Show up. Make your voice heard. Change the process from within. To repeat my closing line from the previous essay:

"I will continue to work within the system until it fails. Then I will work to restore the system as it should have been."

I still need to clean the basement.

Pax,

Newbius

Presumptive nominees

Isn't it funny how the MSM polling seems to *always* result in some "generic republican" attaining 'front-runner' status before the real thinkers and voters in the party have even thought it through?

Mitt Romney? Jon Huntsman? Gary Johnson? Tim Pawlenty? Really???

Artificial, Centrist, Contrived, and Vanilla. Yet, those are the choices the MSM wants us to believe are electable. They don't want you to think. They want you to accept their conventional wisdom.

The two most exciting people in (or not yet in) the race are dismissed as crackpots and unelectable. The two most genuine 'candidates' out there so terrify the MSM that they are actively trying to minimize (Cain) or destroy (Palin) them before they gain enough traction with the People.

Forget the artfully edited sound bites designed to destroy these people. Remember that these people are a direct threat to the progressive machine and the enablers in the Media. The American Press has more in common with the USSR's Pravda, than Russia Today does now. In fact, I would propose that a fairer treatment of events and candidates in the American news would be found on RT than on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, or even Fox.

So, do you own research. Ignore the 'presumptive nominee' crap coming from biased push-polls. Go out and actually LISTEN to the candidates in their own words and in context. Then you might see that those people labeled 'unelectable' just might be better qualified to lead than the ones currently 'leading'.

Newbius
|||

Community

A couple of days ago, a good friend of mine was unintentionally (intentionally??) smeared by a link aggregator, who copied/linked/stole without attribution a picture of her and posted it as 'porn'. I won't even call that person a blogger, as there doesn't seem to be much original thought there.

My good friend politely asked that the photo that he stole be taken down, and the blog title be changed to something less misogynistic. He refused. The gun blogging community is taking action in shunning this person and contacting his advertisers.

Good for them.

In my post below, "Painting targets on our clay feet", I tried to point out that we as an interest group need to move past the need to 'porn' our sport. Especially when it comes to portraying the fairer sex and their participation in our community. There are plenty of positive examples of women in our sport who are accomplished. There is no need to 'porn' them. They should be celebrated because of their accomplishments, not because they are women. I am quite sure that Julie Golob Golosky, Molly Smith, Tam, and Breda can all out-shoot me. I am not threatened by this at all. In fact, I welcome it. Let me buy some more ammo for them if it helps advance our sport in a positive light to all women.

Some of the comments on my 'clay feet' post assumed that I objected to the Lucky Gunner 'ammo waitresses', even though I tried to be very clear that this was not the case. That post had been stewing in my brain for many months prior because of my interactions with my wife, daughter, sons, and their female friends.

The 'gun culture' has an uphill climb with women. Try and deny it, but that is a fact. Any tour through your average gun store with your wife, girlfriend, or daughter in-tow will affirm this. And, we need to fix it. It starts with us.

Speaking of Lucky Gunner: As a matter of policy, I do not accept advertising. I link to the Second Amendment Foundation prominently, but accept no money from them. I believe in what they stand for and the work that they do. Beginning today, you will see a link to Lucky Gunner right below the SAF logo, in response to their support of Breda. I will not accept any funds from them, nor will I post an ad from them. However, they have shown themselves to be a part of our community. For this, I thank them.

Pax,

Newbius

Housekeeping - New links

As part of my regular troll through the internet, I check out several forums dedicated to aspects of the fight for our Second Amendment rights. I find these places to be valuable sources of information and opinion. So, in an effort to make them more accessible to myself (I use my own blogroll/link list as a jumping-off point), and as a service to the half-dozen of you who read me daily, I am adding them to the sidebar.

The forums are Maryland Shooters, CalGuns, OpenCarry, and USCCA. They are linked just below the SAF logo. Please go and check them out.

Newbius

Three Percent Bitch

I started to leave a comment at Sipsey Street Irregulars, but it hit post-length so I am doing it here instead.

