Among the Bitter People: The Diplomad Goes to a Gun Show

After many, many years serving or otherwise living in nanny states or outright dictatorships in Asia, Latin America, Western Europe, Massachusetts and New York, I currently have the pleasure of living in one of the few places still dedicated to the principles of Western Civilization, most notably that of individual rights and responsibilities. Yes, friends, you guessed it; I speak of that bastion of civilization known as the American South.

Maligned and ridiculed by Hollywood and the “highly educated” products of our decayed university system as a bunch of no-tooth extras from “Deliverance;” sneered at by endless numbers of late-night comics, pundits, and politicians; its proud traditions twisted and misrepresented by the “anointed ones” of the liberal Northeast and the loony LA-SF-Seattle axis, it is the South that gets the last laugh. Its population grows in numbers, as does its economic and political strength while the sneering liberal bastions see theirs shrink. It comprises the greatest repository of patriotism and selfless sacrifice in the nation: the men from the states of the old “stars and bars” Confederacy responded in disproportionate numbers to defend the “stars and stripes” when Muslim maniacs attacked the liberals' home base, New York. Southerners and other rural folk who “cling to” their religion and guns form the backbone of our armed forces, and, lest we forget on this Memorial Day, in disproportionate numbers populate the lists of the dead and wounded in the ongoing war against the Jihadists. For this the “elite morons,” such as John Kerry and Stephen King, reward them with a sneer for being uneducated boobs.

This weekend I got to do something I hadn’t done in a while. I got to enjoy one of those great spectacles of freedom that we increasingly are losing in our nation. I speak, of course, of a good old “Gun and Knife Show,” an event now hard to find outside of the South. That is a shame. They are a fun place to find genuine bargains – e.g., a great deal on a Colt Government Model .45 (the greatest handgun ever made. I brook no dissent!) Much more important, however, they provide a powerful venue for the expression and the defense of individual liberty.

Let me digress a bit. One of my great beefs with condescending liberal politicians, such as Hillary, is that when they seek the votes of gun owners they talk about hunting and the joys of plinking tin cans on a summer afternoon. It is as though the Second Amendment addresses some lesser “right,” some vague “right to have fun,” a “right” granted and subject to rescinding by the state. Don’t get me wrong. I have done my share of hunting and plinking all around the world and have enjoyed both immensely, but that is not what the Second Amendment to the Constitution addresses. I am certain that when drafting the Bill of Rights, the Founding Fathers didn’t give a passing thought to hunting, target practice, or enjoying the great outdoors. Today’s putative defenders of the Second Amendment make a serious mistake when they get sucked into the “defense of hunting” argument. Once you equate “the right to bear arms” with hunting, you have stepped on a slippery slope. “So gun ownership is about hunting, eh? Well, you don’t need a handgun to go hunting, or a semiautomatic rifle. You live in Brooklyn: when are you ever going to go hunting? Who in today’s America actually NEEDS to go hunting?” And so on.

The Second Amendment is right in there with the other nine in the Bill of Rights restricting the powers of the state, making the argument that certain rights belong to the people merely because they are human beings. Among those rights is the right to self-defense. A free country need not fear an armed populace. An armed populace provides a serious restraint on the state by denying it the exclusive possession of the implements of violence. It is not about hunting.

The participants at the gun show I attended understood this quite clearly. There was relatively little in the way of hunting gear. The items on sale and display were overwhelming about self-defense. Speaking of the participants, they were a wonderful mix of whites, Hispanics, and blacks. All of them friendly and open folk who would at the drop of a hat engage you in conversation and offer their advice and opinions on guns, the economy, and politics. I would note that support for Obama and Clinton was, uh, about zero. I loved one t-shirt for sale that showed a picture of Obama over the phrase, “In Your Heart You Know He’s Wright.” I kept remembering the question from a British friend who, upon hearing about gun shows, asked me, “Are they safe?” Well, friend, it is just about the safest place on earth. No mad gunman or terrorist would dare make an appearance there!

I had one thought I am embarrassed to admit having had; please don’t tell anybody. As I stood near a table, haggling over a couple of .45 magazines, an elderly gentleman dragging a tank of oxygen rolled up in his wheelchair next to me to look at some Smith & Wesson revolvers. I had the stupid question pop into head, “What is he doing buying that?” Fortunately, I immediately corrected myself and answered the stupid little liberal that we all carry around inside and who must be fought at every opportunity, “He is precisely the person for whom the Second Amendment is so important.” I can just about guarantee that he was not going deer hunting.

Enough said. Must go to bed. God bless the South.

Great Zeus! Quick! Call Al Gore!

We have an urgent mission for Al Gore! He must act now before disaster hits! Please donate to help send Al to the scene of this climate crisis! Maybe Prince Charles wants to join him?

Jupiter is undergoing major climate change and could lose many of its large spots over the next seven years . . . the demise of still more spots over the next seven years will mark the end of a newly proposed, 70-year climate cycle.

