As regards the 2nd amendment –

First - the -so called- elections, (second time that our military was denied their say in a Presidential election) don’t reflect east coast patriots.   NY and other “blue states” conservatives aren’t asleep. Keep the pressure up!

This video, shows a side of New Yorkers not to be seen on the MSM.

Second –  from my earlier posting of Gun Control and Gun Rights cartoons, a twisted view of the 2nd amendment, used to evoke an emotional response:

I become more aware of my ignorance about the early days of the republic, and the mindset toward firearms. “a well regulated militia” INDEED! this excerpt via Wikipedia:

The Militia Acts of 1792 were a pair of statute enacted by the second United States Congress in 1792. The acts provided for the organization of the state militias and provided for the President of the United States to take command of the state militias in times of imminent invasion or insurrection. This authority was used to suppress the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Acts_of_1792

WE the people were, in effect required to keep and bear arms: [Enlarged font my emphasis]

The second Act, passed May 8, 1792, provided for the organization of the state militias.

It conscripted every “free able-bodied white male citizen” between the ages of 18 and 45 into a local militia company. Militia members were to arm themselves with a musket, bayonet, and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack. Men owning rifles were required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gunpowder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch, and a knapsack.[5]

Some occupations were exempt, such as congressmen, stagecoach drivers, and ferryboatmen. Otherwise, men were required to report for training twice a year, usually in the Spring and Fall.

The militias were divided into “divisions, brigades, regiments, battalions, and companies”as the state legislatures would direct.[6] The provisions of the first Act governing the calling up of the militia by the President in case of invasion or obstruction to law enforcement were continued in the second Act.[7] Court martial proceedings were authorized by the statute against militia members who disobeyed orders.[8]

Ok –  that shoots the hell out of liberals and their antipathy toward so called “assault weapons”.   A well regulated militia, WE THE PEOPLE, were our own homeland security, and were required to have -what was then- the latest technology in weapons.

Use and subsequent amendments

The authority to call forth the militia was first invoked by George Washington to put down the Whiskey rebellion in Western Pennsylvania in 1794, just before the law granting that authority expired. Congress quickly passed the Militia Act of 1795, which made the provisions of the 1792 act permanent.

These Militia Acts were amended by the Militia Act of 1862, which allowed African-Americans to serve in the militias of the United States. They were replaced by the Militia Act of 1903, which established the United States National Guard as the chief body of organized military reserves in the United States.   Italics my emphasis – “X”

This item from Guns Magazine:

Posted  in Editor’s Picks, Surplus Classic And Tactical Firearms

The Militia Act Of 1792

The New England Flintlock Militia Musket Armed State Militias In The Country’s Earliest Days.

Like most post-war periods, the years following the end of the American Revolution saw our small standing army reduced to a skeleton force. With the British still in control of Canada, the French in control of the area that someday would be defined as the Louisiana Purchase and Europe in constant turmoil, the Congress passed the 1792 Militia Act—“an Act more effectively to provide for the National Defense, by establishing a Uniform Militia through the United States.” The Act required white male citizens between the ages of 18-45 become members of their state militias and that every militiaman was to “provide himself with a good musket or firelock” within 6 months after passage.

 

 

 

The New England Militia Musket both guarded the homeland and put game on the table as every “able-bodied man” was required to have one.

 

Militia musket barrels were pinned in place, enhancing the clean, slim lines of the fullstock model. Wrists were often checkered and in this example, show considerable handling wear.

The catch in the Act were the words “provide himself” since neither the Federal nor the state governments were capable of supplying sufficient muskets to arm all the members of the expanded militias. In short, many militiamen had to buy their own muskets. As a result, what evolved between 1790 and 1840 was an elegant pattern of a musket made by local gunsmiths, which today are referred to as the New England Flintlock Militia Musket.