Regarding THIS POST:

Mike, this is not directed at you. It is directed at those 3%ers who just piss and moan about the NRA. You whiners, this is for you:

The vitriol we send the NRA's way may be justified. No argument there. Yet, they *are* the 800-pound gorilla that the Congress fears.

Rather than us 3%ers continuing to bitch and whine and complain about them, why don't we do something about them instead?

When my local church began to stray from the Message and secularize, in an attempt to appeal to the masses, I did not change churches. Instead, I changed MY church.

The NRA purports to represent 4 million gun owners. Because those gun owners are usually politically active, Congress bends to the NRA's will. This is a fact.

With the above as a given, what if we change the NRA instead of constantly whining about them? If the 3% number is true (and I have no logical reason to doubt it), then there are approximately (3% of 300,000,000 people) 9 million patriots who would take a stand, and a lot of them (most of them?) are not NRA members.

Say what you will about the NRA. I am not defending them. What I am advocating is this: instead of pissing and moaning about them, co-opt them. Take them over from within. They are an organization which elects their board. Every member gets a vote. Engage them inside their own system and bend them to our will.

Get involved.

We have too damned many whiny 'patriots' complaining about shit, that they are doing nothing about inside the current systems (where the risk/reward ratios are still sane). People would rather complain and be keyboard cowboys about the excesses of our elected criminal class. I am getting tired of reading the vacuous, back-handed swipes about the people who are actually in the trenches daily (yes, including the NRA).

You 3%ers who have given up on the system, keep stockpiling bullets and beans. At this point you are all talk. I know how hard it is to engage Congress, as I have been actively working *my* congressman about Gunwalker and lots of other things. I am active. Are you?

What Mike and David Codrea did is nothing short of amazing, given that they had ZERO support initially from the NRA. Yes, the NRA joined late. The fact is, they DID join. Did it help? Only time will tell. We, however, have to quit the sniping and backbiting and eating our young that we do so effing well. We need to make the institutional dinosaurs into *our* dinosaurs.

I am past being tired about this situation. So, here is my challenge to you 3%ers:

Get active, or shut the hell up.

You have a problem with the NRA? Join up and get active, or shut the hell up. You think GOA is not paying enough attention to your pet issue? Join them, get active, or shut the hell up. You think the SAF should be litigating against your petty infringement? Join them, get active, or shut the hell up.

I hope this is pissing you off. I hope that you take a good hard look at the man in the mirror and ask that guy "What have you done *TODAY* to advance the cause of Liberty?" Because if the answer is "nothing", then I have no time for you.

Lead, Follow, or get the hell out of the way.

Newbius
|||

Lie of the Day - Waco Jim Cavanaugh

From the Washington Post's report today:

"There is no gun-trafficking statute," said James Cavanaugh, a retired ATF supervisor. "We've been yelling for years that we need a gun-trafficking statute because these cases are so difficult to prove."

In the paragraph immediately prior to his outright falsehood, the statement is made that the cases against so-called 'Straw Purchasers' "rarely amount to more than charges of lying on federal documents."

Let's examine that one for a bit. ATF Form 4473 (the form which MUST be completed in order to purchase a firearm at a dealer) clearly states in the header the following:

WARNING: You may not receive a firearm if prohibited by Federal or State law. The information you provide will be used to determine whether you are prohibited under law from receiving a firearm. Certain violations of the Gun Control Act, 18 U.S.C. 921 et. seq., are punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment and/or up to a $250,000 fine.

And, in the area where the purchaser is attesting that they are buying for themselves (Section 11.a.), it states:

If you are not the actual buyer, the dealer cannot transfer the firearm(s) to you.

Below this is another warning:

I understand that answering "yes" to question 11.a. if I am not the actual buyer is a crime punishable as a felony under Federal law, and may also violate State and/or local law.

Let's examine this for a second. A person purchasing a firearm for another person (the definition of a 'straw purchaser') is committing a Federal FELONY. If arrested and convicted, that person is now a PROHIBITED PERSON who can NO LONGER purchase or possess a firearm. Furthermore, the crime is punishable by a jail term of up to 10 years, and a fine of up to $250,000. Yet, Jim Cavanaugh whines that the ATF can only prosecute them for 'paperwork violations'?