During this time, Jupiter's equatorial region will warm up a whopping 18 degrees Fahrenheit (10 Celsius) and the planet will grow cooler near the poles.

Now we know where all those unsold SUVs are going! General Motors, will you stop at nothing?!?

Bush 3 vs. Carter 2?

Is the November presidential election coming down to a choice between Bush's Third Term (McCain) or Carter's Second Term (Obama)?

Hmmm . . . as somebody who was around in and remembers the 1970's, I'll sign up for the Bush Third Term option any time . . .

How can Anybody Still Believe this Nonsense?

Sigh, a deep, deep, sigh.

Ah, those believers in man-made global warming . . . whatever else one thinks about them, one has to admire the tenacity of their belief, a belief allegedly built on science but, yet, a belief they "cling to" even as scientists turn away from it as an embarrassing faux pas.

We have Britain's number one believer, the otherwise unemployed and unemployable, Prince Charles reportedly warning us that,

[T]he world faces a series of natural disasters within 18 months unless urgent action is taken to save the rainforests. In one of his most out-spoken interventions in the climate change debate, he said a £15 billion annual programme was required to halt deforestation or the world would have to live with the dire consequences.

"We will end up seeing more drought and starvation on a grand scale. Weather patterns will become even more terrifying and there will be less and less rainfall," he said. "We are asking for something pretty dreadful unless we really understand the issues now and [the] urgency of them." The Prince said the rainforests, which provide the "air conditioning system for the entire planet", releasing water vapour and absorbing carbon, were being lost to poor farmers desperate to make a living.

He estimated that the cost would be about £15 billion a year but said that this should be viewed as an insurance policy for the whole world. "That is roughly just under one per cent of all the insurance premiums paid in the world in any one year. It is an insurance premium to ensure the world has some rainfall and reasonable weather patterns. It is a good deal."

Last month, the Prince had a meeting at St James's Palace with four state governors from Brazil to discuss the best way to allocate the money. One option would be for an organisation such as the World Bank to administer the fund. The Prince made clear yesterday that if nothing was done there was a "severe danger of losing a major part of the battle against climate change".

In an interview on Radio 4's Today programme, the Prince disclosed that he had raised his concerns with the White House, Vladimir Putin, the Russian prime minister, and President Sarkozy, of France. He said he had pressed Barclays, Shell, Goldman Sachs and McDonald's to join his campaign.

But he also said consumers had to play their part by choosing products that were environmentally sustainable and called for improvements in labelling.

Oh, Lord, where to begin? Does that "Prince" title come with a PhD in meteorology or any other science? Just wondering.

So the Prince thinks we need a "programme" costing 15 billion pounds (about $30 billion) to save the world? What a deal! The Royal Family probably could come up with the entire sum from what the beleaguered British taxpayers hand over to them. The Royals could sell a few palaces, get rid of the horses, dump a few Bentleys, give up their annual doles, and, presto, you've got big bucks on the way to bureaucrats in "an organisation such as the World Bank" or directly to Third World politicians, who undoubtedly will put the money to good use. We hope readers share our conviction that combined with "improvements in labelling" this can and will save the world in 18 months. The Prince said so!

Apparently Prince Harry was in a Royal hurry to tell his friends in Knightsbridge the news of Daddy's revelation,

Prince Harry was driven to a London night club at speeds of more than 100mph with a police escort, it has been claimed.

The prince was spotted last Saturday evening in the passenger seat of a car travelling at high speed on a motorway towards the capital, a Sunday newspaper alleges. The car - allegedly containing the man identified as the prince, and another man - was accompanied by a police protection Range Rover. Hours later the Prince was seen in Boujis, the fashionable Knightsbridge club.

We are sure he was in a hybrid. Maybe Sir Paul loaned his?

Poor Princely dears! They seek to warn us -- and their friends in "fashionable Knightsbridge"-- about impending climate disaster due to "man-made global warming" at the very same time that the number one advocate of that theory's "predictions" of horrific hurricanes changes his mind,

WASHINGTON (May 18) - Global warming isn't to blame for the recent jump in hurricanes in the Atlantic, concludes a study by a prominent federal scientist whose position has shifted on the subject.Not only that, warmer temperatures will actually reduce the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic and those making landfall, research meteorologist Tom Knutson reported in a study released Sunday.

In the past, Knutson has raised concerns about the effects of climate change on storms. His new paper has the potential to heat up a simmering debate among meteorologists about current and future effects of global warming in the Atlantic. Ever since Hurricane Katrina in 2005, hurricanes have often been seen as a symbol of global warming's wrath. Many climate change experts have tied the rise of hurricanes in recent years to global warming and hotter waters that fuel them. Another group of experts, those who study hurricanes and who are more often skeptical about global warming, say there is no link. They attribute the recent increase to a natural multi-decade cycle."

Oops!

