Category Archives: Government Schools

Acts of Rebellion

Posted on by

There were two acts of rebellion this week. One occurred in Washington…state, that is. The other occurred in Boston—241 years ago. That second act of rebellion is known as the Boston Tea Party.

http://www.bostonteapartyship.com/wp-content/themes/btps/images/tea-thrown-by-patriots.jpg

The Boston Tea Party, December 16, 1773.

If you look at root causes, you’ll notice that both events were/are driven by the same motivation—rebellion against a corrupt and tyrannical state. In Boston, the root cause of the Tea Party was an act of economic warfare by the British East India company with the compliance of the British government against the growing competition of the American colonies, especially the ship owners of New England.

In Washington state, the rebellion is more wide-spread. It is the conservative gun-owners and law enforcement officials against the liberals in control of the Seattle/Tacoma area. The conservatives own the statehouse, less the Governor. Seattle/Tacoma has the larger population and controls the Governor. Bloomberg paid for the passage of Initiative 594 that imposed unrealistic regulations on the ownership and transfer of firearms.

The anniversary of the Boston Tea Party slipped by with little attention, if any, from the mainstream media. Their attention was focused on Washington state and the public rejection of I-594 by gun owners and law enforcement across the state.

The MSM was watching, but not reporting—unless the Seattle liberal machine tried to enforce their new law at a rally and it blew up in their face. But, the libs backed down and no confrontation, other than in local headlines, took place. Even less attention by the MSM was given to a press release by the Sheriff and Prosecutor of Lewis County, WA. They declared they would not enforce the new I-594 law.

‘I Will Not Comply’ rally draws gun-rights supporters to Olympia

Protesters rallied at the state Capitol in Olympia to denounce an expanded initiative on gun-purchase background checks that voters widely approved last month.

Originally published December 13, 2014 at 7:00 PM | Page modified December 15, 2014 at 7:10 AM

By Joseph O’Sullivan, Seattle Times Olympia bureau

http://seattletimes.com/ABPub/2014/12/13/2025232642.jpg

Alan Berner / The Seattle Times. Above, Sam Wilson, carrying a rifle on his back, waits on the Capitol grounds to address the crowd.

OLYMPIA — Following a tradition going back to at least the Whiskey Rebellion of the early 1790s, demonstrators gathered here Saturday afternoon at the Capitol to protest the tyranny of what they consider unlawful American government.

But instead of decrying a tax on distilled liquor such as Pennsylvanians did just years after the U.S. Constitution was ratified, demonstrators here at the “I Will Not Comply” rally denounced a law expanding gun-purchase background checks that was approved last month by Washington voters.

Initiative 594, which voters passed by a 19-point margin, expands background checks to people buying firearms in private sales or exchanging them in a transfer.

…

Speaking to the crowd, rally organizer Gavin Seim blamed events like the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting in Connecticut on people trying to regulate firearms.

“The people that are trying to take our guns are the ones that are causing events where children and families and people are lost,” said Seim, who ran unsuccessfully this year for U.S. Congress.

Washington State Patrol put the crowd at about 1,000 people; Seim estimated 1,500.

You can read the entire artlcle here at the Seattle Times.

The Washington state liberals and Bloomberg used the shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School as justification. This week, some of the families of the Sandy Hook victims filed suit against Bushmaster and others claiming the AR-15 is a military weapon and unsuitable for civilian use, therefore the sale of such a weapon should be banned.

I won’t post a portion of that article, it is just too stupid. You can follow the link and read it yourself. All I’ll say that New England, suffering under liberal oppression, is the only area such a suit has a chance of winning. Manufacturers cannot be held responsible for the use of their products. If that were so, no brewery would now exist in the United States, nor would alcohol be allowed to be imported.

The act of rebellion in Washington state was largely ignored outside of Seattle. The Connecticut lawsuit, however, could have wide-spread impact if the families win. Of course it would be too much to expect for them to sue the real culprits, the local school district who chose to allow those students and teachers to be unprotected, exposed and vulnerable to a mental defective and thief.

Facebook

Hypocrisy

Posted on by

The news this morning is filled with items that the surviving NewTown students are going back to school at a new location. There will be armed guards at the school to insure their safety.  Too bad they didn’t think of that at their old school.

Newtown shooting survivors go back to school

MONROE, Conn. Classes resumed Thursday for the students of Sandy Hook Elementary School for the first time since last month’s massacre in Newtown, where a gunman killed 20 first-graders and six educators.

