October 23, 2019

Black Conservatives Discuss NRA Founded to Protect Slaves

VIDEO: An interesting discussion on the founding of the NRA and the reason for it. Listen carefully to the historic references and then ask yourself if they are true – go find out.

Share

Freemason Harry Reid’s Nuclear Option

Now precedent has been set. Freemason Harry Reid, managed to get through the Senate a “Nuclear Option” that overrides the Senate rules that a 60/40 majority vote is required to end a filibuster and/or to pass/block a president’s nomination to lower courts, as in this case.

Wrongfully, some (especially those looking to use this occasion to bilk people out of money) are saying that the passage of this simple majority rule in the Senate applies to everything. It doesn’t but it could very easily. In this case, that is if you want to believe what we are being told, this nuclear option applies only to getting lower court, presidential nominees confirmed while making it easier to block a filibuster and or just to obtain a simple majority to get the job done.

It’s the precedent that has been set that concerns me. On issues like amending or by-passing the Constitution and/or Bill of Rights, what will become of that? Imagine a simple majority to destroy the Second Amendment. And, yet again, imagine a simple majority to ratify a treaty: say an arms control UN treaty. I’ve said it will happen and this appears to be one step closer to that.

After passage of the nuclear option, Obama made reference to his attempts at gun control and how filibustering and not having a super majority vote prevented it. One would be remiss to think for a second that this move will not play nicely into the hands of tyrants on gun control and all other rights and freedoms.

The mistake many are making here is that they think this is a Harry Reid issue. It’s not. It’s a planned event, necessary for the ruling class to achieve what they want while hiding behind the charade of the nuclear option and the two-party, fake political system. It has been planned for a long time to destroy the so-called “rules” of the Senate and Congress and this move finally begins that destruction.

Precedent has been set and now we can look for implementation of the nuclear option for many things. Don’t make the mistake of thinking this is republican vs. democrats. The ruling class, which involves members of both, in it together and in it to win it, are pulling the wool over our eyes. This was planned.

What happens next?

Share

That Modern, Updated Version of the Second Amendment

I was sent this information via email. It contains information about a study guide for an Advance Placement History Exam in which it appears as though great liberties were taken in the writing and publication of this study guide to alter the text of at least one of the Bill of Rights, i.e The Second Amendment.

I can confirm that this study guide can be purchased on Amazon. I can also confirm that part of what is contained in the email is also found as the write up about the study guide found on Amazon.

This text is designed for a one-semester or one-year United States history course for students preparing to take the AP U.S. History Exam. Teachers can assign the book as the course textbook or as a supplement to a college-level textbook. U.S. History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination presents the history of the United States from pre-Columbian times to the Obama administration. It follows the curriculum put out by the College Board for this course of study.

The quote above is only partial. The remainder can be read by visiting the link provided above.

If you take the time to visit Amazon and scroll down to see how the study guide has been rated and the comments left by consumers, you will discover the guide gets very low ratings and recommendations of NOT to allow students to read this information.

I can also confirm at least some media outlets online are talking about this.

So what’s all the fuss? According to what was provided to me, and a copy of it can be found below, one incident in the study guide provides to students what the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights says. I do not have a copy of this study guide so I’m a bit reluctant to publish this.

But first, for those who don’t know or can’t exactly remember, the Second Amendment reads:

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.

But, what appears in the study guide is considerably different.

The people have the right to keep and bear arms in a state militia.

And this follows the curriculum of the College Board?

There once was a time when I would have completely blamed political agendas for this. I’m wondering how much of this is actually due to ignorance and ineptitude?

I’d also be curious as to what other travesties are written into this study guide?

So why is this such a tragedy and rewriting the Bible is not?

advanceplacement

Share

People Willingly Signing Petition to Repeal Bill of Rights

Share

The Electoral College, Sheriffs and the Bill of Rights

Guest post by Jim Beers:

As the calls to “do away with the Electoral College and go to direct election of Presidents” grow, rural Americans better prepare to stand and be counted. Don’t be fooled that this is a partisan move because it is the Democrats that want it.

If the Electoral College is eliminated, Presidential candidates will ONLY have to campaign in the cities where the majority (pure democracy) of all votes exist. These urban voters are the bedrock of ever-higher taxes, gun control, government property control, government land acquisition, wilderness, hunting/fishing elimination, abortion, same-sex activities, Federal hegemony over State governments, draconian environmental and animal rights laws, public land closures, and an abiding disinterest in the welfare and culture of rural America. Federal tax largesse would shift more and more state and federal tax dollars to urban enclaves and their acquiescent Mayors that support national political winners to guarantee future votes in more frequently rigged urban voting systems.

Doing away with The Electoral College guarantees a rural America more and more in the shadow of urban America just as rural Illinois is shaded by Chicago or rural New York struggles in the shadow of “The City”. Rural states like South Dakota or New Mexico or Alabama will eventually become merely asterisks in our children’s history books.

This week the President appeared in Minneapolis to tout gun control as he spoke before wallpaper made up of diverse, uniformed law enforcement officers. As he pontificated how we all want “universal background checks” (I don’t think so) and how we “support clip control”, I was struck by the nature of these pensive and costumed gun control “Dick Tracies” on the wallpaper behind him.

