Editor's Note: Sorry for the delay on this post. I started this the day after the government reopened but large amounts of school work prevented me from coming back and finishing. Also, this is my 50th published post!
After a 16 day partial government shutdown and a flirtation with our nation's debt limit, shortly after midnight Thursday morning, President Obama signed a bill into law that would reopen the government and fund it through Jan. 15, 2014, restore back pay for all furloughed workers and raise the debt ceiling through Feb. 7, 2014. So now that everyone is back to work and things are "normal" again, what have we gotten and where are we going from here?
We still have a law that 57 percent of Americans do not want. A law that spent millions and millions of dollars on a website that doesn't work. A law that is jacking up premiums for Americans in just about every state in the union despite our president's claim that premiums would decrease across the board. In a now infamous statement, President Obama also promised us that if we liked our health plan and our doctor, we could keep them. What a load of garbage! Thousands and thousands of people are having their health plans cancelled every day! A well-known example for Maryland residents came just the other day when Republican Congressional Candidate Dan Bongino (MD-06) received a letter cancelling his private health insurance plan.
Now let's be clear here. As I've said in a previous post, Republicans did not shutdown the government over Obamacare. In fact they couldn't shutdown the government. How can one-half of one-third of the government shut it down? It's not possible. But the media and Democrats want you to think that, even though it was Democrats' refusal to pass any bill the House passed that caused the shutdown and then prolonged it. Republicans pushed first to defund this train wreck of a law, then to delay it and then finally they changed tactics again to at least get rid of the congressional and presidential exemption. And then on Wednesday night they caved in and got none of it. Obamacare is going to fail. Let's just hope America doesn't crash too hard when it does.
In regards to the debt limit and spending, there have been absolutely no changes.Spending levels have been maintained and, in at least one case, boosted by over $2 billion for an Ohio River project that benefits Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R) home state of Kentucky as well as Illinois Democrat Sen. Dick Durbin. Sen. Lamar Alexander's (R) home state of Tennessee is also expected to see a benefit from this funding increase.
Funding the government at essentially current levels and agreeing to raise the debt limit has done nothing for this country other than simply "kick the can" another 12 or so weeks down the road. The ideas Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) mentioned in a Wall Street Journal op-ed about two weeks ago were completely ignored. Reforms to entitlement programs and other government spending are necessary if this country expects to be able to keep paying its bills. The budget must be balanced and hard choices must be made. Those are facts. What's up for debate is this: How painful and hard do we want these choices to be? The longer we wait, the more painful it becomes.
President Obama whines repeatedly to the media and the American people that, as a country, we're lurching from crisis to crisis. Well by signing this "deal" into law last week, he's complicit in that! Since nothing has changed, we're going to be in this exact mess after Christmas and New Year's, facing the potential of another government shutdown and the possibility that members of Congress, facing an election year, will vote to kick the can down the road again. That's dysfunctional. And make no mistake, BOTH parties are to blame for that.
Jimmy Williams
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Thursday, October 17, 2013
Putting Partisanship Ahead of the People
Editor's Note: I originally wrote this piece the day the partial government shutdown took effect a little over two weeks ago. Unfortunately I never logged on to actually publish it until this morning. Apologies for the delay and another post will be coming this afternoon about the end of the shutdown.
In Congress Tuesday one party and its leaders put bitter partisan politics ahead of the American people and shut down the government.
In Congress Tuesday one party and its leaders put bitter partisan politics ahead of the American people and shut down the government.
And it wasn’t Republicans.
That’s right, I’m talking about
President Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Minority
Leader Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats.
The sticking point of the failure to
pass any legislation was, as we all probably know, Obamacare. Or, as the
official euphemistic titles goes, the Affordable Care Act.
Retiring Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.)
said Obamacare had the potential to become a “train wreck.” And what a train
wreck it has become. Among numerous other failed promises, President Obama
promised the American people that if we liked our health plans, we could keep
them. That was a lie. Thousands and thousands of people are now having their
health plans dropped under the law.
Obama promised the American people
that healthcare premiums would decrease by $2,500 for a typical family. That
was a lie. Instead, across the country premiums will increase $7,450 for a family of four. In
Maryland, the rate increase could be as high as 83-86 percent. In Tennessee,
reports indicate that rates could increase as much as 190 percent. Read that
again. It’s not a typo. And for Andy and Amy Mangione, a couple living in
Kentucky, health care costs tripled literally overnight, going from $333 to
$965 per month.
Workers who had worked full time
jobs have suddenly found those jobs cuts to 29.5 hours per week or, worse,
these workers have been laid off. The exchanges in the majority of states were not ready for Tuesday's deadline and still aren't working right. Small businesses, the backbone of Main Street
that Obama vowed to protect and restore, can no longer pay the health care costs
they used to pay for their employees. And the list goes on.
Repeated polling has shown that
nearly 60 percent of Americans want to return to the healthcare system we had
in 2009, before Obamacare was forced on the American people. A full seven in
ten Americans now have a problem with some or all of the law. Even unions, the
backbone of Obama’s political machine, have turned on Obamacare.
Seeing all this outrage from the
American people and the disastrous effects Obamacare is having on America
across the board, last week Republicans in the House of Representatives passed
a bill that would fully fund all government operations except Obamacare.
Democrats in the Senate, led by Reid, then voted to strip the defunding measure
from the bill.
So House Republicans compromised. In
the early hours of Sunday morning, the House passed a new bill that would fully
fund the government, repeal the incredibly unpopular excise tax on medical
devices and delay Obamacare for one year. This measure would have been on par
with the wholly unconstitutional executive actions Obama has already taken to
delay and rewrite Obamacare on his own. Except this time it would have been a
legal change.
Republicans showed remarkable
flexibility on this issue. They did not want a government shutdown and they
also knew the American people do not want Obamacare. But when they realized
they would not get Obamacare defunded in the Senate, they instead substituted a
one year delay that would have given both sides some of what they wanted while
keeping the government open.
But alas, it did not happen. Obama,
Reid and Senate Democrats, in an absolutely stunning show of “my way or the
high way” politics, rejected this compromise. With no other legislation in
place, the government shut down.
In choosing to shut down the
government instead of compromising with Republicans, Senate Democrats put
partisan politics and their insane need to cling to a law the American people
do not want ahead of the American people. By taking this action, Democrats on
The Hill have utterly failed the American people. Despite almost assured media
attempts to frame it otherwise, this shutdown rests purely on the shoulders of
President Obama and the Democrats, not Republicans.
I hope Obama and his fellow party
leaders are ready for the 2014 midterm elections because the American people
will be out in force to make them pay for this incompetence.
Jimmy Williams
Jimmy Williams
Thursday, August 1, 2013
If Liberalism Is So Great...
Hi, everyone. To people who regularly check into this blog, and I know there are is a fairly good sized group that does, I apologize for once again being away for so long. I've had serious personal matters to deal with and maintaining my blog has been the absolute farthest thing from my mind for the last 4-5 weeks. But I finally had some time today at my internship to check in. I actually wrote this post about one month ago but then never signed back in to post it. Enjoy:
If Liberalism is so great...how come Social Security and Medicare are going bankrupt? How come SSDI will be broke within 4 years, Medicare by 2023 and the Social Security Trust fund before 2045 or sooner if things keep going the way they are?
If Liberalism is so great...how come 76% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck? How come we have record high numbers of people, over 46 million Americans at last count, on food stamps and over 10 million on disability? How do we as a country still have tens of millions of people out of work four and a half years after our president promised us that, if we just spent nearly $1 trillion, they'd all be back to work by now?
If Liberalism is so great...how come everyone in America gets poorer and poorer as our liberal politicians get richer and richer and assert more and more power? How come the poor people and minorities these politicians act like they want to help are still poor despite these politicians giving them hundreds of millions of our hard-earned dollars?
If Liberalism is so great...how come Chief Executive's 9 of the 10 BEST states (The exception being Nevada) to do business in are controlled by Republicans while 8 of the 10 WORST state to do business in (Michigan and Pennsylvania are the exceptions) are controlled by Democrats? How come George Mason University's Freedom in the 50 States survey puts 9 Republican-controlled and 1 split legislature state (New Hampshire) in the top 10 MOST FREE states while 9 of the 10 LEAST FREE states (Mississippi, at #41) are Democrat-controlled?
If Liberalism is so great...how come people and businesses are fleeing liberal controlled states in huge numbers? Why have nearly 40,000 people, or possibly more by this point, taking people nearly $2 billion with them left Maryland since Gov. Martin O'Malley took office in 2007? How come gun manufacturers and other businesses are leaving liberal, business hostile states like Maryland, New York, Oregon and California for business and job friendly states like Texas and Virginia?
If Liberalism is so great...how come liberal states like Maryland and California have had to raise taxes to back-breaking levels just to barely squeak out a balanced budget while Texas, a booming Republican-led state, just experienced a 2-year budget surplus of nearly $9 billion?
If Liberalism is so great, how come this is all reality? Why are Republicans and Conservatives like Texas Gov. Rick Perry constantly ridiculed and reviled in the media for policies that WORK? Why has America gone from being a superior nation of hard-working makers to a lazy nation of dependent takers? Granted there are still plenty of hard working people left in this country but there are tens of millions content to just sit there and have everything served to them. They think they are entitled. Liberalism makes them think that way. Liberalism? Oh yeah, it's so "great."
Jimmy Williams
If Liberalism is so great...how come Social Security and Medicare are going bankrupt? How come SSDI will be broke within 4 years, Medicare by 2023 and the Social Security Trust fund before 2045 or sooner if things keep going the way they are?
