The Defender

I've moved

2011-01-30T17:43:00.001-08:00

New blog:

http://resolutedefender.wordpress.com/

Basically, since starting The Defender several years ago, I have experienced a shift in the goals for my blog and how I want to run it. Plus, I now like WordPress better than Blogger. So head on over there and start keeping a watch for new stuff.

2010-08-17T12:19:00.000-07:00

2010-08-17T12:15:00.000-07:00

Blogging a Book: The PIG Guide to American History

2010-05-28T07:35:00.000-07:00

If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; the may assume the provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, everything, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress.

- James Madison, 1792

Arguing against the idea the the "general welfare" clause of the Preamble grants power of itself.

Long time, no post.

2010-05-25T09:04:00.000-07:00

Well, life has been very busy for the past several months, and blogging has taken a back seat on the priority list. With school out for the summer, I intend to renew the auld acquaintance and hopefully provide some thoughts that will edify, enlighten, and yes, entertain. Y'all be looking, I should have some new posts up shortly.

Combat for Dummies: Murphy's Rules, Part III

2010-02-05T18:36:00.000-08:00

-The problem with taking the easy way out, is that the enemy has already mined it.
-Never worry about the bullet with your name on it. Instead, worry about shrapnel addressed to 'occupant'.

-The enemy is anyone who is going to get you killed, no matter what side he is on.

-All battles are fought at the junction of two or more map sheets --- printed at different scales.

-All battles are fought uphill.

-All battles are fought in the rain.

-Logistics is the ball and chain of armoured warfare.

-Boldness becomes rarer the higher the rank.

-Never reinforce failure. Failure reinforces itself.

-Only 5% of an intelligence report is accurate. The trick of a good commander is to isolate the 5%.

-Tactics are for amateurs; professionals study logistics.

-When a front line soldier overhears two General Staff officers conferring, he's fallen back too far.

-It isn't necessary to be an idiot to be a senior officer, but it sure helps.

-No captain can do very wrong who places his ship alongside that of the enemy.

-Always know when it's time to get out of Dodge.

-Always know how to get out of Dodge.

-There are two kinds of naval vessels: submarines and targets.

-A lost battle is a battle one thinks one has lost.

-Surprise is an event that takes place in the mind of a commander.

-All warfare is based on deception.

-A little caution outflanks a large cavalry.

-If you take more than your fair share of objectives, you will have more than your fair share to take.

-Perfect is the enemy of good enough.

-Mine fields are not neutral. They attack anyone.

-Your mortar barrage will put exactly one round on the intended target. That round will be a dud.

-The mortar team will always have the correct number of safety pins to prove they armed all the rounds. To ensure this, the mortar team carries extra pins.

-Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl.

-If at first you don't succeed, call for artillery.

-When artillery doesn't work, call for an air strike.

-Overkill works.

-When you have secured an area, don't forget to tell the enemy.

-Military intelligence is a contradiction of terms.

-If it flies, it dies.

-The buddy system is essential to your survival. It gives the enemy somebody else to shoot at.

-Cavalry doesn't always come to the rescue.

-Radios will fail as soon as you desperately need fire support.

-Things that must be together to work usually can't be shipped together.

-The most dangerous thing in a combat zone is an officer with a map.

-There is nothing more satisfying than having someone take a shot at you and miss.

-If your sergeant can see you, so can the enemy,

-You'll only remember your hand grenades when the sound is too close to use them.

-Smoke and loud noise don't kill. Only hits count.

-The faster you shoot the bad guys, the less shot you will get.

-If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you may have misjudged the situation.

OK, my mistake . . .

2010-01-22T07:06:00.000-08:00

So Bushmaster did not actually release the ACR. Only a media page of some sort. After going back and reading my January newsletter from Bushy, I see that the rifle itself is scheduled for sales release the 1st of March. This rather important notation is in somewhat smallish print, and I completely missed seeing it the first time I read the letter - maybe I was distracted by the giant heading, "Announcing the Bushmaster ACR."

As I had previously seen the great big countdown clock on the new ACR page on Bushmaster's webpage, I excitedly assumed the rifle was to be released in a mere matter of days . . . alas, I was in error. My apologies for the false alarm.

Oh well, at least we have a definitive date.

Hang in there, y'all, I have some ideas for actual, written posts . . . just have not made the time to get them written. In the meantime, I'd like to know what y'all thought of Col. Crockett's view of economics.

Bushmaster to Release ACR

2010-01-18T16:36:00.001-08:00

Tomorrow. Finally. Check it out here.

Combat for Dummies: Murphy's Rules, Part II

2010-01-11T18:34:00.000-08:00

-If your attack appears to be going really well for once, it’s an ambush.

-The only thing more accurate than incoming enemy fire is incoming friendly fire.

-“When the pin is pulled, Mr. Grenade is not our friend.” --U.S. Marine Corps

-If it's stupid but works, it ain’t stupid.

-Make it too tough for the enemy to get in, and you can't get out.

-A Purple Heart just proves that were you smart enough to think of a plan, stupid enough to try it, and lucky enough to survive.

-Don't ever be the first, don't ever be the last and NEVER, EVER volunteer to do anything.

-The quartermaster has only two sizes: too large and too small.

-“Five second fuses [are guaranteed to] last three seconds.” --Infantry Journal

-You are not Superman (Marines and fighter pilots take note).

-A sucking chest wound is Nature's way of telling you to slow down.

-If you are forward of your position, your artillery will fall short.

-Never forget that your weapon was made by the lowest bidder.

-The enemy diversion you're ignoring is their main attack.

-No OPLAN ever survives initial contact.

-There is no such thing as a perfect plan.

-There is no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole.

-A retreating enemy is probably just falling back and regrouping

-Friendly fire - ain’t.

-Recoilless rifles - aren't.

-Suppressive fires - won't.

-Protective fire - don't.

-Perfect plans - aren't.

-The important things are always simple.

-The simple things are always hard.

-If you're short of everything except the enemy, you're in combat.

-No combat-ready unit has ever passed inspection.

-No inspection-ready unit has ever passed combat.

-Radios will fail as soon as you need fire support.

-When both sides are convinced that they are about to lose ... they are both right.

-All weather close support doesn't work in bad weather.

-The bursting radius of a grenade is always one foot greater than your jumping range.

-The only terrain that is truly controlled is the terrain upon which you are standing.

-The law of the bayonet says the man with the bullet wins.

-The best tank killer is another tank. Therefore tanks are always fighting each other ...& have no time to help the infantry.

-Precision bombing is normally accurate to within +/- one mile (...or so).

-“Cluster bombing from B-52s is very, very accurate. The bombs are guaranteed to always hit the ground.” --USAF Ammo Troop

-The side with the fanciest uniforms loses.

-Armored vehicles are bullet magnets; a moving foxhole that attracts attention.

-Expending material in combat is easier than filling out Graves Registration forms -- Ammo is cheap; your life isn't.

-Just because you can't see the enemy, don't for a minute believe they can't see you.

-When you have secured an area, don't forget to tell the enemy.

-"Aim towards the enemy." --Instruction printed on U.S. Rocket Launcher

-"A slipping gear could let your M-203 grenade launcher fire when you least expect it. That would make you quite unpopular in what's left of your unit." --Army's magazine of prevention maintenance

-"It is generally inadvisable to eject directly over the area you just bombed." --U.S. Air Force manual
-"Tracers work both ways." --U.S. Army Ordnance

-"Any ship can be a minesweeper....once." --Anon

-"Never tell the platoon sergeant you have nothing to do." --Unknown Marine Recruit

-"If you see a bomb technician running, try to keep up with him." --USAF Ammo Troop

-“Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.” - Gen. MacArthur

-You, you, and you . . . Panic. The rest of you, come with me. (Marine Gunnery Sergeant)

Combat for Dummies: Murphy's Rules, Part I

2010-01-01T12:00:00.000-08:00

-Have a plan.

-Have a back-up plan, because the first one won't work.

-If you can choose what to bring to a gunfight, bring a big weapon and a friend with a big weapon.

-In ten years nobody will remember the details of caliber, stance, or tactics. They will only remember who lived and who didn't.

-If you are not shooting, you should be communicating, reloading, and running.

-In combat, there are no rules, always cheat; always win. The only unfair fight is the one you lose.

-Use cover or concealment as much as possible. The visible target should be in FRONT of YOUR weapon.

-Don't drop your guard.

