NOVATOWNHALL

The candidacy of Barack Obama has spurred a growing dialogue within the African American pastoral community. Not everyone is entirely on board with the presidential candidate, and some are borderline critical.

This relatively non-partisan February sermon by Dr. James David Manning of ATLAH World Ministries in Harlem covers a wide range of issues, both religious and secular, and sheds light on matters which may or may not resonate with all voters but may draw interest from opposition campaign teams. Some of the criticism could be considered constructive other remarks are rather pointed.

It’s mostly safe for work, depending on where you work.

It appears that the Supreme court will clarify one of its earlier rulings. The all important swing vote on the court, spoke as follows …

Kennedy said that in his view, the amendment says “there is a general right to bear arms, quite without reference to a militia.“

One good thing the current US President did was pick a couple of improvements for the SCOTUS. In Heller v. DC the case of U.S. v. Miller will be superseded. Miller has been the basis for many of the gun bans enacted, including the one in DC. The court in Miller erred; it attempted legal jujitsu and stumbled.

A reading of the decision in Miller shows the innate mendacity of the left in its quest to ban the public from owning arms. Justice McReynolds repeatedly stated in Miller that the individual had a right to keep and bear arms. Despite his efforts, this case has been a bane upon the country and has only caused misery for lawful gun owners. The gun bans enacted under the umbrella of Miller, directly impact an individual’s inherent, natural right to self defense. Many despots in other countries enacted gun bans because such bans enable despots to terrorize the populace under their regimes. All of these bans where enacted under the banner of public safety and order. If this sounds familiar it should as these are the tactics of the left in America the past 80 years.

Read the rest of this entry »

As reported in the paper of record:

Prior to the program, illegal immigrants from Mexico who did not have a criminal history were returned to their home country almost immediately, without jail time or a formal deportation order. Apprehended illegal immigrants identified as “other than Mexican,” or OTMs, were given notices to appear at a future deportation hearing. The notices were referred to by the U.S. Border Patrol as “notices to disappear,” since only about 13 percent ever showed up.

On average, about half of those caught at the Southwest border are Mexican nationals. Currently, they face formal deportation procedures only in those limited areas covered by Operation Streamline or if they have been identified as convicted criminals.

Ms. Fobbs said that during fiscal 2007, a total of 136,712 Mexican nationals were returned home — 67,793 of whom were identified as criminal illegals.

Despite the praise it has received from members of Congress, Operation Streamline is not without its drawbacks and its future expansion is in doubt without a significant increase in federal funding.

The U.S. Marshals Service, which is responsible for returning illegal immigrants to their countries of origin, is strapped for both resources and manpower to conduct the program. The Justice Department, asked to prosecute the newly charged illegals, lacks the manpower to get the job done.

Congress appropriated $22 million to hire additional prosecutors, support staff and deputy U.S. marshals, and the administration is seeking $100 million for the Southwest Border Enforcement Initiative — to hire additional people to support the increased prosecutions.

Question: If we can spend billions a month in Iraq, why can’t we spend a few million to secure our southern border?

Well you should have because it was IEATAPETA Day, “the day when we piss off the hypocrites at PETA who have the highest kill-rate out of any animal shelter in Virginia.”

Haha, thanks Ed. I was covered because I eat one just about every day of the year.

Dang, it sure is quiet around these parts, with precious little BLOGGING going on. Well, my excuse is work and domestic responsibilities. And I know all our other bloggers have their own unique excuses.

But as they say, the key to keeping up the traffic level is to have continuous new material on the front page. So, in the interest of maintaining some semblance of currentness, I am going to make a command decision and establish the tradition that whenever the updates at the NOVA TownHall Blog are in danger of reaching a two day lapse, I will post my favorite ak-47 video again.

So here it is.

My guess is, you will be seeing more of it. (Credit to the original).

This article in the local paper of record reminds why the U.S. Supreme Court is about to provide the hottest popular discussion of judicial issues in years:

So hot, that court administrators already have agreed to release audiotapes of the seminal Second Amendment case, practically the moment the justices adjourn after what promises to be a lively debate about what the Founding Fathers were thinking more than 200 years ago with respect to the rights of individual Americans to possess firearms.

A lot of people who don’t follow the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) on a regular basis will be paying extraordinarily close attention to DC v Heller because the Court’s decision will have an impact on firearms laws throughout the country. If you live in Virginia, you are mighty interested in whether you can accidentally take a wrong turn off the GW Parkway with a gun in the car and not commit a felony. If you live in DC or New Jersey or a number of other states, you are interested in whether you might eventually be allowed to defend yourself with the same level of force the criminals have.