If Liberalism is so great...how come 76% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck? How come we have record high numbers of people, over 46 million Americans at last count, on food stamps and over 10 million on disability? How do we as a country still have tens of millions of people out of work four and a half years after our president promised us that, if we just spent nearly $1 trillion, they'd all be back to work by now?
If Liberalism is so great...how come everyone in America gets poorer and poorer as our liberal politicians get richer and richer and assert more and more power? How come the poor people and minorities these politicians act like they want to help are still poor despite these politicians giving them hundreds of millions of our hard-earned dollars?
If Liberalism is so great...how come Chief Executive's 9 of the 10 BEST states (The exception being Nevada) to do business in are controlled by Republicans while 8 of the 10 WORST state to do business in (Michigan and Pennsylvania are the exceptions) are controlled by Democrats? How come George Mason University's Freedom in the 50 States survey puts 9 Republican-controlled and 1 split legislature state (New Hampshire) in the top 10 MOST FREE states while 9 of the 10 LEAST FREE states (Mississippi, at #41) are Democrat-controlled?
If Liberalism is so great...how come people and businesses are fleeing liberal controlled states in huge numbers? Why have nearly 40,000 people, or possibly more by this point, taking people nearly $2 billion with them left Maryland since Gov. Martin O'Malley took office in 2007? How come gun manufacturers and other businesses are leaving liberal, business hostile states like Maryland, New York, Oregon and California for business and job friendly states like Texas and Virginia?
If Liberalism is so great...how come liberal states like Maryland and California have had to raise taxes to back-breaking levels just to barely squeak out a balanced budget while Texas, a booming Republican-led state, just experienced a 2-year budget surplus of nearly $9 billion?
If Liberalism is so great, how come this is all reality? Why are Republicans and Conservatives like Texas Gov. Rick Perry constantly ridiculed and reviled in the media for policies that WORK? Why has America gone from being a superior nation of hard-working makers to a lazy nation of dependent takers? Granted there are still plenty of hard working people left in this country but there are tens of millions content to just sit there and have everything served to them. They think they are entitled. Liberalism makes them think that way. Liberalism? Oh yeah, it's so "great."
Jimmy Williams
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
Happy Tax of July, Maryland!
Well, it's now July 1st. Usually that doesn't mean much other than July 4th is just 3 days away and if you haven't started planning your Independence Day events yet then you better get on it.
But for Marylanders, July 1st of this year means taxes, taxes and more taxes. The first phase of the higher gas tax takes effect today, which means you'll now be paying approximately 4 cents more for a gallon of gas ultimately on the way up to around 16 cents or more per gallon by the time the full tax takes effect in a couple years. By 2016, it is estimated that the gas tax will be 62.5 cents per gallon, up from around 25 cents per gallon last week. 62.5 cents. If you average 10 gallons per fill-up (But for many it's more than that), that's $6.25 per fill-up. Even if you only stop for gas once every 2 weeks (And many stop much more frequently than that), that's $162.50 out of your pocket every year just on gas taxes. And that's most likely on the low end! For married couples, how many less date nights does that represent? For kids, how many video games will you no longer be able to get? How many fewer Orioles games will you be able to attend? The list of examples goes on and on.
But it gets worse than that. The tax, obviously, applies to everyone stopping for gas in Maryland, including commercial drivers conducting business in the state. That means your bills for services such as plumbing, etc. are going to go up because that cost increase will be passed on to the consumer. Food bills, as if they were not already high enough, are going to go higher still as grocery stores pass the increased fuel costs onto us. These business are not just going to sit there and take losses because the tax is higher. We all lose!
Tolls across the state also increased today. It now costs $6 to cross the Chesapeake Bay Bridge up from $4 last week. When Gov. Martin O'Malley took office, the toll was $2.50. The same toll also applies on the Nice Memorial Bridge on U.S. 301. Those tolls are one-way only. Tolls on the habor tunnels and the Key Bridge are going from $3 to $4. That toll is collected both ways (A total of $8 per round trip). Tolls on the bridges in the northern part of the state, the JFK Memorial Bridge on I-95 and the Hatem Bridge on U.S. 40, are now going to be $8 (collected northbound only). And all of these tolls are supposed to increase again next year. The Bay Bridge is slated to increase to $8. According the Nancy Jacobs article I have linked to above, Maryland now has $33 in tolls, the same amount as Pennsylvania which has nearly double the number of toll roads, and more than Virginia's $27.10, which includes the Chesapeakle Bay Bridge-Tunnel at $12 per crossing.
Granted, for commuters who use their EZ Passes to drive these bridges and tunnels every day, it doesn't cost quite that much. But EZ Pass rates jumped proportionally across the board as well and of course now it costs you $1.50 per month ($18 per year) just to "rent" the device from the state. Even if you don't use it. It used to be free. As Sean Casey was saying on the Morning Show on WCBM Baltimore Monday morning, don't be surprised if that rate jumps to say, $2 per month in the near future.
And of course we have the much talked about, and widely hated, "rain tax," properly known by the state as the "stormwater management fee." The tax is being levied in Maryland's nine largest counties plus the city of Baltimore and it has thousands of citizens and business owners up in arms. While some counties have elected to fight the tax, Frederick County is charging residents a one cent and Carroll is refusing to levy it on residents, several are just blindly following the law, the result of an unfunded EPA mandate for Maryland to spend $15 billion to fight pollution in the Cheasapeake Bay.
The size and scope of the tax is different in every jurisdiction. In some counties it's a flat tax based on square footage of impervious surfaces on your property. In others residents pay one rate while businesses pay another, much higher rate. Churches and nonprofits are exempt in some counties but not others. In some counties the tax will increase after the 2014 elections. And Howard County hasn't even started enforcing the tax yet as County Executive Ken Ulman (D), now a candidate for Lieutennant Governor, has put the brakes on his brian-child county legislation for "further review" of the matter.
Here's the bottom line: the rain tax unfairly punishes Maryland residents for pollution in the Bay that they aren't even putting there. According to figures obtained by state Del. Pat McDonough (R-Baltimore and Harford), the leader of the new nonpartisan "Stop the Rain Campaign," pollution from stormwater runoff only accounts for 2 percent of the total pollution in the Bay. And even then, I would aruge, most of that pollution comes from the chemicals poured all over our state roads during the winter for snow removal. It doesn't come from private property. As Casey also pointed out on the Morning Show, gasoline, oil, lubricants and other fluids and pollutants fall right off the Bay Bridge and directly into the Bay every single day! Yet the Bay Bridge, as with all state owned properties and structures, is exempt from the tax!
And what of the states north of us along the Susquehanna River? As McDonough points out, the tax doesn't even address any pollution concerns north of the Conowingo Dam. Maryland residents can only do so much, and controlling the actions of other states in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed isn't one of the things they can do.
So what can Maryland residents and business owners do now? In regards to the rain tax, McDonough's new campaign is exploring the possibility of a lawsuit with Judicial Watch. And they would have precedent. Just this past January, federal judge Liam O'Grady found in favor of the state of Virginia and Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli when he ruled that "Stormwater runoff is not a pollutant, so the EPA is not authorized to regulate it." That lawsuit was precipitated by the EPA attempting to require Fairfax Conunty to restrict stormwater flow into a county creek as if it were a pollutant. As for the new tolls and taxes, voters on both sides of the aisle must start similar grassroots campaigns to stir up dissisent and outrage. Change Maryland is a brilliant example of such a campaign. Then they must take out this frustration at the polls in November 2014 by voting for someone else! I can't tell you the number of Democrat or Democrat-leaning voters I've talked to who complain about high taxes in this state and then keep voting for O'Malley and Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown, Speaker of the House of Delegates Michael Busch, Senate President Mike Miller, etc. Those are the very same people who keep raising your taxes!
Jimmy Williams
But for Marylanders, July 1st of this year means taxes, taxes and more taxes. The first phase of the higher gas tax takes effect today, which means you'll now be paying approximately 4 cents more for a gallon of gas ultimately on the way up to around 16 cents or more per gallon by the time the full tax takes effect in a couple years. By 2016, it is estimated that the gas tax will be 62.5 cents per gallon, up from around 25 cents per gallon last week. 62.5 cents. If you average 10 gallons per fill-up (But for many it's more than that), that's $6.25 per fill-up. Even if you only stop for gas once every 2 weeks (And many stop much more frequently than that), that's $162.50 out of your pocket every year just on gas taxes. And that's most likely on the low end! For married couples, how many less date nights does that represent? For kids, how many video games will you no longer be able to get? How many fewer Orioles games will you be able to attend? The list of examples goes on and on.
But it gets worse than that. The tax, obviously, applies to everyone stopping for gas in Maryland, including commercial drivers conducting business in the state. That means your bills for services such as plumbing, etc. are going to go up because that cost increase will be passed on to the consumer. Food bills, as if they were not already high enough, are going to go higher still as grocery stores pass the increased fuel costs onto us. These business are not just going to sit there and take losses because the tax is higher. We all lose!
Tolls across the state also increased today. It now costs $6 to cross the Chesapeake Bay Bridge up from $4 last week. When Gov. Martin O'Malley took office, the toll was $2.50. The same toll also applies on the Nice Memorial Bridge on U.S. 301. Those tolls are one-way only. Tolls on the habor tunnels and the Key Bridge are going from $3 to $4. That toll is collected both ways (A total of $8 per round trip). Tolls on the bridges in the northern part of the state, the JFK Memorial Bridge on I-95 and the Hatem Bridge on U.S. 40, are now going to be $8 (collected northbound only). And all of these tolls are supposed to increase again next year. The Bay Bridge is slated to increase to $8. According the Nancy Jacobs article I have linked to above, Maryland now has $33 in tolls, the same amount as Pennsylvania which has nearly double the number of toll roads, and more than Virginia's $27.10, which includes the Chesapeakle Bay Bridge-Tunnel at $12 per crossing.