-Always tactical load and threat scan 360 degrees.

-The faster you finish the fight, the less shot you will get.

-Your number one Option for Personal Security is a lifelong commitment to avoidance, - deterrence, and de-escalation.

-Do not attend a gunfight with a handgun, the caliber of which does not start with a ".4."

-Never be the idiot who shows up armed only with a knife.

-Bring an automatic weapon. Better yet, bring two.

-Bring all your friends, with all their automatic weapons. Get them to bring their friends, with all of their -automatic weapons.

-Bring lots and lots of ammo -- it's cheap life insurance.

-Anything worth shooting is worth shooting twice. Ammo is cheap. Life is expensive.

-Only hits count. Close doesn't count. The only thing worse than a miss is a slow miss.

-If your shooting stance is good, you're probably not moving fast enough, nor using cover correctly.

-Move away from your attacker. Distance is your friend. (Lateral and diagonal movement are preferred.)

-Accuracy is relative: most combat shooting is more dependent on "pucker factor" than the inherent accuracy of the weapon.

-Flank your adversary when possible. Protect yours.

-Decide to be aggressive ENOUGH, quickly ENOUGH.

-Be courteous to everyone, friendly to no one.

-Be polite. Be professional. But have a plan to kill everyone you meet.

-Watch their hands. Hands kill. (In God we trust. Everyone else, keep your hands where I can see them).

-When in doubt, empty the magazine.

-Someday someone may kill you with your own weapon, but they should have to beat you to death with it because it is empty.

-“If the enemy is in range, so are you.” --Infantry Journal

-Incoming fire has the right of way.

-Don't look conspicuous: it draws fire.

-Teamwork is essential - it gives the enemy someone else to shoot at.

-"Don't draw fire; it irritates the people around you." --Infantry Journal

-Never share a fox hole with anyone braver than yourself.

-Anything you do can get you shot. Including, doing nothing.

-The easy way is always mined.

-“Try to look unimportant; the enemy may be low on ammo” --Infantry Journal

-Professionals are predictable - it's the amateurs that are dangerous.

-The enemy invariably attacks on one of two occasions:
a. When you're ready for them.
b. When you're not ready for them.

a. when they're ready

b. when you're not.

-If you can't remember, “Front Towards Enemy” really means “This side the heck away from you.”

-Mines are equal opportunity weapons.

Wear the Pants

2009-12-30T12:01:00.000-08:00

From Dockers:

Col. David Crockett Speaks on Government and Money, Part IV

2009-12-30T12:00:00.000-08:00

"In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:

"Fellow-citizens--I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can to-day offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only."

"I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation as I have told it to you, and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

"And now, fellow-citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error."

"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit of it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so."

"He came upon the stand and said:

"Fellow-citizens--It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today."

"He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.

"I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.

"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. I have had several thousand copies of it printed, and was directing them to my constituents when you came in.

"There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men--men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased--a debt which could not be paid by money--and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."

Finis

Col. David Crockett Speaks on Government and Money, Part III

2009-12-29T12:00:00.000-08:00

"I have given you," continued Crockett, "an imperfect account of what he said. Long before he was through, I was convinced that I had done wrong. He wound up by saying:

"So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you."

"I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go to talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:

"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it, than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote, and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot."

"He laughingly replied: "Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go round the district, you will tell the people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way."

"If I don't," said I, "I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it."

"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you."

"Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-by. I must know your name."

"My name is Bunce."

"Not Horatio Bunce?"

"Yes."

"Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad that I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend. You must let me shake your hand before I go."

"We shook hands and parted. It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

"At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.

"Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.

"It is not exactly pertinent to my story, but I must tell you more about him. When I saw him with his family around him, I was not surprised that he loved to stay at home. I have never in any other family seen a manifestation of so much confidence, familiarity and freedom of manner of children toward their parents mingled with such unbounded love and respect.

"He was not at the house when I arrived, but his wife received and welcomed me with all the ease and cordiality of an old friend. She told me that her husband was engaged in some out-door business, but would be in shortly. She is a woman of fine person; her face is not what the world would at first sight esteem beautiful. In a state of rest there was too much strength and character in it for that, but when she engaged in conversation, and especially when she smiled, it softened into an expression of mingled kindness, goodness, and strength that was beautiful beyond anything I have ever seen.

"Pretty soon her husband came in, and she left us and went about her household affairs. Toward night the children--he had about seven of them-- began to drop in; some from work, some from school, and the little ones from play. They were introduced to me, and met me with the same ease and grace that marked the manner of their mother. Supper came on, and then was exhibited the loveliness of the family circle in all its glow. The father turned the conversation to the matters in which the children had been interested during the day, and all, from the oldest to the youngest, took part in it. They spoke to their parents with as much familiarity and confidence as if they had been friends of their own age, yet every word and every look manifested as much respect as the humblest courtier could manifest for a king; aye, more, for it was all sincere, and strengthened by love. Verily it was the Happy Family.

"I have told you Mr. Bunce converted me politically. He came nearer converting me religiously than I had ever been before. When supper was over, one of the children brought him a Bible and hymn-book. He turned to me and said:

"Colonel, I have for many years been in the habit of family worship night and morning. I adopt this time for it that all may be present. If I postpone it some of us get engaged in one thing and some in another, and the little ones drop off to sleep, so that it is often difficult to get all together."

"He then opened the Bible, and read the Twenty-third Psalm, commencing: "The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want." It is a beautiful composition, and his manner of reading it gave it new beauties. We then sang a hymn, and we all knelt down. He commenced his prayer "Our Father who art in Heaven." No one who has not heard him pronounce those words can conceive how they thrilled through me, for I do not believe that they were ever pronounced by human lips as by him. I had heard them a thousand times from the lips of preachers of every grade and denomination, and by all sorts of professing Christians, until they had become words of course with me, but his enunciation of them gave them an import and a power of which I had never conceived. There was a grandeur of reverence, a depth of humility, a fullness of confidence and an overflowing of love which told that his spirit was communing face to face with its God. An overwhelming feeling of awe came over me, for I felt that I was in the invisible presence of Jehovah. The whole prayer was grand--grand in its simplicity, in the purity of the spirit it breathed, in its faith, its truth, and its love. I have told you he came nearer converting me religiously than I had ever been before. He did not make a very good Christian of me, as you know; but he has wrought upon my mind a conviction of the truth of Christianity, and upon my feelings a reverence for its purifying and elevating power such as I had never felt before.

"I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him--no, that is not the word--I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

"But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted--at least, they all knew me.

To be continued . . .

Col. David Crockett Speaks on Government and Money, Part II

2009-12-27T12:00:00.000-08:00

Previous engagements preventing me from seeing Crockett that night, I went early to his room the next morning, and found him engaged in addressing and franking letters, a large pile of which lay upon his table.

I broke in upon him rather abruptly, by asking him what devil had possessed him to make that speech and defeat that bill yesterday. Without turning his head or looking up from his work, he replied :

"You see that I am very busy now; take a seat and cool yourself. I will be through in a few minutes, and then I will tell you all about it."

He continued his employment for about ten minutes, and when he had finished it turned to me and said:

"Now, sir, I will answer your question. But thereby hangs a tale, and one of considerable length, to which you will have to listen."

I listened, and this is the tale which I heard:

"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. When we got there I went to work, and I never worked as hard in my life as I did there for several hours. But, in spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made houseless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them, and everybody else seemed to feel the same way."

"The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business, and rushed it through as soon as it could be done. I said everybody felt as I did. That was not quite so; for, though they perhaps sympathized as deeply with the sufferers as I did, there were a few of the members who did not think we had the right to indulge our sympathy or excite our charity at the expense of anybody but ourselves. They opposed the bill, and upon its passage demanded the yeas and nays. There were not enough of them to sustain the call, but many of us wanted our names to appear in favor of what we considered a Praiseworthy measure, and we voted with them to sustain it. So the yeas and nays were recorded, and my name appeared on the journals in favor of the bill."

"The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up, and I thought it was best to let the boys know that I had not forgot them, and that going to Congress had not made me too proud to go to see them."

"So I put a couple of shirts and a few twists of tobacco into my saddle-bags, and put out. I had been out about a week, and had found things going very smoothly, when, riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up I spoke to the man.

He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly, and was about turning his horse for another furrow, when I asked him if he could give me a chew of tobacco.

