Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

And Claire Responds

I sent a note to Sen. Claire McCaskill indicating my opposition to Sen Diane Feinstein’s proposed gun bill. To her credit, she responded (I have many issues with her but she does reply to her constituents most of the time.)

January 26, 2013
Dear Mr. Howard,

Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control policy and gun safety. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.

As you know, the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees Americans the fundamental right to bear arms. I strongly support legal and safe gun ownership by law-abiding citizens and have consistently voted to uphold this constitutional right. I welcomed and supported the recent Supreme Court decision in the District of Columbia v. Heller case that made clear that the constitutional right to gun ownership is an individual one.

At the same time, we have to make sure that guns do not fall into the hands of individuals who should not have them. We should have sensible, constitutional controls on gun ownership that address safety in our communities, like preventing the mentally ill and criminals from possessing guns.

Recent tragedies, such as the mass shooting in Aurora, Colorado, and the horrific events in Newtown, Connecticut, have made it clear that our nation’s current gun laws should be reconsidered. Efforts to close the gun show loophole, provide for universal background checks on all guns sales, and to ensure that those with court-determined, dangerous mental health diagnoses do not get access to guns are being considered. While I want to closely study any proposal before I vote on it, I welcome these initiatives, because they represent sensible steps to keep our communities safe while respecting gun ownership rights. Importantly, legal experts believe each of these steps is consistent with the Second Amendment.

Knowing that those responsible for some of the most prominent mass shootings in recent history have suffered from mental illness, it is equally clear that we must also consider mental health services available to our citizens. A more robust mental health care system may help identify and treat individuals who need help before they resort to violence. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly known as “Obamacare,” will substantially expand important mental health coverage when it is fully implemented in 2014. I am hopeful that efforts to repeal these vital expansions in mental health care will come to an end, while new efforts will be undertaken to expand access to care.

Importantly, I firmly believe that an attempt to promote appropriate gun safety measures can be done without infringing upon law-abiding citizens’ right to own firearms or unduly burdening the hunting and sportsmanship culture of Missouri.

You may be interested to know that, in the past, my commitment to respecting the Second Amendment has led me to vote to permit residents of the District of Columbia to own and purchase firearms and to prevent funding for any international organization, including the United Nations, that places a tax on any firearm owned by a United States citizen. I have also opposed other inappropriate measures related to gun ownership rights, such as forcing Missouri to accept other states’ firearms laws.

While the debate over appropriate gun control measures is divisive, I believe there is middle ground here. This nation can come together to support sensible laws that prevent the mass murder of innocent citizens — especially innocent children — while we continue to respect our constitution and its Second Amendment rights. Please know that, as your United States Senator, I will keep your thoughts in mind as Congress considers gun-related legislation in the months ahead.

Again, thank you for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance to you on this or any other issue.


Claire McCaskill
United States Senator

P.S. If you would like more information about resources that can help Missourians, or what I am doing in the Senate on your behalf, please sign up for my email newsletter at


Note to Sen. McCaskill

Sent through the Senate web site:

Please reject Sen Feinstein’s proposed Gun Bill.  There is no part of it that would make the country safer.  There is nothing in it that will keep a crazy person from just finding another weapon and commit evil anyway.  The issue is not “Gun Violence”.  It is “All Violence” and countries that ban guns see huge increases in all violence, including ironically enough, gun crimes.  The United States should not go follow the failed policies of other countries.



A House Divided

Many people have heard of Lincoln’s ‘House Divided’ speech.  Most people don’t know where he was going with it.  The common understanding was predicting the division of the country.  Actually he specifically stated that, “…a house divided cannot long stand…” did not mean that the house would fall.  What he predicted was that that the house would have to resolve its difference and become either all free or all slave.  In 1865 it looked like the decision was made to make the country all free.  But the slave masters were allowed to persist.  Reconstruction.  Jim Crow.  Lynchings.  Segregation. The works…were all attempts of the slave masters to subdue the former slaves again.  Slowly, progress was made against the slave masters.

But in the early 20th Century, the wanna be slave masters found a new tool.  “Progressivism”.  For 100 years the “Progressives” have worked to impose their will on the country.  “Progressivism” has been described as, day one, the “Progressive” makes up their mind.  Day two, they make up your mind.

Looks like once again we are faced with a house divided between free and slave.  The slave masters are moving to make the country whole again, but this time all slave.  The issue is gun control and the “Progressive’s” move to disarm all of the country, except of course, themselves.

