Recalls and Voting Patterns

Good news today as a couple of anti-gun Colorado state senators are recalled by the voters.  Ed Morrissey gives a nice rundown of it on Hotair.

Morrissey quotes from Sean Sullivan of the Washington Post:

The particulars of Tuesday’s elections prompted some gun-control advocates to argue that the results shouldn’t be over-read. For one thing, voters didn’t receive mail ballots automatically, a substantial change of protocol in a state where the majority of voters cast their votes via mail.

Automatic mail ballots.  You wonder why Colorado became a blue state?  Why an anti-immigration candidate like Tancredo would lose the governor's race to Hickenlooper?  That's your answer.

They call it Election Day for a reason.  All this early voting, voting and registering by mail and the other shenanigans pulled in the name of "voting rights" are means of enhancing fraud.  The left always screams that there is no fraud.  That's really easy to say if the rolls and the votes cannot be audited.

The best thing that can be done for freedom in this country is for every state to pass a law requiring a picture ID for voting.  The next step would be to limit voting to election day, and require people to register and vote in person unless their are mitigating circumstances for absentee voting.

I have voted absentee when I knew I would be out of town.  My mother-in-law used to vote absentee every election because she was home-bound.  The county clerks have no problem dealing with the exceptions.  That's what they are elected to do.  But voting by mail as a normal process is an invitation to stuff the ballot box.

Anyone too lazy and unmotivated to get a photo ID, and too indolent to vote on election day or file a legitimate absentee ballot, does not deserve a vote.

Spin Cycle

Axelrod says that Obama should get credit for Putin's Syrian solution. 

It's called affirmative action credit. 

Obama and Kerry threatened an unbelievably small attack that would force Assad to eat his Cheerios with a fork and possibly limit him to almond milk.  Even that threat was mitigated by 60 to 70% hard disapproval on the part of the American people as well as increasing resistance in Congress for authorizing force.  At this point, even the fat cats in the Senate would likely vote it down.

The Russians, seeing an opportunity to make a mockery of America's Nobel laureate, offer a diplomatic settlement which Assad immediate accepts. 

If I found the evidence for Assad's deployment of chemical weapons rather fragile before, it is absolutely gossamer now.  Assad has Russian support and does not need to use chemical weapons.  The al Qaida-backed insurgents are losing ground and, though the civil war may continue for some time, are unlikely to topple the Assad regime.  Assad is dictator, but he is a dictator with western, secular leanings.  His remaining in power is likely the best outcome, at least in the short term.

Does Obama come out of this unscathed?  I would say, yes, mostly.  Even with the most intense of media spins, he still looks like a weak dope.  Claiming the securing of chemical weapons was part of a discussion between him and Putin sounds rather lame to me.  It's just too much of a "Yeah! Me, too".  I think a lot of Americans will have the same reaction.  After all, the attack was supposed to be about "punishing" Assad for crossing Obama's red line (that really wasn't his, you know).

Obama's plan, as in Egypt and Libya, was to replace the existing regime with a Moslem Brotherhood/al Qaida-affiliate government in the name of "democracy".  It seems quite strange that Americans owe the former KGB head, Putin, our thanks for keeping us out of a nasty, pointless engagement that had the potential to ignite the entire region.   

Nullification and Missouri

An editorial from a Connecticut paper called the Journal Inquirer takes the Missouri legislature to task for attempting nullification, going so far as to urge Barack Obama to follow in the footsteps of slave-owner Andrew Jackson:

President Barack Obama might benefit from President Andrew Jackson’s response to South Carolina’s attempt at nullification: “Tell them if one South Carolina finger is raised in defiance of this government, then I shall come down there and once I’m there, I’ll hang the first man I lay hands on to the first tree I can reach.”

I don't know how that would have worked between Jackson and South Carolina.  As far as Barack Obama is concerned, he's welcome to come on down and start at my house.  I have a lot of nice big oak trees.  I'll even supply the rope.  Of course, he might want to bring along some help if he plans on hanging me.  I guess he could bring Michelle and threaten to have me wake up next to her.  I'd hang myself.

