In the last couple days, the JoeBama mis-administration has trotted out the old, Marxist trope about “needs”. Specifically, “Who, in God’s name, needs a weapon that can hold 100 rounds, or 40 rounds, or 20 rounds?”
Sound familiar? Maybe because it’s derived, at least ideologically, from: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Same thinking. Same non sequitur. Same Marxist depravity.
Nowhere, in the US government’s purview is it to determine what I need or do not need. That is for me, alone, to decide. And, it is certainly outside the jurisdiction of “government” to attempt to frame my rights in terms of some political/bureaucratic arbitrary assessment of my needs. I won’t be having that. We won’t be having that conversation. And, if that’s your start point, then we have reached an impasse.
Let’s examine this philosophical non-starter through the lens of any other right. If the government can determine your need to keep and bear a weapon loaded with 20 rounds, what else do they get to control via the “needs argument”?
Does your family really need two cars?
Do you really need to earn more than minimum wage?
Do you need air conditioning in the summer?
Do you really need to eat 3 meals a day?
Do you really need to exercise all your rights or can you give a few up for the “common good”?
Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit (formerly Estate/Property) do not limit your exercise of rights on the basis of need. Nor, does the Bill of Rights contain any measure of limit on the free exercise of any of the rights outlined therein. If we assume – as we rightly should – that the aforementioned rights are Natural Rights (not granted by government) then, it follows that government may not revoke or limit them. The only moral limiting factor on my rights is if my exercise thereof infringes on another’s similar rights. And… my keeping and bearing a gun with x-round capacity infringes on no one’s rights.
If would-be, Tin Pot Joe, feels that he doesn’t need 20 rounds… that’s his business. And, I’m fine with that. But, I will not be drawn into a goofy debate about my rights starting from a Marxist assumption. And, neither should anyone else.
While the mis-administration wrestles with and loses to that fundamentally American bit of orthodoxy, I’ll leave you with this:
Multiple governors signaled that they will be taking action against Democrat President Joe Biden after Biden officially unveiled his initial plan to attack Second Amendment rights.
Biden announced a series of actions, which he articulated during a press conference where he made multiple false claims, targeting two types of gun parts: pistol braces and chunks of plastic and metal that are unfinished firearms. The Biden administration also will be publishing “model red flag legislation” for states to consider. This comes just a couple of weeks after the Biden administration urged the Supreme Court to uphold a warrantless gun confiscation case.
White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said following Biden’s press conference that the president’s actions were his “initial actions,” that there “will be more,” and that he intends to “use the power of his presidency” to crack down on Americans’ constitutionally protected Second Amendment rights.
Numerous governors immediately pushed back on Biden’s attack on Second Amendment rights and indicated that they will be taking action to protect their residents from Biden’s agenda.
“Biden is threatening our 2nd Amendment rights. He just announced a new liberal power grab to take away our guns,” Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) wrote on Twitter. “We will NOT allow this in TX. It’s time to get legislation making TX a 2nd Amendment Sanctuary State passed and to my desk for signing.”
Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy (R) said that Biden’s actions “won’t save lives or stop criminals,” and would only “disarm law abiding citizens.”
“Alaska is a Second Amendment sanctuary state, and we will be evaluating our options,” Dunleavy said.
“I think it’s out of control and it’s obvious that they can’t get it through Congress and so he’s acting on his own,” Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds (R) said. “He’s doing it at a rapid speed. There has not been another president, I don’t think, in history that has implemented the number of Executive Orders that this president has implemented. And the hypocrisy of running as a uniter and a president that was going to bring both parties together and heal this country, he has done anything but that. He is continuing to divide the country and he’s doing it through these outlandish Executive Orders.”
South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem (R) highlighted the portion of the Second Amendment that states “shall not be infringed,” writing: “Biden claims that his actions won’t infringe on the 2nd Amendment. That’s false.”
“Taking away guns with Red Flag laws is an infringement,” Noem continued. “Placing new limits on firearms sales is an infringement. Curbing ammo purchases is an infringement.”
Idaho Governor Brad Little (R) said that the state will be standing up for its residents’ Second Amendment rights.
“Idaho will not stand for President Biden’s unilateral actions to erode your Second Amendment rights,” Little said. “Idaho’s Congressional delegation and I are in lockstep in our opposition to the President’s actions and his direction to Congress to strip law-abiding Americans of their constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”
Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon (R) tweeted: “Wyoming is, has always been, and will continue to be a state where 2nd Amendment rights are recognized and protected.”
“I oppose any orders or actions imposed from the federal level that infringe on this fundamental right,” Gordon continued. “Today I signed HB 236 which prohibits financial institutions and payment processors in Wyoming from discriminating against firearms businesses engaged in lawful commerce.”