With their original school still being treated as a crime scene, the more than 400 students are attending classes at a refurbished school in the neighboring town of Monroe. Law enforcement officers have been guarding the new school, and by the reckoning of police, it is “the safest school in America.”

I seem to remember a few years ago, well a couple of decades ago, when drugs and gangs were problems in schools, there were armed officers assigned to schools then. I don’t know how many there still are. I believe they are now called “resource” officers.

That leads to the following question. Why is the NEA and AFT so strongly against armed guards in school? They don’t want armed, trained teachers, either? So what do they propose?

** crickets **

They have no solution and don’t want ours either. Perhaps they would be happier in a different area of employment? I wonder how RTW would affect their, the NEA and AFT, attitude, hmmm?

***

I see that our Senator Roy Blount was bragging that he voted for the new tax plan and “averted” the fiscal cliff. Now we’re told the Senate only had access to that plan for 3 minutes before it came to a vote and it’s filled with pork, new taxes and few, if any, spending cuts.

So, Senator Blount, you’re proud of voting for a bill that you did not read, knew nothing of its contents, raised taxes and did not cut any spending. Is that correct? Then why do you expect to be re-elected?

No bill would be better than more pork, more spending. If the bill isn’t passed, the government won’t stop. I don’t see you refusing Obama’s bribe—your pay-raise, either.

RINO.

***

Something is going on in Illinois. It appears the Illinois legislature is jumping on Diane Feinstein’s gun-grabbing plan. This notice from the Illinois State Rifle Association was sent to its members this week.

SPECIAL ALERT UPDATE– YOUR ACTION REQUIRED SENATE COMMITTEE APPROVES BILLS TO RUN RANGES OUT OF BUSINESS AND BAN 80% OF YOUR GUNS

MESSAGE FROM COMMITTEE DEMOCRATS: “Eliminating law-abiding gun owners is a good ‘first step’ towards a ‘civil society.’”

Votes on HB815 and HB1263 were split along party lines in the Senate Public Health Committee Wednesday night with the committee Democrats voting 6-4 and 6-3 to send the bills to the full senate. If these two bills become law, they will resulting most, if not all ranges in the state going out of business as well as the banning of ALL semiautomatic rifles, pistols and shotguns as well as banning all pump shotguns and rifles.

In comments made during testimony, committee Democrats stated plainly that HB815 and HB1263 were “first steps” and that these bills have as their objective the creation of a “more civil society.” In other words, elimination of lawful gun owners is a required first step for creating a more civil society. Of course, there was no mention of the impact of eliminating criminals.

I’m sure these democrats are proud how well gun banning has worked for Chicago and Cook County.

***

Boehner is scrambling to save his Speakership. He’s trying to persuade GOP House members that he’ll be tough with Obama this year…all the while picking off lint from his suit where he rolled over for Obama and the dems.

Boehner tells GOP he’s through negotiating one-on-one with Obama

By Russell Berman – 01/02/13 05:04 PM ET

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is signaling that at least one thing will change about his leadership during the 113th Congress: he’s telling Republicans he is done with private, one-on-one negotiations with President Obama.

During both 2011 and 2012, the Speaker spent weeks shuttling between the Capitol and the White House for meetings with the president in the hopes of striking a grand bargain on the deficit.

Those efforts ended in failure, leaving Boehner feeling burned by Obama and, at times, isolated within his conference.

Or, perhaps it’s the hot breath of opposition to his role as Speaker of the House?

Eleventh Hour: Speaker Boehner Moves to the Right

by Matthew Boyle 3 Jan 2013, 1:36 AM PDT

The Speaker of the House will be elected today and some conservatives believe they have the votes necessary to oust John Boehner. In an appearance on CNBC, American Majority Action spokesman Ron Meyer said there are more than 20 House Republicans willing to vote for someone other than Boehner on Thursday when the 113th Congress convenes to elect a Speaker. Another source from a different organization has similarly confirmed that more than 20 have planned to oppose Boehner.

I don’t trust John Boehner. He’s a liar; a phony to the core interested only in his own benefit. A loyal member of The Ruling Class. The sooner we’re rid of him, the better.

 

 

Facebook

Tuesday’s Notes

Posted on by

Robert A. Heinlein created a science-fiction universe for many of his books. In that universe we would be in the middle of what he called, “The Crazy Years.” We have some fine examples of that just scanning today’s news items.