The requirements placed on a militiaman were very specific when it came to his equipment. In Massachusetts, for example, the “Laws for Regulating and Governing the Militia of the Commonwealth of the Massachusetts” stated that: “Every non-commissioned officer and private of the infantry shall constantly keep himself provided with a good musket; with an iron or steel rod; a sufficient bayonet and belt; two spare flints; a priming wire and brush, and a knapsack; a cartridge box or pouch with a box therein, to contain not less than 24 cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a horn; and shall appear so armed, accoutered and provided, whenever called out, except that when called out to exercise without cartridges loaded with ball, provided always that whenever a man appears with his rifle all his equipment shall be suited to his weapon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this act, all muskets for arming the Militia, as herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen enrolled and providing himself with arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid shall hold the same exempt from all suits, distresses, executions or sales for debt or for payment of taxes.”

Also, under the Massachusetts Militia Law, towns were required to “maintain a supply of 100 pounds of powder, 300 pounds of musket and rifle balls of various sizes and 300 flints for each sixty militiamen.” How times have changed in Massachusetts!

Having to spend his money on a musket, the militiaman proved to be no fool. What he purchased from a local gunsmith was a dual-purpose firearm. With its typical .69-caliber, smoothbore barrel, the militia musket fulfilled the required militia role perfectly, but even more important to its owner, I suspect, the militia musket fulfilled the role of a perfect smoothbore sporter. Loaded with shot, ball or buck-and-ball, it was right at home on the front lines or in the game fields.    [Italics my emphasis "X"]

While many different gunsmiths made them, the New England militia muskets acquired a distinct styling of their own with a number of shared characteristics. Fortunately, enough of the privately owned militia muskets have survived that we know a great deal about them.

The militia musket was stocked-full normally in walnut, although specimens stocked in maple and cherry have been encountered. The stock lines are svelte, accentuated by a small, narrow butt and a graceful wrist. The wrist is commonly checkered with an oval or diamond shaped, brass or silver escutcheon plate inletted on top of the wrist behind the tang.

The stock furniture is brass and very British in style as seen here in the pictures of the finely-shaped comb of the stock and the pineapple motif of the forward finial of the trigger guard. Typically there are three, stylish ramrod thimbles pinned to the stock. There are no musket-like barrel bands holding the barrel and stock together. The militia barrel is pinned in place, enhancing the trim lines of the fullstock model, and typically the militia model carries no sling swivels.

The .62- to .70-caliber barrel can be either a surplus US military musket barrel or of new manufacture. The tapered round barrel is typically 40″ to 42″ long, of .69-caliber, with the lines similar to what became the M1816 military barrel and mounted with a small bayonet lug to secure an M1816-type socket bayonet. The musket sports a small, brass or steel (bayonet lug) front sight but typically no rear sight.

If the barrel was newly manufactured, states like Massachusetts required that all musket and pistol barrels made in the state, other than US Armory or contract barrels, be proofed. “Provers” were appointed at the county level by the state. Once a barrel was proofed, the prover stamped the breech with a “P” for proof, his initials and the year of the proof.

Approximately, 25 percent of the militia muskets examined are fitted with surplus American military musket barrels. The barrel used by Connecticut gunsmith, Buell, to build the New England militia musket pictured here is a surplus military barrel and so proofed and stamped with the “V/P eagle head” proof mark.

By requirement, the militia musket was fitted with an iron, button-head ramrod—wooden ramrods being liable to breakage under combat conditions.

To me, the most unusual and distinguishing characteristic of the New England militia musket is its quality lock. The most difficult part of any muzzleloader to produce is the lock, and American gunsmiths imported English locks by the barrel full. The typical militia musket was fitted with a refined, sporting lock that was usually engraved and carried the maker’s or importer’s names and possibly the word “Warranted.” The names of prominent English lock makers like R. Ashmore and W. Ketland appear commonly. The commercial militia locks feature a gooseneck cock and usually a roller bearing on the frizzen spring. Military musket-style locks can also be found on militia muskets, but they’re much less common.

The use of a teardrop and an oval lock screw escutcheon combination is almost universal in the New England militia model.