"Yes," said he, "such as we make and use in this part of the country; but it may not suit your taste, as you are probably in the habit of using better."

"With that he pulled out of his pocket part of a twist in its natural state, and handed it to me. I took a chew, and handed it back to him. He turned to his plow, and was about to start off. I said to him: "Don't be in such a hurry, my friend; I want to have a little talk with you, and get better acquainted," He replied:

"I am very busy, and have but little time to talk, but if it does not take too long, I will listen to what you have to say."

"I began: "Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and---"

"Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again."

"This was a sockdologer. I had been making up my mind that he was one of those churlish fellows who care for nobody but themselves, and take bluntness for independence. I had seen enough of them to know there is a way to reach them, and was satisfied that if I could get him to talk to me I would soon have him straight. But this was entirely a different bundle of sticks. He knew me, had voted for me before, and did not intend to do it again. Something must be the matter; I could not imagine what it was. I had heard of no complaints against me, except that some of the dandies about the village ridiculed some of the wild and foolish things that I too often say and do, and said that I was not enough of a gentleman to go to Congress. I begged him to tell me what was the matter.

"Well, Colonel, it is hardly worth while to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest."

"Thank you for that, but you find fault with only one vote. You know the story of Henry Clay, the old huntsman and the rifle; you wouldn't break your gun for one snap."

"No, nor for a dozen. As the story goes, that tack served Mr. Clay's purpose admirably, though it really had nothing to do with the case. I would not break the gun, nor would I discard an honest representative for a mistake in judgment as a mere matter of policy. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is."

"I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question."

"No, Colonel, there's no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true!"

"Certainly it is, and I thought that was the last vote for which anybody in the world would have found fault with."

"Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity!"

"Here was another sockdologer; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:

"Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did."

"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the Government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the Government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive, what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution."

To be continued . . .

Col. David Crockett Speaks on Government and Money, Part I

2009-12-25T19:32:00.000-08:00

This narrative is related in "The Life of Colonel David Crockett," by Edward S. Ellis. Now in the public domain; retrieved from TheAdvocates.org.

I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support, rather, as I thought, because it afforded the speakers a fine opportunity for display than from the necessity of convincing anybody, for it seemed to me that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question, when Crockett arose. Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make one of his characteristic speeches in support of the bill. He commenced:

"Mr. Speaker -- I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the Government was in arrears to him. This Government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price. If it is a debt, how much is it? Has it been audited, and the amount due ascertained? If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the war of 1812 precisely the same amount. There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor, and if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House. There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of; but we never hear of any of these large debts to them. Sir, this is no debt. The Government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.

Like many other young men, and old ones too, for that matter, who had not thought upon the subject, I desired the passage of the bill, and felt outraged at its defeat. I determined that I would persuade my friend Crockett to move a reconsideration the next day.

To be continued . . .

Magpul Releases AFG

2009-12-02T18:54:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, DrDrake (username) of Magpu l announced a very intriguing new product over on M4Carbine.net. It's called the Magpul AFG - AFG for Angled Vertical Foregrip. I was talking to some fellows recently about the best solution for a forward rail index point; we agreed that vertical fore grips (VFGs) don't exactly cut the mustard, and a standard handstop, such as that offered by Knight's Armament Co., is A) expensive and B) rather one-dimensional. As they have before, in steps Magpul with what appears to be a very viable solution. To quote DrDrake:

"The AFG falls into the category of “Theory Based" products. Simply put, these products are designed to enhance weapon performance and user interface beyond what is currently available. Because these products do not simply replace an existing weapon component, there is an understanding with Theory Based Products that simple plug and play doesn’t apply. They require education by way of instructions, training, and familiarization with the product to become proficient, and only then will the benefits be realized. In addition to the AFG, other products in this category are the B.A.D. Lever, MS2, and ASAP.

The primary difference between the AFG and standard vertical foregrips is weapon controllability. This is a direct result of hand position, grip style and body mechanics. Below is a detailed description of the Theory behind the AFG."

A pic:

A page from the slideshow description found here:

Several more great "live action" pics of Travis Haley using the AFG can be seen here.

Appears to me the AFG is sort of a modified MIAD grap integrated with a KAC Handstop. A few more details (Again, from DrDrake):

• Retail price $34.95

• Available colors Black, Flat Dark Earth, OD Green and Foliage Green

• Timeline, available in mid December

Oh yeah, it works for AKs and shotguns . . .

Hornady to Manufacture 6.5 Grendel

2009-11-22T19:34:00.000-08:00

Very interesting, just found out about this 5 min ago. It seems this little cartridge is catching on . . . let's see:

1) Bullets - made by anybody and everybody (6.5 is a popular caliber)

2) Brass - Lapua, Hornady (I assume Hornady makes their own)

3) Complete Cartridges - Alexander Arms, Wolf, and now Hornady

Check out the new round here.

The French Revolution: Good or Bad?

2009-11-03T18:46:00.000-08:00

Following is an essay I wrote for World History this past spring semester. Bear in mind this was written for the benefit of a Liberal Arts professor; couple that with the fact that I just generally had fun writing this, it's a rather flowery paper. I genuinely enjoyed the research; unfortunately, the footnotes I had generously scattered throughout did not translate to Blogger, so you'll have to guess about which information comes from where. Hope you all will find some of the information beneficial.

The question before us is one disputed by historians, would-be philosophers and socio-political theorists alike. It deals with a national revolution, and the positive consequences - or lack thereof - that resulted from the catastrophic upheaval of one governmental system, a period of terror, and finally the evolution of a new government that was not, in the end, so terribly unlike the first. The revolution referred to is none other than the French Revolution of 1789; the question: what were the positive consequences of said revolution? This essay will argue that there were in fact no positive consequences promulgated that justified revolution; while select Revolutionary ideas, such as the Metric system of measurement, have since been employed usefully, certainly nine years of tumult was unnecessary to their invention.

The French Revolution was initially heralded with joy by most in the newly born United States. The American people, so lately indebted to the French for the securement of their own liberty, were appropriately enthused to learn the French were following suit. According to one William Maclay, the fall of the Bastille, and the bloody chaos precipitated thereby, were merely the necessary pains that accompanied the beginning of every new life. “France seems travailing in the birth of freedom,” he wrote. “Her throes and pangs of labor are violent. God give her a happy delivery! Royalty, nobility and vile pageantry . . . seem like to be demolished with their kindred Bastille, which is said to be laid in ashes.” In England, the Constitutional and Revolution Societies of London conferred their “solemn public seal of sanction” upon the overthrow of the Ancien Regime.

But there were those who viewed the Revolution with concern. It seemed to them as though the Revolution had begun in a rather spontaneous, almost “seat of the pants” manner, with nobody really in control of anything and mostly unordered chaos prevailing. The first news of it was, as historian David McCullough says, “a bolt out of the blue, catching everyone by surprise.” “Everyone” even includes the newly organized French National Assembly, which was nominally the head of efforts to press for monarchial reform and popular liberty. Indeed, the storming of the Bastille was far from an organized, glorious assault launched upon the bastions of aristocracy to initiate revolution; it was more the natural consequence of a wildly excited mob - “in which capitalists who wanted to defend their money were mixed with gaol-birds who were only waiting for the opportunity to rob them of it” - suddenly finding itself in possession of some thirty thousand hastily manufactured pikes and thirty thousand hastily appropriated muskets. One self-proclaimed “conqueror of the Bastille” affirmed that the mob acted without authority or command when he glowingly described the “prodigies of valor” displayed by “this leaderless multitude of persons.”

It was this very ungoverned mob action that sounded a warning note. John Adams of the United States, himself a former revolutionary, hoped sincerely “The French Revolution will . . . produce effects in favor of liberty, equity, and humanity as extensive as this whole globe and as lasting as all time;” but he had “learned by awful experience to rejoice with trembling,” for it was in just such tumultuous upheavals as the one in France that “the most fiery spirits and flighty geniuses frequently obtained more influence than men of sense and judgement; and the weakest man may carry foolish measures in opposition to wise ones proposed by the ablest.”

In England, Irish statesman Edmund Burke had made a name for himself defending the American Revolution in Parliament, but the method fixed upon by the French for ushering in their own liberty struck him as singularly ineffective. “In one summer they have done their business . . . they have completely pulled down to the ground their monarchy, their church, their nobility, their law, their revenue, their army, their navy, their commerce, their arts, and their manufacturers.” More importantly, the French had “destroyed all balances and counterpoises which serve to fix a state and give it steady direction, and then they melted down the whole into one incongruous mass of mob and democracy [emphasis added].”