Granted, for commuters who use their EZ Passes to drive these bridges and tunnels every day, it doesn't cost quite that much. But EZ Pass rates jumped proportionally across the board as well and of course now it costs you $1.50 per month ($18 per year) just to "rent" the device from the state. Even if you don't use it. It used to be free. As Sean Casey was saying on the Morning Show on WCBM Baltimore Monday morning, don't be surprised if that rate jumps to say, $2 per month in the near future.
And of course we have the much talked about, and widely hated, "rain tax," properly known by the state as the "stormwater management fee." The tax is being levied in Maryland's nine largest counties plus the city of Baltimore and it has thousands of citizens and business owners up in arms. While some counties have elected to fight the tax, Frederick County is charging residents a one cent and Carroll is refusing to levy it on residents, several are just blindly following the law, the result of an unfunded EPA mandate for Maryland to spend $15 billion to fight pollution in the Cheasapeake Bay.
The size and scope of the tax is different in every jurisdiction. In some counties it's a flat tax based on square footage of impervious surfaces on your property. In others residents pay one rate while businesses pay another, much higher rate. Churches and nonprofits are exempt in some counties but not others. In some counties the tax will increase after the 2014 elections. And Howard County hasn't even started enforcing the tax yet as County Executive Ken Ulman (D), now a candidate for Lieutennant Governor, has put the brakes on his brian-child county legislation for "further review" of the matter.
Here's the bottom line: the rain tax unfairly punishes Maryland residents for pollution in the Bay that they aren't even putting there. According to figures obtained by state Del. Pat McDonough (R-Baltimore and Harford), the leader of the new nonpartisan "Stop the Rain Campaign," pollution from stormwater runoff only accounts for 2 percent of the total pollution in the Bay. And even then, I would aruge, most of that pollution comes from the chemicals poured all over our state roads during the winter for snow removal. It doesn't come from private property. As Casey also pointed out on the Morning Show, gasoline, oil, lubricants and other fluids and pollutants fall right off the Bay Bridge and directly into the Bay every single day! Yet the Bay Bridge, as with all state owned properties and structures, is exempt from the tax!
And what of the states north of us along the Susquehanna River? As McDonough points out, the tax doesn't even address any pollution concerns north of the Conowingo Dam. Maryland residents can only do so much, and controlling the actions of other states in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed isn't one of the things they can do.
So what can Maryland residents and business owners do now? In regards to the rain tax, McDonough's new campaign is exploring the possibility of a lawsuit with Judicial Watch. And they would have precedent. Just this past January, federal judge Liam O'Grady found in favor of the state of Virginia and Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli when he ruled that "Stormwater runoff is not a pollutant, so the EPA is not authorized to regulate it." That lawsuit was precipitated by the EPA attempting to require Fairfax Conunty to restrict stormwater flow into a county creek as if it were a pollutant. As for the new tolls and taxes, voters on both sides of the aisle must start similar grassroots campaigns to stir up dissisent and outrage. Change Maryland is a brilliant example of such a campaign. Then they must take out this frustration at the polls in November 2014 by voting for someone else! I can't tell you the number of Democrat or Democrat-leaning voters I've talked to who complain about high taxes in this state and then keep voting for O'Malley and Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown, Speaker of the House of Delegates Michael Busch, Senate President Mike Miller, etc. Those are the very same people who keep raising your taxes!
Jimmy Williams
Tuesday, June 11, 2013
Would You Close the IRS or Gitmo? Survey Says: IRS
This past Thursday, June 6th, I went out and did another Man on the Street for WCBM. This time I went to Harbor Place in downtown Baltimore near the aquarium with much better success. I was never approached by any security or police officers and people were more than willing to talk to me as I walked around the harbor.
This week's question was quick and straightforward but for some it may have been a tough one: Which would you rather see closed, the IRS or Guantanamo Bay? As we all (should) know by now, the IRS (and possibly also the Obama Administration itself) is guilty of targetting Conservative and Tea Party groups with delays, extra scrutiny, etc. on their applications for tax-exempt status. On the other side we have Obama himself trying to dismiss this scandal and others and instead renew calls to close Guantanamo Bay, the facility at which we keep terrorist detainees. Jay Leno drew massive cheers from his audience last week by suggesting that the IRS should be sent to Gitmo.
Considering my location in Baltimore, itself a deep blue and incredibly corrupt city within deep blue and corrupt Maryland, I went in with the expectation that nearly everyone I talked to would side with Obama and favor closing Gitmo, a move which would most likely move terrorist detainees into U.S. prisons on home soil, while implying the IRS should be allowed to keep doing what it is doing now. I was pleasantly surprised when that didn't happen.
A majority of the people I interviewed on Thursday believed that the IRS should be closed over Guantanamo Bay. Despite all attempts to sweep this issue under the rug by Obama and his regime, that the average American still wants to see the IRS closed should speak volumes. It is a sign that Americans have finally woken up to realize the government and its agencies have overstepped their bounds and are out of control.
Now don't get me wrong, I wholeheartedly acknowlegde the need for a government to levy taxes and maintain a revenue collection agency to assure those taxes are paid. What I and millions of Americans are saying here is that the IRS has now gone well over and beyond what its original purpose was. According to a quick Google search, the IRS now has in excess of 106,000 employees. Why does the IRS need over 100,000 people to help collect taxes? It doesn't. But the IRS still wants to hire thousands more agents so that it can enforce Obamacare! As a nation we're seriously still going to trust the IRS to enforce Obamacare when it can't even operate within the bounds of and execute current laws?
The targeting scandal, along with the new news of outlandish spending by the IRS for employee "training" to the tune of millions and millions of dollars, should be a wake up call that now is the time to start seriously looking at the size and scope of the IRS. Yes the IRS is a necessary government agency, but it is time to reign it in and bring the monster back under control.
Jimmy Williams
This week's question was quick and straightforward but for some it may have been a tough one: Which would you rather see closed, the IRS or Guantanamo Bay? As we all (should) know by now, the IRS (and possibly also the Obama Administration itself) is guilty of targetting Conservative and Tea Party groups with delays, extra scrutiny, etc. on their applications for tax-exempt status. On the other side we have Obama himself trying to dismiss this scandal and others and instead renew calls to close Guantanamo Bay, the facility at which we keep terrorist detainees. Jay Leno drew massive cheers from his audience last week by suggesting that the IRS should be sent to Gitmo.
Considering my location in Baltimore, itself a deep blue and incredibly corrupt city within deep blue and corrupt Maryland, I went in with the expectation that nearly everyone I talked to would side with Obama and favor closing Gitmo, a move which would most likely move terrorist detainees into U.S. prisons on home soil, while implying the IRS should be allowed to keep doing what it is doing now. I was pleasantly surprised when that didn't happen.
A majority of the people I interviewed on Thursday believed that the IRS should be closed over Guantanamo Bay. Despite all attempts to sweep this issue under the rug by Obama and his regime, that the average American still wants to see the IRS closed should speak volumes. It is a sign that Americans have finally woken up to realize the government and its agencies have overstepped their bounds and are out of control.
Now don't get me wrong, I wholeheartedly acknowlegde the need for a government to levy taxes and maintain a revenue collection agency to assure those taxes are paid. What I and millions of Americans are saying here is that the IRS has now gone well over and beyond what its original purpose was. According to a quick Google search, the IRS now has in excess of 106,000 employees. Why does the IRS need over 100,000 people to help collect taxes? It doesn't. But the IRS still wants to hire thousands more agents so that it can enforce Obamacare! As a nation we're seriously still going to trust the IRS to enforce Obamacare when it can't even operate within the bounds of and execute current laws?
The targeting scandal, along with the new news of outlandish spending by the IRS for employee "training" to the tune of millions and millions of dollars, should be a wake up call that now is the time to start seriously looking at the size and scope of the IRS. Yes the IRS is a necessary government agency, but it is time to reign it in and bring the monster back under control.
Jimmy Williams
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Assault on Freedom of the Press Hits Me
UPDATE 9:56 p.m. EDT: After being shown legal precedent in the Supreme Court case of Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner, a 5-4 decision by the Court in 1972, I am willing to concede that even though malls are open to the public, they can still be considered private property. However, as I wrote previously, I was not harassing anyone or recording audio without permission of my subjects. If I was turned down by a person, I would have backed off without a fight. And again, no one at the station ever thought this would be a problem when we decided on this assignment.
Even if you take this Supreme Court ruling into account, I still object to General Manager Michael Sullivan's refusal to talk to any of my bosses at WCBM about the situation and to his idea that I can't stand on a public sidewalk in front of "his" mall and ask people questions. On the contrary, this Supreme Court ruling gives me all the legal precedent I need to stand on the sidewalk in front of Towson Town Center and ask all the questions I want to ask. I also reject his idea that mall customers don't want to be asked about their opinions on certain issues. On the contrary, a great number of people love having a microphone in front of their mouth so they can express their opinions on any subject. In my experience, if you tell someone they might end up hearing their voice on the radio, they're more than eager to talk.
ORIGINAL POST 2:30 p.m. EDT: No I'm not being investigated by Eric Holder and the corrupt Department of Justice, but today I was kicked out of the Towson Town Center and off its premises for trying to conduct "man on the street" interviews with mall goers.