Light, trim, nicely balanced and accurate, the New England Flintlock Militia Musket is a unique military arm.  State militiamen could not have asked for finer handling firearms than their privately owned militia muskets when called up to fight the War of 1812 or the Seminole and Mexican Wars or maybe even the Civil War. Keep an eye out for this important American military treasure. By Holt Bodinson

Massachusetts Military Shoulder Arms 1784-1877 by George D. Moller, Mowbray Publishing, 54 E. School St., Woonsocket, RI 02895, (800) 999-4697, www.gunandswordcollector.com American Military Shoulder Arms—Volume II by George D. Moller. University of New Mexico Press, MSC05 3185, 1 University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, (505) 277-2346, www.unmpress.com

United States Martial Flintlocks by Robert M. Reilly. Hardcover, 263 pages Mowbray Publishing, 54 E. School St., Woonsocket, RI 02895, (800) 999-4697, www.gunandswordcollector.com

 

A button head iron ramrod and a socket bayonet lug were required features of the militia musket.

 

 

 

Refined English locks, more at home on a fine sporting rifle, graced the majority of militia muskets.

 

 

 

The distinctive teardrop and oval head lock screw escutcheon combination was universally applied to the militia musket model.

 

 

 

 

A thumb piece or simple brass and silver inlays were widely incorporated in the militia model stocks.

 

 

 

 

Stylish, British-type, brass furniture graced most of the militia muskets. This trigger guard is reminiscent of the Brown Bess’.

http://gunsmagazine.com/the-militia-act-of-1792/

SO A WELL REGULATED MILITIA USED MILITARY GRADE WEAPONS OF THE TIME.

AND THIS LITTLE NOTE:

The United State Constitution formalized the long standing colonial practice of maintaining a
Militia. Delaware dates its militia from the early Swedish settlers of 1655 attempting to defend
themselves from the Dutch.  A “Militia Clause” was included in the constitution as a hedge against
standing armies that were viewed with suspicion in light of the recent War of Independence.  The
standing army was referred to as “the Engine of arbitrary power, which has so often and
successfully been used for the subversion of freedom” according to Luther Martin.  Elbridge Gerry
added, “If a regular army is admitted, will not the militia be neglected and gradually dwindle into
contempt?   The Constitution gives Congress the ability to “raise and support armies”, but attempts
to circumscribe the regular force with appropriations of monies for a term of no more than two
years. The document also tasks the congress   “to provide and maintain a navy”.  It then goes on to
specifically delineate a Militia in Article 1, Section 8, it calls for the Congress to:“Provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions.
Also to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such Part of them as may
be employed in the Service of the United States reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers,
and the Authority for training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.”

The second amendment states that “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.”  Modern interpretation defines this as
an individual right, but in the context of the times, it is clear there was a relationship between
bearing arms and “a well-regulated Militia” that is sometimes overlooked today, but was critical at
our nation’s founding. It was added at the insistence of the anti-federalists to prevent the federal
government from disarming the militia. Three years later, the Militia Act of 1792 would further
expound upon this perceived need, and offer specifics.

This constitutional language remains the guiding charter for today’s National Guard, the modern
version of the Militia. There is still a dual responsibility to both State and Nation for the modern day
militiamen of the National Guard.  This federal/state relationship was codified almost at the onset of
our nation, and it has been refined ever since.  http://www.militaryheritage.org/MilitiaAct1792.html

This Sacramento bee political cartoon forgets that the militia referred to in the 2nd amendment was the “home guard”; citizen soldiers.  When not called upon, their weapons were used to hunt for food as well as self protection.  See how they twist the intentions of both the founders, and the NRA.

“ANY QUESTIONS”?

Willie, Joe, and Bill in WWll

Courtesy of a veteran friend I “met” while on JibJab; a considerable amount of my postings came from e-mails received from him.

Willie,Joe, and Bill in WWII

Get out your history books and open them to the chapter on World War II.  Today’s lesson will cover a little known but very important hero of whom very  little was ever really known. Here is another important piece of lost U.S. History.

Makes ya proud to put this stamp on your  envelopes… 

Bill Mauldin  stamp honors grunt’s hero. The post office gets a lot of criticism. Always has, always will. And with the renewed push to get rid of Saturday mail  delivery, expect complaints to intensify. But the United States Postal Service deserves a standing ovation for something that happened last month:

Bill Mauldin got his own postage  stamp.