If the actions of the mob sounded a warning note, the form taken by the newly established Revolutionary government set clanging a whole host of alarm bells for both Adams and Burke. According to David McCullough, Adams could not avoid predicting “a tragic outcome, in that a single legislative assembly, as chosen by the French, could only mean ‘great and lasting calamities.’” Before the Revolution was even underway, Adams had voiced concern over the political philosophies of the French philosophe Turgot, who espoused “collecting all authority into one center, that of the nation,” in a perfect democracy and single legislative body. As far as Adams could read his history, no perfect democracy had yet existed; from his own experience he knew the utter impracticality of trusting the whole people to decide much of anything - even on the small scale of a village, let alone a nation of thirty million inhabitants. Edmund Burke agreed: “I do not know under what description to class the present ruling authority in France. It affects to be a pure democracy, though I think it in a direct train of becoming shortly a mischievous and ignoble oligarchy.” Burke conceded that under the right conditions, and in the right place, a pure democracy might be necessary, even desirable. But like Adams, he saw no place in history that gave evidence of a successful democracy, even of a “pure” one. “If I recollect rightly, Aristotle observes, that a democracy has many striking points of resemblance with a tyranny.”

Thus we see the early concerns for the direction of the Revolutionary movement. Have not they been justified? In the utter debauchery of The Terror, do we not see plainly evidenced the tyrannical reign of a select few over a bloodbath? It is truly ironic when a revolution in the name of liberty for all proceeds to stamp out with diligent malignancy the liberty of all but a few. By 1793, France ceased to be a democracy; she now claimed Republican status, though of a definition perhaps never before voiced. According to Saint-Just, one of the most powerful men in Revolutionary France during the initial Terror, “That which constitutes a republic, is the destruction of all that is opposed to it.” Precisely as John Adams and Edmund Burke had feared, tyranny was quickly rearing its ugly head. The infamous Robespierre, when requesting temporary dictatorship, affirmed Saint-Just by declaring, “The principle of the republican government is virtue, and the means required to establish virtue is terror.”

Sixty years later, Frenchman Frederic Bastiat would scathingly write,

“At what a tremendous height above the rest of mankind does Robespierre here place himself! . . . he himself will remake mankind, and by means of terror . . . he wants a dictatorship in order that he may use terror to force upon the country his own principles of morality . . . [and] not until he, Robespierre, shall have accomplished these miracles, as he so rightly calls them, will he permit the law to reign again.”

The practical outcome of such views would be the senseless butchery - it can hardly be called murder - of thousands of French people, many of whom were the same poor commoners to whom the Revolution was supposed, originally, to provide succor. Their crime? Possibly, in a fit of exasperation, they spoke negatively of the Assembly, or the Revolution itself. Perhaps, while literally starving, they complained about the high price of bread - or were simply not publicly enthusiastic about said price. Maybe they wished aloud that it were not quite so necessary to send so many to the guillotine. Any one of the above was cause enough to be reported, and packed away to prison. Under such conditions, the prisons became astonishingly full astonishingly quick; the most effective manner of dealing with the situation was simply to convict the prisoners, execute them, and continue the institution of good morals and Republicanism. According to historian Pierre Gaxotte,

“Fish wives were condemned to death for showing want of respect to the members of popular society, and firemen because they had put out a fire during the siege . . . On the 4^th of December . . . sixty-four young men, bound together two by two, were stood between two parallel ditches which had been dug to serve as their graves. Facing them were the cannon of the Revolutionary Army . . . the gunners fired, and the condemned men fell in heaps, like a crop that had grown too heavy. Most of them were only wounded, and the soldiers finished them off with their swords. Next day there was a fresh massacre, but this time the executioners had larger ideas, for two hundred and nine inhabitants of Lyons were dragged to the fatal spot . . . those whom the grapeshot had spared were smashed to pieces with pickaxes or hatchets.”

Such was the virtue imposed by the Revolutionaries! By the end of the century, it would be their undoing, as both Robespierre and Saint-Just died as they had condemned so many others to die: by that uniquely Revolutionary killing device, the guillotine. France had passed through fire, sword, and blood, and yet what had been accomplished? “In the course of ten years,” writes French historian Pierre Gaxotte, “the Revolution had falsified all calculations and disappointed all hopes. The benefits which had been expected of it were an ordered and stable government, sound finance, wise laws, peace abroad and tranquility at home. Instead of which there had been anarchy, war, communism, the Terror, insolvency, famine and two or three bankruptcies.” At the beginning of it all, John Adams had questioned, “Will the struggle in Europe be anything other than a change in impostors?” One might well argue that this was exactly the sum total of what occurred; a monarchy was exchanged for anarchy, then despotism; one flawed way of thinking cashiered for another equally as flawed. When Napoleon seized the reigns of governance, the Revolution had come full circle: it had begun by toppling the rule of a single man in the name of rule by the people, and it now ended by declaring a single man ruler in the name of the people.

Frederic Bastiat wrote in the 1840s:

“Frenchmen have led all other Europeans in obtaining their rights - or, more accurately, their political demands. Yet this fact has in no respect prevented us from being the most governed, the most regulated, the most imposed upon, the most harnessed, and the most exploited people in Europe. France also leads all other nations as the one where revolutions are constantly to be anticipated.”

This seems hardly a description of a prosperous and bountiful land shepherded by “an ordered and stable government.” Rather, it describes a land that has yet to recover an even political keel, and is in recurring danger of yet more fighting, yet more bloodshed. Not surprisingly, France has had no less than eleven constitutions since 1793 - an indication of instability if ever one existed.

So what were the consequences of the Revolution? It tolled the death knell of the Ancien Regime; it introduced, as Pierre Gaxotte said, communism, and must certainly be reckoned a precursor to the socialist philosophies of the 19^th and 20^th centuries. In 1909, on the eve of the Bolshevik Revolution, Prince Petr Kropotkin would write, “What we learn from the study of the Great [French] Revolution is that it was the source of all the present communist, anarchist and socialist conceptions.” One man has said it thus: “If the French Revolution was the end of monarchy and aristocratic privilege . . . it was also the beginnings of modern totalitarian government and large-scale executions of ‘enemies of the People’ by impersonal government entities.”

I believe it well safe to say, there were no positive consequences of the French Revolution.

Bibliography:

Bastiat, Frederic. The Law. Irvington-on-Hudson: Foundation for Economic Education, 2001.

Burke, Edmund, and Thomas Paine. Reflections On The Revolution In France and The Rights Of Man. Garden City: Dolphin Books, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1961.

Gaxotte, Pierre. Translated by Walter Alison Phillips, Litt.D. The French Revolution. London: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1932.

Keversau, ‘A Conqueror of the Bastille Speaks’, Exploring the French Revolution,

http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/searchfr.php? function=find&keyword=bastille&x=0&y=0# (accessed 30 January 2009).

McCullough, David. John Adams. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001.

Rich Geib’s Universe. The French Revolution.

http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/ french/french.html (accessed 30 January 2009).

ACR Update

2009-10-13T10:00:00.000-07:00

Thought some of you fellows might be interested in this. In a recent e-mail, Bushmaster announced:

"The ACR testing and analysis programs are running right on schedule. We are running it through every imaginable scenario to ensure that it’s absolutely ready to be released. Each day brings us closer and closer to the official launch, which is tentatively in the first half of 2010."

Note that the e-mail comes from Bushmaster, but Remington is the company with the pictures and gun specs online. I don't know what to call this thing anymore . . . Magpul/Bushmaster/Remington Masada/ACR. Some guys online are saying that Remington will handle the military contracts, Bushmaster will take care of the civilians.

By the by, I just checked Bushmaster’s webpage, and they have updated the “ACR Product Update” tab to include the above statement with a new picture of the ACR that looks like it’s straight from Remington’s Military site. So far as I know, this has been done fairly recently - within the last week or so, maybe two.

Anyhow, it's an interesting rifle, a bit less novel now than when Magpul first announced its development at SHOT way back in 2007. One of the main distinguishing characteristics of Magpul's original design was the capability to fire either 5.56x45 NATO or 7.62x39 "Commie" ammo with just a few parts swaps, and the very neat ability (as I understand it) to utilize standard Kalashnikov magazines, rather than the NATO modified type of the sort used in most 7.62x39 AR-15 style rifles.