Are you KIDDING ME?

"Paperwork violations" are the meat and potatoes of ATF's daily business, especially against gun dealers. Catching and prosecuting the real bad actors isn't sexy, but the existing law DOES have teeth.

Instead, ATF runs illegal weapons smuggling operations, in hopes of doing the DEA's job of stopping the drug cartels. They force the licensed gun dealers to cooperate under threat of their livelihood, and are complicit in the commission of numerous felonies that violate their very own laws. All the while, law-abiding gun owners and gun dealers are persecuted by Lefty Statist gun grabbers and professional pro-crime activists like the Brady Campaign.

I don't know about you, but I think it is time to cut this agency down to size. (Only because it is going to be a while before we repeal NFA34, GCA68, and FOPA86).

Have you contacted your congresspeople yet? Does your Representative know about "Gunwalker"? How about your Senator? If not, WHY NOT? What are you waiting for, an engraved invitation to participate in representative government?? If YOU don't contact them, THEY won't care about this issue.

Newbius
|||

Request to Virginia Gunowners

Please contact your U.S. Congressman about Project Gunrunner and the 'Gunwalker' scandal. My Congressman has done about as much as he can behind the scenes and needs citizens from other districts to start asking questions, too. If you live in Virginia, please contact them today. If you are in the district represented by Bobby Scott, Bob Goodlatte, or Randy Forbes, it is especially important that you apply pressure.

For the rest of you gun owners: If your congressman is on the House Judiciary Committee, then you need to get a fire lit under them about the BATFE. Direct them to Senator Grassley's office for further information after sending them these links:

Journalist's Guide to Project Gunwalker

GOA Briefing Paper

CBS News report by Sharyl Attkisson and Video

It is time for this rogue ATF agency to become accountable, or be disbanded.

Newbius
|||

The open carry debate

A little brouhaha has erupted over the 'library carry' demonstration. I am not going to address the specific controversy here.

What I will state is this:

Define your goals. Plan a way to effectively achieve those goals. Do an 'after-action' report to gauge the effectiveness of those plans. Adjust, adapt, and then repeat.

If your goal is to maximize media exposure, regardless of reaction or outcome, then you take the negative with the positive and live with the result. If your goal is something else, then it would help to state it in advance so that the reaction can be tempered in the context of the desired outcome.

Pax,

Newbius

"Call your congressperson!" - A guide to HOW

Please call your congressperson, and do so regularly, about the issues important to you.

For example: Today, I had a very lengthy conversation with the Legislative Director for my congressperson. They are not directly involved in the specific committee on the issue I called about, but are the back door to the delegation members who are.

I gave the Legislative Director an extensive background overview of the case in question, especially noting links to other columns and blogs with pertinent information, and also referred them to a Senator's office with more information. The Legislative Director took good notes, is going to be checking the links, and assured me they would follow up on this through their House contacts.

I was calling them in the capacity of citizen and constituent, not as a blogger/ unauthorized journalist, and this seemed to make them more forthcoming with how they were planning to work the information. I was advised that for "official comment", I should talk to their Communications Director and was provided with that person's name and contact info.

Interestingly, the person I usually communicate with, when I identified myself to him (I call them a lot) and asked about the specific issue (a hot issue involving potential scandal and a likely executive-branch cover-up), they couldn't get me to the legislative director's phone fast enough. This is a first for me. The other times I have gotten to speak with the Legislative Director, I was called back to discuss policy issue questions that I had raised and it took 24 hours or more to hear back. The fact that I got put through immediately indicates to me that some types of issues still carry serious weight in the halls of Congress.

Some advice: Having names, dates, and places handy when asked for more detail REALLY helps your credibility. Being able to tell the Legislative Director about something that is easily verifiable and FACTUAL really got their attention.