Mauldin died at age 81 in the early days of 2003. The end of his life had been rugged. He had been scalded in a bathtub, which led to  terrible injuries and infections; Alzheimer’s disease was inflicting its cruelties. Unable to care for himself after the scalding, he became a  resident of a California nursing home, his health and spirits in rapid  decline.

He was not forgotten, though. Mauldin, and his work, meant so much to the millions of Americans who fought in World War II, and to those who had waited for them to come home.  He was a kid cartoonist for Stars and Stripes, the military newspaper; Mauldin’s drawings of his muddy,
exhausted, whisker-stubble infantrymen Willie and Joe were the voice of truth about what it was like on the front lines.

Mauldin was an enlisted man just like the soldiers he drew for; his gripes were their gripes, his laughs their laughs, his heartaches their heartaches. He was one of them. They loved him.

He never held back. Sometimes, when his cartoons cut too close for comfort, superior officers tried to tone him down. In one memorable incident, he enraged Gen. George S. Patton, who informed Mauldin he wanted the pointed cartoons celebrating the fighting men, lampooning the high-ranking officers to stop.  Now!

“I’m beginning to feel  like a fugitive from the’ law of averages.”

The news passed from soldier to soldier. How was Sgt. Bill Mauldin going to stand up to Gen. Patton? It seemed impossible.
Not quite.  Mauldin, it turned out, had an ardent fan:  Five-star Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, supreme commander of the Allied forces in Europe .. Ike put out the word: Mauldin draws what Mauldin wants. Mauldin won. Patton lost.

If, in your line of work, you’ve ever considered yourself a young hotshot, or if you’ve ever known anyone who has felt that way about him or herself, the story of Mauldin’s young manhood will humble you. Here is what, by the time he was 23 years old, Mauldin  accomplished:

“By the way, wot wuz them  changes you wuz
Gonna make when you took over
last month, sir?”

He won the Pulitzer Prize, was featured on the cover of Time  magazine. His book “Up Front” was the No. 1 best-seller in the United States.

All of that at 23. Yet, when he returned to civilian life and  grew older, he never lost that boyish Mauldin grin, never outgrew his excitement about doing his job, never big-shotted or high-hatted the people with whom he worked every day.

I was lucky enough to be one of them. Mauldin roamed the hallways of the Chicago Sun-Times in the late 1960s and early 1970s with no more officiousness or air of haughtiness than if he was a copyboy. That impish look on his face remained.

He had achieved so much. He won a second Pulitzer Prize, and he should have won a third for what may be the single greatest editorial cartoon in the history of the craft: his deadline rendering, on the day  President John F. Kennedy was assassinated, of the statue at the Lincoln Memorial slumped in grief, its head cradled in its hands. But he never acted as if he was better than the people he met. He was still Mauldin, the enlisted  man.

During the late summer of 2002, as Mauldin lay in that California nursing home, some of the old World War II infantry guys caught wind of it. They didn’t want Mauldin to go out that way. They thought he
should know he was still their  hero.

“This is the’ town my  pappy told me about.”

Gordon Dillow, a columnist for the Orange County Register, put out the call in Southern California for people in the area to send their best wishes to Mauldin. I joined Dillow in the effort, helping to spread the appeal nationally, so Bill would not feel so alone. Soon, more than
10,000 cards and letters had arrived at Mauldin’s bedside.

Better than that, old soldiers began to show up just to sit with Mauldin, to let him know that they were there for him, as he, so long  ago, had been there for them. So many volunteered  to visit Bill that there was a waiting list. Here is how Todd DePastino, in the first paragraph of  his wonderful biography of Mauldin, described  it:

“Almost every day in the summer and fall of 2002 they came to Park Superior nursing home in Newport Beach , California , to honor Army  Sergeant, Technician Third Grade, Bill Mauldin.  They came bearing relics of their youth: medals, insignia, photographs, and carefully folded newspaper clippings. Some wore old garrison caps.  Others arrived resplendent in uniforms over a half century old. Almost all of them wept as they filed down the corridor like pilgrims fulfilling some  long-neglected obligation.”

One of the veterans explained to me why it was so important:  “You would have to be part of a combat infantry unit to appreciate what moments of relief Bill  gave us.