I'm interning this summer with AM radio station WCBM Baltimore and today for my first field assignment I was dispatched to the Towson Town Center to conduct man on the street interviews gathering the reactions and opinions of the public to the trio of scandals currently rocking the Obama Administration: the Benghazi cover up, IRS targeting of Tea Party and Conservative groups and DOJ wiretaps. After successfully interviewing three very accommodating ladies in the food court I was approached at random by a security guard who asked what I was doing. Next I was told I needed permission to talk to people in the mall from the manager's office. This didn't seem right to me and I pointed out that the mall is a public space and I was getting consent from people before recording any audio. The guard offered to take me down to talk to his bosses so we went.
After being kept waiting for 15 minutes, Michael Sullivan, the mall's general manager, finally came out to see me. I identified myself, stated my purpose and was told I couldn't be there because the mall was "private property," not a public space and that he "owned the mall." "It's like coming into my house," Sullivan told me. "I invite shoppers in to shop here but I don't invite you in to ask them questions." He next asked for the specifics of my questions and then insisted that the customers wouldn't want to be bothered by such questions.
I offered to call my bosses back at the station so that we could all talk it over and attempt to resolve the situation. He wouldn't hear of it. I asked him if I could leave the mall and conduct my interviews outside on the sidewalk. He told me I couldn't do anything anywhere on the mall's property which went "all the way to the curb," including the parking garages and the sidewalks in front of the various stores and restaurants. I then asked him where I could go if not on "his" property. He wouldn't answer.
My bosses at WCBM couldn't believe it once I got back and told them I had been kicked out. Like me they agree that the mall is a public space, even if it has an owner. If the mall truly was "like [Sullivan's] house," then I wouldn't have been able to get in to begin with. Yet I walked right in through Macy's and up to the food court without knocking on any doors, ringing any bells or passing any "no trespassing" signs. I wasn't harassing anyone nor did I break any laws. And if the customers wouldn't want to be bothered by my questions, then how come three ladies were more than willing to talk to me after I explained what I was doing? Lastly, I'd be more than willing to check any right of way maps Sullivan wanted me to, but I know his property doesn't go "all the way to the curb," especially on the side that borders Dulaney Valley Road (MD-146), a state funded and maintained throughfare. That's a public sidewalk and I could stand there if I wanted to. I just didn't want to force anything more today because Sullivan is at least twice as large as I am and could probably crush me no problem.
Despite all this, some good things came out of this experience. I still got an interview done before I was kicked out of the mall. And because I got kicked out of the mall, we have a second story to talk about here at the station in addition to the man on the street clips I gathered today. It sort of worked out. If you're going to be up, tune in from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. EDT on Friday, May 31st on AM 680 or wcbm.com where these stories will be covered at some point during the show. Should be fun as always.
Jimmy Williams
Even if you take this Supreme Court ruling into account, I still object to General Manager Michael Sullivan's refusal to talk to any of my bosses at WCBM about the situation and to his idea that I can't stand on a public sidewalk in front of "his" mall and ask people questions. On the contrary, this Supreme Court ruling gives me all the legal precedent I need to stand on the sidewalk in front of Towson Town Center and ask all the questions I want to ask. I also reject his idea that mall customers don't want to be asked about their opinions on certain issues. On the contrary, a great number of people love having a microphone in front of their mouth so they can express their opinions on any subject. In my experience, if you tell someone they might end up hearing their voice on the radio, they're more than eager to talk.
ORIGINAL POST 2:30 p.m. EDT: No I'm not being investigated by Eric Holder and the corrupt Department of Justice, but today I was kicked out of the Towson Town Center and off its premises for trying to conduct "man on the street" interviews with mall goers.
I'm interning this summer with AM radio station WCBM Baltimore and today for my first field assignment I was dispatched to the Towson Town Center to conduct man on the street interviews gathering the reactions and opinions of the public to the trio of scandals currently rocking the Obama Administration: the Benghazi cover up, IRS targeting of Tea Party and Conservative groups and DOJ wiretaps. After successfully interviewing three very accommodating ladies in the food court I was approached at random by a security guard who asked what I was doing. Next I was told I needed permission to talk to people in the mall from the manager's office. This didn't seem right to me and I pointed out that the mall is a public space and I was getting consent from people before recording any audio. The guard offered to take me down to talk to his bosses so we went.
After being kept waiting for 15 minutes, Michael Sullivan, the mall's general manager, finally came out to see me. I identified myself, stated my purpose and was told I couldn't be there because the mall was "private property," not a public space and that he "owned the mall." "It's like coming into my house," Sullivan told me. "I invite shoppers in to shop here but I don't invite you in to ask them questions." He next asked for the specifics of my questions and then insisted that the customers wouldn't want to be bothered by such questions.
I offered to call my bosses back at the station so that we could all talk it over and attempt to resolve the situation. He wouldn't hear of it. I asked him if I could leave the mall and conduct my interviews outside on the sidewalk. He told me I couldn't do anything anywhere on the mall's property which went "all the way to the curb," including the parking garages and the sidewalks in front of the various stores and restaurants. I then asked him where I could go if not on "his" property. He wouldn't answer.
My bosses at WCBM couldn't believe it once I got back and told them I had been kicked out. Like me they agree that the mall is a public space, even if it has an owner. If the mall truly was "like [Sullivan's] house," then I wouldn't have been able to get in to begin with. Yet I walked right in through Macy's and up to the food court without knocking on any doors, ringing any bells or passing any "no trespassing" signs. I wasn't harassing anyone nor did I break any laws. And if the customers wouldn't want to be bothered by my questions, then how come three ladies were more than willing to talk to me after I explained what I was doing? Lastly, I'd be more than willing to check any right of way maps Sullivan wanted me to, but I know his property doesn't go "all the way to the curb," especially on the side that borders Dulaney Valley Road (MD-146), a state funded and maintained throughfare. That's a public sidewalk and I could stand there if I wanted to. I just didn't want to force anything more today because Sullivan is at least twice as large as I am and could probably crush me no problem.
Despite all this, some good things came out of this experience. I still got an interview done before I was kicked out of the mall. And because I got kicked out of the mall, we have a second story to talk about here at the station in addition to the man on the street clips I gathered today. It sort of worked out. If you're going to be up, tune in from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. EDT on Friday, May 31st on AM 680 or wcbm.com where these stories will be covered at some point during the show. Should be fun as always.
Jimmy Williams
A "Sad Day for Scouting" Indeed
A few days late but no less relevant I'd finally like to take some time to weigh in on the vote a week ago today to allow openly gay youth to be members of the Boy Scouts of America. A decision that was not only totally inappropriate, but also ignored the voice of the membership at large.
There's a reason the National Council didn't put this issue to a direct vote from the membership: it would have failed. A survey of the rank-and-file members of the BSA found that over 60 percent of the membership rejects a change in policy that would allow gays to be in scouting openly. Yet when it came to the vote, the results were entirely flipped from what the rank-and-file support.
Around 61 percent of the delegates choose to ignore the feelings of the membership at large and approve this policy change. According to some reports, no dissenting opinions or viewpoints were even allowed to be presented to the delegates before they voted, a huge overreach by national leaders should that prove to be true. This can be equated to the current national feeling about ObamaCare. In a recent survey, 54 percent of voters, including about one quarter of Democrats, support returning to a health care system that is pre-2009. House Republicans have voted to repeal ObamaCare 37 times. So what do Democrats do? They keep on shoving ahead with implementing the program, ignoring the public at large.
John Stemberger, founder of OnMyHonor.Net and a leading opponent of the policy change, cites figures that should be quite alarming for national BSA leaders if (well now, when) the policy change goes into effect. According to his estimates, the BSA is now facing a drop in membership of between 200,000 and 400,000 youth. That does not even count any adults or volunteers associated with those youth. Other figures I have seen include an estimated loss of $44 million in revenue for the BSA. That amount is many times greater than any amount of funding former corporate donors have withdrawn in the past couple of years.
As Stemberger has said in many interviews, Scouts is not supposed to be about sexuality at all. Scouts has never been about banning gays, its been about banning gay activisim, he has said. And he's right. Now that gays are allowed in the BSA openly, sexuality has unavoidably been thrown into the BSA. Under the now outgoing "don't ask, don't tell" policy , if you will, gays could still be scouts and sexuality was never discussed. The focus was on advancing, camping, cooking, hiking, etc.
But now the focus will turn to sexuality. And that's not where it should be. Parents should be allowed to discuss homosexuality and being gay with their children on their own timetable. But now because gays will be openly allowed in scouting, those kids, some as young as 6 years old, could find out about it at anytime, even if the parents aren't ready to have that discussion. Simply put, that is not okay.
Personally I am now winding down my involvement in the Boy Scouts of America, as are my brother and father. I am an Eagle Scout. I still work with my troop as an Assistant Scoutmaster and will be attending my third summer camp as an adult in about two months time. But I cannot continue to be part of an organization that has caved to minority interests, violated its own morals and betrayed the beliefs and values of the majority of its membership. Summer camp this year will be my last for quite a while, if not forever. My father is leading summer camp for the troop this summer and it will be his last major project with our troop. My brother is only a Board of Review away from earning his Eagle and once he does so and attends summer camp, he will be out as well. We may still hang around, but in very limited rolls and we will probably not reregister in January.