When trying to force action about an agency's abuse, it helps to be able to demonstrate how their actions might affect another agency's relationship with the citizens, or with diplomatic concerns with an allied country. A Congressional Representative will likely not have direct oversight on your issue, but might be able to sway State, or Commerce, or another agency that your issue affects them too and they will then be able to pick away at the edges from another angle. We need to use our contacts to force them into using theirs. If nothing else, a Congressman wants to be seen as 'doing something'. It helps them to be able to direct their efforts if you know, or can envision, consequential effects and you communicate these to them.

Please also remember this when contacting them: Be CALM. Be rational. Be credible. Be persistent. Be friendly. And, ALWAYS TELL THE TRUTH. Your congressperson's office fields hundreds of calls per day. If you only ever call them when you are angry about some piece of legislation that 'tramples your puppy', then you will only be known as a malcontent.

Every time I call, I am friendly and pleasant. I identify myself by name. I am clear about the current status of the legislation in question (use THOMAS to search for it). I have already checked their website (HOUSE and SENATE) to see if they have issued a position statement. I know what I am trying to say to them (use bullet-point notes if needed). Most importantly, I have my facts handy. As my call today with my Congressman's office showed me, sometimes you get put right through and YOU NEED TO BE READY.

My "take-aways" are these:

First, stay in regular contact with your congressperson's office such that they know you and at least respect your commitment to the issues.
Second, have your facts handy and readily transferred so that it is easy for them to get to.
Third, some of them really do care and will work with the people who have the legislative or committee power, even if their office does not.
Fourth, see item one, Call your Congressman!

Pax,

Newbius

Happy Guy Fawkes Day

Remember, remember the 5th of November....

You can either read the historical account of the Gunpowder Plot, or you can view the modern interpretation of it (and rebellion against tyranny) and watch V for Vendetta.

Newbius
|||

Help a Lady Out

Renee Ellmers is in a recount fight with Bob 'Who are You-Tube' Etheridge. 

The Stupid Party is being, well, Stupid about it and is not supporting this with either Lawyers, Guns, or Money (like they aren't supporting Joe Miller in Alaska, either).  Anyway, Candidate Ellmers is ahead, but just barely.  The Evil Party is going to keep recounting until they can Franken her and manufacture the votes needed to steal this, UNLESS WE DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

Can you spare the cost of a box of ammo?  If so, DONATE HERE

Pax,

Newbius

QOTD: John Marshall

Today's Quote of the Day comes to us courtesy of the Cornell Law Library's online repository of court cases:

The question whether an act repugnant to the Constitution can become the law of the land is a question deeply interesting to the United States, but, happily, not of an intricacy proportioned to its interest. It seems only necessary to recognise certain principles, supposed to have been long and well established, to decide it.

That the people have an original right to establish for their future government such principles as, in their opinion, shall most conduce to their own happiness is the basis on which the whole American fabric has been erected. The exercise of this original right is a very great exertion; nor can it nor ought it to be frequently repeated. The principles, therefore, so established are deemed fundamental. And as the authority from which they proceed, is supreme, and can seldom act, they are designed to be permanent.

This original and supreme will organizes the government and assigns to different departments their respective powers. It may either stop here or establish certain limits not to be transcended by those departments.

The Government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the Legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the Constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may at any time be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested that the Constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it, or that the Legislature may alter the Constitution by an ordinary act.

Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The Constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and, like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.

If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law; if the latter part be true, then written Constitutions are absurd attempts on the part of the people to limit a power in its own nature illimitable.

Certainly all those who have framed written Constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be that an act of the Legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void.
Chief Justice John Marshall, in delivering the opinion in Marbury v. Madison

Our Constitution is the fundamental founding document of our Government. It has specific and defined limits of authority assigned to each branch of our Government. It has proscribed areas in which the Government may not meddle. Any actor or agent of the Government who attempts to usurp power not given them through the Constitution is an outlaw. Any person who attempts to enforce laws which are repugnant to the Constitution is an outlaw and a criminal, is violating their Oath of Office, and should be defended against as such. This is one of the reasons that the Statists try so hard to nominate people to the courts who have an elastic view of what is Constitutional. If they twist the plain meaning of the plain text, if they torture the words enough, perhaps anything they can then dream up will be deemed as acceptable to the Constitution.