You had to be reading a soaking wet Stars and Stripes in a water-filled foxhole and then see one of his cartoons.”

“Th’ hell this ain’t th’  most important hole in the world. I’m in it.”

Mauldin is buried in Arlington National Cemetery . Last  month, the kid cartoonist made it onto a  first-class postage stamp. It’s an honor that most generals and admirals never receive.

What Mauldin would have loved most, I believe, is the sight of  the two guys who keep him company on that stamp. 

Take a look at it.  There’s Willie.  There’s Joe.

And there, to the side, drawing them and smiling that shy, quietly observant smile, is Mauldin himself. With his buddies, right where he belongs. Forever. 

What a story, and a fitting tribute to a man and to a time that few of us can still remember. But I say to you youngsters, you must most seriously learn of and remember with respect the sufferings and  sacrifices of your fathers, grand fathers and great grandfathers
in times you cannot ever imagine today with all you have. But the only  reason you are free to have it all is because of  them.

I thought you would all enjoy reading and seeing this bit of American
history!

THE FINAL INSPECTION

PLEASE
DO NOT HOLD ON TO THIS.
SOMEONE HAS TO HOLD OUR COUNTRY IN THEIR HANDS.
SEND THIS ON, AND ON AND ON

THE FINAL
INSPECTION

The soldier stood and faced
God,
Which must always come to
pass.
He hoped his shoes were
shining,
Just as brightly as his
brass.

‘Step forward now,
soldier,
How shall I deal with
you?
Have you always turned the other
cheek?
To My Church have you been
true?’

The soldier squared his shoulders and
said,
“No, Lord, I guess I
ain’t,”
Because those of us who carry guns,

Can’t always be a saint.

I’ve had to work most Sundays,

And
at times my talk was tough.
And sometimes I’ve been violent,

Because the world is awfully rough.

But, I never took a penny,

That wasn’t mine to keep…

Though I worked a lot of overtime,

When the bills just got too steep.

And I never passed a cry for help,

Though at times I shook with fears…

And
sometimes, God, forgive me,
I’ve wept unmanly tears.

I know I don’t deserve a place,

Among the people here.

They never wanted me around,

Except to calm their fear.

If you’ve a place for me here, Lord,

It
needn’t be so grand.
I never expected or had too much,

But
if you don’t, I’ll understand.

There was a silence all around the
throne,
Where the saints had often trod.

As
the soldier waited quietly,
For the judgment of his God.

“Step forward now, you soldier,

You’ve borne your burdens well.

Walk peacefully on Heaven’s streets,

You’ve done your time in Hell.”

Author Unknown~

 

West Point Cadets Taught Patriots Are Terrorists

 FROM AMERICAN FREE PRESS:

West Point Cadets Taught Patriots Are Terrorists

February 13, 2013                         AFP                                                                                            

 

Influential study published by an Israeli academic at America’s top military school seeks to brainwash future military leaders into believing those who advocate small government, individual sovereignty, freedom and liberty are the enemy

By Victor Thorn

At West Point where cadets are groomed into officers, a new 148-page report released on January 15 is urging enlisted men and women to be on alert for “terrorists” in the form of those who consider themselves patriots.

This study, released by the United States Military Academy’s Combating Terrorism Center, is entitled “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right.” Its author, Professor Arie Perliger, the Director of Terrorism Studies at the Combating Terrorism Center and Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, holds membership in the Council on Foreign Relations and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, as well as being a former instructor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Considering his background, Perliger warns that growing legions of conservative-minded citizens across the U.S. pose a serious threat to our nation’s safety. Yet, whom precisely does Perliger deem as being affiliated with what he labels the “violent far right?”

In his own words, Perliger placed a bulls-eye on those who “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights.”

Even more specifically, Perliger asserted that other so-called extremists fall into the categories of anti-federalists, fundamentalist Christians, survivalists, gun-rights advocates, libertarians, pro-lifers, and those who oppose high taxation.

Not content with simply fingering these broad-reaching factions, Perliger zeroed in on another favorite globalist target. “Some groups are driven by a strong conviction that the American political system and its proxies were hijacked by external forces interested in promoting a New World Order.”