You see, federal firearms laws, despite collusion on the part of the Judicial Branch, are mostly in violation of the the Second Amendment, which is still the supreme law of the land.  The federal government is the one acting defiantly.  Missouri, if the legislature is able to override our Democrat governor's veto, would be acting to restore balance in an overly-centralized system.  I have a feeling Jackson would be aghast at the reach of the central government and of its bureaucracies.  There's a good chance that, as a somewhat compulsive duelist, Ol' Hickory would be calling people out before he'd give up his guns. 

The Journal Inquirer has the audacity to make it a matter of patriotism: 

The National Rifle Association refuses to give its opinion about the nullification argument. The question should be put to the NRA again and again until an answer is given. Here is a real issue of patriotism.

OK, so the editor was equally indignant, I'm sure, at the Connecticut legislature's violation of citizens' Second Amendment rights?  Or with the District of Columbia's long-standing unconstitutional ban on handguns?  Or with draconian firearms restrictions in Chicago and New York City? 

No, probably not.  Only Missouri hillbillies are evil, stupid nullifiers.  Nullification only counts when it is in defiance of laws the editor likes.  Nullifying the plain language and intent of the Constitution is acceptable.  

Where is this editor when our rights to self-defense, to privacy, to security in our persons and property are casually subsumed by the federal leviathan?  Remember when dissent was the highest form of patriotism?  I am a patriot of my country.  I have no use for the rogue government that is running unchecked in Washington, DC.  But, you, Eddie the Editor, being a journalist, are clearly too stupid to understand the difference.

Finally, this maroon buffoon under the protection of the First Amendment express its contempt for all Missourians: 

Missouri’s attempt at nullification is an insult to the nation. It should be tested immediately and anyone who tries to use it against federal law should be arrested and tried. President Obama should notify Missouri’s governor and legislature that he plans to do exactly that.

No, we are not insulting the nation.  Again, the editor confuses the nation with the government.  They are not the same.  There are, in fact, a multitude of governments within the nation.  Does E Pluribus Unum ring any bells?  One nation, under God, not under Obama.  If one level of government fails, citizens are able to call upon other levels.  I'm sure the editor saw the value of this when state Jim Crow laws were nullified by the federal government.  It's mostly been one way for the past 150 years, but what comes down sometimes goes up. 

Maybe we just need to change our battle cry from, "Revolution!" to "Rebalance!"

Meanwhile, to paraphrase (and significantly sanitize) what my father once told someone who ordered him and a friend out of town, Missourians are in the habit of doing as they please.  If the Barack Obama or the Journal Inquirer or anybody else doesn't like it, it's really too bad.

Fencing Fun

I've been back in the woods clearing out for a new fence.  The ground is a little steep in places. 

And there are a few rocks now and then.  Fortunately I'm on this side of the stream.  Last night I was just driving steel posts.  

The only problem is carrying them back there and remaining upright while I drive them (unrolling the barb wire is interesting, too).  The night before, I put in a cedar post so I had to set it.  I'll be doing the same tonight with a braced set coming to lower ground, but it will be flatter there. 

It's pretty hot work, but it's mostly in the shade, and it's scenic.  I'm not complaining.

 

They are just phone pictures, but you can click to see them bigger. 

Sometimes Violence Is A Pretty Good Answer

Via Gateway Pundit (continue to pray for Jim Hoft):  Teen Robbery Suspects Beaten By, uh, Victims?

Speaking of Virginia, the two future rocket scientists pictured above attempted to rob a couple of University of Virginia students at gunpoint.  Can we say that maybe the plan did not come together?

It's just beautiful.  You can read more at the link.

Hope in Virginia?

There is a good chance that Virginia, increasingly a blue state as government employees colonize across the Potomac, will elect the odious Clintonite, Terry McAuliffe as governor.  Cuccinelli, someone with good conservative credentials, is losing due in part to a strong showing by a relatively unknown Libertarian candidate named Robert Sarvis.  I hope the equation changes, and Virginians elect Cuccinelli.  Not being from Virginia or all that familiar with the personalities and platforms, It’s possible that I agree with Sarvis as much or more than I agree with Cuccinelli.  I do know that Attorney General Cuccinelli worked hard to thwart Obamacare, and I appreciate that. 