When I was in high school, our civics class covered the Constitution, including the Marbury v. Madison case. Do they still do so? I would bet not. It interferes with the teaching that the State is supreme...

Newbius

Senate Incumbent Rankings Part 2

Fun with Spreadsheets...

The previous rankings were biased in favor of the 3 gun rights scores. The listing below is biased differently, and exposes a small bit of hypocrisy on the part of some Democrats.

The hypocrisy is that these Democrats will pander to the Gun Lobby, while remaining firmly in Statist territory on everything else. The bias in the score weightings is based upon their votes on the major legislation this year. This ranking, unlike the previous list, really highlights the disparity between someone who professes support for gun rights, and someone who is pro-Liberty.

The scoring is as follows:

Gun Rights Composite 0-4
Health Care x5
TARP x3
Sotomayo Confirmation x4
Wall Street Bailout x2
Reciprocity 1
National Park Carry 1
Maximum possible - 20 points

The sort order is still Score, arranged by Seniority. Please take note that the NRA scored both the National Park Carry vote, and National Reciprocity. As you look down-list you will see a lot of "D" and "F"-rated Democrats (1 or 0 in the GR column) who raised their NRA Grades for the 2010 election cycle by voting for these measures (after failure was assured). Like Harry Reid highlighted earlier, they get a PASS from the NRA because they have played the right song on the fiddle, yet all of their other moves are anti-liberty.

SCORE SEN NM P ST GR HC TARP SOTO WS REC NPC
20 4 Orrin Hatch R UT 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 6 Thad Cochran R MS 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 14 Mitch McConnell R KY 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 17 Richard Shelby R AL 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 31 Bob Bennett R UT 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 32 Kay Bailey Hutchison R TX 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 33 Jim Inhofe R OK 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 35 Jon Kyl R AZ 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 37 Sam Brownback R KS 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 38 Pat Roberts R KS 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 43 Jeff Sessions R AL 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 45 Mike Enzi R WY 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 47 Jim Bunning R KY 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 48 Mike Crapo R ID 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 55 John Ensign R NV 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 58 Lisa Murkowski R AK 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 60 Saxby Chambliss R GA 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 63 John Cornyn R TX 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 65 Richard Burr R NC 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 66 Jim DeMint R SC 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 67 Tom Coburn R OK 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 68 John Thune R SD 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 69 Johnny Isakson R GA 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 70 David Vitter R LA 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 77 Bob Corker R TN 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 82 John Barrasso R WY 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 83 Roger Wicker R MS 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 86 Mike Johanns R NE 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 89 Jim Risch R ID 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
19 98 George LeMieux R FL 4 1 1 1 1 1 0
18 9 Chuck Grassley R IA 4 1 1 1 0 1 1
18 18 John McCain R AZ 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
16 20 Kit Bond R MO 4 1 1 0 1 1 1
16 61 Lindsey Graham R SC 4 1 1 0 1 1 1