This umbrella characterization includes constitutionalists, those wary of a growing police state, and political activists such as some tea partiers. Thus, by using manipulative, emotionally-charged language intended to divide-and-conquer, Perliger equates those interested in preserving their individual freedoms with skinheads, neo-Nazis and militia members. Or, even more condescendingly, he smears conservatives as being backward, archaic and living in an era that has passed them by. In contrast, Perliger applauds liberals as future-oriented and progressive in their views.

Dr. Herbert W. Titus, a constitutional law professor and former dean of the Regent University School of Law “says it’s an attempt to link conservative thought with violence.”

Titus told WorldNetDaily: “Professor Perliger has adopted the strategy of many left-wing members of the professoriate, concentrating on the behavior of a few in order to discredit many who hold similar views but who do not engage in any form of violence.”

“His theory is that of the iceberg, that which as seen may be small, but it hides what is a much larger threat just below the surface. Obviously, the professor disagrees with those who favor small government, cutting back of federal government encroachments upon the powers of the state and to discredit this movement focuses on a few gun-toting militia,” Titus said.

“Like so many in the Obama administration, Perliger does not want to engage in any dialogue on the issues, but just discredit an entire political movement by ad hominem charged words,” Titus said. “Perliger is not a serious scholar, but a propagandist for the existing regime.”

West Point Urged to Fire Nutty Professor

• Citizens up in arms over professor’s attempt to demonize true American conservatives

The president of a popular conservative advocacy group is calling on West Point to fire the author of a controversial report that paints conservatives as terrorists. In a January 29 interview with AMERICAN FREE PRESS, Bill Wilson of Americans for Limited Government expanded on these thoughts.

“I’m sending a letter to the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee insisting that all funds be withheld from their Combating Terrorism Center until this guy [Perliger] is fired and his report withdrawn,” he told AFP.

When asked what most incensed him, Wilson replied, “Perliger’s report isn’t an isolated incident. We’ve seen this type of demonizing ever since Obama took office. The left is going for the kill by using raw partisan political propaganda. The author of this report wants people to look those of us with traditional conservative values who support limited government as dangerous and suspect. He’s saying: this is somebody you don’t want to be. Instead, Perliger favors those who always submit to collectivism and the group. But this type of mindset is what doomed the former Soviet Union.”

Wilson added, “The military implications are really dangerous because Perliger wants to breed a whole generation of officers that may not respect sovereignty and autonomy.”

In a January 28 article, Wilson expanded on this notion. “[We] are being taught to view freedom-loving Americans as violent racist terrorists-in-waiting as part of the federal government’s ongoing jihad against common-sense fiscal conservatism and constitutionally limited government.”

AFP inquired about what forces were behind Perliger’s work. “In 2009 the Department of Homeland Security offered a course curriculum prepared by the Southern Poverty Law Center [SPLC] that was meant to cast suspicions on returning vets because they might harbor right-wing affiliations,” he said. “The SPLC is a sleazy left-wing group.”

But he didn’t stop there in terms of culprits. “The mainstream media is owned by a handful of corporations that are completely compliant in their worldview that government is always best and correct, and those who don’t support it are wrong,” he said. “Real journalism doesn’t exist in the mainstream media any more.”

The conversation then turned to another subject that contradicted Perliger’s conclusions. “The hard left,” Wilson stated, “is far more violence prone that anyone on the right. Groups like the Earth Liberation Front and animal rights advocates will sabotage train tracks, spike trees, and have threatened to destroy the Keystone Pipeline.”

Wilson emphasized that an unmitigated assault is being waged against the citizens of this country. “Every day the First Amendment is being shutdown, and now Obama is trying to kill the Second Amendment. Why shouldn’t everyone be suspicious of what they’re doing? The left is waging an incredible assault on our Bill of Rights by undercutting and taking away this contract between the American people and the states.”

In closing, Wilson pointed out a more subtle aspect of Perliger’s smear tactics. “In the past, we didn’t let politics get involved in the military,” said Wilson. “But Perliger gave the officer corps pure political indoctrination as if they were the old Red Army. What used to be a very important feature—the non-political nature of our military—is now being turned on its head.”

