February 19, 2019

Open Thread – 5th Day, 2nd Month, 2019

Anti-Christ/False Profit With Satan Horns Fish Hat Invades Arabia

Please use this open thread to post your ideas, information, and comments about issues not covered in articles published on this website. Thank you.


“Red Flag” Laws Are More Than Asking a Judge to be Clairvoyant

David Trahan, executive director of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine (SAM), writes in his latest column that “Red Flag Laws” ask our judges to be clairvoyant, to predict what someone might do if they had a gun in their possession.

The issue here is that when someone deems, from their own perspective, that a person might be a danger to themselves or to other people, should have their constitutional rights – in this case the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms – taken away from them forever or until such time as a judge or others think that right should be restored.

What can possibly go wrong?

The mindset in this post normal society of immorality and social decadence, is that a person is incapable of being responsible for their actions. While this may be partly true when comparing times of the past with those of the future, such irrational thinking is based upon fear and ignorance.

Where once people minded their own damned business, today the trend is to get into the face and affairs of others, especially when another person is operating from a position of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that disagrees with the accuser, i.e. that person willing to file a petition to have another person’s rights stolen from them.

Isn’t the biggest of all questions in this regard, who is going to become ruler of the chicken house? I’ve been around the block a time or two and there exists virtually nobody involved in politics/law enforcement (they go hand in hand), or even health and mental health professionals, who should be trusted to make any kind of judgement as to whether a person is deemed dangerous to themselves or to others, short of the obvious lunatic.

Trahan points out (in a different articles) that laws designed to steal a person’s Second Amendment rights are unique only to the Second Amendment where it is being required to take some kind of “competency” test before you can exercise a right. The argument is often that, in this case, a Second Amendment right can cause the death of a person. So what! Any honest person can tell you that all rights can, directly and indirectly result in bodily injury, mental injury, and sometimes death.

Guns are singled out and always have been. They are singled out because of the mind control and manipulation of all things in this totalitarian/fascist country to keep the masses scared to death, forcing them to call upon more government to keep them safe. The remarkable insanity of this approach is that people call upon the most corrupt and hypocritical organization that exists in the world today, to keep them safe and to protect them. It shows what a fantastic job these fascist bastards have done, when once we were taught that the purpose of the Second Amendment was to insure the tyrannical pond scum of governments would not take from us our rights.

Strong delusion prohibits people from seeing such a basic concept!

At the end of Trahan’s piece he writes: “One of the important lessons I have learned is that the underlying causes of domestic violence, mental health problems and suicide are far more complicated than just taking away a gun.

Furthermore, advocates know best how to address these issues. Instead of trying to find more sophisticated ways to justify a new law that runs counter to our fundamental constitutional rights, I suggest bringing these groups together, with lawmakers and state leaders, to examine these issues in a much more comprehensive and cooperative manner.

It seems like a better approach than relying on laws that ask judges and law enforcement to predict the future.

It is of political necessity for public servants to make statements about “bringing groups together,” but in reality, this post normal existence has moved far beyond any pragmatic approach to solve societal problems. Such approach always results in diminished rights.

So where does that leave us? Simple. Trahan already points out the existing laws that deal with those who choose to use violence. These so-called “Red Flag Laws” are a most dangerous act that places god-like responsibilities into the hands of some in whom I wouldn’t entrust the care of my chickens. Seriously! Do you want some scum-ball politician or incompetent, agenda-driven, crooked judge deciding what’s best for you?

Fear and ignorance of guns leaves a person with irrational hallucinations. And yet I recall the aftermath of the Boston Marathon when people lined the streets watching and applauding as law enforcement, without proper due process of the law, went door to door, sometime busting down doors, pointing weapons of mass destruction at innocent people, under the guise of looking for “terrorists.” This is what fear can do for you. That fear is so well engrained into the minds of the feckless masses, they fail to see the truth and importance of the protection of our existence through the total protection of our rights.

No person should be allowed, say nothing of granted, the authority to stand in judgement as to whether any person is a danger to themselves or others, let alone pretending they can predict the future.

The issue here is not the gun and never has been. To declare the gun the problem is as intelligent as saying lips are responsible for what a person says.

Until such time as this society is willing to address the real problems they have created through their decadence, perversion, and adiamorphicism, frantically and irrationally trying to find just one more LAW that will stop a gun from killing someone, it remains the epitome of craziness.


Open Thread – 4th Day, 2nd Month, 2019

13 – 3 Coincidence?

Please use this open thread to post your ideas, information, and comments about issues not covered in articles published on this website. Thank you.


