BluegrassBulletin.com

Stand Your Ground Update

When the Bureau of Land Management surrounded Cliven Bundy's ranch in Colorado in an effort to reclaim land upon which he and his family had been grazing cattle for generations, the armed forces of the United States took aim at citizens with their weapons.

Some say that revelations implicating Harry Reid and the Chinese in a plan to use the land for other purposes caused the BLM and the armed agents to stand down.  Not so says the rancher's son.

A show of force was necessary to stop the government seizure and sale of embattled cattle rancher Cliven Bundy's cows, his son said on Sunday, a day after an armed standoff between federal agents and hundreds of Bundy's supporters. [Reuters]

The armed standoff came after a contingent of militia groups headed for the ranch in support of Bundy and in opposition to the military like maneuvers of the BLM and other agents.

Under the Obama administration there has been a rise in the number of states which have created a separate militia unit under the control of the governor alone without any requirement that the  members treat the president as their commander in chief.

Obama is angered by the several State Governors who have reestablished “State Defense Forces.” These forces are described as: “State Defense Forces (also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves, State Militias) in the United States are military units that operate under the sole authority of a state government; they are not regulated by the National Guard Bureau nor are they part of the Army National Guard of the United States. [Politcalvelcraft.org]

And just how has the president responded in the face of the increase in militia groups, state military units and private citizens having the ability to defend themselves?

President Obama has requested $1.1 billion and the Department of Justice (DOJ) asked for $382.1 million for gun control "to protect Americans from gun violence." [Foxnews]

Is it just me or do you hear echoes of "The Concord Hymn"?

Trey Grayson Leaves Harvard Post

Former Republican Secretary of State Trey Grayson has announced that he is leaving his post at the Harvard Institute of Politics.  Some are speculating that he will return to Kentucky and seek elected office again.

Considering that Rand Paul faces legal difficulties in his desire to run for both Presidency of the United States and his Kentucky US Senate seat at the same time, Grayson may be eyeing an opportunity that he was denied in 2010.

However, as popular as Grayson was among many Kentucky establishment republicans four years ago, his stature as a viable republican candidate has not been helped by his activities or the changes to the political landscape since he left Kentucky.

Grayson, along with former Clinton administration official Robert Reich, were named as co-chairs of a PAC dedicated to electing only democrats. [Washington Post]

In addition, the forces of the TEA party which gained strength in the Commonwealth largely on the shoulders of Rand Paul have gotten far more organized in Grayson's former home county of Boone.

Your Land, My Land?

I'm not a big fan of Alex Jones or his hysterics, but I have been following this developing story and what you read below should give you a glimpse of how the government really sees you and me when we don't agree with them.  It also raises a question:  Is this land really your land, is this land really my land?

Federal snipers with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) trained guns on members of a family yesterday after they dared to stop and take video footage of cattle outside the bounds of a designated “First Amendment Area,” before arresting one of the men for non-compliance.

The cattle were being rounded up by BLM officers as part of a crackdown on Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who has refused to pay “grazing fees” demanded by the feds as a result of a re-classification of 600,000 acres of federal land in northeastern Clark County which Bundy claims has been in his family for generations.

Fears that the confrontation may turn violent and concerns that Bundy is drawing increased support from liberty activists and the local community prompted the feds to tape off two ridiculous “First Amendment Areas,” outside of which free speech in support of Bundy is banned. A sign placed inside the area reads “Welcome to Amerika – Wake Up” alongside a hammer and sickle logo.

When Bundy’s family members violated that rule yesterday in an attempt to peacefully document the cattle roundup, they were met with a barrage of loudspeaker warnings and four BLM snipers with their guns trained on the dissenters.

None of the family members were armed, but as soon as Dave Bundy began filming the cattle in the distance, 11 BLM vehicles each with two agents arrived and surrounded him.

“They also had four snipers on the hill above us all trained on us. We were doing nothing besides filming the area,” said Ryan Bundy.