High school band marches with hammer & sickle

Posted: Sep 25, 2012 8:01 AM CDT Updated: Sep 25, 2012 10:03 AM CDT
By FOX News, By Todd Starnes

newoxfordbands.com / FOX NewsA Pennsylvania high school marching band is raising eyebrows with a halftime performance that commemorates the Russian revolution, complete with red flags, olive military-style uniforms, and giant hammers and sickles.

“St. Petersburg: 1917” is the theme for the New Oxford High School Marching Band. Ironically, the school’s athletic teams are called the Colonials and their colors are red, white and blue. The band’s website features a picture of the group with students holding a hammer and sickle.

“There is no reason for Americans to celebrate the Russian revolution,” said one irate parent who alerted Fox News. “I am sure the millions who died under Communism would not see the joy of celebrating the Russian revolution by a school 10 miles from Gettysburg.”

***

How is this for a surprise? Romney pulls in more campaign donations in HOLLYWOOD than Obama does in New York City aided by Beyonce.

Romney Eyes Hollywood Return After Successful Weekend Fundraiser

By DOMINIC PATTEN | Monday September 24, 2012 @ 11:06am PDT

Turns out Mitt Romney is a big fan of Hollywood. After pulling in $6 million in a fundraiser Saturday at the Beverly Hilton, the GOP candidate could be back in town soon. “This weekend’s event was very successful and there are plans to try to get the Governor back in Los Angeles again after the first or second debate for a similar occasion,” a source close to the Romney campaign.

…

The event pulled in about $2 million more than what President Obama raised at his most recent celebrity-hosted event last week in NYC with Beyoncé and Jay-Z.

And Obama is doing soooo good? All the while Romney gathers more money than Obama in Beverly Hills? Who’da thunk it!?

***

The more California taxes and spends, the more the state goes into debt like a 3rd world despot, people are voting—with their feet.

The Great California Exodus: A Closer Look

Tom Gray & Robert Scardamalia

For decades after World War II, California was a destination for Americans in search of a better life. In many people’s minds, it was the state with more jobs, more space, more sunlight, and more opportunity. They voted with their feet, and California grew spectacularly (its population increased by 137 percent between 1960 and 2010). However, this golden age of migration into the state is over. For the past two decades, California has been sending more people to other American states than it receives from them. Since 1990, the state has lost nearly 3.4 million residents through this migration.

This study describes the great ongoing California exodus, using data from the Census, the Internal Revenue Service, the state’s Department of Finance, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and other sources. We map in detail where in California the migrants come from, and where they go when they leave the state. We then analyze the data to determine the likely causes of California’s decline and the lessons that its decline holds for other states.

The data show a pattern of movement over the past decade from California mainly to states in the western and southern U.S.: Texas, Nevada, and Arizona, in that order, are the top magnet states. Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Idaho, and Utah follow. Rounding out the top ten are two southern states: Georgia and South Carolina.

A finer-grained regional analysis reveals that the main current of migration out of California in the past decade has flowed eastward across the Colorado River, reversing the storied passages of the Dust Bowl era. Southern California had about 55 percent of the state’s population in 2000 but accounted for about 65 percent of the net out-migration in the decade that followed. More than 70 percent of the state’s net migration to Texas came from California’s south.

What has caused California’s transformation from a “pull in” to a “push out” state? The data have revealed several crucial drivers. One is chronic economic adversity (in most years, California unemployment is above the national average). Another is density: the Los Angeles and Orange County region now has a population density of 6,999.3 per square mile—well ahead of New York or Chicago. Dense coastal areas are a source of internal migration, as people seek more space in California’s interior, as well as migration to other states. A third factor is state and local governments’ constant fiscal instability, which sends at least two discouraging messages to businesses and individuals. One is that they cannot count on state and local governments to provide essential services—much less, tax breaks or other incentives. Second, chronically out-of-balance budgets can be seen as tax hikes waiting to happen.

The data also reveal the motives that drive individuals and businesses to leave California. One of these, of course, is work. States with low unemployment rates, such as Texas, are drawing people from California, whose rate is above the national average. Taxation also appears to be a factor, especially as it contributes to the business climate and, in turn, jobs. Most of the destination states favored by Californians have lower taxes. States that have gained the most at California’s expense are rated as having better business climates. The data suggest that many cost drivers—taxes, regulations, the high price of housing and commercial real estate, costly electricity, union power, and high labor costs—are prompting businesses to locate outside California, thus helping to drive the exodus.

There is much more data at the website. I suggest you read the entire article and consider how you and your home state can take advantage of California’s folly and idiocy.

Facebook