I don't know that Remington/Bushmaster will retain this intriguing function, but I will definitely be looking forward to the ACR release nonetheless.

A brief history in pics:

"Bagman" promo from SHOT 2007. This was based on the 5.56/7.62 concept originally developed by Magpul. According to a Discovery Channel "FutureWeapons" episode featuring the (then) Masada, the idea was that US operators or their allies could leave a very "light footprint" in hostile territory by using the enemy's ammunition. No 5.56 NATO brass laying around means it is much easier to "blend in" to your surroundings and remain anonymous - thus becoming a sort of "bagman." For some reason, Picasa inverts the colors - weird, but I think you can get the general idea.

Poster by Magpul comparing the Masada to the other primary competitors of yesteryear - the M4, the SCAR, and the XM8. The HKXM8 is no more; but the M4 and the SCAR are definitely out there. PDF files won't upload to blogger, but go here and you can see it.

A pic of the Masada.

Very neat folding stock.

Note the rail system. The Magpul Masada originally had a forward handgrip that reminds me of the MOE - doesn't come with rails, but you can attach them yourself.

The Bushmaster flyer for what had become the "Bushmaster ACR"

The current flyer for the "Remington ACR." Whereas the Masada had different forward grips for different configurations, the ACR apparently has a one-size-fits all grip. Integral rails come standard.

Some action shots

Here's hoping the ACR will finally come to fruition.

1 man + 1 woman = 1,4000 babies

2009-09-26T16:59:00.001-07:00

How many people take "Be fruitful and multiply" seriously these days? Not many. Several European countries are literally dying off, as is China; and as I recall, the Japanese government is paying families to have children.

On the other hand, you have the Krishevsky family. Mrs. Krishevsky passed away recently at the age of 99, leaving approximately 1,400 descendants to continue an amazing legacy. Y'all can read the complete article here, on Ynetnews.com, but this is the synopsis: Mr. Krishevsky and Mrs. Krishevsky had eleven children. Those original eleven children produced 150 of their own . . . and those 150 had no less than 1,000. Thus far, there have also been a few hundred great-great-grandchildren.

And Mrs. Krishevksy knew all of them. Wow. How refreshing!

"The Chart"

2009-09-20T16:41:00.000-07:00

I found this about a week ago while searching 'tier 1' AR-15s on Google. Basically, it is a chart that compares M4 type rifles from a number of manufacturers, including BCM, Noveske, Colt, Armalite, Bushmaster, S&W, Daniel Defense, and several others. A lot of the information is not readily discernible from a catalog ad or "I have a buddy" stories.

Perhaps more importantly, there is a list of desirable features to look for in an M4/M16 type rifle, with excellent descriptions and links to some very good pictures and explanations on M4carbine.net forums. Very enlightening!

I highly recommend all of you interested fellows to take a look. I can't get blogger "insert link" to work at the moment, but if you'll scroll down to my "Sheepdog Resources" links, you'll find it listed as "The M4 Chart"

The Mysterious Islands: Evolution's Birthplace

2009-09-15T16:05:00.000-07:00

The Mysterious Islands Trailer 2: Evolution's Birthplace from Vision Forum on Vimeo.

Check out the website, TheMysteriousIslands.com.

No, I'm not dead . . .

2009-09-10T14:44:00.000-07:00

. . . just super busy. School started back several weeks ago, and coursework is eating my time. I have a number of future posts percolating in my brain, but I don't have the time right now to sit down and put all of that on paper. This is just to let y'all know I haven't dropped off the face of the earth or forgotten I have a blog.

Forensics and Shot Placement

2009-07-29T10:01:00.000-07:00

There's an FBI slideshow floating around the internet right now that I think is very interesting. I would encourage you sheepdogs to check it out.

WARNING: graphic forensic photographs. Slideshow Link

I suppose this is why former operator Larry Vickers says "Speed is fine . . . accuracy is final." Feel to free to comment - I'd love to hear what you fellows think.

Time Sensitive: HR 2749

2009-07-28T11:04:00.000-07:00

From the Weston A. Price Foundation:

The House of Representatives is scheduled for a vote on HR 2749 (The Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009) on Tuesday, July 28 (tomorrow). HR 2749 will be voted "on suspension", meaning that debate will be limited to 40 minutes and no amendments will be considered. A two-thirds vote will be required for HR 2749 to pass. The Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund is asking everyone to contact their U.S. Representatives requesting that they vote against HR 2749.

Industrial food processors and food imports need effective regulation, but this should not be done at the expense of the 'local food system.' HR2749 will impose burdensome regulations on small farmers and local food producers including registration fees and extensive paperwork requirements for which many small food businesses will not have the resources to comply. The 'local food system' is not the source of the food safety problems in this country, small farmers and local artisanal producers are part of the solution.

HR 2749 would reduce FDA's accountability while significantly increasing its power. The bill would empower FDA to conduct warrantless searches of business records without any evidence whatsoever that a violation has occurred, to order a quarantine prohibiting or restricting the movement of food in a geographic area. HR 2749 also creates severe criminal and civil penalties with the potential for substantial fines for even minor violations of the law.

Urge your Representative to vote against HR 2749 and support a food safety bill that will target imports and industrial foods while leaving small farmers and local food producers alone.

Three Ways to Contact your Representative:

1. Send an email through the "Oppose HR 2749" petition at http://bit.ly/Oppose_HR2749
2. Go to "My Elected Officials" at www.congress.org and enter your zip code to find your legislators. Call and/or send a fax.
3. Call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 to contact your Representative's office.

Whoo-hoo! Remington ACR

2009-07-26T14:53:00.000-07:00

I've been watching for this for some time now. Finally, Remington has released something definite regarding the Magpul/Bushmaster Masada/ACR.

Check this out: Remington's ACR Page

Apparently, it is to be released in 5.56, 6.8 SPC, and, glory be: 6.5x39, popularly known as the "Grendel."

There is a rumor on the internet that when released for public sales, the price will be somewhere $1,500. Time will tell if the ACR is indeed released to the general public, and if it will released - as Magpul originally planned - in 7.62x39.

At the risk of sounding very stage-drama-melodramatic, I quote the Remington website: "This changes everything . . ."

Newsflash: Gun Owners of America E-mail

2009-07-19T14:12:00.000-07:00

Friday, July 17, 2009

A vote to protect your right to travel out-of-state with
a firearm could come to a vote next week -- even as
early as Monday!

Senators John Thune and David Vitter are the sponsors of
S. 845 -- a bill that will establish concealed carry
reciprocity amongst the several states.

Senators Thune and Vitter offered the bill as an
amendment (#1618) to the Department of Defense
authorization bill (H.R. 2647).

This provision will use the constitutional authority
allowing Congress to enforce "full faith and credit"
across the country, so that each state respects the
"public acts, records, and judicial proceedings" of
every other state (Article IV).

The benefit of the Thune/Vitter legislation is that --
unlike other, competing measures -- it would protect the
right of any U.S. citizen to carry out of state
(regardless of whether he possesses a permit), as
long as he is authorized to carry in his home state.
This is important because of states like Vermont and
Alaska, where residents can carry concealed without
prior approval or permission from the state... in
other words, without a permit!

ACTION: Please urge your Senators to vote YES on the
Thune/Vitter concealed carry reciprocity amendment that
will be offered to the Department of Defense
authorization bill and NO on any modifying amendments.
This vote could come as early as Monday, so please act
on this right away!

You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your
Senators the pre-written e-mail message below.

----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Senator:

Please support the Thune/Vitter amendment to the
Department of Defense authorization bill. This amendment
will protect the right of citizens to carry firearms
outside of their home state without violating the rights
of the other states. Thus, the reciprocity language
masterfully protects the principle of federalism while
also promoting Second Amendment rights.

A person's right to defend himself and his family should
not end at the border of his state.

I urge you to vote for the Thune/Vitter concealed carry
amendment and to oppose any modifying actions that seek
to weaken their amendment.

Sincerely,

(Place your Name, City, and State here)

New Links: Sheepdog Stuff

2009-07-18T19:00:00.000-07:00

I've been doing some poking around, and have discovered a number of websites with pertinent information for sheepdog applications. Y'all know all those sites that sell US Army manuals on CDs? Well, it appears as though all of those same manuals are available for free from the Army itself. Several of you, I know, are aware of Global Security's fine collection; unlike that site, however, the places to which I have linked provide predominately downloadable PDF files (much easier to deal with). Check them out and poke around; lots of great resources. The new links are down this page a-ways on the left; right under "Resources" and right above "Followers." Keep an eye out for possible future updates.