Open Thread – 2nd Month, 2nd Day, 2019

American Dream: Anyone Can Be President

Please use this open thread to post your ideas, information, and comments about issues not covered in articles published on this website. Thank you.


Ban Maine’s Nomination to Head Public Safety?

Should we choose to support the new Maine governor, Janet Mill’s, pick to head up the Department of Public Safety, then it would be hypocritical to veer from Mike Sauschuck’s reasoning, or lack there of, and we should ban all things that we perceive as scary. Oh, wait a minute. That is already underway in this misguided, brainwashed, sissified, perverted society we have created.

In a report found online, Sauschuck was quoted as saying that when a person was seen openly carrying a rifle, “What he did was scare the hell out of a lot of people.” If that’s his and his followers’ beliefs, then by all means let’s ban Michael Sauschuck, those who support him, and many of his followers because, putting it bluntly, he and his ilk “scare the hell” out of me.

And part of what scares the hell out of me (seriously though, nothing scares the hell out of me) is his other statement made where the report filed this: “he said he stands by his personal views and believes no constitutional right is unlimited.”

This is the totalitarian effort on display all across America. If no constitutional right is unlimited, then why bother to have any. Let’s simply erase anything in the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights (along with “settled” laws like Roe v. Wade) that might even suggest some sort of liberty or freedom that was once exercised freely in this out of control society. After all, if no right is unlimited then the end result always becomes a complete erasure of any and all rights.

The basic foundation of a “conservative” approach to the governing of a people is limited government and the protection of all rights, whether those rights are considered unalienable (never questioned and/or from GOD ALMIGHTY) or are issued as privileges by the fascistic government.

Without the rule of law whose strength lies in the protection of individual rights, chaos ensues. It always has and always will.

When any person in a position of authority over others operate from a position that no laws are sacred and meant to be broken or changed in a progressive fashion that spirals deeper into immoral existence, oppression follows. Anyone would know this who studies true history.

It’s scary if you can see it. But few can or will, even when it is too late…like it already is.


Maine: Crossbow Hunting – To Be Or Not To Be

Maine, once again, is being presented with a bill that would allow the use of crossbows during the regular archery season for deer. Those opposed see this as a means to kill more deer that would in turn take away hunting opportunities for hunting. Those in favor see it as the opposite.

We should toss out mostly what the Maine Guides have to say because their only position on any issue concerning hunting is all about themselves. Such is understandable…to a point, but come on…

Nobody has presented a reason why prohibiting a crossbow during archery season on deer other than for selfish reasons. I ask, is that legitimate?

If we were to take on that attitude, where would we stop. I remember when someone suggested a “primitive” muzzleloader season. That soon became not so primitive a sport so that today a “muzzleloader” is not much different than a single-shot regular firearm. Where’s the beef? Didn’t this elevation of muzzleloader take away somebody else’s hunting opportunity?

One group says that allowing crossbows will result in killing off all the deer before the rifle hunters have a chance. Are there that many crossbow hunters that they would actually force a close of the season early because the deer are all gone? We may be looking at a shorter deer hunting season but not because of crossbows. Where’s the beef?

Maybe we should ban ice fishing because ice fishermen are taking all the fish so fly rodders are left with no fish to catch?

So, do rifle hunters hold the privilege to lay out the who, what, and with what you can hunt because there are more of them?

I need something more to go on other than one group is trying to protect their own selfish interests. If I discover that there are no deer left (I think in many places that’s the case anyway) and the only chance I have to get a deer is to take up crossbow hunting, or archery, then sign me up.

How about an open season deer in July hunting with an atlatl?

I just am not the kind of person that feels justified in dictating to all others how and by what means they can hunt. Give me a good and sound biological reason, or public safety concern and I’m on board. Whine about your own shortcomings of selfishness and you get no support from me.



Camuso Confirmed as IFW Commissioner

You can read Ms. Camuso’s testimony she read before the confirmation committee here.

Congratulations all around for the selection and appointment of Judy Camuso, former Wildlife Director at the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW), to the elevated, tough, and prestigious rank of commissioner. Only time will tell what kind of a commissioner she will be.

Reading her testimony, it runs like a well-prepared political campaign speech written for the purpose of impressing those appointed to approve or disapprove. It is for that reason I put little value behind such a speech, regardless of how promising it may seem to some and world-ending to others.

With all of this in mind, I would like to make a few comments about her goals and perspectives.

My biggest concern was somewhat addressed by the new commissioner when she said, “We need to bring consumptive and non-consumptive users together to help us address the complicated challenges facing fish and wildlife.” In her vision to bring more hunters and fisherman to the sport, one in which the new commissioner points out to be “the primary tools we use to manage fish and wildlife populations…”, she never gets to speak the words I would have loved to have heard.