The NRA and other 2nd Amendment advocacy organizations will be promoting the news on this issue heavily, which will resonate around the country.

But perhaps the most immediate beneficiary of the controversy which begins next week will be John McCain, the Republican nominee for president. Because no matter how or whether the Supreme Court rules, voters will be reminded of the Supreme Court’s significance.

By extension, they will be reminded of the president’s significance in offering Supreme Court nominations in the case of vacancies, which could very well be two during the next president’s term in office.

As friend and NVTH visitor G. Stone reminded me, if you are thinking of working against McCain, be sure to think about the types of Supreme Court justices a President Obama or Clinton would offer up. Although McCain is not the best public official on the 2nd Amendment by a long shot (a refrain that would apply to him on a large number of issues) he is head and shoulders above the two Democrats.

This advice is what influenced me to mostly shut up about the presidential election this year and lay off my budding Lou Dobbs hagiography. In my case, “supporting John McCain” means “not running John McCain into the ground at every possible chance,” so the SCOTUS issue made me a “supporter.” Plus providing occasional links like this.

And obviously, on a host of other vital issues that could come up before the Supreme Court, among this troika of presidential candidates the best hope for nominating good judges - however dubious it may be - is definitely John McCain.

If the McCain camp is smart, they will be publicizing the heck out of the Supreme Court’s DC v Heller proceedings and all related media stories beginning approximately now.

Now this is interesting.

She commonly reported information about the relatives, household composition, family deaths and illnesses, etc., of members of our team, without ever having observed or been informed about them. As an example, she knew the personality and precise manner of death (i.e., the exact type of cancer) of a relative of a team member that no one could conceivably have guessed. She once spoke about the strange behavior of some inexplicably frenzied animals beyond her direct observation: Though residing in another city, she commented, “So those cats really went berserk last night, didn’t they?” the morning after two cats in a team member’s house uncharacteristically had violently attacked each other at about 2 AM….

You’re going to want to read all of that one - it leaves quite a lot to think about.

Transients. People that have no roots, and do not plan to stay in an area.

Transients that are not citizens are not as bad as those that are citizens, and know they are not going to be here in five years. Why? One reason I have some knowledge concerning people that know they will be moving out of the area in a short amount of time.

A while back, my pastor was talking with a gentleman (I use the term loosely) about the taxes and how much the education costs are for Loudoun county. In particular, he brought up bond issues. The person with whom he was speaking stated he always votes for spending for education no matter what, even if it is frivolous. When my pastor, slack jawed, asked why the gentleman replied that he did not intend on living here for long, his company would be moving him in a matter of 3 or 4 years at most, and the single most important factor for housing price increase is “what are the schools like”. If the schools are excellent, then the housing is in high demand, and supply/demand dictates an increase in price. He stated he would not be here for more than a couple of years for paying on the bonds, so it made perfect sense for him to vote for every bond issue related to schools that comes up. While “past performance is no predictor of future value” this guy had figured that the highest probability of him getting a capital appreciation of the house he bought was to plunge the county in debt. It wouldn’t hurt him — he’d be long gone when the debt came due.

In a sense, this guy was a bigger drag on the taxes than illegal aliens. He knew that the county would pay 3 times as much for the capital improvements, but he also knew he would not be paying it himself. Those that were staying would pay (with those that move in later) while he had long since moved out. Don’t even ask me what I think of the people that vote with that as their mindset — matter of fact I’ll tell you anyway. They are bigger thieves than the politicians. They figured a way to scam the system and take money from others through the use of their vote.

The only way around such a scam is to pay up front on all projects. Don’t allow the government to borrow for anything, but only to allow the government to tax based on voting. In other words, have funding questions stated “Do you support a $.05 cent per hundred increase in the tax rate for construction of a school ….” The tax bill would be assessed at the time of the vote. You vote for a tax increase, you pay the tax.

Is it going to happen? I doubt it seriously. Would it be fair? Yes.

Well well well, what in the bushy eyebrows of Satan do we have here in today’s mail:

An AARP card for yours truly! There is so much that is wrong about this I hardly know where to start, but in full awareness of the crew who are most likely to opine here I must begin by acknowledging the utter inappropriateness of this particular piece of mail and the OBVIOUS fact that there is certainly nothing FUNNY about it. About which fact I am confident we are all of the same mind.