Will we ever go back? That remains to be seen but I don't count on it. I eagerly wait to see if there will be a movement to found an organization similar to the American Heritage Girls, an alternative to the now liberally dominated Girl Scouts, for boys, possibly "American Heritage Scouts." I would be willing to contribute the founding of such an organization should the opportunity arise. As for the BSA, it has signed its own death sentence. Things will only get worse, not better. The lawsuits will not stop, cases of abuse will not stop and will probably increase if gay youth attempt to have sexual contact with other youth. And within a few years, groups like NAMBLA will have open access to the BSA. When that happens, abuses will really take off.
Jimmy Williams
There's a reason the National Council didn't put this issue to a direct vote from the membership: it would have failed. A survey of the rank-and-file members of the BSA found that over 60 percent of the membership rejects a change in policy that would allow gays to be in scouting openly. Yet when it came to the vote, the results were entirely flipped from what the rank-and-file support.
Around 61 percent of the delegates choose to ignore the feelings of the membership at large and approve this policy change. According to some reports, no dissenting opinions or viewpoints were even allowed to be presented to the delegates before they voted, a huge overreach by national leaders should that prove to be true. This can be equated to the current national feeling about ObamaCare. In a recent survey, 54 percent of voters, including about one quarter of Democrats, support returning to a health care system that is pre-2009. House Republicans have voted to repeal ObamaCare 37 times. So what do Democrats do? They keep on shoving ahead with implementing the program, ignoring the public at large.
John Stemberger, founder of OnMyHonor.Net and a leading opponent of the policy change, cites figures that should be quite alarming for national BSA leaders if (well now, when) the policy change goes into effect. According to his estimates, the BSA is now facing a drop in membership of between 200,000 and 400,000 youth. That does not even count any adults or volunteers associated with those youth. Other figures I have seen include an estimated loss of $44 million in revenue for the BSA. That amount is many times greater than any amount of funding former corporate donors have withdrawn in the past couple of years.
As Stemberger has said in many interviews, Scouts is not supposed to be about sexuality at all. Scouts has never been about banning gays, its been about banning gay activisim, he has said. And he's right. Now that gays are allowed in the BSA openly, sexuality has unavoidably been thrown into the BSA. Under the now outgoing "don't ask, don't tell" policy , if you will, gays could still be scouts and sexuality was never discussed. The focus was on advancing, camping, cooking, hiking, etc.
But now the focus will turn to sexuality. And that's not where it should be. Parents should be allowed to discuss homosexuality and being gay with their children on their own timetable. But now because gays will be openly allowed in scouting, those kids, some as young as 6 years old, could find out about it at anytime, even if the parents aren't ready to have that discussion. Simply put, that is not okay.
Personally I am now winding down my involvement in the Boy Scouts of America, as are my brother and father. I am an Eagle Scout. I still work with my troop as an Assistant Scoutmaster and will be attending my third summer camp as an adult in about two months time. But I cannot continue to be part of an organization that has caved to minority interests, violated its own morals and betrayed the beliefs and values of the majority of its membership. Summer camp this year will be my last for quite a while, if not forever. My father is leading summer camp for the troop this summer and it will be his last major project with our troop. My brother is only a Board of Review away from earning his Eagle and once he does so and attends summer camp, he will be out as well. We may still hang around, but in very limited rolls and we will probably not reregister in January.
Will we ever go back? That remains to be seen but I don't count on it. I eagerly wait to see if there will be a movement to found an organization similar to the American Heritage Girls, an alternative to the now liberally dominated Girl Scouts, for boys, possibly "American Heritage Scouts." I would be willing to contribute the founding of such an organization should the opportunity arise. As for the BSA, it has signed its own death sentence. Things will only get worse, not better. The lawsuits will not stop, cases of abuse will not stop and will probably increase if gay youth attempt to have sexual contact with other youth. And within a few years, groups like NAMBLA will have open access to the BSA. When that happens, abuses will really take off.
Jimmy Williams
Thursday, May 9, 2013
Mishandling of the Cole Withrow Battle
I first addressed Eagle Scout Cole Withrow's suspension/expulsion for accidently bringing a shotgun to his high school in his truck in my blog post last week. Right away some good things, and some partial right steps, came out. Cole is at least allowed to graduate, but still not with his class. The story has national attention. And Liberty University has offered him whatever financial aid it will take for him to attend.
Despite all this, there are steps that could have been taken that haven't been. And today those of us who are members of the "Free Cole" Facebook group and fan page discovered that the fan page has been deleted and that the group administrators are trying to remove the group. This coming after the group administrators had already blocked group members from posting to the group about a week ago. The explanation you ask? There are claims that "severe threats" have been made and that taking down the group and page is "honoring the family's wishes." I'm sorry but that's a terrible explanation and taking down the pages because of "threats" is simply caving to the opposition and letting it win.
The fan page had over 5,500 "likes" before it was taken down and the group nearly 11,000 members as of this writing. If you make all that go away, how is the school board, or anyone who has authority in the decisions surrounding Cole for that matter, going to see that there is massive public support for him and his family? Yes a lot of us, including me, wrote emails to the superintendent of schools but emails can be deleted and tampered with. The authorities can't make the Facebook pages go away or dispute them (in theory anyway, you never know anymore). Taking down the page and group won't stop whatever "threats" were coming in but it will make it appear that public support for Cole has gone away.
Another shortcoming of the movement is that it appears no one close to Cole and his family would condone protests outside the school board or a boycott of school by students. Kimberly Boykin, the family friend quoted in the initial article by Todd Starnes, told several of us in a thread long since deleted from the group that we shouldn't be encouraging the entire student body to boycott school simply because student boycotts "are against school policy" and would lead to "automatic suspension." Your point, Ms. Boykin? It's called civil disobedience to protest an unjust decision by the school system. A man named Martin Luther King Jr. showed us all during the 1960s that civil disobedience can be quite effective in bringing about change. And if Cole's whole school took part, and I'm sure they would have, they couldn't suspend all of them because it wouldn't be practical.
The fact is that student protests and sit-ins can be quite effective in changing an unpopular decision by a school. When my Dad was in Catholic grade school in the 1960s the nuns who ran the school made a decision (I can't remember what exactly, it's been years since my Dad told this story) that was incredibly unpopular with the student body. In response the entire student body staged a sit-down protest at recess. After 10 minutes of chanting "Hell no, we won't go!" the nuns gave in. The decision was reversed. The students won. The protest WORKED.
Writing emails, praying for the school board to do the right thing, petitioning to have laws changed and waiting for this case to work its way through the legal system can only do so much. In order to effect real change, you have to take action. And from what I saw before posting by group members was disallowed, there were hundreds of people ready to organize that action and hold protests. Yet they were told not to. We were told not to encourage students to stand up for their rights and boycott an unfair decision. And if that's how this case is going to be fought, then I hope Ms. Boykin doesn't expect a positive outcome. I support Cole wholeheartedly and so do thousands of others. But we want to see real action. And refusing to take that action because of fear of punishment from the system is not smart, it's complacency. Last I checked, that doesn't win battles.
Jimmy Williams
Despite all this, there are steps that could have been taken that haven't been. And today those of us who are members of the "Free Cole" Facebook group and fan page discovered that the fan page has been deleted and that the group administrators are trying to remove the group. This coming after the group administrators had already blocked group members from posting to the group about a week ago. The explanation you ask? There are claims that "severe threats" have been made and that taking down the group and page is "honoring the family's wishes." I'm sorry but that's a terrible explanation and taking down the pages because of "threats" is simply caving to the opposition and letting it win.
The fan page had over 5,500 "likes" before it was taken down and the group nearly 11,000 members as of this writing. If you make all that go away, how is the school board, or anyone who has authority in the decisions surrounding Cole for that matter, going to see that there is massive public support for him and his family? Yes a lot of us, including me, wrote emails to the superintendent of schools but emails can be deleted and tampered with. The authorities can't make the Facebook pages go away or dispute them (in theory anyway, you never know anymore). Taking down the page and group won't stop whatever "threats" were coming in but it will make it appear that public support for Cole has gone away.
Another shortcoming of the movement is that it appears no one close to Cole and his family would condone protests outside the school board or a boycott of school by students. Kimberly Boykin, the family friend quoted in the initial article by Todd Starnes, told several of us in a thread long since deleted from the group that we shouldn't be encouraging the entire student body to boycott school simply because student boycotts "are against school policy" and would lead to "automatic suspension." Your point, Ms. Boykin? It's called civil disobedience to protest an unjust decision by the school system. A man named Martin Luther King Jr. showed us all during the 1960s that civil disobedience can be quite effective in bringing about change. And if Cole's whole school took part, and I'm sure they would have, they couldn't suspend all of them because it wouldn't be practical.
The fact is that student protests and sit-ins can be quite effective in changing an unpopular decision by a school. When my Dad was in Catholic grade school in the 1960s the nuns who ran the school made a decision (I can't remember what exactly, it's been years since my Dad told this story) that was incredibly unpopular with the student body. In response the entire student body staged a sit-down protest at recess. After 10 minutes of chanting "Hell no, we won't go!" the nuns gave in. The decision was reversed. The students won. The protest WORKED.
Writing emails, praying for the school board to do the right thing, petitioning to have laws changed and waiting for this case to work its way through the legal system can only do so much. In order to effect real change, you have to take action. And from what I saw before posting by group members was disallowed, there were hundreds of people ready to organize that action and hold protests. Yet they were told not to. We were told not to encourage students to stand up for their rights and boycott an unfair decision. And if that's how this case is going to be fought, then I hope Ms. Boykin doesn't expect a positive outcome. I support Cole wholeheartedly and so do thousands of others. But we want to see real action. And refusing to take that action because of fear of punishment from the system is not smart, it's complacency. Last I checked, that doesn't win battles.