No guns = A rude, crude society

2009-07-15T18:43:00.000-07:00

"The society of the late 20th century America is perhaps the first in human history where most grown men do not routinely bear arms on their persons, and boys are not regularly raised from childhood to learn skill in the use of some kind of weapon, either for community or personal defense. Ours also happens to be one of the rudest and crudest societies in history, having jubilantly swept most of the etiquette of speech, table, dress, hospitality, regard for fairness, deference to authority, and the relations of male and female and child and elder under the fraying and filthy carpet of politically convenient illusions. With little fear of physical reprisal, Americans can be as loud, gross, disrespectful, pushy, and negligent as they please. If more people carried rapiers at their belts or revolvers on their hips it is a fair bet that you would be able to go to a movie and enjoy the dialogue from the screen without having to endure the small talk, family gossip, and assorted bodily noises that many theater audiences these days regularly emit."

Samuel Francis, in "Chronicles"

Here's my post-response to Stephen Boyd's most recent post, over at Defending our Christian Heritage.

Been super busy

2009-07-13T18:49:00.000-07:00

Sorry about the deplorable lack of posting, y'all. I'm right in the middle of the busiest few weeks of the summer, school-wise, so I haven't much time to sit down and write anything. I'll be busy a while longer, then I'll try to get back into it.

Quote from "Amazing Grace"

2009-07-05T18:14:00.000-07:00

I'm sitting here watching the movie "Amazing Grace" with my family. I love the intellect displayed throughout the movie, the quick wit, the wonderful command of the English language. Almost at the very start of the movie, our family erupted in laughter at this particular gem, which Mom immediately declared would be the perfect subject of a post.

"It is a scientific fact that marriage and health are inseparable . . . Single men wither away and die in rooms that smell of feet and armpits."

How true . . . "It is not good that man should be alone . . ."

Robert E. Lee on Honesty

2009-07-01T09:38:00.000-07:00

"The trite saying that honesty is the best policy has met with the just criticism that honesty is not policy. The truly honest man is honest from conviction of what is right, not from policy."

AK vs. AR vs. . . Mosin Nagant.

2009-06-21T18:47:00.000-07:00

Alright. Here goes. I am stepping into the AR vs. AK debate. But to sort of spice up things, I’m throwing in perhaps the quin-ultimate fighting rifle of the past 100 years or so: the Mosin-Nagant. I have obtained a very thought provoking list of key points from 7.62x54r.net. Feel free to peruse them, and then share any thoughts you might have.

Knowing that some of you probably are not familiar with ARs, AKs, and MNs, I have determined to provide some basic info before I list the points.

This is an AK-47. The name designates the type of rifle, the name of the designer, and the year of adoption by the Soviet Army. Roughly translated, they letters and numbers mean “Automatic rifle, Kalashnikov (the fellow who designed it), model 1947” - AK-47. Furniture is solid wood or plastic. Military versions have fully automatic capability, as well as detachable magazines; thus, they may accurately be termed, “assault rifles.” AKs are not renowned for their accuracy. Military AK-47s have a bayonet with about a 6 inch blade.

This is a Mosin-Nagant. Originally designed and adopted by the Russians in 1891. All furniture is solid wood, and very heavy. As you can see, it is a bolt action rifle with a very long barrel. These are pretty slow to load and fire, but pretty accurate - customized versions of these rifles were used for sniper platforms as late as the Second World War. The Mosin has a bayonet that looks half as long the rifle itself, and is of the old triangular sort that is no good for anything other than thrusting.

This is an AR-15. The name stands for “ARmalite rifle, model 15,” as I understand it. This is the rifle that was adopted by the US Army as the famed M-16. Furniture is high-tech plastic. AR-15s can be customized and used for very precise shooting at extended ranges. However, unlike the AK, they do require a good bit of maintenance for proper function. There is a reason one does not often see pictures of bayonets mounted on ARs; the AR platform is not designed to double as a halberd, and would not last long when employed as such.

Now for the list itself. Throughout, AK = AK-47; AR = AR-15; MN = Mosin-Nagant.

AK: It works though you have never cleaned it. Ever.
AR: You have $9 per ounce special non-detergent synthetic Teflon infused oil for cleaning.
MN: It was last cleaned in Berlin in 1945.

AK: You are able to hit the broad side of a barn from inside.
AR: You are able to hit the broad side of a barn from 600 meters.
MN: You can hit the farm from two counties over.

AK: Cheap mags are fun to buy.
AR: Cheap mags melt.
MN: What's a mag?

AK: Your safety can be heard from 300 meters away.
AR: You can silently flip off the safety with your finger on the trigger.
MN: What's a safety?
AK: Your rifle comes with a cheap nylon sling.
AR: Your rifle has a 9 point stealth tactical suspension system (this is hyperbole, obviously).
MN: You rifle has dog collars.

AK: Your bayonet makes a good wire cutter.
AR: Your bayonet is actually a pretty good steak knife.
MN: Your bayonet is longer than your leg.

AK: You can put a .30" hole through 12" of oak, if you can hit it.
AR: You can put one hole in a paper target at 100 meters with 30 rounds.
MN: You can knock down everyone else's target with the shock wave of your bullet going downrange.

AK: When out of ammo your rifle will nominally pass as a club.
AR: When out of ammo, your rifle makes a great wiffle bat.
MN: When out of ammo, your rifle makes a supreme war club, pike, boat oar, tent pole, or firewood.

AK: Recoil is manageable, even fun.
AR: What's recoil?
MN: Recoil is often used to relocate shoulders thrown out by the previous shot.

AK: Your sight adjustment goes to "10", and you've never bothered moving it.
AR: Your sight adjustment is incremented in fractions of minute of angle.
MN: Your sight adjustment goes to 12 miles and you've actually tried it.

AK: Your rifle can be used by any two bit nation's most illiterate conscripts to fight elite forces worldwide.
AR: Your rifle is used by elite forces worldwide to fight two bit nations' most illiterate conscripts.
MN: Your rifle has fought against itself and won every time.

AK: Your rifle won some revolutions.
AR: Your rifle won the Cold War.
MN: Your rifle won a pole vault event (again, a bit of hyperbole, perhaps . . .).

AK: You paid $350.
AR: You paid $900.
MN: You paid $59.95.

AK: You buy cheap ammo by the case.
AR: You lovingly reload precision crafted rounds one by one.
MN: You dig your ammo out of a farmer's field in Ukraine and it works just fine.

AK: You can intimidate your foe with the bayonet mounted.
AR: You foes laugh when you mount your bayonet.
MN: You can bayonet your foe on the other side of the river without leaving the comfort of your hole.

AK: Service life, 50 years.
AR: Service life, 40 years.
MN: Service life, 100 years, and counting.

AK: It's easier to buy a new rifle when you want to change cartridge sizes.
AR: You can change cartridge sizes with the push of a couple of pins and a new upper.
MN: You believe no real man would dare risk the ridicule of his friends by suggesting there is anything but 7.62x54r.

AK: You can repair your rifle with a big hammer and a swift kick.
AR: You can repair your rifle by taking it to a certified gunsmith, it's under warranty!
MN: If your rifle breaks, you buy a new one.

AK: You consider it a badge of honor when you get your handguards burst into flames.
AR: You consider it a badge of honor when you shoot a sub-MOA 5 shot group.
MN: You consider it a badge of honor when you cycle 5 rounds without the aid of a 2x4.

AK: After a long day the range you relax by watching "Red Dawn".
AR: After a long day at the range you relax by watching "Blackhawk Down".
MN: After a long day at the range you relax by visiting the chiropractor.

AK: After cleaning your rifle you have a strong urge for a stiff shot of Vodka.
AR: After cleaning your rifle you have a strong urge for hotdogs and apple pie.
MN: After cleaning your rifle you have a strong urge for shishkabob.

AK: You can accessorize you rifle with a new muzzle brake or a nice stock set.
AR: Your rifle's accessories are eight times more valuable than your rifle.
MN: Your rifle's accessory is a small tin can with a funny lid, but it's buried under an apartment building somewhere in Budapest.