OTHER RELATED ITEMS AT: https://americanfreepress.net/?p=8607

Girls and Guns – “Like milk and cookies”… Inspired by Regis Giles’s “Girls Just Wanna Have Guns”

I used to know a spirited woman, originally from Montana. Since deceased, one of her expressions was  “get their panties in a bunch”. So –  If YouTube doesn’t  “get their panties in a bunch”, this satire will be available. For Girls (and Women) everywhere who are unafraid of, are proficient in and enjoy exercising the 2nd amendment.

We lave lost a great Patriot

This posted by PAN National Director – didn’t know of him till this obit. You will find his pg worth the read. His last post was just prior to the Nov “elections” (parentheses intended) when we thought “O” would be ousted.  I include the obit, the link can be used to access his pg. We lave lost a great Patriot. “X”

Darla Dawald, National Director

Check out the blog post ‘Skip MacLure 1944 – 2013′

Please join us in paying respects and condolences to the family of Skip MacLure and honoring his life. Skip was a regular contributor on PAN the past few years. He was a true Patriot! RIP Skip! DD

Blog post added by Skip MacLure:

Skip MacLure 1944 – 2013 It is with deepest sadness that I have to announce that Skip MacLure passed away in the early hours of February…

Blog post link:  (PAN)

Skip MacLure 1944 – 2013

Contributor

Skip MacLure 1944 – 2013

• Posted by Skip MacLure on February 9, 2013 at 4:07pm

Skip MacLure 1944 – 2013

It is with deepest sadness that I have to announce that Skip MacLure passed away in the early hours of February 5th, 2013. Skip had just celebrated his 69th birthday on February 4th.

Although I knew Skip for only seven years, he became the closest friend that I have ever had the privilege to know. While it is difficult to come to terms with this loss, I feel honored to have known him for what was, unfortunately, far too short a time.

Skip was, unabashedly, a true conservative. Plain-spoken, he was not afraid to take anyone to task, regardless of party affiliation. He believed that the Constitution was the greatest legal document ever written, a gift from God to the people of the finest country in the world.

Skip was often attacked by the liberal left for his honest remarks. Although he shrugged off what were often cruel, personally offensive remarks, I felt hurt by them… for I knew the sort of person that Skip really was. Much of it was standard leftist rhetoric, but it still smarted. If they knew Skip’s family and friends, for example, they would see that he was anything but racist. Having been brought up by his Italian grandparents, he endured the taunts of neighborhood children who called him “the little blue-eyed wop kid”. It served to toughen him up for the future.

I could go on further, but this is not to be a biography, but an invitation to his friends and readers to salute a true patriot and a great American.

I have agreed with Skip’s family that his website, skipmaclure.us, continue… alas without new articles from the man himself. I know that Skip would want me to continue what he started, and for the site to stay true to his beliefs.

Semper fi, Skip.

Written by Skip’s editor, Dee.

Like those fleeting moments of sunset… We Remember – Video tribute

This YouTube video was sent via e-mail. Like those fleeting moments of sunset; we are losing the few remaining ones Tom Brokaw dubbed “The Greatest Generation”.

First seen – Supermarine Spitfire.  After the Spitfire,  a B-25 “nose shot”,  A Grumman F-6-F Hellcat, Odd tail shot of Century series Korean War era Jet belies it’s type. Douglas DC-3′s (AKA C-47′s, “gooney birds”)  Head on shot of an F-18 Hornet – Perhaps the Superhornet variant.   A group of P-51-D Mustangs – Folks these did not see action until 1944; too bad the B and C models are seldom shown which were the ones to finally turn the tide against the Luftwaffe [Toward the end of this video, there is a very short archive clip of perhaps the C models.]  Actual footage of Spitfires, and stills of those valiant ones. AT-6 “Texan Trainer, w/ B-25 in background. A Grumman SBD “Dauntless” divebomber (the ones who sank three Japanese carriers at Midway) and a F4U-4 Corsair to its left, followed by Acrhive shots of them,  a most famous and much used footage of a B-17-F Flying Fortress in a banking turn during take-off.  The old Vet is by a B-17 -G Flying fortresses; the chin turret was to reduce losses from hair raising head on attacks by Luftwaffe pilots.