Jimmy Williams
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Benghazi Whistle Blowers Confirm What We've Long Known
If you missed today's House Oversight Committee hearings on Benghazi then you missed A LOT. Over 7 hours of testimony by three incredibly brave whistle-blowers have answered some questions and raised even more about just what happened in Benghazi on Sept. 11th, 2012.
I was able to watch about one and a half hours of the testimony live and have since watched a few highlight reels of the hearings with the key points and moments. Here's what we learned today in a somewhat reasonable flow:
From the first moment the ATTACK on our consulate started, our officials on the ground, including Ambassador Stevens, called it an attack. It was never called a protest. It was never blamed on some random video. The video was described as a "non-event" by Mr. Hicks. The whistle-blowers confirmed the talking points about the attacks were in fact edited to remove any mentions of terrorism. We also learned that Susan Rice never even talked to Mr. Hicks, one of the whistle-blowers who testified today and the ranking United States official in Libya after Stevens was killed, before she went on all five Sunday talk shows and called the attacks a "protest" against a YouTube video.
Mr. Hicks said that decision was embarrassing and that it made the Libyan government so angry that the FBI was kept out of Benghazi for 18 days! And all that time the crime scene wasn't secured. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), read an email that connected the attacks to an Islamic terrorist organization the next day on Sept. 12th. And we also learned that the hospital Stevens was taken to was controlled by terrorists, by our enemies!
We learned these men repeatedly requested additional security in Benghazi and it was denied. We learned that there were special ops forces on the ground in Libya ready to go get in the fight and try and save their fellow Americans but that they were ordered to stand down. It is still unclear where or who that order came from and more hearings will be needed to get to the bottom of it. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the ranking member of the Oversight Committee, was also caught blowing smoke when he asserted that it would have taken 9-12 hours to get air support to Libya. Officials on duty that night told Mr. Hicks that it would take 2-3 hours but even that figure is questionable.
The nearest Air Force base to Benghazi is Aviano Air Base in Northern Italy, which can be found using the base locator I have linked to. It is about 1,100 miles from Benghazi. The base has a complement of F-16s.The top speed of an F-16 is 1,500 miles per hour and with drop tanks and a couple sidewinder missiles, the F-16 would have had the range to get there, hit a target, refuel on the way back via a tanker dispatched to trail the plane or planes and land safely back at Aviano. I will not believe that would have taken 2-3 hours and certainly not 9-12 hours as Cummings asserted. And even if it would have taken 2-3 hours, the firefight in Benghazi dragged on throughout the entire night! Why was no attempt at air support made?
As far as the cover up back here at home goes, the whistle-blowers today told the committee that the State Department tried to block them from meeting with members of Congress unless State had a lawyer present. At one point Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was blocked from a meeting, as he told Sean Hannity tonight on Fox. Additionally, Gowdy told Hannity tonight that after 8 months, he and the rest of the American people still have no idea where the president was during all this.
On top of all of this, equally disturbing were the open and brazen attempts by many Democrats on the committee today to smear and discredit Republicans and the whistle-blowers. Cummings was in all out "smear and cover" mode from his first words before we even heard anything from the whistle-blowers. Rep. William Clay (D-Mo.) had the nerve to try and blame budget cuts for a terrorist attack. Yes, because somehow money made terrorists kill Ambassador Stevens. Rather than ask any serious questions, Rep. Carolyn Maloney blew her entire five minutes on a hysterical rant trying to shield Hillary Clinton.
Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), who in mine and many people's minds shouldn't even be on this committee or in Congress at all, spent her five minutes attacking the whistle-blowers and trying to get them to say they were there for political reasons when they clearly were not. She accused them of lying when they were not. She also said, "We don't want to get involved in who down the line gets consulted." Rep. Holmes that is exactly what we want to get involved in! We want to know who denied our people help! We want to know who in our government is responsible for not fighting back while our people were being murdered! And we want to know why we were lied to by our president, our secretary of state and our ambassador to the United Nations. We will keep digging. And we will eventually establish accountability. We will get justice for Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.
Jimmy Williams
I was able to watch about one and a half hours of the testimony live and have since watched a few highlight reels of the hearings with the key points and moments. Here's what we learned today in a somewhat reasonable flow:
From the first moment the ATTACK on our consulate started, our officials on the ground, including Ambassador Stevens, called it an attack. It was never called a protest. It was never blamed on some random video. The video was described as a "non-event" by Mr. Hicks. The whistle-blowers confirmed the talking points about the attacks were in fact edited to remove any mentions of terrorism. We also learned that Susan Rice never even talked to Mr. Hicks, one of the whistle-blowers who testified today and the ranking United States official in Libya after Stevens was killed, before she went on all five Sunday talk shows and called the attacks a "protest" against a YouTube video.
Mr. Hicks said that decision was embarrassing and that it made the Libyan government so angry that the FBI was kept out of Benghazi for 18 days! And all that time the crime scene wasn't secured. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), read an email that connected the attacks to an Islamic terrorist organization the next day on Sept. 12th. And we also learned that the hospital Stevens was taken to was controlled by terrorists, by our enemies!
We learned these men repeatedly requested additional security in Benghazi and it was denied. We learned that there were special ops forces on the ground in Libya ready to go get in the fight and try and save their fellow Americans but that they were ordered to stand down. It is still unclear where or who that order came from and more hearings will be needed to get to the bottom of it. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the ranking member of the Oversight Committee, was also caught blowing smoke when he asserted that it would have taken 9-12 hours to get air support to Libya. Officials on duty that night told Mr. Hicks that it would take 2-3 hours but even that figure is questionable.
The nearest Air Force base to Benghazi is Aviano Air Base in Northern Italy, which can be found using the base locator I have linked to. It is about 1,100 miles from Benghazi. The base has a complement of F-16s.The top speed of an F-16 is 1,500 miles per hour and with drop tanks and a couple sidewinder missiles, the F-16 would have had the range to get there, hit a target, refuel on the way back via a tanker dispatched to trail the plane or planes and land safely back at Aviano. I will not believe that would have taken 2-3 hours and certainly not 9-12 hours as Cummings asserted. And even if it would have taken 2-3 hours, the firefight in Benghazi dragged on throughout the entire night! Why was no attempt at air support made?
As far as the cover up back here at home goes, the whistle-blowers today told the committee that the State Department tried to block them from meeting with members of Congress unless State had a lawyer present. At one point Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was blocked from a meeting, as he told Sean Hannity tonight on Fox. Additionally, Gowdy told Hannity tonight that after 8 months, he and the rest of the American people still have no idea where the president was during all this.
On top of all of this, equally disturbing were the open and brazen attempts by many Democrats on the committee today to smear and discredit Republicans and the whistle-blowers. Cummings was in all out "smear and cover" mode from his first words before we even heard anything from the whistle-blowers. Rep. William Clay (D-Mo.) had the nerve to try and blame budget cuts for a terrorist attack. Yes, because somehow money made terrorists kill Ambassador Stevens. Rather than ask any serious questions, Rep. Carolyn Maloney blew her entire five minutes on a hysterical rant trying to shield Hillary Clinton.
Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), who in mine and many people's minds shouldn't even be on this committee or in Congress at all, spent her five minutes attacking the whistle-blowers and trying to get them to say they were there for political reasons when they clearly were not. She accused them of lying when they were not. She also said, "We don't want to get involved in who down the line gets consulted." Rep. Holmes that is exactly what we want to get involved in! We want to know who denied our people help! We want to know who in our government is responsible for not fighting back while our people were being murdered! And we want to know why we were lied to by our president, our secretary of state and our ambassador to the United Nations. We will keep digging. And we will eventually establish accountability. We will get justice for Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.
Jimmy Williams
Thursday, May 2, 2013
An Eagle Scout Done Wrong: Cole Withrow Suspension
UPDATE 3:48 p.m EDT: I have been working on this blog post in between classes and now that I'm back on again, several things have changed. First, as reported by the local ABC affiliate, Cole will be allowed to graduate, but not with his friends at Princeton High School. It will instead be an alternative option only. That is not justice. This same article also reports that two teachers in Johnston County, including an administrator who works at Cole's school, have done the same thing Cole did. Yet neither was charged with a felony or even arrested. The administrator who works at Cole's school served a three day suspension and still works there.
The second major piece of information, also reported by Todd Starnes, is that Cole has now been offered "whatever scholarships he need[s] to attend Liberty University," by Liberty University Chancellor Jerry Falwell Jr. Falwell also had the following to say about this incident:
“When you see a basketball player who is glorified for announcing that he’s gay and then you see an honest young man like Cole arrested and treated like a criminal for making an honest mistake – you wonder what’s happening to our country,” he said. “The culture seems to be completely disconnected from our roots – our Christian heritage and our Constitution. I hope the American people wake up before it’s too late.”
Original Post: As first reported by Todd Starnes on Wednesday, May 1st, Cole Withrow, of Johnston County, N.C., has been suspended and is facing expulsion for accidentally driving to school on Monday, April 29th with an unloaded shotgun in the back of his truck. The gun was reportedly left in the back after a weekend skeet shooting trip and was simply forgotten about on Sunday night. And oh, by the way, Cole is an Eagle Scout and honor student at his high school and is scheduled to graduate in just a matter of weeks.