AK: Your rifle's finish is varnish and paint.
AR: Your rifle's finish is Teflon and high tech polymers.
MN: Your rifle's finish is low grade shellac, cosmoline and Olga's toe nails.

AK: Your wife tolerates your autographed framed picture of Mikhail Kalashnikov.
AR: Your wife tolerates your autographed framed picture of Eugene Stoner.
MN: You're not sure there WERE cameras to photograph Sergei Mosin.

AK: Late at night you sometimes have to fight the urge to hold your rifle over your head and shout "Wolverines!"
AR: Late at night you sometimes have to fight the urge to clear your house, slicing the pie from room to room.
MN: Late at night, you sometimes have to fight the urge to dig a fighting trench in the the yard to sleep in.

So there you have it. Comments?

Hints to Young Men: Choice of a Wife

2009-06-20T17:20:00.000-07:00

"Young gentlemen, a word of advice to you in the choice of a wife. Don't allow yourself to be deceived and fascinated by a gay, dashing young lady, fond of company, extravagant, vain, artistical and showy in dress. It is a not a doll or coquette you want for a partner. Choose rather one of those retiring, modest, sensible, neat young ladies, who have learned to deny themselves, and possess a decided mind, and have acquainted themselves with the domestic affairs of a family."

From our latest book acquisition, a charming little volume entitled, "Cyclopedia and Compendium: Useful Knowledge". This ancient tome is sadly without a date of publication, but is apparently from the days when ladies were ladies, men were men, and both were expected to behave as such. Pretty good advice, actually - slipped in right along with the dictionary of the English language, dictionary of nautical terms, advice on how to conduct public meetings, cures for household ailments, a listing of all counties in the state of Alabama, etc., etc., under the quaint chapter heading, "Hints to Young Men." They don't write books like this any more . . .

One-liners from General Robert E. Lee

2009-06-16T18:56:00.000-07:00

“I cannot consent to place in control of others one who cannot control himself.”

"I like whiskey. I always did, and that is why I never drink it."

"Obedience to lawful authority is the foundation of manly character."

“It is particularly incumbant on those charged with the instruction of the young to set an example of submission to authority.”

"You cannot be a true man until you learn to obey."

"Never do a wrong thing to make a friend or to keep one."

"In all my perplexities and distresses, the Bible has never failed to give me light and strength."

Presidential Proclamation: June is officially "LGBT Pride Month"

2009-06-10T13:15:00.000-07:00

Read the article here.

Army Considers Options in Replacing the M4

2009-06-09T10:18:00.000-07:00

This is "old news," but I don't think very many folks know about it. Read the article HERE.

If you don't do anything else, just look at the multi-media comparing the potential replacement weapons. Notice how many of them are piston operated (or modified impingement). Notice also that Colt has essentially done nothing (that I can see) to upgrade the M4, other than adding folding battle sights and a few other little doodads.

I also found it interesting that several of the carbines are offered in non-5.56 calibers: 6.5 SPC, 6.5 Grendel, 7.62x39.

I'll be curious to see what comes of this. SOCOM has already adopted the FN SCAR, and SOFD-D (Delta) has claimed the HK 416/17 system - both of which are piston operated systems.

Some Thoughts on the Death of George Tiller

2009-06-08T21:00:00.001-07:00

Most of you, I am sure, are by now familiar with the recent murder of Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas. I personally knew very little about Dr. Tiller until one week ago this past Sunday, when he was shot, but in the past few days I have done a fair bit of research about him and what he did. I would like to share with you the gist of what I have learned.

The story of the life of Dr. George Tiller is one of confusion and tragedy. He devoted his life to the business of murdering babies, and apparently did so with an almost religious conviction. Finally, he was himself murdered, leaving behind a wife, four children, and ten grandchildren - who I am sure will miss their granddaddy very much.

Dr. Tiller has long been notorious as one of the few doctors in the country who will provide late term abortions. His clinic in Wichita, Kansas, “Women’s Health Care Services,” was one of only three in the nation that performed abortive procedures after the twenty-first week of a baby’s development. He has been picketed and harassed for decades; his office was bombed in 1985, and he was shot in both arms in 1993. In 1998, the FBI informed him that he was number 1 on the “violent anti-abortionists’ hit list.” Reportedly, he wore a ballistic vest habitually.

I think it is safe to say that Dr. Tiller had to be committed to what he was doing, or he would have stopped before now. I do not say that with admiration or respect; I say that as a statement of what appears to be fact.

According to his own account, Dr. Tiller originally planned to be a dermatologist. His father died unexpectedly in a plane crash, and Dr. Tiller assumed the task of closing his dad’s “huge family medicine practice.” While doing so, he of course came in contact with many of his father’s patients. It was there, he says, “The women in my father's practice for whom he did abortions educated me and taught me that abortion is about women's hopes, dreams, potential, the rest of their lives. Abortion is a matter of survival for women.” The day after he was shot, back in 1993, he returned to work with his arms still bandaged. “There was never any question in my mind that I was going back to work the next day. I belonged there and they were not going to separate me from my job and they were not going to separate me from my community. So I did go to work the next day, and we got everything done. People got taken care of, it took a long time. Arms hurt, bled a little bit, but so what? I am not going to be run over and I'm not going to run out. It's just that simple.”

Dr. Tiller’s family apparently supported him very strongly. He recounted one particular conversation: "My daughters came into my study. I was reading. And they said: 'Daddy, if not now, when? If not you, who? Who is going to stand up for women with unexpected and badly damaged babies?' I had the support of my family, and we were able to proceed ahead."

Dr. Tiller also appears to have been fairly religious. He was an active member of Reformed Lutheran Church, where he served as an usher. In fact, he was killed while passing out bulletins before the service began.

Dr. Tiller’s wife, Jeanne, recorded an album in 2005, entitled “Legacy of Love.” One of the songs she performs is “The Lord’s Prayer.”

THIS website (click the block letters to link) has a guestbook where people may leave condolences for the Tiller family. It is amazing how many of these are written from a religious standpoint: “Rest in the peace that he left the earth in God’s house.” “I am glad that George will be able to be with his savior.” “May his soul rest in peace and may God comfort you in your time of need.” “I know that God holds him in high regard and he is sitting at the throne right now.”

Yet God’s Word says something very different:

‘Cursed is the one who takes a bribe to slay an innocent person.’
-Deuteronomy 27:25

'There are six things the Lord hates, yes, seven are an abomination to Him: a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood . . .'
-Proverbs 6:16,17

“You shall not murder.”
-Exodus 20:13

“Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.”
-Galatians 5:19-21

"If you are reproached for the name of Christ, blessed are you, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. On their part He is blasphemed, but on your part He is glorified. But let none of you suffer as a murderer, a thief, an evildoer, or as a busybody in other peoples’ matters."
-1 Peter 4:14,15

" . . . You know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."
-1 John 3:15

“But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
-Revelation 21:8

'Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.'
-Revelation 22:14,15

The Bible makes it clear that God hates murder. In John 8:44, Jesus says that the devil, Satan, was a “murderer from the beginning.” In Jeremiah 2:34, the Lord continues a condemnation of Israel’s idolatries, saying, “Also on your skirts is found the blood of the lives of the poor innocents. I have not found it by secret search, but plainly on all these things.”

Apparently, Dr. Tiller himself estimated that he had performed more than 60,000 abortive procedures. Supposedly, there was a link on THIS site where one could hear Dr. Tiller himself say this. Interestingly, I have been unable to access this web page since the afternoon of Friday the 5th; if any of you are able to do so, please let me know.

The 60,000 figure is widely quoted, however, so we will accept it as accurate. If it is indeed true, then Dr. George Tiller is personally responsible for the murder of 60,000 babies.

I know that’s a big number, and hard to visualize abstractly. Think about it this way: If Dr. Tiller had killed one baby every single day of the year, he would have taken 164.384 years to reach 60,000. He would have needed to start in 1845, just nine years after the Battle of the Alamo. However, it appears that he did not begin performing abortions until 1970; so, he would have had to perform an average of 1,538 abortions each year for 39 years to reach his estimated number. If he worked 365 days a year (I’m sure he did not), then he averaged 4.21 abortions per day.

Some of these were “life of the mother” cases - in other words, kill the child so the mother can live. Some were based on sonogram data that the child would be severely deformed or would not develop “normally” - thus, kill the child so he/she would not suffer, go through life as a vegetable, etc. Some simply were based on the baby being inconvenient.