The problem for Republicans is that they have become nearly as much a Big Government party as Democrats.  Sure, they want to talk about cutting taxes, but when the government still spends more than it takes in, cutting taxes is not going to help.  We need to cut government.  The “Rovian” approach has failed.  Not Quite As Extreme As the Democrats is not a winning slogan.  The GOP establishment wants to change the priorities of Big Government – a stronger military (a more strenuous military, their hero, Teddy Roosevelt might say), more law enforcement, less welfare – as opposed to moving government out of people’s lives as much as possible. 

From what I can pick up, McAuliffe’s primary point of attack against Cuccinelli is that he is a social conservative who would limit “personal freedom”.  By this McAuliffe means killing babies and endorsing sodomites – as our friend Justin would say.  You can bet that McAuliffe wants more restrictions on firearms and concealed carry, property rights, and the way in which parents are allowed to raise and educate their children.  Strangely, the very fundamental and essential rights of self-defense, privacy, being secure from unreasonable searches and confiscation of property, and choice in education are not considered personal freedoms by corrupt thugs like McAuliffe.  He will work to increase the size and scope of government and the intrusiveness of the Commonwealth’s various bureaucracies if he is elected governor. 

Republicans, if they are going to be a viable party in the long term, are going to have to clearly articulate their support for small ‘l’ libertarian values, like property rights.  Like limitations on the police state.  Like reducing regulations and shortening the reach of bureaucracies.  Republicans do not need to run on a platform supporting drugs, vice, and anarchy, but they do need to make the case for a non-interventionist government.  I suspect that one reason most are so poor at articulating this idea is that they do not really believe in it.  Conversely, Cuccinelli, viewed as a TEA Party hero, appears to be a true believer who could win in a tough state if he can get his message past all the interference.

Machete 101

I was raised by an axeman.  Dad always used a double-bit felling axe for anything that might be considered a reasonable application.  We also had a steel-handled scythe which we called our brush-hook.  The old-timers who had cradled wheat and oats from sunup to sundown could probably shave a feller with their "sickle" and never nick him.  Machetes, though, were not common in the hardwood.  We did have the rusted remnants of a corn knife which I confiscated as a sword when I was a child.  For work, I used a double-bit axe, a down-sized True Temper that I got for my birthday -- the picture looks like I was about eight.  I cut sprouts, cleared brush, and delimbed the logs we cut for firewood.  In winter, I took an axe with a well-worn and battered head to open holes in the ice for our stock cows.  All that, and I am still have to shorten my stroke when I chop left-handed.

I always figured an machete was too light and too short to be of much use around here, though I am fascinated by big blades.  As I noted before, I decided to get the Cold Steel Magnum Kukri Machete to pack along for heavier stuff when I as running my string trimmer.  Since that time, I have come to conclude that it's actually a pretty good tool back in the brush.  I pack it a lot, despite the length being occasionally awkward while on the tractor. 

Always being one to want to learn something new, I recently ran across these youtube videos of a gentleman down in Ecuador, Don Fernando Caamano, who has considerably more than a passing acquaintance with the machete:    


Making a reaping hook for brush cutting.


Using a reaping hook in clearing brush.

Don Caamano looks like he knows what he is doing. 

A reaping hook used in conjunction with a machete allows the wielder to avoid getting too much that will bleed in the way of that big swinging blade.  The hook is used to get the brush or weeds into a better position for the blade to cut safely and efficiently. 

I cut the one pictured above with my chainsaw from some variation of black oak.  It's pretty tough, and maybe a little heavier and more substantial that Don Caamano's hook.  The thing I like about it is that it is a solid stop for the blade.  In other words I can put the knob end of the hook behind something light but tough like buckbrush and chop into it so the material is effectively sheared off.  It's kind of like anvil pruning shears.  A straight stick would work as well part of the time, but the hook is handy for pulling brush out and holding clumps together.  The hook takes a lot of abuse, but it saves the blade, and the raw material for a new one is amazingly cheap around my place. 

I was working on a very steep hillside yesterday, clearing for some new fencing.  I wound up using the hook to grab a sapling and hold myself in place a time or two and as a staff for stability.  Sticks:  the original cutting edge technology. 

Anyway, for machete work, I would say that the reaping hook has proven its worth in terms of convenience, safety, and efficacy.