15 62 Lamar Alexander R TN 4 1 1 0 1 1 0
14 28 Judd Gregg R NH 2 1 1 0 1 1 1
12 3 Richard Lugar R IN 1 1 1 0 1 0 1
12 50 George Voinovich R OH 1 1 1 0 1 0 1
11 99 *Scott Brown R MA 4 0 1 1 0 0 0
9 34 Olympia Snowe R ME 2 1 0 0 0 1 1
9 44 Susan Collins R ME 2 1 0 0 0 1 1
6 5 Max Baucus D MT 4 0 0 0 0 1 1
6 19 Harry Reid D NV 4 0 0 0 0 1 1
6 57 Ben Nelson D NE 4 0 0 0 0 1 1
6 92 Mark Begich D AK 4 0 0 0 0 1 1
5 10 Arlen Specter D PA 4 0 0 0 0 0 1
5 29 Russ Feingold D WI 1 0 0 0 1 1 1
5 40 Tim Johnson D SD 4 0 0 0 0 1 0
5 76 Jim Webb D VA 3 0 0 0 0 1 1
5 81 Jon Tester D MT 3 0 0 0 0 1 1
5 88 Mark Warner D VA 3 0 0 0 0 1 1
5 95 Michael Bennet D CO 3 0 0 0 0 1 1
4 42 Mary Landrieu D LA 2 0 0 0 0 1 1
4 64 Mark Pryor D AR 2 0 0 0 0 1 1
4 75 Bob Casey, Jr. D PA 2 0 0 0 0 1 1
4 84 Mark Udall D CO 2 0 0 0 0 1 1
3 21 Kent Conrad D ND 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
3 26 Byron Dorgan D ND 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
3 49 Blanche Lincoln D AR 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
3 51 Evan Bayh D IN 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
3 73 Bernie Sanders I VT 2 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 79 Amy Klobuchar D MN 2 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 85 Tom Udall D NM 2 0 0 0 0 1 0
3 87 Jeanne Shaheen D NH 2 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 91 Jeff Merkley D OR 2 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 97 Al Franken D MN 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
2 2 Patrick Leahy D VT 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
2 52 Bill Nelson D FL 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
2 56 Maria Cantwell D WA 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
2 90 Kay Hagan D NC 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
1 11 Jeff Bingaman D NM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 13 Tom Harkin D IA 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1 15 Jay Rockefeller D WV 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 22 Herb Kohl D WI 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 36 Ron Wyden D OR 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 74 Sherrod Brown D OH 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 Daniel Inouye D HI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 7 Carl Levin D MI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 8 Christopher Dodd D CT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 12 John Kerry D MA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 16 Barbara Mikulski D MD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 23 Joe Lieberman ID CT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 24 Daniel Akaka D HI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 25 Dianne Feinstein D CA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 27 Barbara Boxer D CA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 30 Patty Murray D WA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 39 Richard Durbin D IL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 41 Jack Reed D RI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 46 Chuck Schumer D NY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 53 Tom Carper D DE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 54 Debbie Stabenow D MI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 59 Frank Lautenberg D NJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 71 Bob Menendez D NJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 72 Ben Cardin D MD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 78 Claire McCaskill D MO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 80 Sheldon Whitehouse D RI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 93 Roland Burris D IL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 94 Ted Kaufman D DE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 96 Kirsten Gillibrand D NY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pax,