Perhaps the most consistent question about the installed dementia patient occupying the oval office, is about who actually is planning the policy, scheduling the implementation and giving Biden his instructions after his breakfast pudding. For those who have followed politics closely, the answer has always been obvious: Barack Obama and the Chicago crew.
JoeBama is not a meme, nor is it a snarky slap at the current White House occupant, it is a reality.
Barack Obama and his ideologues (who took over the DNC) are now completely in control over the leftist policy execution. Obama with the help of his former administration crew, eliminated the remaining remnants of the Clinton machine, installed Tom Perez and then set about absorbing the AME church network…. that’s where James Clyburn came in, to endorse Biden as part of the final stages of the plan.
Today, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, the former spokesperson for Obama’s State Department, essentially admitted that Obama’s network was in charge, and Biden receives his instructions from the crew.
There is a history – a backstory – that only a handful of people genuinely understand. The answers boil down to the less discussed issue of ideological camps and the modern alignment that has taken place over the past decade. The most visible reference for the inflection point was the 2008 primary contest between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
Throughout the first decade of this millennium there was an ideological shift, an inflection point, that became ¹most clear in the rise of a little known state representative who was appointed to become a Senator from Illinois, his name was Barack Obama. In the background of Obama’s rise were the people who designed the modern political left. Those Obama creationists were/are hardline revolutionary communist types.
This RevCom group was comprised of the more radical elements of the progressive movement; those who wanted to “fundamentally change” the United States, and who have a very patient and methodical plan to do so.
Those elements took control by convincing the far-left labor movement to abandon the traditional Democrat apparatus and support a more radical approach. The SEIU, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, UAW, UFCW and others were leveraged to this position through promised financial benefit if they went along.
Those groups became the more powerful ammunition needed by the radical community activist teams, which were entirely on the side of Obama. Hillary Clinton’s first run for the presidency was crushed under the weight of the leverage all of the radicals aligned on the Obama side. Clinton was only left with the option to support the extremists in exchange for support in 2016.
However, the support she received was not full-throated. The ideological hatred that was created during the earlier inflection point, when the camps were at war, left scars. Those scars never healed; and, quite frankly the radicals were not going to support someone they just didn’t like.
Radical footsoldiers operate best on feelings and emotions. Clinton just didn’t do it for them… One by one the traditional democrat left was wiped out by the more extreme radical leftists. [Remember the destruction of the Bart Supak “blue dogs”?]
Fast forward to today, very recently, and what we are seeing is the outcome of the radical-left in complete control over the internal club systems and political party apparatus. It took some time for this takeover to matriculate.
We are there now…. and into this far-left soup of radical elements the new left-wing media is mixed. The media are now activists for the radicals. This is why there is a more brutally obvious bias present today that was not present before. The bias was always present, but the scale of the ideological nature of the bias was not always as visible. Today the ideological support is crystal clear.
The issue for the Andrew Cuomo’s and Gavin Newsom’s of the world is inherently a matter of club selection. Barack Obama, meaning the people behind the Obama system of radical elements, were the decision-makers in the 2020 Democrat primary race. They will never give up that control now.
Team Obama selected Joe Biden specifically because he was controllable; extremely controllable and almost cognitively disconnected from any functional capabilities. Team Obama also selected and installed Kamala Harris as the Vice President with the intent to use her as the substantive and moldable ally.
When Biden is removed, willingly or by political power, the radicals are planning to use Kamala to continue their “fundamental change” priorities. Biden is being thrown upon the spears of those who want to defend against the attack of the radicals.
The extreme policies we are seeing come from the Biden administration are being assigned to him specifically because he is disposable. The radicals do not care about public opinion of the policies or outcomes because they have Biden in place to absorb all the negative attachments.
Kamala Harris is the key to seeing the hidden hand of the Obama control agents at work. Harris’s associations are Obama’s associations. Harris’s crew is Obama’s crew. Anyone who is not Harris; and who carries a perspective of potential political influence; is now a thorn in the agenda.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo was rising in influence, as a result he needed to be eliminated in order to retain the exclusive position of Kamala Harris as heir to the radical agenda.
Watch over the next several weeks, months and years and you will see prominent Democrats left with a decision…. Support Harris (meaning those behind her) and the RevCom agenda, OR be targeted for removal by the new radical system that includes a willing media taking targeting orders from the club.