An F-4-F “Wildcat” that bore the brunt of the bad days in 42; (Butch O’Hare flew this one)

http://partneringwitheagles.wordpress.com/2011/09/22/butch-and-easy-eddie-true-account/  A Cutiss P-40-E “Kittyhawk” then archive clip of a P-40-B “Tomahawk”, with E models after.

Other gut wrenching memories.  I cannot describe the degree of sadness I feel for the loss of life and sacrifices made…

The Phony Defenders of the Constitution … Exploiters of Conservatives and Patriots « Cry and Howl

The Phony Defenders of the Constitution … Exploiters of Conservatives and Patriots « Cry and Howl.

NOT NEGOTIABLE: 2nd Amendment Quotes

Get a bunch of Navy Seals together; fully armed, and make the MSM news anchors read this over national TV.   Gold font my emphasis – “X”  Thanks to Gds44, and News You May Have Missed, who reposted this from this blog.

  

 

Jen Kuznicki

Conservative writer

A Treasury of Quotes About Our 2nd Amendment

By task On January 3, 2013

What the Framers said about our Second Amendment
Rights to Keep and Bear Arms

“I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.”
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

“Whereas civil-rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as military forces, which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.”
– Tench Coxe, in Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution

“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.”
– Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188

If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State.  In a single State, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense.  The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.
– Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

“That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms … ”
– Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

“[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation… (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
–James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 46

“To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government.  The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.”
–John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe.  The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.  A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.”
–Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).

“Who are the militia?  Are they not ourselves?  Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom.  Congress have no power to disarm the militia.  Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American…  The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
–Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

“Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion.  The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.”
–Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

“What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?  Let them take arms.”
– Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356

“No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
– Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950]

“The right of the people to keep and bear … arms shall not be infringed.  A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country …”
– James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“What, Sir, is the use of a militia?  It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty …. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.”
– Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment, I Annals of Congress at 750, August 17, 1789

” … to disarm the people – that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
– George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380

” … but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights …”
– Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29

“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense?  Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress?  If our defense be the real object of them under the management of Congress?  If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?”
– Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836

“The great object is, that every man be armed … Every one who is able may have a gun.”
– Patrick Henry, Elliot, p.3:386

“O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people!  Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone …”
– Patrick Henry, Elliot p. 3:50-53, in Virginia Ratifying Convention demanding a guarantee of the right to bear arms

“The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons.  They are left in full possession of them.”
– Zacharia Johnson, delegate to Virginia Ratifying Convention, Elliot, 3:645-6

“Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms …  The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard, against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible.”
– Hubert H. Humphrey, Senator, Vice President, 22 October 1959                                                                                                                                                                            Reminder – H.H.H. was a Democrat – “X”

“The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpation of power by rulers.  The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally … enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
– Joseph Story, Supreme Court Justice, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, p. 3:746-7, 1833

” … most attractive to Americans, the possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave, it being the ultimate means by which freedom was to be preserved.”
– James Burgh, 18th century English Libertarian writer, Shalhope, The Ideological Origins of the Second Amendment, p.604

“The right [to bear arms] is general.  It may be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia; but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent.   The militia, as has been explained elsewhere, consists of those persons who, under the laws, are liable to the performance of military duty, and are officered and enrolled for service when called upon….  If the right were limited to those enrolled, the purpose of the guarantee might be defeated altogether by the action or the neglect to act of the government it was meant to hold in check.  The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need no permission or regulation of law for the purpose.  But this enables the government to have a well regulated militia; for to bear arms implies something more than mere keeping; it implies the learning to handle and use them in a way that makes those who keep them ready for their efficient use; in other words, it implies the right to meet for voluntary discipline in arms, observing in so doing the laws of public order.”
– Thomas M. Cooley, General Principles of Constitutional Law, Third Edition [1898]

“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress … to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms…. ”
–Samuel Adams

 http://jenkuznicki.com/2013/01/a-treasury-of-quotes-about-our-2nd-amendment/

 

Foot in mouth – Who is protecting Mr. Bloomberg’s Pansy A**

Two thumbs up for Gds44 and The Foxhole for this post!