Kennedy and Huckabee in the News

News reports tell us that Senator Ted Kennedy has been flown to Mass General Hospital in Boston from his family compound in Hyannisport. He apparently has suffered "seizures" which some news reports state could prove indicative of a stroke. We wish him a speedy recovery and our thoughts and prayers are with him and his family.

The MSM has filled the airwaves, news pages, and the bandwidths with all sorts of testimonials to Ted Kennedy. Lots about his long service, his health problems, his suffering with the violent deaths of three brothers, but if you look a little deeper, not really much accomplished. We would be hard-pressed to come up with some lasting and, above all, worthwhile piece of legislation for which he can claim full or even major credit. He has been consistently wrong on foreign affairs, wrong on the economy, and generally wrong on just about everything. He was a disastrous presidential candidate. Getting endorsed by Ted Kennedy for national office more than likely is the kiss of death.

And while we quite genuinely do wish him good health and a return to his family and friends, we wonder if it would be inappropriate to ask whether the Kopechne family is among the many visitors to his hospital bedside.

On to Huckabee. What is wrong with the man? How could he say something as stupid as he did at the May 16 NRA convention. From the Wall Street Journal,

“We believe the government should get its hands off of us as much as possible, we don’t need that much of it, we’d like less of it and we darn sure would like for it to be less expensive but the reality is and I’m worried,” Huckabee said when he was interrupted by a loud thump from backstage.

The quick-witted Southerner looked behind him and said to the Louisville, Ky., crowd: “That was Barack Obama, he just tripped off a chair and someone pointed a gun at him and he dove for the floor.”

What would posses him to say such a stupid thing? Obama is quick to take offense at the wrong things, but on this one he has every right to be offended as does every American. Stupid, stupid, stupid. I hope Huckabee calls Obama and expresses his regrets.

The Definition of Political Inexperience

Earlier today, President Bush gave a perfectly good, historically accurate speech before the Israeli parliament, the Knesset. He noted the following,

"Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along," Bush said. "We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.

We have an obligation to call this what it is - the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

A succinct and good defense of the long-standing US policy of not appeasing terrorists and other aggressors, right? Or so we thought! But, no, the Democrats, led by Barack Hussein Obama, saw this statement as an attack on them! They went bonkers!

According to the Associated Press,

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama accused President Bush on Thursday of launching a "false political attack" with a comment about appeasing terrorists and radicals . . . "It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel's independence to launch a false political attack," Obama said in the statement his aides distributed. "George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president's extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel."

Who are Obama's advisers? Is there nobody on the candidate's staff or within the Democratic party who has political sense? Bush never mentioned Obama or anybody else, yet the Demos lashed out with Pelosi, Kerry, Biden, et al, joining in. They completely ignored that Bush's comments went over extremely well with "our stalwart ally Israel." Just imagine if Bush had given a speech condemning corruption or lying or any other sin or misdeed. Would Obama have felt that speech was about him,too?

The man is a boob. If he was going to say anything he should have said he fully agreed with the President on the need not to reward or "appease" aggressors. Instead, he has given the Republicans a wonderful "if the shoe fits" argument, and brought renewed attention to his very naive and downright dangerous position on Iran: his willingness to talk to the bearded loon in charge without any preconditions, e.g., stop shipping weapons to Iraq.

This is going to be easy. Obama and the Democrats are not ready for the White House. They will not get it.

Are We Witnessing Another American Political Miracle?

In all the noise of the ongoing political campaign, we can forget to remind ourselves of the wonder and mystery of our political system. It is a unique system, and a somewhat -- no, no, strike that "somewhat" -- VERY brutal system. Most notably in recent years it gives few second chances and only to those willing to suffer great pain and public humiliation, e.g., Richard Nixon. It is a system that demands constant renewal. New blood!

The other feature of our system is that this messy, horrid, brutal, prolonged, etc, process usually produces some very interesting candidates, and, more often than not, some very good Presidents. As a group, our Presidents stand well above the leaders of any other country for the same 225 years or so. Not many if any other countries have produced leaders the stature of Washington, Jefferson, the two Adams, Lincoln, Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge (yes, Coolidge -- a remarkable man), Truman, Eisenhower, and Reagan. Even the much-maligned dad and son Bush presidencies helped transform the world and bring freedom and prosperity to millions of people. Some of our more mediocre Presidents, e.g., JFK, LBJ, Clinton, Nixon, and Ford, also led fairly successfully at times of great challenges to America and to the status quo. Jimmy Carter? Yeah, uh, OK, he was a major dud -- no system is perfect -- but even he got Israelis and Egyptians to sign a peace deal that still holds. Our system has a pretty good record; I will stand it up against any other country's.

I digress. Let's get back to the present. We are quite possibly seeing that system produce yet another political wonder if not outright miracle.

Drum roll, please . . .

The Democrats will nominate the one major candidate, Obama, who cannot win the White House for the Democrats, in this "The Year of the Democrats," and the Republicans will nominate the one major candidate, McCain, in this "The Year of the Democrats," who can win the White House for the Republicans. Amazing how it works.