The family were told to leave the area via loudspeaker because they had violated the crudely established “First Amendment Area”. [Infowars]

Russia Matters

Vladmir Putin may be losing his grip on reality says German Chancellor Merkel.  Hillary Clinton compares Putin to Nazi Germany.  Putin timed his threats over the Ukraine to coincide with a pre-announced launch of an inter-continental ballistic missile.  He sent a warship to Cuba, is patrolling very close to our maritime borders, supports Iran and is making deals with Communist China.  Russia matters.

Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld both said the same thing within the past week.  Our president has conducted himself in a way that has given the rest of the world the clear impression that we are weak economically, weak morally, weak militarily and have a weakened political system that is weak on threats to democracy.  In other words, Obama has made America more vulnerable in direct contravention of his first and foremost job, protecting the security of our nation and defending our Constitution.

Now, having diagnosed the very serious condition in which we find ourselves, what do we do to heal these problems and how much time do we have to get back on our feet?  The answer is: we have precious little time and we need radical change.

Impeachment takes too long and it would get hung up in the Senate.  Obama's term in office isn't up until January 2017.  So how do we rid ourselves of this sickness?

We must take back the majority in the Senate, increase our seats in the house and move swiftly to remove him from office or at the very least deny him any power over our future.

If you really think that the world is just awash with enthusiasm over Obama then let's assume you are right.  Why would they be?  Is the rest of the world thrilled that we have enjoyed so much prosperity?  Do they celebrate our successes?  No.

The rest of the world is like a pack of wolves at our doorstep, living off the scraps we throw into the yard but waiting patiently for the one opportunity to exploit our weakness to come inside, take all the food and eat us in the process if possible.

Why does Russia matter?  Because they have just demonstrated for the rest of us how totally inept and dangerous the Obama administration really is.

Should Convicted Felons Be Permitted To Vote?

It is a particular bugaboo with me.  I am pretty dogmatic when it comes to debate.  I firmly believe that it is essential for every participant to agree upon the meaning of every word and concept before being required to discuss it.  So, for the sake of accuracy, let us start with the definition of "felon".

A convicted felon is a person who has a criminal record of having been found guilty, or having pled guilty, to a criminal offense defined by the state in which the conviction took place as a "felony", or a person who has a record of having been convicted of or having pled to a criminal offense defined by the federal government as a "felony".  Therefore, the first step in this debate is to examine what is and what is not a felony.  I will confine my discussion to felonies arising under Kentucky law. 

In Kentucky a "felony" is defined as an offense for which a sentence to a term of imprisonment of at least one (1) year in the custody of the Department of Corrections may be imposed.

How many persons alive today in Kentucky have a criminal record which contains a "felony"?  According to a study based upon 2010 data the number of Kentuckians with felony convictions was 243,842.  However, this included people currently in prison, currently on parole or probation or serving their sentences in local jails.

Of the total number of people with felony convictions, according to the study 180,984 of those people were classified as "ex-felons".  Of course since a felony conviction is for life (except in the case of a pardon) no one is likely to be an "ex-felon" who was included in this number.

Now, let's examine the kinds of things that can result in a felony conviction.

Bouncing a check for more than $100 was at one time a felony.  Finding and keeping lost property worth more than $500 is a felony.  Using your mother's car without her permission a second time can be a felony.  And over the years, as the legislature has modified the marijuana laws to the point where it is now legal in many states, many people in Kentucky have felony records as a result of conduct which in today's world would be nothing more than a misdemeanor.

Many people with felony records had those crimes added to their history when they were in their teens.  Some of those folks are now in their retirement years having lived long, rewarding, prosperous lives without another blemish.

So the question which the people of Kentucky may have to face when considering whether to amend the Constitution will certainly not be fully described in any language chosen by the legislature.

Which is just one example of why, when you hear any politician trying to score points by raising his/her rhetoric to a fever pitch, you should first insist that they define their terms.

And though I said I was going to limit my discussion to "felonies" as defined by Kentucky law, as we all know some states have made the possession of certain firearms, and ammunition magazines felonies.  According to the federal courts, Kentucky may be required to give those convictions full faith and credit. 

Should a young woman who bounced a check for $100 when she was in college and had no money to fight the charge so instead pled guilty be punished the rest of her life with all the baggage attendant to being a felon?