Newbius

*NOTE: Scott Brown is not given credit for his stance on the Health Care vote even though he stated that he was opposed to the measure. Also, he is given no credit for the votes on Reciprocity and Park Carry. Had he been elected in time to cast his vote on Health Care, his score would have been 5 points higher at 16, right above Lamar Alexander. If credited for both gun votes as well, he would place right behind John McCain due to Seniority.

Senate Incumbent Rankings

I have compiled my "Newbius Rankings" of current Senate Incumbents, based upon my view of Liberty and Gun Rights issues. This table lists all current incumbents, their current Seniority, and my ratings based on recent votes and overall history regarding gun rights. The table rates as follows:

Composite Gun Rights grade (expressed as a number 4-0 A-F)
Health Care Vote (For=0, Against =1)
TARP Vote (For=0, Against=1)
Sotomayor Confirmation (For=0, Against=1)
Wall Street Bailout (For=0, Against=1)
National CCW Reciprocity (Against=0, For=1)
National Parks Carry (Against=0, For=1)

The maximum possible score is 10 and the scoring is biased towards Second Amendment freedom.

The data is sorted in order by Score, then by Seniority

SC SN Name GR HC TARP SOTO WS NCR NPC
10 4 Orrin Hatch (R-UT) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 6 Thad Cochran (R-MS) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 14 Mitch McConnell (R-KY) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 17 Richard Shelby (R-AL) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 31 Bob Bennett (R-UT) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 32 Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 33 Jim Inhofe (R-OK) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 35 Jon Kyl (R-AZ) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 37 Sam Brownback (R-KS) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 38 Pat Roberts (R-KS) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 43 Jeff Sessions (R-AL) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 45 Mike Enzi (R-WY) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 47 Jim Bunning (R-KY) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 48 Mike Crapo (R-ID) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 55 John Ensign (R-NV) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 58 Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 60 Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 63 John Cornyn (R-TX) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 65 Richard Burr (R-NC) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 66 Jim DeMint (R-SC) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 67 Tom Coburn (R-OK) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 68 John Thune (R-SD) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 69 Johnny Isakson (R-GA) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 70 David Vitter (R-LA) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 77 Bob Corker (R-TN) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 82 John Barrasso (R-WY) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 83 Roger Wicker (R-MS) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 86 Mike Johanns (R-NE) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 89 Jim Risch (R-ID) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
9 9 Chuck Grassley (R-IA) 4 1 1 1 0 1 1
9 20 Kit Bond (R-MO) 4 1 1 0 1 1 1
9 61 Lindsey Graham (R-SC) 4 1 1 0 1 1 1
9 98 George LeMieux (R-FL) 4 1 1 1 1 1 0
8 18 John McCain (R-AZ) 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
8 62 Lamar Alexander (R-TN) 4 1 1 0 1 1 0
7 28 Judd Gregg (R-NH) 2 1 1 0 1 1 1
6 5 Max Baucus (D-MT) 4 0 0 0 0 1 1
6 19 Harry Reid (D-NV) 4 0 0 0 0 1 1
6 57 Ben Nelson (D-NE) 4 0 0 0 0 1 1
6 92 Mark Begich (D-AK) 4 0 0 0 0 1 1
6 99 Scott Brown (R-MA) 4 0 1 1 0 0 0
5 3 Richard Lugar (R-IN) 1 1 1 0 1 0 1
5 10 Arlen Specter (D-PA) 4 0 0 0 0 0 1
5 34 Olympia Snowe (R-ME) 2 1 0 0 0 1 1
5 40 Tim Johnson (D-SD) 4 0 0 0 0 1 0
5 44 Susan Collins (R-ME) 2 1 0 0 0 1 1
5 50 George Voinovich (R-OH) 1 1 1 0 1 0 1
5 76 Jim Webb (D-VA) 3 0 0 0 0 1 1
5 81 Jon Tester (D-MT) 3 0 0 0 0 1 1
5 88 Mark Warner (D-VA) 3 0 0 0 0 1 1
5 95 Michael Bennet (D-CO) 3 0 0 0 0 1 1
4 29 Russ Feingold (D-WI) 1 0 0 0 1 1 1
4 42 Mary Landrieu (D-LA) 2 0 0 0 0 1 1
4 64 Mark Pryor (D-AR) 2 0 0 0 0 1 1
4 75 Bob Casey, Jr. (D-PA) 2 0 0 0 0 1 1
4 84 Mark Udall (D-CO) 2 0 0 0 0 1 1
3 21 Kent Conrad (D-ND) 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
3 26 Byron Dorgan (D-ND) 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
3 49 Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
3 51 Evan Bayh (D-IN) 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
3 73 Bernie Sanders (I-VT) 2 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 79 Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) 2 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 85 Tom Udall (D-NM) 2 0 0 0 0 1 0
3 87 Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) 2 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 91 Jeff Merkley (D-OR) 2 0 0 0 0 0 1
2 2 Patrick Leahy (D-VT) 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
2 52 Bill Nelson (D-FL) 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
2 90 Kay Hagan (D-NC) 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
1 11 Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 13 Tom Harkin (D-IA) 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1 15 Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 22 Herb Kohl (D-WI) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 36 Ron Wyden (D-OR) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 56 Maria Cantwell (D-WA) 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
1 74 Sherrod Brown (D-OH) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 97 Al Franken (D-MN) 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 Daniel Inouye (D-HI) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 7 Carl Levin (D-MI) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 8 Christopher Dodd (D-CT) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 12 John Kerry (D-MA) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 16 Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 23 Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 24 Daniel Akaka (D-HI) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 25 Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 27 Barbara Boxer (D-CA) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 30 Patty Murray (D-WA) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 39 Richard Durbin (D-IL) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 41 Jack Reed (D-RI) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 46 Chuck Schumer (D-NY) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 53 Tom Carper (D-DE) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 54 Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 59 Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 71 Bob Menendez (D-NJ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 72 Ben Cardin (D-MD) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 78 Claire McCaskill (D-MO) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 80 Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 93 Roland Burris (D-IL) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 94 Ted Kaufman (D-DE) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 96 Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sorry about the formatting, I haven't mastered tables in HTML yet and I wanted to get this out. For ease of reading, you might want to dump the table into a spreadsheet.

