Quote

People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Sunday, July 03, 2011

James Webb Wants To Resurrect A Silly Idea

I had to read this twice in order to figure out exactly what Virginia's weirdest United States senator was trying to accomplish:
Webb wants to establish two minutes of silence on Veterans Day
Blue Ridge Caucus

Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., wants the nation to observe two minutes of silence every Veterans Day.

Here’s a release from his office:

Senator Jim Webb today joined a bipartisan group of House and Senate members in announcing legislation to establish a two-minute moment of silence on Veterans Day.

“This legislation renews a tradition that began after World War One, when the citizens of many countries would observe a moment of remembrance on the eleventh minute of the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month — the moment the Armistice was signed,” said Webb. “It is an appropriate gesture to honor those who serve and have served.”

The “Veterans Day Moment of Silence Act” would direct the President to issue a proclamation every year calling on Americans to observe a two-minute moment of silence at exactly 2:11 Eastern time on Veterans Day, which is celebrated on November 11th. [link]
A moment of silence?  To honor veterans?

Shouldn't that be directed to Memorial Day?  To honor the fallen?

On Veterans Day we should - and do - shout our gratitude to those who, over the centuries, shouldered arms and marched off to protect us from harm.

Silence?

Not this thankful American.


Millions of men and women were - are - willing to give their last full measure of devotion in order to secure and maintain our freedom.  For them, hold that banner high. Sing their praises.

At the top of your lungs.

They deserve no less.

Can Abingdon Be Far Behind?

The city of Roanoke has done the right thing by backing away from a proposal requiring that it adopt U.N. supported "urban development areas."

What could be sweeter on this (pre) Independence Day than this headline from the Roanoke Tea Party?


A great day indeed.

Now, is the city of Abingdon the lone commie holdout in Southwest Virginia?

Seems so.

- - -

Roanoke has righted itself. But the fact that it dabbled with government-mandated "smart growth" has led to a Tea Party candidate for state Senate up there to run to the right of the two establishment candidates - including Dave Nutter, an otherwise stalwart conservative.

See "Tea party Senate hopeful Tripp Godsey fears U.N. control." His may be an unwarranted fear, but Godsey's right in wanting to keep the U.N. as far away from our freedoms as possible.  Its intentions are unmistakeably dishonorable.

Here's to liberty.  And to those who fight diligently to safeguard it.

So Does She Believe In 'Stimulus' Or Not?

This from Roanoke Times editorial page editor Christina Nuckols has me scratching my head.  From "A 75-year investment in national pride":
Today, "stimulus" has become a pejorative term. Billions in federal spending saved thousands of jobs, or at least delayed public sector purges. But capital expenditures were frittered away on modest repaving projects, and high-speed rail funds were scattered so widely among political battleground states that it's impossible to discern any tangible progress.
In point of fact, that federal stimulus spending to which she refers - if we combine G.W. Bush's effort with that of our current spender-in-chief - approached a trillion dollars, not just "billions."  But I'm willing to concede the "thousands" of (government) jobs that trillion "saved" (do the math and strap yourself down when you realize what each job therefore cost).

But is Ms.Nuckols approving of federal stimulus or opposed?  That's what I want to know.  Her "capital expenditures were frittered away on modest repaving projects, and high-speed rail funds were scattered so widely among political battleground states that it's impossible to discern any tangible progress" sure doesn't sound like a vote of approbation to me.

The thrust of her editorial is that we should spend more on parks (I think).  Fine.  But should that spending occur instead of "frittering away" taxpayer dollars on jobs?  Or in combination with?

Clarity, babe.  It goes a long way when you take upon yourself the task of convincing others that your point of view is a worthy one.

We Decide, Amigo

Illegal immigrants to USA:

"We have earned the right to be here."

America to illegal immigrants:

First, we decide.  
Second, no, you haven't.  

You defied our laws and mocked our way of life the moment you set foot on our soil.  Go home.  And come back the right way.

Or go home.

Either way.

Because your being here in defiance of the law of this land has earned you nothing.