It's worth a closer look than you will likely get from the discussions now underway.

Related articles

Paul Pressing to Restore Felons' Voting Rights

17 Years In Prison For Fetal Homicide In Kentucky, Never For Abortion

What Happens In California Comes Here In .....

No doubt you've heard it said that what happens on the west coast happens here in the heartland 10 years later.  Well let us hope and pray that what is happening in Los Angeles county never happens anywhere else.

Residents are complaining that the police, dressed in military armor, have a pattern of behavior "oppressive" to the people they are supposed to be serving.  And as in this case, many times the police raids are based upon "anonymous" tips.

You will recall how law enforcement behaved after the Boston Marathon bombings.  Now, in this video, you will see how an innocent 80 year old man was gunned down in his bedroom.

I've asked these questions of you before, but now you need to be asking yourself again, when will we take back our country?  What will you do?

Here's the 7 minute video that should wake you up.  It is very hard to do damage control once the flood breaks out of its banks.

 

Diane Feinstein Thinks Free Speech Is A Privilege Not A Right

Okay, so Texas schoolbooks are trying to re-write the Second Amendment in the minds of children.  Now, Diane Feinstein is trying to silence anybody, particularly bloggers, from speaking their minds.  How is she doing this?  Well, she says that free speech is a "privilege" not a right. 

Constitution, what constitution? 

Re-Writing History In Texas Textbooks

In case you didn't know it, most of the textbooks in the nation are based upon what Texas wants them to say.

No matter where you live, if your children go to public schools, the textbooks they use were very possibly written under Texas influence.

Texas originally acquired its power over the nation’s textbook supply because it paid 100 percent of the cost of all public school textbooks, as long as the books in question came from a very short list of board-approved options.

As a market, the state was so big and influential that national publishers tended to gear their books toward whatever it wanted. [NYBooks.com]

Well, hold your seats Moms and Dads, and liberty loving constitutionalists across the nation, guess what Texas is doing to the Second Amendment.

The authors of United States History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination have taken it upon themselves to change the Constitution of the United States. The high school textbook contains a summary of each Amendment that alters the initial intent in which they were created.

The textbook notes the Second Amendment as, "The people have a right to keep and bear arms in a state militia."

The actual 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."

Guyer High School and numerous others have assigned the book for an "Advanced Placement History" course. By assigning anti-factual literature, the only advanced placement the school has ensured for their students is in the world of biased academia. [Breitbart]

It's hard to unlearn things, which is why it is so important to keep an eye on what we are teaching in the first place.

The Problem Isn't Republicans, It's The Hated View Of Republicans

EDITORIAL RANT

I was once asked by a news paper editor if I was a Republican, or a TEA partier.  I told him that I prefer to avoid labels because they are over-broad.  I am who I am, think what I want and try to have good reason for what I think always willing to be persuaded, if possible, where I am wrong.

As Emerson once said "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."  I would emphasize the word "foolish" in that quote as I do not believe that there is anything inherently wrong in being consistently wise.

I know many people who are registered to vote under different banners who think very much alike on many issues.  The Republicans certainly have no special claim to the "right to life" issue, the "right to bear arms" issue, the right to be free from intrusive government regulations issue or many other issues that are of real concern to people regardless of their party registration.

But listen to the haters and you would think that all Republicans are evil.  Such thinking is over broad, over inclusive and born of a little mind.

Dea Riley, former candidate for Lieutenant Governor with the late Gatewood Galbraith recently posted this to her Facebook page:

Come on Dea.  Do you really think that all persons in the Republican Party openly embrace exclusion, elitism and social categorization?  That we are all radical fascists seeking to impose a specific ideology/theology on everyone, embracing intrusion into individual rights?  That certainly doesn't define me, and neither does it define or describe many of the republicans I know. That is an insult.

But you are in good company.  MSNBC which has turned out to be the great hater of all things republican made up out of thin air a claim that "conservatives" hate bi-racial families. 

My God!  First of all there was no "conservative" backlash last year which the facts prove and which caused MSNBC to amend it's tweet to remove the word "conservative".  But that doesn't cure the problem.