It is nothing more than a political sham to make such statements of how I am uniquely qualified to bring both sides of the aisle together while never saying the words needed to drive that point home to reality. While anyone, and evidently many are doing it today, can say how great her speech sounds that she is going to unite the consumptive and non-consumptive users together in total harmony, it’s quite another to understand why there is such a deep divide between the two existences and solving the real reason for such a division.

I know of no so-called “consumptive” user who would consider it a decent thing to attempt to force non-consumptive users to abandon their idealisms and lifestyles and exchange them for those of the hunter and fisherman. The real problem here is that non-consumptive users, mostly those who are against hunting, trapping, and fishing, and support the “rights” of animals – sometimes over those of men – make no bones about getting into the faces of consumers demanding they end their practices and fall in line with the radical extremism lifestyles they promote.

The question I have is whether or not Commissioner Camuso understands that and if so, what she intends to do or say that will end the toxic attack? Until she can put an end to this sort of quasi-terroristic existence (totalitarianism), it would not only be ill-advised but dangerous to pursue any kind of funding for MDIFW through general taxation. Such a move would only embellish the already radical separation – the cause of such anger and hatred among groups. If both sides are convinced the other side isn’t out to assassinate their lifestyle in order to fulfill idealistic agendas, then general funding might work. Good luck with that.

The second issue to speak of concerns Camuso’s comments on women and their roles at MDIFW. Camuso states: “I will work to bring more women into the IFW community.” Placing this comment in what I believe to be the context of her testimony, I believe her reference to “the IFW community” means mostly the community existence of the MDIFW operation itself.

Personally, I have no issue with whether qualified men or qualified women are doing the job. I don’t intend to put words in Camuso’s mouth, but I would take opposition to bringing “more women into the IFW community, simply to bring in more women – the same as if it were men. I would hope that the objective of building and operating a fish and wildlife department is with the employment of the best qualified people rather than fulfilling some sort of quota to bring more women aboard. I doubt few understand or agree with my perspective on this. It’s the society we have created – part of striving for mediocrity.

Perhaps this is better toned down when Camuso speaks of her support and claims to continue to boost the involvement of women in outdoor pursuits, including that of hunting and fishing. Go for it! A great idea!

I was most disappointed in the new commissioner’s comments about Climate Change. “The potential impacts are catastrophic and mitigating climate change will require high level support, planning and funding.” And herein lies the political ignorance of Climate Change. A changing climate, something that has existed since the beginning of time, does not need “mitigating” through some fictitious “planning” and certainly not with any fraudulent “funding.”

Climate Change, once more accurately and falsely presented as Global Warming, does not exist in the context presented and any half-witt who didn’t flunk Chemistry 101 knows Climate Change, as sold to the public, cannot exist. It is nothing more than a hoax to con billions of dollars out of an ignorant public brought up on “Bread and Circuses.” Evidently, the new commissioner is part of that religious group (or she used the comment to get her through the confirmation process).

If the new commissioner intends to address climate change (not capitalized) then the effort should be placed in a better understanding of a naturally changing climate and what affects that has on the management of wildlife. That is understandable and should have been an integral part of any and all wildlife management plans; past, present, and future.

But, to think that by devising some kind of plans and finding “funding,” which means more taxation levied against the people, to “mitigate” Climate Change, is a con job that nobody should lend a hand to support.

Camuso has a big job to do. I doubt she will have the time nor the support to accomplish much of any of her lofty goals regardless of her own personal ideals. Government is a destructive, devouring monster that has claimed the ambitions of many who have come before Camuso and many who will follow.

I wish her the best of luck.


Maine 2018 Deer Harvest And Other Data

It does seem a bit odd to be able to put together a deer harvest chart this early in the season. Thanks to the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) for putting to use a new digital tagging system that, if nothing else, gives us hunters a fresh-in-our-minds look at the recent passed deer hunting season.

Below is the chart compiled by the best damned statistician Maine has. The most recent deer hunting season ended with a total deer harvest of 32,438. As has been stated, this total is a bit of an unexpected increase not totally because MDIFW decided to flood the market with a record number of “Any-Deer Permits” (ADP). Let’s hope the MDIFW will provide us with some data on whether the issuance of ADPs brought them closer to the number of female deer killed needed to meet goals.

In addition to the record ADPs issued, much of Maine saw ample snow to hunt on which always brings harvest numbers higher. It should be stated that it appears in a few areas of Central and Southern Maine deer populations are considerably higher than Western, Northern and Eastern Maine. Those areas are still experiencing low deer populations and thus deer harvests.