Words Well Writ

Mark Steyn on Obama's assault on corporate jets.  And on his prayer that we all have short memories:
President Obama taunted Republicans on Wednesday, “and ask [sic] them, are they willing to compromise their kids’ safety so that some corporate-jet owner continues to get a tax break?”

In the Republic of Brokistan, that’s the choice, is it?  In his bizarre press conference on Wednesday, Obama made no fewer than six references to corporate-jet owners. Just for the record, the tax break for corporate jets was part of the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009” — i.e., the stimulus. The Obama stimulus. The Obama-Pelosi-Reid stimulus. The Obama-Pelosi-Reid-Democratic-party stimulus that every single Republican House member and all but three Republican senators voted against. The Obama–Corporate Jet stimulus that some guy called Obama ostentatiously signed into law in Denver after jetting in to host an “economic forum.”
The Obama-Corporate Jet stimulus. Cute.

Ultra-Liberals Want Ultra-Liberal Justice To Retire?

How can that be?

Democrats and liberals have a nightmare vision of the Supreme Court's future: President Barack Obama is defeated for re-election next year and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, at 78 the oldest justice, soon finds her health will not allow her to continue on the bench.

Oh. She's old. And therefore needs to go.

Maybe they should convene a death panel and begin proceedings ...

Maybe I'm Reading The Constitution Wrong

But where it says "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized," doesn't that mean "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized"?

Apparently not in Lynchburg.

This comes to us from the Lynchburg Tea Party:
Friends,

The Lynchburg Tea Party is reaching out to community groups all across the city and across political lines to fight an issue that will directly effect you and your neighbors.

The City of Lynchburg is trying to give the planning commission (building permits, code enforcement, etc.) the ability to issue search warrants if they suspect “code” violations.

This is an outright violation of the 4th amendment.

On August 9th at 7 p.m. at City Hall (900 Church St) there will be another hearing about the proposed changes to the law. We had 50 people at the last meeting but we need 150 at this next meeting. Not ONE person spoke in favor of this change to the law. 19 spoke against. And yet instead of killing it the city council voted 4 to 3 to change the wording and then hold another hearing.

Please let your community know about this.

This will effect the minority communities before it ever touches anyone else.

Contact your City Representative and tell them you DO NOT support this absurdity.

Thank You,

Kurt Feigel
Lynchburg Tea Party President [link]
Would a judge sign off on a search warrant on the basis of a "suspected" building code violation?  Stranger things have happened.

To those who rule Lynchburg: It would do you well to heed these words:

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed." (source)

If you're going to change the law on a whim, just because you don't like certain citizens within your midst, why not simply change the law to allow your minions to shoot the sunsabitchas and be done with them?

Reefer Madness

Let's start with this given: the streets of Chicago run red with the blood of innocent victims who are being slain by out-of-control brigands and badasses.  With impunity.  In other cities, police warn the law-abiding to stay clear of certain neighborhoods because they're overrun with thugs who can't be controlled by the police.  The police, seemingly, have ceded those neighborhoods to the lawless.

So where do we direct our efforts to force Americans to obey the law?

Where it's a lot easier:


For the love of God.

- - -

* A note to all you dope smokers: You were warned long ago not to listen to this guy.  You voted for him anyway.  So wrap your brains around this:


In his first year in office: U.S. eases stance on medical marijuana.

Last month: Obama administration to crack down on medical marijuana.


If only you'd listened.

- - -

** Yes, it should be legalized.

- - - 


*** No, I don't smoke dope.

A Meaningless War

I suppose, when I search my brain cells for another conflict that dragged American forces into it for no good reason, I come up with - tentatively - World War I.  It began, after all, when Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary was assassinated in Sarajevo in 1914, by a Yugoslav nationalist, causing the Archduke's country to declare war on Serbia (that's right). Germany, allied with Austria-Hungary, declared war on Serbia too. And, well, you know the rest.

We went to war.

Huh?

Which brings us to Libya, 2011.


Great! We're on track!

Uh, excuse me.  Where does that track lead?  And what do we get out of it when we reach that destination?

Some agitated dude shoots a prince and nine million people die as a result.

And we're killing Libyans because ... why?  We don't like Moammar Gadhafi.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.