Karen noted one of President Obama’s jobs programs: Obama Kills Off Another Coal Plant Along With 3900 Jobs. Your Editor had thought that President Obama’s jobs proposals were supposed to help create more jobs, and not kill existing ones, but Karen pointed out that the President was keeping a promise.
William Teach noted Senator Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CA) proposals to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms:
By William Teach | January 25, 2013 – 7:30 am
It is more than likely going nowhere. Senate Majority leader Harry Reid, himself a supporter of 2nd Amendment rights (hey, one good mark for him), may not even bring it up for a vote, instead allowing it to languish in committee. And, if he does bring it up, he may not have the votes. And, if it somehow manages to pass, it’ll die in the House. That doesn’t matter to DiFi, who’s intent on adding massive restrictions to the guns law abiding citizens can own
(NRA) According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein’s website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of “assault weapon” that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners. Some of the changes in Feinstein’s new bill are as follows:
The legislation would effectively ban any rifle and shotgun with a pistol grip.
More at the link. Mr Teach concluded by saying, “No word on whether DiFi will do away with any armed security for herself and her office.” As it happens, while Senatrix Feinstein doesn’t believe that you have a right to keep and bear arms, she does.
She subsequently let that permit lapse, after the group she thought posed a threat to her safety no longer did. But it is both telling and unsurprising that she believes she has a right to keep and bear arms when she believes her safety is at risk, but that the common people do not.
Cassy Fiano Chesser of the Victory Girls wrote: Dianne Feinstein Starts the Gun Grab
Karen, the Lonely Conservative, wrote on the same subject: Senator Dianne Fienstein Announces Gun Grab Legislation
L D Jackson addressed the issue: 2nd Amendment And The States.
Posted by: Phineas on January 25, 2013 at 4:01 pm
If anyone had any notion that the European Union was anything but a bureaucratic dictatorship, this should open their eyes:
A European Union report has urged tight press regulation and demanded that Brussels officials are given control of national media supervisors with new powers to enforce fines or the sacking of journalists.
The “high level” recommendations that will be used to draft future EU legislation also attack David Cameron for failing to automatically implement proposals by the Lord Justice Leveson inquiry for a state regulation of British press.
A “high level” EU panel, that includes Latvia’s former president and a former German justice minister, was ordered by Neelie Kroes, European Commission vice-president, last year to report on “media freedom and pluralism”. It has concluded that it is time to introduce new rules to rein in the press.
“All EU countries should have independent media councils,” the report concluded.
“Media councils should have real enforcement powers, such as the imposition of fines, orders for printed or broadcast apologies, or removal of journalistic status.”
As well as setting up state regulators with draconian powers, the panel also recommended that the European Commission be placed in overall control in order to ensure that the new watchdogs do not breach EU laws.
I’m sure these new powers, if granted, will be used only for the common good, to ensure fair, sensitive journalism — as determined by a bunch of Eurocrats.
The danger of this is obvious: the power to fine or fire is the power to dictate, and the only reporters to retain their jobs will be those who say things pleasing to the mandarins in Brussels. It would be the death knell of free speech in Europe, for free speech is meaningless if it doesn’t include the right to say things that make the powerful uncomfortable, or even simply to offend. A free, unfettered press is essential to a democratic society, and if the press is fettered, so is the citizen, who becomes a subject. The society is no longer free.
More at the link.
Robert Stacey Stacy McCain asks: How Long Can the ‘Dollar Bubble’ Last?
Your Editor has found himself on the opposite side from most of te conservative bloggers he reads concerning the decision by the Department of Defense to allow women to apply for front-line combat positions. Sister Toldjah’s article: A thoughtful argument against having women serve alongside men on the frontlines. Leslie Eastman on Le*gal In*sur*rec*tion wrote “Xena, Warrior Princess” makes great TV, but not sensible reality. William Teach added: Kathleen Parker: Women On The Front Lines Is A Bad Idea Patterico had the sort of non-committal article, Women Now Allowed to Go Into Combat, but if the original article doesn’t have much to it, it has drawn a lot of comments — 143 so far — on the topic, and it’s fair to say that most of the commenters are opposed to the decision. Your Editor has been one of the commenters. Donald Douglas has a short article on the subject, making the point:
In my classes I’ve spoken to a number of veterans and current service personnel on the policy as well. Privacy issues remain a problem for those serving with opposite sex personnel, and comparative strength between men and women comes up. But mostly the consensus is that women should be able to serve in front-line combat.
I wish that Dr Douglas had fleshed that out a bit more, because your Editor would be interested in knowing the opinion of soldiers who have actually been in combat on this topic.