To decipher, using Orrin Hatch as an example:

10 4 Orrin Hatch (R-UT) 4 1 1 1 1 1 1

Total Score 10, Current Seniority 4, Name (Party Affiliation-ST), Gun Rights 4 (A), Health Care 1 (Against), Tarp 1 (Against), Sotomayor Confirmation 1 (Against), Wall Street Bailout 1 (Against), National Parks Carry 1 (For), National CCW Reciprocity 1 (For).

Using this rating system we see that, on issues important to me, he maxes the grade. His current Overall Seniority is #4 (Republican Seniority #2 behind lower-rated Dick Lugar), and if my decision was between this Senator and an unknown, I would likely vote for him.

I am not a single-issue voter. I view Liberty issues as being intertwined, with the most telling indicator of a politician's support for Liberty being their support for our Second Amendment rights.

Usually, but not always, a politician who supports our gun rights also supports civil liberties. A very telling example of this is Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

6 19 Harry Reid (D-NV) 4 0 0 0 0 1 1

While his overall gun rights score is still a 4 (A), his actual votes on the other key issues were against Liberty. His support for Statist policies manifested in votes for expansion of government with regard to ObamaCare, TARP, Wall Street bailouts, and in his vote to confirm Sotomayor. While Harry Reid might be a friend of the NRA, Harry Reid is not a friend of Liberty.

Please do you own research on the people representing you in Congress. Before you vote, use resources like Open Secrets and Project Vote Smart to discover where a candidate stands and who is funding their campaign. Create tables of your own based upon issues important to you.

Most importantly, get involved.

Pax,

Newbius

Independence Day July 4th, 2010

..."We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"...

As it was written 234 years ago, and is still the foundation of our Nation. We are a Nation, not of Men or Corporations, but of Law. Justice requires that assurance of equality be found in our dealings with others. That we not sacrifice the unpopular for the popular. That we not render the fruits of prosperity as a crime to be apologized for, nor taken for benefit of those who will not earn it.

The American Dream is that each of us, citizens of the greatest experiment in self-governance, be free to achieve to the level of our industry, innovation, or effort. That each of us has the freedom to pursue our livelihood, without fear of confiscation by arbitrary men with the trappings of power yet no moral basis to exercise it.

We were founded on the principles of Liberty. We broke free of one tyrant three thousand miles away. Did we trade him for three thousand tyrants, one mile away?

On this Independence Day, 2010, take the time between grilling your burgers and dogs and pouring another cold beer to reflect upon the founding idea enshrined in our Declaration of Independence. Take the time to understand that Freedom and Liberty are messy, and yet being Free is the only just way to live one's life.

To all of the Patriots who have sacrificed for my Freedom, all the way back to April 19, 1775 and up through to today: I salute you.

Pax,

Newbius

Day By Day, Declaration of Independence

PASS THIS ON
H/T Scott McCray

Flag Day-2010

Today, June 14, is Flag Day. A day of remembrance and honor for our flag and what it represents.

As a reminder to those who would denigrate the concept of the United States as a Nation (and who advocate open borders and polyculturalism), I present our Pledge of Allegiance:

'I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.'

We were founded as a Republic, not a democracy. We are a nation under God, but you may worship as you please (or not at all). We are a nation of Laws, not of Men, though our current representatives seem to have forgotten this.

So, you people who denigrate our Nation, a reminder and fair warning: We are only a nation "indivisible" for as long as there is Liberty and Justice for all. When some men are held to different standards of account because of cronyism, favoritism, or political sway, then the nation is in peril.

Kind of like now.

Newbius
|||