I am an exceptionally young 47, and on good nights, when the lighting is just so, and the cashiers are sufficiently culturally remote, I still get carded. SO THERE, YOU BASTARDS.

For one thing, although I have been admittedly proven grumpy way beyond my years since approximately the age of 24, I am in no wise a “grumpy old man.” I am a realist, which entails a certain amount of clarity that the mindlessly youthful have often interpreted as crotchety. I’m as young at heart as they are, although much quicker to strike with my cane. Experience.

For another, I am sure we are all aware that “retired” in my own case is at least 20 years hence because of the utter discombobularity of the whole Social Security scam - thank you very much Franklin D. Roosevelt and every president since - and as long as I am laboring out here like a dog to support the aged lard-asses living off my dime I would expect to be viewed at very least in a different demographic class.

As sure as they’re all down in Florida playing shuffleboard I’ll be up here paying FICA to cover their whiskey and bingo, and I frankly don’t see enough commonality in that relationship for us all to be carrying the same card. Really, it should be two totally separate cards: One, AARP, and the other, AARP Sucker.

Yes, all ego aside, I am going on record as a resister in this particular case. It’s a matter of principle, and some principles are too important to stand aside and watch the corrupt game keep on going. I prefer to fight.

And there is the ego aspect as well.

UPDATE: Yeah, I just replaced the original card with one with the “Authorization Code” whited out, because on second thought I have no idea what this behemoth organization has access to, such as possibly my grocery records. I don’t want those stolen.

Well, it seems that CO₂ emissions may not be the global warming driver that we have been lead to believe. This report indicates that methane, C₄H, is a much bigger culprit. Accordingly, we should all go vegetarian to save the world.

Of course, the liberals/socialists here will say we have to outlaw meat. But first, those who believe in global warming should put up or shut up. Go vegetarian.

For myself, I’ll contribute to the cause by removing methane producers such as Whitetailed Deer. Bon appetit.

The following is a public service message from Tax payer for Accountable Government, TAG. TAG is a non-partisan group whose interest is accountability in government spending and growth. Our Government is going wild. This is a flyer put out by TAG.
Read the rest of this entry »

With all the recent news about how gosh darned exotic China really is, I don’t know that anyone needs further convincing, but here ya go anyway (cat lovers may not want to click on the link):

“When we went inside, we saw about 70 cats being kept in cages stacked one on top of the other in two tiny rooms.

“Disease spreads quickly among them and they die slowly in agony and distress. The government won’t even do the cats the kindness of giving them lethal injections when they become sick. They just wait for them to die.

“It is the abandoned pets that suffer the most and die the soonest. They relied so much on their owners that they can’t cope with the new environment…”

The killing of the six stray cats at the kindergarten - where staff at a Beijing cigarette factory leave their children - is the most striking illustration of the city-wide fear of cats.

A teacher at the nursery said: “We did it out of love for the children. We were worried the cats might harm them. These six cats had been hanging around the kindergarten looking for food.

“So three male teachers put out plates of tuna in cages for bait, trapped the cats and then beat them to death with sticks…”

You have to hand it to the Chinese that they so resolutely allow any tinch of humanitarian scruples to slide right off their backs.

And, frankly, who can blame them. When the powers that be decide “We need to get rid of a WHOLE BUNCH of cats before the Olympics,” (5 months away), if you quibble over logistics you might never get anything accomplished. You could easily end up with animal lovers hemming and hawing about animal rights and basic human decency until the whole program is nibbled to death by ducks.

The fact that the round up will be accomplished in a fashion that most civilized societies would view as, well, harsh, is not going to interfere with the round up actually occurring. In China, they get things done.

It should not be allowed to stand. This poor woman is now under arrest because the government has decided parents no longer have the right to hose their kids down (video here).

I can remember many times when the threat of being taken out back and hosed down is the only thing that kept a yard ape in line. And they knew I’d do it, too. Imagine two little girls whining and bickering in the car while you are trying to make your way through rush hour traffic. A parent must have the freedom to say “If you two don’t keep quiet for the rest of the trip you are both getting hosed down as soon as we get home!”

There were some times with a carload of kids eating kids meals from McDonalds when by the time I got home and saw the sheer food-armageddon, Jackson-Pollack maelstrom they had commited upon themselves with the honey, bbq sauce,  milkshake, ketchup and soda, that there really was no other solution. And while I did not have a pressure washer at my disposal, if I had, I can think of an episode or two it might have come into use.