When Cole parked and went to grab his bag, he discovered the shotgun. According to Starnes and his sources, the events that followed went like this:
Cole secured the shotgun in his truck. He next went directly the the school office to call his mother and tell her what happened and ask for her help in getting the gun back home. However, his conversation was apparently overheard by someone in the office. School officials went to his truck and found the gun. Cole has now been handed a suspension (a family friend said "expelled for 365 days" but expulsion means you can't come back at all), has been effectively blocked from finishing his high school career and graduating with his friends and is facing a felony for "knowingly and willfully bringing a weapon onto educational property."
Cole did not "knowingly or willfully" bring his shotgun on campus. And when he realized what happened, he did the honest and honorable thing and moved to quickly correct it. But by being open and honest about the situation, he paid for it. This is inexcusable. If this teaches our kids anything, it teaches them that being open and honest is wrong and instead they should just lie, cheat, hide, etc.
Jimmy Williams
The second major piece of information, also reported by Todd Starnes, is that Cole has now been offered "whatever scholarships he need[s] to attend Liberty University," by Liberty University Chancellor Jerry Falwell Jr. Falwell also had the following to say about this incident:
“When you see a basketball player who is glorified for announcing that he’s gay and then you see an honest young man like Cole arrested and treated like a criminal for making an honest mistake – you wonder what’s happening to our country,” he said. “The culture seems to be completely disconnected from our roots – our Christian heritage and our Constitution. I hope the American people wake up before it’s too late.”
Original Post: As first reported by Todd Starnes on Wednesday, May 1st, Cole Withrow, of Johnston County, N.C., has been suspended and is facing expulsion for accidentally driving to school on Monday, April 29th with an unloaded shotgun in the back of his truck. The gun was reportedly left in the back after a weekend skeet shooting trip and was simply forgotten about on Sunday night. And oh, by the way, Cole is an Eagle Scout and honor student at his high school and is scheduled to graduate in just a matter of weeks.
When Cole parked and went to grab his bag, he discovered the shotgun. According to Starnes and his sources, the events that followed went like this:
Cole secured the shotgun in his truck. He next went directly the the school office to call his mother and tell her what happened and ask for her help in getting the gun back home. However, his conversation was apparently overheard by someone in the office. School officials went to his truck and found the gun. Cole has now been handed a suspension (a family friend said "expelled for 365 days" but expulsion means you can't come back at all), has been effectively blocked from finishing his high school career and graduating with his friends and is facing a felony for "knowingly and willfully bringing a weapon onto educational property."
Cole did not "knowingly or willfully" bring his shotgun on campus. And when he realized what happened, he did the honest and honorable thing and moved to quickly correct it. But by being open and honest about the situation, he paid for it. This is inexcusable. If this teaches our kids anything, it teaches them that being open and honest is wrong and instead they should just lie, cheat, hide, etc.
Jimmy Williams
Friday, April 19, 2013
Death Penalty for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
Well folks, he's been caught. Tonight brought an end, and the beginning of a sense of closure for Americans, to the Boston Marathon terrorist attack. One suspect, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, died as the result of a shootout over night and police took Dzhokhar Tsarnaev alive from a boat parked in Watertown, Mass. backyard just hours ago on Friday night. And now that he's been caught, it is time to expedite his trip to Hell by imposing the death penalty in a federal trial. Dzhokhar and his older brother Tamerlan are not "criminals" but rather enemy combatants and deserve to be treated as such.
Now, as several of you know from my previous posts I am a Catholic and pro-life. But I have always been for capital punishment, especially in cases like this. The death penalty needs to always be there as a threat for crimes against humanity such as this. Without it, all criminals (or enemy combatants in this case) face is life in prison with 3 meals each day, free healthcare, etc. Life in prison will not be enough to make up for the atrocities committed this week in Boston.
Three people were killed, including an 8 year old boy, somewhere around another 30 lost a limb or limbs, and in total over 180 were injured in the initial blasts on Monday. The suspects intentionally placed that bomb in close proximity to Martin Richard with the knowledge that it would probably kill him. They showed absolutely no mercy or compassion for him or any of the other blast victims. And then during the manhunt Thursday night and early Friday morning they shot and killed police officer Sean Collier from MIT and another police officer.
What about these actions warrants that Dzhokhar be kept alive? What part shows that he deserves any compassion from us? If it weren't for the chance that he may have valuable answers and information about terror plots against the United States, I would've preferred he were shot dead in that boat. Dzhokhar does not deserve to be kept alive for the next 60 or more years on the taxpayers' dime. What good would that do anyone? Why should his actions be rewarded with life in prison?
He should be interrogated about why and how his brother carried out this attack, tortured for any additional information about terror threats that he may have, and then be put to death. It is as simple as that. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has no respect for the sanctity of human life, so why should we respect his life?
Jimmy Williams
Now, as several of you know from my previous posts I am a Catholic and pro-life. But I have always been for capital punishment, especially in cases like this. The death penalty needs to always be there as a threat for crimes against humanity such as this. Without it, all criminals (or enemy combatants in this case) face is life in prison with 3 meals each day, free healthcare, etc. Life in prison will not be enough to make up for the atrocities committed this week in Boston.
Three people were killed, including an 8 year old boy, somewhere around another 30 lost a limb or limbs, and in total over 180 were injured in the initial blasts on Monday. The suspects intentionally placed that bomb in close proximity to Martin Richard with the knowledge that it would probably kill him. They showed absolutely no mercy or compassion for him or any of the other blast victims. And then during the manhunt Thursday night and early Friday morning they shot and killed police officer Sean Collier from MIT and another police officer.
What about these actions warrants that Dzhokhar be kept alive? What part shows that he deserves any compassion from us? If it weren't for the chance that he may have valuable answers and information about terror plots against the United States, I would've preferred he were shot dead in that boat. Dzhokhar does not deserve to be kept alive for the next 60 or more years on the taxpayers' dime. What good would that do anyone? Why should his actions be rewarded with life in prison?
He should be interrogated about why and how his brother carried out this attack, tortured for any additional information about terror threats that he may have, and then be put to death. It is as simple as that. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has no respect for the sanctity of human life, so why should we respect his life?
Jimmy Williams
How much could a tweet cost you? At the University of Maryland, try $500.
Monday, April 15th kicked off the start of campaign season for SGA elections here at the University of Maryland. This year the incumbent Go Party and the challenging Time Party. A note that the party names are meaningless beyond just grouping people together. They usually change every year.
As The Diamondback reported on Tuesday, April 16th, if the Time Party is going to unseat the Go Party this year, it will have to do so with severely limited resources. That's because earlier this month the Time Party was fined $500 because one of its representatives turned to Twitter to accuse the current SGA of illegally promoting the incumbent president before campaigning officially kicked off. That fine represents a whopping 25 percent of the Time Party's original $2,000 operating budget. Both parties start off with the same amount of money to spend.
This fine is an absolute travesty on multiple fronts. First, let's look at the chain of events leading up to the fine. The SGA allegedly began campaigning illegally for a Go Party candidate. So the Time Party turned to Twitter to call them on it, presumably to also raise awareness of the issue with the public. And instead of investigating the incident (no investigation is mentioned), the Time Party is fined $500 by the SGA Elections Board? What for? The Time Party committed no wrong.
And now to address the shear amount of the fine. The SGA Elections Board has taken away 25 percent of the Time Party's campaign money. How can the party be expected to mount a serious challenge to the incumbents with that big of a disadvantage? If the board absolutely had to punish the Time Party for bringing potentially illegal campaign practices into the public eye, which there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with, why couldn't the fine be more reasonable? A $50 or $100 fine would have sent a message without crippling the Time Party's ability to wage an effective campaign.
The worst thing about all this is that there doesn't appear to be any precedence or rule regulating the action the Time Party took. A commenter on The Diamondback's story researched election rules and found that the only time a $500 fine is permitted is for campaigning early. Does that mean the elections board is somehow classifying the Time Party tweet as early campaigning??? Last time I checked, a tweet trying to raise awareness of a potential violation by another party is not early campaigning in any fashion. If anyone should be at risk of being fined, it's the Go Party!
So if the Time Party didn't break any rules, and it did not, why the massively debilitating fine? Simple, the Go Party runs the SGA right now and the elections board is surely sympathetic to the party and what it stand for. The elections board then found this tweet and stretched into a gray area of its election rules to cripple the opposition. I realize I might look like a conspiracy theorist to some but honestly think about it for a second and you will realize it makes a heck of a lot of sense. This story, which got almost no coverage on campus beyond a poorly written Diamondback article, is corruption at its finest.
Jimmy Williams
As The Diamondback reported on Tuesday, April 16th, if the Time Party is going to unseat the Go Party this year, it will have to do so with severely limited resources. That's because earlier this month the Time Party was fined $500 because one of its representatives turned to Twitter to accuse the current SGA of illegally promoting the incumbent president before campaigning officially kicked off. That fine represents a whopping 25 percent of the Time Party's original $2,000 operating budget. Both parties start off with the same amount of money to spend.
This fine is an absolute travesty on multiple fronts. First, let's look at the chain of events leading up to the fine. The SGA allegedly began campaigning illegally for a Go Party candidate. So the Time Party turned to Twitter to call them on it, presumably to also raise awareness of the issue with the public. And instead of investigating the incident (no investigation is mentioned), the Time Party is fined $500 by the SGA Elections Board? What for? The Time Party committed no wrong.
And now to address the shear amount of the fine. The SGA Elections Board has taken away 25 percent of the Time Party's campaign money. How can the party be expected to mount a serious challenge to the incumbents with that big of a disadvantage? If the board absolutely had to punish the Time Party for bringing potentially illegal campaign practices into the public eye, which there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with, why couldn't the fine be more reasonable? A $50 or $100 fine would have sent a message without crippling the Time Party's ability to wage an effective campaign.