Looking at the numbers provided, there are a couple items that should be looked at. The number of big bucks (200 pounds or more and those registered with the Maine Sportsman’s Magazine) killed this past season was 559. What that means is that as a percentage of the total deer harvest, big bucks attributed to 1.72%. That figure tells us that the percentage of big bucks making up the harvest remains lower than the percentages from the years 2000 – 2004. The chart shows us that in comparison to the year 2000, big bucks killed was but 72% – i.e. 28% lower.

Looking at these numbers over an extended period of time is telling us that whatever MDIFW is doing in their deer management practices, fewer big bucks, as a percentage of the population, are being taken. Logic should tell us this equates to fewer big bucks in the overall population…sort of. There are other demographics that should be considered before any concrete conclusions can be made. However, the trend has continued for so long now, it appears that Maine is not making any effort to change this aspect of the deer herd.

Below is a photo from the Maine Sportsman of the biggest of the Big Bucks that were registered, weighing in at 300 lbs.


Open Thread – 30th Day, 1st Month, 2019

And Yes, We’re All Gonna Die!

Please use this open thread to post your ideas, information, and comments about issues not covered in articles published on this website. Thank you.


Come Now! Progressivism Caused by Republican Somnolence?

*Editor’s Note* – Below is a link to Victor David Hanson’s piece on the “Progressive Race to the Bottom.” What he writes is, for the most part, quite accurate but lacking in real, in-depth read searching as most members of the Media seem instructed to do. What I am not sure of is whether Hanson actually believes all that he writes.

He correctly blames the rapid transformation of a society into a progressive frenzy that seems out of this world to any true conservative, on a “somnolent” Republican Party. However, Hanson, after showing readers point blank truth that there is no such thing as a Democrat and Republican Party, tries to show hope for the future that the Republican Party will wake up. Wake up from what? Does nobody anymore see the historic Tom Foolery of the make believe two-party system? It’s right in front of our eyes and yet it can’t be seen?

When the Republicans are in control of the White House and Congress, it’s all talk and no action. This cannot be seen in the reality it is because brainwashed, well-trained automatons keep their short attention spans focused on News, Facebook, Twitter, etc. never lifting their hand to read search and discover the real truth that is no longer spoken or made easily available.

When the Democrats are in control of the White House and Congress, it’s all talk and no action. I could verbatim repeat what I just wrote above, but why bother. Both parties practice somnolence it appears, not by choice but by order. Order of whom?

Hanson talks of how Obama changed the goal post in a violent swing to the Left with his presidency of executive actions. We should know, but most don’t, that executive actions can all be erased by the next president. So how has Trump done in erasing Obama’s executive orders? How about socialized medicine? How about secure borders? What has really changed to slow down or halt the out-of-control migration to progressivism? If it can be built with executive actions surely it can be destroyed by the same.

To the extent in which Hanson describes how the society/slaves of the U.S. Corporation, has progressed into socialism and on the verge of communism, there obviously is no longer enough collective brain power to see the obvious – that all of this radical progressive shift didn’t just happen because the Republicans feel asleep. Or, you can continue to dither and believe that that is the real reason. See you later.

Both parties have their sleeping disorders. Politics in government follows a path and plan that is laid out by someone or something bigger than a political party or a college and university system.

The message here seems to be to hear what I say, BUT DON’T GO LOOK! Society and politics is terrible! We’re all gonna die! BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

Until such time as people are willing to put away all the false teachings that have been and currently are being shoved down their throats as truth, we will never move beyond a handful of people willing to spend ten minutes reading someone’s incomplete perspective of why we are where we are and doing what we are doing.

Much of the world is somnolent, incapable of moving beyond the false dichotomy of a Democrat and Republican Party. It’s much, much bigger than that.

Wake Up!!!

“The old Democratic party championed the working classes, wanted secure borders to protect middle-class union wage earners, and focused generous federal entitlement help on the citizen poor. Civil rights were defined as equality of opportunity for all.

That party is long dead. An updated Hubert Humphrey or even Bill Clinton would not recognize any of the present “Democrats.”

Even the old wing of elite liberals is mostly long gone, with its talk of legal immigration only, opposition to censorship, pro-Israel foreign policy, let-it-hang-out Sixties indulgence, and free speech.

It was superseded by grim progressives who are not so much interested in a square, new, or fair deal for the middle classes, as an entirely different deal that redefines everything from the Bill of Rights and the very way we elect presidents and senators to an embrace of identity politics as its first principle.” <<<READ MORE>>>