That is what is going on…
[¹Any person who was 15 to 30 years old in 2007/2008 is lost to this level of manipulation. They were the people who drank the Obama Kool-Aid and they became permanently infected. Their sense of self, their matriculation, came into being during the Obama psychological war. You will note they are currently, approximately, 28 to 40 years old (+/- a few years). When you encounter a leftist person who appears to have totally lost their mind over the COVID stuff; and or they are going bat-shit crazy about the masks, in such a way they just cannot allow you to exist without their attempt to confront you; you will note the vast majority fit in this age group of 30 to 45. There is no reasoning with those who defined their world views in the Obama era. They are a lost generation; and, unfortunately, a few of them were breeders.]
Earlier today Joe Biden raised some eyebrows when he said “no amendment to the constitution is absolute.” The first ten amendments to the constitution are commonly known as “The Bill of Rights.”
The occupant of the oval office, and head of the executive branch, saying the Bill of Rights is not absolute, should be challenged immediately to qualify that statement.
As a reminder:
♦ Amendment 1 – Freedom of Religion, Speech, and the Press
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
♦ Amendment 2 – The Right to Bear Arms
A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
♦ Amendment 3 – The Housing of Soldiers
No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
♦ Amendment 4 – Protection from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
♦ Amendment 5 – Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property
No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
♦ Amendment 6 – Rights of Accused Persons in Criminal Cases
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
♦ Amendment 7 – Rights in Civil Cases
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law.
♦ Amendment 8 – Excessive Bail, Fines, and Punishments Forbidden
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
♦ Amendment 9 – Other Rights Kept by the People
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
♦ Amendment 10 – Undelegated Powers Kept by the States and the People
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
The White House has released some details of the six executive actions the JoeBama team has put together for Joe Biden to sign.
(1) The Justice Department, within 30 days, will issue a proposed rule to help stop the proliferation of “ghost guns.” We are experiencing a growing problem: criminals are buying kits containing nearly all of the components and directions for finishing a firearm within as little as 30 minutes and using these firearms to commit crimes. When these firearms turn up at crime scenes, they often cannot be traced by law enforcement due to the lack of a serial number. The Justice Department will issue a proposed rule to help stop the proliferation of these firearms.
(2) The Justice Department, within 60 days, will issue a proposed rule to make clear when a device marketed as a stabilizing brace effectively turns a pistol into a short-barreled rifle subject to the requirements of the National Firearms Act. The alleged shooter in the Boulder tragedy last month appears to have used a pistol with an arm brace, which can make a firearm more stable and accurate while still being concealable.
(3) The Justice Department, within 60 days, will publish model “red flag” legislation for states. Red flag laws allow family members or law enforcement to petition for a court order temporarily barring people in crisis from accessing firearms if they present a danger to themselves or others. The President urges Congress to pass an appropriate national “red flag” law, as well as legislation incentivizing states to pass “red flag” laws of their own. In the interim, the Justice Department’s published model legislation will make it easier for states that want to adopt red flag laws to do so.
(4) The Administration is investing in evidence-based community violence interventions. Community violence interventions are proven strategies for reducing gun violence in urban communities through tools other than incarceration. Because cities across the country are experiencing a historic spike in homicides, the Biden-Harris Administration is taking a number of steps to prioritize investment in community violence interventions.
The American Jobs Plan proposes a $5 billion investment over eight years to support community violence intervention programs. A key part of community violence intervention strategies is to help connect individuals to job training and job opportunities.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is organizing a webinar and toolkit to educate states on how they can use Medicaid to reimburse certain community violence intervention programs, like Hospital-Based Violence Interventions.
Five federal agencies are making changes to 26 different programs to direct vital support to community violence intervention programs as quickly as possible. These changes mean we can start increasing investments in community violence interventions as we wait on Congress to appropriate additional funds. Read more about these agency actions here.
(5) The Justice Department will issue an annual report on firearms trafficking. In 2000, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) issued a report summarizing information regarding its investigations into firearms trafficking, which is one way firearms are diverted into the illegal market where they can easily end up in the hands of dangerous individuals. Since the report’s publication, states, local, and federal policymakers have relied on its data to better thwart the common channels of firearms trafficking. But there is good reason to believe that firearms trafficking channels have changed since 2000, for example due to the emergence of online sales and proliferation of “ghost guns.” The Justice Department will issue a new, comprehensive report on firearms trafficking and annual updates necessary to give policymakers the information they need to help address firearms trafficking today.
(6) The President will nominate David Chipman to serve as Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. ATF is the key agency enforcing our gun laws, and it needs a confirmed director in order to do the job to the best of its ability. But ATF has not had a confirmed director since 2015. Chipman served at ATF for 25 years and now works to advance commonsense gun safety laws. (White House Link)