The worst thing about all this is that there doesn't appear to be any precedence or rule regulating the action the Time Party took. A commenter on The Diamondback's story researched election rules and found that the only time a $500 fine is permitted is for campaigning early. Does that mean the elections board is somehow classifying the Time Party tweet as early campaigning??? Last time I checked, a tweet trying to raise awareness of a potential violation by another party is not early campaigning in any fashion. If anyone should be at risk of being fined, it's the Go Party!
So if the Time Party didn't break any rules, and it did not, why the massively debilitating fine? Simple, the Go Party runs the SGA right now and the elections board is surely sympathetic to the party and what it stand for. The elections board then found this tweet and stretched into a gray area of its election rules to cripple the opposition. I realize I might look like a conspiracy theorist to some but honestly think about it for a second and you will realize it makes a heck of a lot of sense. This story, which got almost no coverage on campus beyond a poorly written Diamondback article, is corruption at its finest.
Jimmy Williams
Thursday, April 11, 2013
The Failed Gun Bill Filibuster is Okay
A lot of Conservatives and Second Amendment defenders are up in arms today because several Republican senators voted today to advance new gun legislation to the floor of the senate for debate. Sixteen Republicans, led by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.), joined with Harry Reid and senate Democrats to move the bill to the floor by a 68-31 vote. Two Democrats voted against bringing the bill to the floor. This vote doomed, for now at least, the filibuster effort led by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah).
But let's take a step back and think about this for a second. We have congressional midterms in about 18 months. There are several Democratic senators retiring and there are also a few Democratic senators in red states, such as Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska), who will be up for reelection. Begich only won his seat in 2008 by one percentage point.
Bringing this bill to a floor debate is going to force these red state Democrats into a really difficult position. Do they vote to pass the bill as is and support their president, and by doing so take massive political hits back home? Or do they break against the president in an effort to shore up tight election prospects next year? If this bill had never come to the floor, these senators would never have to take a stand on the bill. A GOP filibuster would have actually hurt GOP election chances in 2014.
And the bill is already in trouble. The signs of defection are already there. According to the Fox News article linked above, both Begich and Pryor voted with Republicans to block floor debate. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) is co-sponsoring an amendment to the bill along with Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) which would scale back the call for universal background checks. How the senators up for reelection vote on this amendment will also be closely followed.
Landrieu could be in trouble herself. Although she is known as a very conservative Democrat and her handling of Katrina boosted her popularity, her vote to move this legislation to the floor today won't be taken lightly back home. I've already talked to family in Louisiana who assure me they're dead set against her vote today. And if she ultimately votes in favor of the legislation, the three-term senator could find herself in a tight race after coasting to a 52-46 win in 2008. All of these senators will be interesting to watch for sure in the coming weeks.
Jimmy Williams
But let's take a step back and think about this for a second. We have congressional midterms in about 18 months. There are several Democratic senators retiring and there are also a few Democratic senators in red states, such as Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska), who will be up for reelection. Begich only won his seat in 2008 by one percentage point.
Bringing this bill to a floor debate is going to force these red state Democrats into a really difficult position. Do they vote to pass the bill as is and support their president, and by doing so take massive political hits back home? Or do they break against the president in an effort to shore up tight election prospects next year? If this bill had never come to the floor, these senators would never have to take a stand on the bill. A GOP filibuster would have actually hurt GOP election chances in 2014.
And the bill is already in trouble. The signs of defection are already there. According to the Fox News article linked above, both Begich and Pryor voted with Republicans to block floor debate. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) is co-sponsoring an amendment to the bill along with Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) which would scale back the call for universal background checks. How the senators up for reelection vote on this amendment will also be closely followed.
Landrieu could be in trouble herself. Although she is known as a very conservative Democrat and her handling of Katrina boosted her popularity, her vote to move this legislation to the floor today won't be taken lightly back home. I've already talked to family in Louisiana who assure me they're dead set against her vote today. And if she ultimately votes in favor of the legislation, the three-term senator could find herself in a tight race after coasting to a 52-46 win in 2008. All of these senators will be interesting to watch for sure in the coming weeks.
Jimmy Williams
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Why the AP Shouldn’t Have Done Away with “Illegal Immigrant”
The Associated Press made a decision at the start of this month to stop using the phrase “illegal immigrant” in articles. Also gone will be “illegal alien,” “an illegal,” “illegals,” and “undocumented” except in direct quotations. Apparently the AP now considers these phrases offensive to immigrants who have come to this country unlawfully. No exact change was put in place but according to the AP’s blog, one of the acceptable variations appears to be, “living in or entering a country without legal permission.”
This decision by the AP to dump the
phrase “illegal immigrant” and related phrases is part of a broader push by
liberals over the last year or so to remove the phrase from all speech
nationwide. For example, this university started the “Inclusive Language
Campaign” in the fall in an attempt to get students to realize “the words
[they] use may have an impact on others.” One of the phrases the campaign is
trying to eliminate is, “Those illegal aliens.” Instead, the campaign advocates
for the use of “undocumented immigrant” or, by far the most sickening option,
“undocumented citizen.”
The decision by the AP and the
advocacy of the Inclusive Language Campaign here on campus couldn’t be any more
misguided. The word “illegal” means “unlawful” and, according to
dictionary.com, “alien” in this context means “a resident born in or belonging
to another country who has not acquired
citizenship by naturalization (distinguished
from citizen).” Therefore, using the phrases “illegal immigrant” and “illegal
alien” to describe someone who is in the United States, or any country for that
matter, unlawfully is a completely truthful and accurate description. No one is
using these phrases to be offensive. People who feel offended by them are
looking to be offended.
Illegal aliens are certainly not
“undocumented citizens” of the U.S., either. The word “citizen” is used to
describe someone who is not only in this country legally but who has also sworn
and owes allegiance to the United States and the Constitution. Illegal aliens
are not citizens. They couldn’t be any further from it.
Another problem the AP has with
banning all these phrases is that they have nothing short and concise to
replace them. AP Style has always preached that short and concise is the best
way to describe something. By getting rid of these phrases, the AP is replacing
one and two word phrases with a phrase that is nine words in length. Telling
journalists they no longer have to be concise when talking about illegal aliens
is a direct contradiction of everything journalists have been taught for years.
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Marylanders Lose Even More Personal Freedom
Despite
the protests of thousands of gun rights supports and constituents who packed
Annapolis daily, despite the pro-Second Amendment testimony in the state house
that dragged on for hours into the
night, ending at 4 a.m. one night, and despite the fact that supporters of the
bill have admitted that S.B. 281 will not reduce crime, the Maryland General
Assembly on Thursday, April 4th voted to unconstitutionally restrict
our right to bear arms anyway.
This gun-grabbing legislation, euphemistically
titled “The Firearms Safety Act of 2013,” takes massive steps to make handgun
ownership nearly impossible and practically criminalizes owning a handgun or
semiautomatic firearm while doing nothing to deter or punish criminals. Del.
Doyle Niemann (D-Prince George’s) has even gone on record saying the
legislation “is not a solution to violent crime, murder or gun violence.” Well
if it’s not any of those things, then what was the purpose of passing this
bill?! I was under the impression that your purpose was to prevent things like
the Newtown Shooting, which was violent crime, murder and gun violence
all-in-one, from happening again. If your “Firearms Safety Act” won’t stop any
of those things and, by simple logic, won’t prevent another Newtown, then what
the hell does this legislation do?!
I’ll tell you what this legislation
does. Del. Niemann also called this bill “a good first step.” What he and his
crony colleagues mean by that is that it’s a good first step to flying in the
face of the Constitution and taking all
guns away from all law-abiding citizens. According to University of Maryland
Rifle and Pistol Club President Ken Lan, the law as it is written is already a
de facto ban on handguns because the state simply does not have enough state
police certified handgun instructors or range facilities to go around. The
state police, despite the illegality of the move, could also just indefinitely
delay handgun background checks. Lan says he knows some people who have been
waiting over 45 days for a handgun despite the waiting period being just 7
days.
The law is also a clear violation of
both the Constitution and a Supreme Court ruling which makes it illegal for
government to require licensing, fees, etc. to exercise a constitutional right.
This law requires prospective handgun owners to undergo a criminal-style
fingerprinting (much like sex offenders)
and to pay all fees involved in that, which are presently about $34.50. Handgun
owners must additionally pay an application fee for their handgun licenses and
an additional fee every time they seek to renew their license, which would
occur every 10 years. And if that weren’t enough, anyone who owns a “copycat
weapon” when this law goes into effect in October, has to register that weapon
with the state police and pay a penalty of $290 to keep it, a clear violation
of both privacy and Second Amendment rights.
So what now? The most obvious reaction
might be to start collecting petition signatures in order to get the law to a
referendum vote, which Del. Pat McDonough (R-Baltimore and Harford) had vowed to do. But that
isn’t the best idea. The bill of rights is something that isn’t subject to the
ballot, so if we take this to a referendum, we’d be saying the law isn’t a
violation of our basic constitutional rights. The best thing we can do right
now is to take this law straight to the courts and fight it out there. Judges
have shown favor to gun rights in Maryland recently and with the clear
unconstitutionality of this law, we have a shot in the courts.
Regardless of what happens next, the
point is that we cannot give up this fight. We must defend our constitutional
and God-given rights from the liberal elitists in Annapolis, Washington and
state capitals across the country who seek to take them away. And we must teach
these “politicians” that their job is to legislate for the people, not to
legislate for themselves like they seem to always do.
Jimmy Williams
Jimmy Williams
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)