Although I never had the privilege of raising boys, I did care for some, and frankly I can’t see how it would be even POSSIBLE to manage these little monsters in the 2-6 age bracket without having the fire hose in one’s arsenal. I mean, some of these kids don’t just pick up dirt - they seem to emanate it. There were some instances when I saw what my nephews had managed to do to themselves with watermelon or ice cream, that I seriously believed my sister would be best served by not even allowing them onto the property without a good spraying. Hose them down in the driveway, at very least.

The lady in this story apparently had been through a rough car ride with a misbehaving terrible-two, and passed a car wash … and a light bulb went off. That, my friends, is ingenuity. It’s just a shame this type of out of the box thinking is punished, rather than rewarded.

Death by magical man. This lovable, silver-tongued, golden-throated orator says all the right things to get everyone excited and bring all sorts of folks to the show while doves coo and robins alight and choruses of angels sing hosannas.

All well and good.

The problem is, there ain’t no copacetic magic in the world. The world is rubber hitting the road, knees skinned on concrete. Punches in the face.

Barack Obama is pulling in the dough. But Barack Obama is not selling the Democratic party. Or, more accurately, his supporters are buying “Barack Obama” and not the Democratic brand. This is a problem for the Democrats going forward.

As Michael Barone notes:

…in more likely and ambiguous circumstances, a Clinton nomination will seem illegitimate to many who have been swooning over Obama and streaming into polling booths because he alone offers hope…

Can the Democrats build on this or will they choke on this?

Loudoun Easterner editor Martin Casey is a well-meaning fellow but he does not always get it right.

Regarding this week’s front page story (and dig that crazy graphic) on Gov. Tim Kaine’s veto of the bill which would have allowed concealed carry of firearms in establishments that serve alcohol, the editorial “Back to the Wild West?” asks

In today’s society, why does anyone other than a law enforcement officer need to take a gun, concealed or otherwise, into a restaurant or bar?

Having weapons, concealed or not, in public places — restaurants, bars or otherwise — is a scary thought that conjures up movie scenes from “Shane” and “Gunfight at the OK Coral.”

We want our law enforcement officers to carry weapons for our defense if necessary. Permits to carry concealed weapons should be issued rarely through a process rigorous enough to assure that permit holders have sound reasons for carrying a hidden weapon and also are responsible and sane persons.

Mr. Casey’s editorial displays two of the key assumptions that separate gun control proponents from 2nd Amendment supporters: Outright fear of guns, and a thoroughgoing faith that law enforcement personnel will always be there to protect us.

From the perspective of those who are not subconsciously afraid of firearms, this attitude is like flinching at the sight of a hammer or baseball bat. But cultural conditioning being what it is, many otherwise reasonable people fall into the fallacy of seeing the tool, rather than the carrier, as the problem.

The real issue is whether it is sensible for law-abiding citizens to leave their safety and security completely in the hands of law enforcement officials.

Even the gun-fearers don’t really believe this. They lock their doors at night because they know the police can’t be everywhere at a moment’s notice. Most of them probably do not have a problem with people who take self-defense courses. Kung fu kick to break a jaw - ok. Learn to stick a key in the attacker’s eye - ok. But when it comes to having a gun to defend yourself - well, that is a step too far. As though any situation in which a law abiding citizen might feel the need to protect herself with a gun is magically transformed into a situation where the cops are right nearby, every time.

It’s totally illogical, a position that simply has not been fully thought through by the gun control advocates.

I think the root of the disagreement comes down to an irrational fear of firearms and fervent hope of never having to come close to a firearm. If you read it, you will see that Mr. Casey’s editorial definitely seems to reveal such a personal aversion.

Rather than a carefully considered public policy position, gun control advocacy is more akin to fear of spiders.

A further note: The bill in question was aimed at allowing concealed carry permit holders to bring their guns into restaurants without having to display them openly, as long as they are not consuming alcohol. That’s right: Under current Virginia law it’s perfectly fine to go into Applebees wearing a firearm on your hip as long as everyone can see it.

For those who are less ostentatious and confrontational, which means nearly all concealed carry holders, they have to leave their guns in the car when they go out to eat. Leaving your gun in the car is generally not considered a good thing, the key reason being the possibility of theft. The bill simply would have allowed people who have been certified to carry a firearm all day long to keep it with them when they go out to eat.

Below the fold is visitor Loudoun Conservative’s response to the editorial.
Read the rest of this entry »