Why, you ask, does disarming the population imply that the slave masters are trying to make slaves of the American people.  It’s simple.  Free people are free to defend themselves and have the right to bear arms to affect that right.  Slaves are never allowed to arm or protect themselves.  Is the secret service going to give up guns when they protect the President?  Are Bloomberg’s armed guards going to give up the weapons for the cause?  It’s ever so interesting that the people who are the most vociferous about banning guns for the rest of us have no intention of disarming their own protectors.  It’s obvious who they think the masters will be.

Gun Control

The purpose of gun control is not the control of guns.  It is control of people.  The political overlords who screech the loudest about banning guns surround themselves with guns in their employ.  They have no intention of surrendering them.  It’s the slaves who will be disarmed.

Liberal nightmare

Obama’s performance at the first presidential debate was his best performance.

Welcome to what a lot of us have known since ’08.  Obama is a fraud.  He is at best an accomplished actor, reading teleprompted scripts written by others with feigned feeling.  There was NOTHING in his behavior, history, presentation…ANYTHING that indicated to an aware observer that Obama was some kind of towering intellect.   The hiding of his school transcripts proves that.

One of the realizations from the debate is why Obama doesn’t meet with foreign heads of state, especially the ones he is having issues with.  He can’t deal with them any better than he could do with Romney and with state meetings, he doesn’t even get a moderator to run interference for him.  So he goes on the View instead to bask in the adulation of his worshipers.

Obama has NEVER been interested in the job of the presidency.  He is only interested in the trappings of royalty that come with it.

The reality is that he is simply not, and never has been, up to the job.

So is the Chevy Volt Obama’s Volkswagen?

Without, of course, all that Volkswagen was a success, stuff.

He’s already got his excuse in place

If Obama can’t fix the mess he supposedly inherited from Bush, what makes anyone think he can fix the mess he will inherit from himself?  But at least he’ll have a good excuse.

Todd Akin is an idiot

But he’s our idiot. <grumble-grumble>

During the primary, McCaskill polled behind a potted plant.  Now Akin has to prove he’s at least as valuable as a potted plant (some question there).  He’s supposed to be buying air time so he can give his, “I’m not a witch.” speech*.  With everyone expecting that, what I would recommend he do (besides hitting himself in the head with a hammer) is go on the offensive with McCaskill’s record of betraying her constituents to curry favor with her political overlords in her party.  He won’t because he’s an idiot.  But that’s what he should do.

* Christine O’donnell reference.

If Todd Akin were a Democrat…

…he would be Vice President.

Welcome to the King’s States of America

The stupes in Congress are apparently  doing it again.  Via, we see that Congress is passing the “Presidential Efficiency and Streamlining Act” which will eliminate much of the Senatorial oversight of presidential appointments.

There is a clause in the Constitution that says the president can appoint subordinates with the ‘Advice and Consent’ of the Senate.  There was a reason for that clause.  It was to ensure that the managers who report to the president are first and foremost working for the People of the United States.  This prevents the Cabinet from becoming a Royal Court beholden and loyal only to the King, a position the founders really didn’t want to see again.  With the Presidential Efficiency and Streamlining Act, present and future kings presidents can surround themselves with vassals loyal and subservient only to them.  This is taking the stinking corruption of the czars that too many presidents have used and Obama has put on steroids and institutionalizing the practice.

The solution to dragged out appointments is for the president to appoint less controversial appointments.  Obama is not looking for managers to run the affairs of the country.  He is promoting co-conspirators to warp the country into his image.  He’s not looking for competence.  He’s looking for personal loyalty to himself and his animosity to everything that made the United States great.  It is exactly the Senate’s job to say, “No.  Try again.  And why don’t you get a resume next time.”

The President wears two hats.  One is the honorific of Head of State which has all the power and influence of the impotent European monarchs.  At diplomatic affairs, the President gets to sit at the head table with the other heads of state instead of at the kiddy table with the Prime Ministers.  The other job is as the Chief Executive of the Executive Branch.  Not of the government.  The Legislature and Judiciary are supposed to be independent, although it would be easy to think otherwise nowadays.  Not the country.  State governors do not answer to the president.  Nor do the People.  The President does not get to make the country in His own image.

Let me say it again (because I’ve said it before).  The President of the United States is not a King.

The United States does not have a King.

The United States does not want a King.

The United States does not need a King.

Somebody please inform those useless dimwits in Congress.