I do not know of any passage in the Bible that condones any of these as right or just. For those who would like a more detailed analysis of this subject, I recommend THIS article by Mr. Doug Phillips. You may also be interested in THIS article by the father of a very premature birth son (barely 24 weeks, 1 pound 4 ounces), who was constantly advised by medical personal to let the child die - but didn’t, because of what the Bible says.

The fact is, religion apart from Jesus Christ means nothing. That’s not my personal truth, or something I’ve derived, it’s what the Bible says. When man - sinful, fallen, depraved man - endeavors to make himself acceptable to God in a manner which God has decreed unacceptable, the result must be confusion.

I believe this is what we see in the life of Dr. George Tiller. I have said he was religious; based on what I have read on THIS site (which is strangely inaccessible) and THIS one (caution: very graphic, discretion is advised), his religion extended even to the abortive procedures he performed. Dr. Tiller apparently provided religious services for the murdered child after the abortion was complete, should the parents so request. In the second link I listed above, it is possible to see a picture of “Tess,” an aborted little girl, wrapped in swaddling clothes, with a rose and picture of “Jesus” nearby. The webpage of Dr. Tiller’s clinic is “TEMPORARILY OFFLINE,” but according to the inaccessible site I have referenced before, Dr. Tiller’s website had this advertisement:

And this:

The link for which I advised caution contains an account of one such “funeral.”

In addition, the inaccesible website has the following transcript from a 1996 video Dr. Tiller made (I have obtained the information by accessing my cache, which is the only way I can view the page):

“If you wish to see the baby, we call this an identification and separation encounter. About 2-3 hours after you deliver and after the twilight anesthesia has worn off, so that you will remember the process, we will bring the baby to you either at the bedside or we will go to our quiet room and we will bring the baby to you there. During this encounter we will describe to you what's right with your baby, we will identify what's wrong with your baby. You may hold the baby. We can take pictures of you and the family holding the baby, if you wish, and that is not an uncommon request. The identification/separation encounter may be very brief, five or ten minutes. It may even take less than that. Or the identification/separation encounter may involve 2 or 3 hours of bonding with the baby - the identification that this is your baby and you have had a delivery. We understand beyond a shadow of a doubt that the difficult part of this process is not the premature delivery of the stillborn. We understand that the easy part of this process is the premature delivery of the stillborn. The difficult part of the process is saying goodbye to the relationship that you have with your baby - saying goodbye to the hopes and the dreams that you have for this - you have placed this baby in your life someplace and you simply have to start the process of saying goodbye.

When you have finished your support - when you have finished your identification encounter you will separate from the baby by giving the baby to us and you will begin the process of saying goodbye on a long-term basis and you will begin your journey into growth, recuperation, recovery, and healing.”

Notice that Dr. George Tiller declares that he has just aborted a baby - not an “inviable blob of tissue,” or a “blastocyst,” or a “zygote” or an “embryo.” He himself said these were babies; therefore, the term “murderer” is most certainly appropriate.

And this is why I said in the beginning that I see Dr. George Tiller’s life as one of tragedy and confusion. It is evident that in spite of his religiosity, he did not know or understand what the Bible actually says. Instead, he made his own attempt at righteousness, even incorporating a weird, pseudo-religious affectation into the abortive processes he regularly performed.

But, y’all, the Bible makes it clear that there is only one way by which man may be saved, and that through Jesus Christ. Isaiah 64:6 makes it clear that all our righteousness - our attempts to gain favor with God - appear as filthy rags in God’s sight. It’s not an issue of how good or bad a person we are, or whether we gave our life to some socially accepted cause, or any other merit we could possibly attain. It’s not even about an intellectual, abstract realization that Jesus Christ may very well exist - see James 2:19.

It’s about humbling our hearts before the Lord, and crying out “God, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Ultimately, it’s about Jesus Christ, who He isand what He has done in paying the penalty of our sins through His death on the cross, and the glory and honor He is due for the work He has accomplished.

I cannot believe that Dr. George Tiller was a Christian, because I cannot reconcile his actions with what I find in God’s Word. It appears to me that Dr. George Tiller’s life and behavior is indicative of the confusion that dominates our society. In direct contradiction to what the Bible says, it seems that many people apparently do think him a great “christian.” Mr. Doug Phillips wrote an article a few days ago, entitled “FOR WHOM SHALL WE MOURN?” He has since been BLASTED, even by people calling themselves “christians.” It is sickening to me that some people seem to think Mr. Phillips has committed a more grievous sin in speaking the truth, than Dr. Tiller committed in all the abortions he performed.

We are literally seeing evil being hailed as good, and good denounced as evil - and the Bible pronounces a curse on all such. This is why it is critical for us, as believers, to be diligently studying and applying God’s Word - so that we ourselves will have no part in confusion, or in the promulgation thereof.

Information from this article was obtained from:

GUARDIAN.CO.UK
DEMOCRACY NOW
PRCH
GEORGE TILLER - REVEALED
KANSAS CITY.COM
LEGACY.COM Guest Book
WICHITA MEMORIAL (caution: graphic)

You can't help but love a book that starts like this . .

2009-06-03T17:43:00.000-07:00

TO

The Grandchildren of General Jackson

Julia and Jackson Christian

THIS BOOK IS DEDICATED

In the prayerful hope that as they grow in years they may draw inspiration from his example, and conform their lives to the same exalted standard of Christian duty, which marked the character of their grandsire, and which was also reflected in the life of their young mother, who with gentle footsteps followed her father as he followed Jesus

~ Dedication of the "Life and Letters of Stonewall Jackson," written by his wife, Mary Anna Jackson
Republished by Sprinkle Publications

About the Title

2009-06-01T16:24:00.000-07:00

I believe meanings of names to be significant; throughout the Bible, we read of parents who selected names for their children based exclusively on what those names meant. "The Defender" is simply a variation of the meaning of William, which is my first name.

William originated from the Germanic "Wilhelm," which essentially breaks into two words: Wil (will - as in the will to do something) and Helm (helmet - a rather vital piece of protective armor). There are a number of derived renderings of the name's meaning: Resolute Protecter, Determined Guardian, Great Protecter, Strong-willed Warrior, Strong Helmet, Resolute Defender. The wording in each case is slightly different, but the meaning is fairly constant. I tend to visualize words, and words such as these conjure immediately in my imagination a picture of a warrior: grim, determined, his great sword across his back, his dirk at his belt, as he gazes from his look-out; resolved to fight unceasingly and uncompromisingly in defense of truth and justice, and in protection of women, children, and the defenseless. He is resolute, he is determined, he is resolved; he is great and strong; he is a protector, a defender, a very helm to those he guards.

There are such men in history; Christian warriors who understood manhood and the responsibilities associated therewith. Robert E. Lee and Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson (whose timeless nickname is rooted in the idea of iron-willed defense); Joshua Gianavel; William Wallace (the Guardian of Scotland . . . ach, man, mah heart swells at the rememberin') and John Knox; Patrick Henry and George Washington; Moses, Joshua, King David, Nehemiah; and most importantly, Jesus Christ - the absolute most amazing, strong and resolved, defender, protector and guardian ever.

In naming my blog, The Defender, I am seeking to honor the Defenders who have lived and died and provided an example for those who would follow. I am also seeking to convey who I desire to be and what I desire to do. I think you will find that most of what I write revolves around this idea.

ABOUT THE PICTURE:

Taken from the opening sequence of HBO's "John Adams," then modified slightly for a better look.

Excellent Article

2009-06-01T09:38:00.000-07:00

Saw this on Doug's Blog - excellent article about Mr. Obama's recent nomination of Sonia Sotomayor. I do not have time to comment on it right now, but I would recommend reading it.

http://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/rule_of_law/empathy_impartiality_and_justi.aspx

- Johnson

Finally, A Post

2009-05-30T19:04:00.000-07:00

So college ended for the semester, and I really made a concerted effort to get a blog up and running. I've gotten a wee bit sidetracked, lads . . . researching the genealogical history of mah own ancien' family. 'Tis grand thus far - I've traced the line back to the early 1600s for a certainty. Supposedly, a lad of ours rode with William the Conqueror, too, but I've yet to confirm. So my depressing lack of posts must surely be attributed to my engrossing studies of deeds, etc., from Virginia in the 1600s. Patience a few more days, and I should start blogging in a more fitting manner.

Until then, lads -

J.