When the Obama, Bloomberg, and Emmanuel gun controllers wheel out these gun control law officers they are almost entirely urban appointees and employees of the President or Mayor that hires (and can fire) them. They are like the Generals on the vaunted “Joint Chiefs of Staff” (appointed and fired by the President) that assure us about how women can do anything a man can do in combat without disrupting unit cohesion and how same-sex enthusiasts are not disruptive to unit cohesion and performance whether in combat or on submarines. That is to say, they are not “experienced experts whose words are worth considering”; they are little more than “Charlie McCarthies” on the knee of their mentor.

Disregarding the handful of urban Sheriffs, the overwhelming number of American Sheriffs are rural representatives, elected by rural constituents that vote not only their interests but their rural values, culture and traditions. Whether we are concerned about gun control or public road closures or government property seizures, etc. our elected rural Sheriffs have become our first line of defense in protecting rural America from both urban majority control of our state governments’ overreach and from growing federal impositions on rural American property, economies, and rights.

God Bless our Sheriffs and remember that your vote for them may be the most important one you can cast in rural America today.

Rural Americans should consider the Constitutional precedents being set by current and planned gun control. As guns go; so goes our other freedoms.

The 1st Amendment says, “Congress shall make no law… establishing religion… prohibiting free exercise thereof… abridging freedom of speech or of the press… or the right to assemble and to petition the Government…”.

The 2nd Amendment says, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”

Notice that the 1st merely prohibits “Congress” from making laws as noted while the 2nd says “THE RIGHT” “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”. The 2nd says no one shall infringe the right to bear Arms; yet Chicago, Washington DC, New York, San Francisco all get away with absolutely infringing this Constitutional right to bear Arms. Now the federal nannies want to further infringe on this right with an eye toward background checks that lead to registration that leads to confiscation that leads to? Why? Because urban voting blocs (again the pure national majority of voters) and their political leaders simply want it done is the answer.

If urban majority desires, urban political leaders, and federal advocates of an absolutely powerful federal government can simply plow under a Constitutional “right” simply by replacing the Constitution with majority rule what about those other rights (speech, religion, press, assemble and petition) that are merely protected from “Congress” making a law? Could Chicago outlaw Catholics? Could New York ban racial minorities? Could San Francisco ban heterosexuals? Could Boston take control of the newspapers? Could Los Angeles bar any assembly or petition from residents? If they can simply dismiss “the (Constitutional) right to bear Arms” that “shall not be infringed” why can’t they simply force the State government to ban Baptists or imprison people expressing forbidden speech? If it is simply a case of majority votes, we are all lost.

So rural America, fight to keep The Electoral College; support your Sheriff and elect only good ones; and fight to prevent ANY infringement of our Constitutional Rights. The future of rural America, especially, depends on us.

Jim Beers

6 February 2013

Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow. He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress; twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60 Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Eagan, Minnesota with his wife of many decades.

Jim Beers is available to speak or for consulting. You can receive future articles by sending a request with your e-mail address to: jimbeers7@comcast.net

Share

Gun Rights for Dummies…er, Politicians

Share

Why Elevating the Debate on Gun Control is Ceding Rights

Everywhere I go I hear and read the same old malarkey about how gun rights advocates will not “rationally” and “reasonably” join in a national debate to limit access to guns. Those making the demands for such “debate” as they wish to misrepresent their cause, attempt to paint a picture that anyone not wishing to lay down and play dead are “extremist” or “right wing”, along with many other descriptive titles of which I’ll refrain from posting. Gun rights is NOT a left/right issue. Even fascists like Sen. Dianne Feinstein and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg believe in THEIR right to guns for their own protection but seemingly aren’t interested in yours.

From an intelligent perspective, isn’t demanding that others join in THEIR debate on gun control akin to demanding that people sit down and rationally and reasonably debate the need to prohibit the police from entering your home at anytime for any reason just to have a look around? After all, if the police could come into your home anytime, people will be safer – won’t they? Of course the brainwashed masses will immediately say it’s not the same thing. But aren’t they?

Those who say the two are not related do so because they actually believe that because guns exist, mass murders occur. Isn’t that the same as saying that because private homes exist, they are subject to invasion, i.e. robbery, random crime, etc.? And one could further argue that if the people are disarmed, all the more reason cops should invade your home anytime they want because you are not capable of taking care of yourself; just as government wants it.

Most people who advocate for the rights guaranteed in the Second Amendment believe this right is necessary for self protection and the warding off or tyrannical governments, both foreign and domestic and rightfully argue that the presence of guns, no matter the type, is not responsible for mass murders, or killings of any kind.

I’m not attempting to censor the free speech of those seeking bans on guns. It’s disingenuous to demonize people who strongly believe in their right to protection, while at the same time presenting themselves as somehow about the fray because they want to compromise away those rights. This tactic is common throughout all political debate and comes up when one side doesn’t have any fact, truth or data to support the eagerness for dictatorial rule, which is what they are advocating whether they know it or not.

I’m so tired of hearing the ignorance, cultivated through mind manipulation, that comprise is a necessary thing. Compromise is good for things like trying to decide what brand of soda pop to buy for the party but has no place when it comes to the fundamental and inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Before anyone should be talking about further destruction of the Bill of Rights, maybe the “rational” and “reasonable” debate should be about what has happened in our society that ends in things like Sandy Hook.

Guns have been prevalent in the United States at least since the Pilgrims used the blunderbust. Maybe the transformation of a God-fearing, respectful citizenry, founded with a sense of moral duty and responsibility, into a liberal, progressive, decadent, immoral, Sodom and Gomorrah-like culture has something to do with why. Dare we not address that?

Share