The far left, the liberals in the democratic party and yes, even some of the TEA party liberals who are hiding out under the banner of "constitutional conservatives" hate republicans so much that they refuse to see that we are all individuals, with individual thoughts, feelings and beliefs.

As a republican I still believe in individual freedom, and that is because like our founders I believe that my life is a gift from God and that I am endowed by Him with inalienable rights.

As a republican I still believe that when a government fears the people there is hope for liberty, but when the people fear the government we have tyranny.

As a republican lawyer I defend the constitution every day, which on some days means that I defend the rights of people to do things, and say things with which I might personally disagree, but they have the right to do and say them.

And as a republican I have no compelling desire to see that we control people through a particular theology.  I am a Christian and my faith teaches me that I am to love my neighbor, introduce them to God when the chance arises, but recognize that they operate with free will and their choices are their own.  Do I want everybody to be a Baptist, or a Catholic, or a Methodist, or a Quaker or a Mormon or a Pentecostal?  Of course not.  As a Christian I would like everyone to know and accept Christ and I think the best way to do that is to live what I believe to the best of my ability and introduce them to each other.

But as an American, who believes that people should be free from government dictates as to whether and how they worship, I do oppose the goal of radical Islam to force the world to capitulate to their twisted worship of a pedophile prophet or be killed or enslaved.

And likewise I oppose any effort, by any person or group of persons to enslave people under any ideology, including the disgusting political game that addicts people to government hand outs, destroying their sense of self worth, de-incentivizing them to reach their full potential and thus enslaving them to the masters who they eventually think are the only ones who can provide for them.

The problem in this nation isn't republicans, it's the irrational, unsupportable, off the chart hatred OF republicans.  And THAT my friends is not an accident. 

Hating republicans is not the natural consequence of an honest study of history.  It is not the result of deductive reasoning.  Hating republicans is the cold and calculated strategy of those who wish to fundamentally transform America into the kind of nation our founders and thousands upon thousands of our best and brightest ever since have fought to prevent.

It is unfair to say that all democrats are far left liberals.  It is unfair to say that all republicans are cracker-assed racists.

We are all Americans.  We all have the right to want and pursue different paths to happiness.  But hatred of others is destructive.

You may assign to me a desire to run things by my theology, but only on this one point.  In my view, hatred has no place in America.  I would prefer that we love each other, and all people, as we love ourselves. 

If that was our guiding principle, I believe everything else would fall into place.

Prosecutors To Enjoy Immunity No More?

Immunity is a withering vestige of the privileges of Kings.  In fact today we still refer to the immunity enjoyed by governments as "Sovereign" immunity.  Immunity has been extended to various offices connected with government, including judges, lawyers, police officers and prosecutors.  But those days may be over.

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that prosecutors do not enjoy absolute immunity in every case.  The decision arose out of the prosecution of a man, sentenced to death row who spent 17 years in prison until after his appeals and a new trial he was acquitted.

[The] Seventh Circuit has ruled that a prosecutor is not protected by immunity for allegedly coercing false testimony that sent a man to death row 17 years ago. Two prosecutors were accused of egregious misconduct: Lawrence Wharrie and David Kelley. The new opinion from the Seventh Circuit is Fields v. Wharrie, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 1333.

The matter went to a Seventh Circuit panel, which included conservative icon, Richard Posner. Writing for the majority, Posner held that it would be absurd to allow such prosecutors to claim immunity in such cases.

In discussing the Supreme Court’s 1993 decision in Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259 (1993), Posner added that “A prosecutor may not shield his investigative work with the aegis of absolute immunity merely because, after a suspect is eventually arrested, indicted, and tried, that work may be retrospectively described as ‘preparation’ for a possible trial; every prosecutor might then shield himself from liability for any constitutional wrong against innocent citizens by ensuring that they go to trial.” [Turley] [italics added]

When the government acting through its agents does wrong and the agents are then shielded from liability, they certainly enjoy a benefit that does not exist among the general public.  We may be seeing the day come when the last vestige of royal privilege is finally removed from the American system of justice, for all.