June 4, 2020

Open Thread – Thursday, February 20, 2014

FreedomPressFirst Amendment and freedom of the press. It is being reported that the United States now ranks 46th in the world in its ability to report news without the threat of repercussions from government for doing so. And now, President Obama is proposing that members of the Federal Communications Commission be placed in all newsrooms in order to monitor the methods used in determining what gets broadcast and published for news.

As one person was heard saying, “Ah, it will never happen in this country but it is disturbing that this or any other administration even thought of doing it.” I’m not so sure it will never happen in this country. Are you?

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


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


Day 28- No Executive Orders


I will continue this charade until such time as people begin to open their eyes that they are being lied to, manipulated, conned and disrespected. If the real intent was to instigate an honest debate about our children’s safety, then the President of the United States, being honest for a change, would have gone a long way. But instead, the President opts to deceive the people in order to stir up trouble, create chaos, promote distrust of Government and between citizens, to achieve his bigger goal of full dictatorial power assumption, through fear mongering and civil unrest.

Nothing is posted on the White House website about 23 executive orders.

In the meantime, Joe Biden, the lying, non thinking puppet, who once said that Obama wasn’t going to get his shotgun, told people he was counting on the “legitimate news media” to carry out he and the President’s lying, cheating, unconstitutional Second Amendment destruction…..as they have been told to do.

Joe, like President Obama, fears the non “legitimate news media” because they can’t be controlled by them very well, but they are working on it. Out of fear, Biden must demonize anyone writing and presenting facts about both tyrant’s effort to take our guns.

It was announced that on Wednesday, tyrant Obama will either sign an executive order, or perpetrate another dog and pony show, disguised as cyber security. However, we should examine carefully, that is if we allowed to, the details of the executive order as I’m confident this despot will further grow his power while destroying the First Amendment rights of Americans. Wake up! It’s his MO. However, whatever he talks about, I am assuming there will be no details made available until long after he has carried out his unconstitutional plans.


Claiming “Backfire” in Gun Control Debate is Premature and Misleading

I was just reading a rousing rendition from Michael Adams at Natural News, about how “The push for gun control, however, has spectacularly backfired.” Adams’ long list of events that he believes are the result of backfiring against, “people like Biden, Bloomberg, Cuomo, Feinstein and Obama,” is impressive and on the surface one can easily be drawn into the ticker tape victory parade and exclaim, “We showed them!”

I have no intention of trying to prove facts wrong. I’ll leave that up to the liberals and “True Believers.” What I would like to caution readers about are two things that are openly present in this article. Let’s address the first one.

As Yogi Berra once said, “It ain’t over til it’s over”, the same can be said in this Second Amendment battle. How do we measure success and failure or winning and losing?” Isn’t the bottom line here, that when all the dust settles, there is no further destruction in the Second Amendment? While we may claim more people went out and bought guns, and more people joined the NRA, etc., etc. the deaf and out of touch tyrants on Capital Hill are still agog about writing gun control legislation and the republicans have indicated they are willing to sit down and talk about expanding and enhancing background checks on guns. Should this or any other anti Second Amendment bill pass, where’s the victory in that?

Oh, yes! I will be called an idealist, a Second Amendment purist, a radical and God forbid, one of those not willing to compromise away my right to defend and protect myself and my family. Can I honestly do that when the very government that wants me disarmed is the same government that is going to approve my “background” check? After all, I’m probably on the Government’s terror watch list because of my activism and outspokenness against a tyrannical government.

Why is it that people are eager to systematically erode the Second Amendment to a point where it is useless? Why? The cry goes out for public safety and yet, history shows any imbecile that taking away gun rights increases violent crime and lessens public safety. Why do we do this?

The Second Amendment is simple really – “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.” It took 217 years for the United States Supreme Court to affirm that the Second Amendment is an individual right, but in his majority opinion, Justice Scalia made sure that the world understood that the Second Amendment in no way guaranteed there wouldn’t be “reasonable” limits placed on this Bill of Right. This of course left the door wide open, rendering the actual decision as not having much grip at all. The same can be said in NRA v Chicago. People have a right to have a gun but the courts refuse to apply the pure rights intended by the founding fathers.

One can argue that the First Amendment rights of the press do more damage, emotionally and psychologically than any gun violence does, but do we see the same emotional clap trap taking place of placing limits on the First Amendment? Why is it then that Americans, including the self absorbed egoists in Washington, are so wanting to limit Second Amendment rights but it’s taboo to touch freedom of the press or freedom of speech?

The second issue I want to bring up that’s discussed in this article is the claim that it’s a backfire, a victory for gun rights advocates that, gun rights are threatening to use violence if necessary to push back. This is not a victory for gun rights but would be a huge victory for the Marxist regime of President Obama. I have contended all along that it is the goal of this administration to piss off enough people, to do whatever it takes, to get them into the streets displaying violence. Just including this kind of violent threats in any gun rights discussion, incites anger and plays right into the hands of the despots.

While it is grand to rally the troops with thoughts of the things that did happen as a result of the attempt at grabbing our guns, let’s not forget that many of the things that took place were done to test the reactions of the people so the government and those who control the government, get a better sense as to how far and how quickly they need to move to accomplish their goals.

We should not be so quick to wave the victory flag when it ain’t over til it’s over!