The Church of Kharma Futures

The Rev's views on politics, events,faith, and the world. All content copyright Church of Kharma Future 2007-2015 All rights Reserved

Author Archive


Posted by deaconkharmafuture1 on May 6, 2015

So, I receive an email begging for support for Trey Gowdy. I am wondering if he is in some strange recall election or some other election cycle I didn’t know about. After reading this long breathless email about how Hillary is going to defy the Benghazi committee I am told that my signature on a petition could make all the difference. Further down, that little Washingtonian Gem appears like Sally Struthers asking “wont you please help?” With their cup out for some spare change, they ask for 25$ or more. Whatever I can spare, they say. Since my response was bounced from the sender address, I’m assuming it’s some sort of “Bot mailer” (, I’d like to pen a sort of open letter response. Here goes:
First, thank you so much for considering me when sending your informative emails. However, please allow me to retort. What exactly will my donation accomplish? Does Trey Gowdy somehow gain prosecutorial power? Can he subpoena Hillary with this money? Perhaps he can gain access to her server with this money? Perhaps my signature will make all this possible?
As with the IRS issue, I feel you folks are simply giving us bread and circus. No change is actually intended or desired, with the exception of possibly things changing hands. After a lifetime of evidence, I now believe that Republicans don’t want to see a change of anything in Washington but who has the power. Recent examples alone should make anyone with an ounce of reason realize this. Gowdy voting for Boehner for speaker is exhibit ”A.” What change did we see from this? The same guy that rolled over for the current administration was left in place. Continued Republican caving and rolling over after sternly worded but empty threats and promises is Exhibit “B.” Worse, Republicans have proposed legislation neutering their treaty approval authority that was firmly ensconced in the Constitution of the US. Let us call that exhibit “C.”
While as entertaining and satisfying as it is to watch Trey Gowdy holler, fuss, and berate, committee chairmen, members, and those called to testify, it is still only a show. No legal teeth, no real punishment, and certainly no change will come of these proceedings. At the end of the day this show accomplishes as much or less than watching an episode of Jerry Springer. Ultimately the show was interesting, shocking, and terrifyingly humorous that folks get away with what they do, but at the end there is no real resolution. No problems have been solved, they have just been put on display for folks to shake their head at. The outcome, as always proves inconsequential to my life, my well being, and worse does nothing to resolve the ills plaguing our once great nation.
So back to my signature and donation: thanks, but no thanks. Jerry Springer passing around a collection plate at the end of his show is what your email equates to. Please lose my email and don’t ever breathlessly email me asking for a signature or money. We all know neither will do a damn thing to fix what you guys are all party to.


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

If these were “civilians”

Posted by deaconkharmafuture1 on May 28, 2009

Here is the whole article. 

 Here is the excerpt: 

“A statewide SWAT team exercise at a firing range on the secured grounds of a nuclear power plant in Southern Maryland was halted this month after stray bullets shattered glass and struck a command center near the plant’s reactors, officials said yesterday.

Reactor safety at the Calvert Cliffs plant in Lusby was never compromised, according to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Constellation Energy Group, which operates the facility. But Constellation closed the range, a popular training site for local law enforcement agencies, pending investigations by plant security and the Calvert County Sheriff’s Office, which hosted the exercise.


At least five bullets escaped the firing range and traveled more than a half-mile before striking buildings and a vehicle near the reactors, according to the NRC, Constellation and the sheriff’s office.”


My thoughts:

 “Reactor safety at the Calvert Cliffs plant in Lusby was never compromised”

The real reason to be upset (to me) is the employees, there, were in serious danger. Shooting without P R O P E R backstop is ridiculous. The folks in the line of fire are what concern me. I mean it hit a car? What if a fellow was having lunch or just parking? Hit Windows too, what about employees at the windows? If they have P R O P E R backstops then why are we getting stray volleys? Uncontrolled bursts from either inept or irresponsible shooters?

Someone’s rump should be in a sling for this one. Bet nothing happens though. Had this been a private range (what I mean is individual owned) and “civilians”, we’d have heard calls for gun control, range closure, lawsuits, “only professionals should have firearms”, and the Brady crew would have been on scene with picket signs and body bagged adults doing die-ins.

Speaking of which… You know I gotta say it.

“I am the only one professional enough to…” (watch the linked video to that, if you haven’t seen it, it’s a classic)

Posted in Civil liberties, deception, Gun crimes, Gun Laws, gun rights, Homeland Security, Just talking, laws, Politics, regulations, Right to Carry, RKBA, safety ninnies, Second Amendment, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Who’s Really Heartless?

Posted by deaconkharmafuture1 on May 13, 2009

  Recently the governor of South Carolina refused to take some of Obama’s stimulus money. Notably, some money that was slated to go to the school system, here in SC. Law makers railed against him and trashed him, while prophesying doom and gloom and teacher cuts. Teacher cuts in a system that has shown behind in the national average sounds bad, right? A system that ranks low (37/51) in national standing would cut teachers? Say it isn’t so!
  There is much politics within the school system as well as surrounding it. What many don’t know or don’t understand is that many teachers coming out of college have to go outside SC to get a job. There are not enough the slots for them available here.
  Why is it that many new teachers must go out of state to get a job? Why is it that we must further cut jobs? One reason is the TERI program. The “Teacher and Employee Retention Incentive” program is what is both filling slots new teachers could have, and also eating into the state budget. This is a problem for new teachers, and the state budget, by allowing a teacher to continue to draw retirement and to earn teacher salary and leave, “at the rate consistent with their years of service”, on top of that. So rather than pay a new teacher a first year salary, also providing a job, you close up the job market and over pay a teacher for doing the same job. “The TERI program is designed for employees who wish to access their retirement contributions from the SC Retirement System, but desire to continue employment with the agency and retain the same position they held prior to entering the program.” Wow, Holy Double Dipper Batman! To boot, depending on which version of TERI, they can have contracts for specific terms so they are paid for the term of the contract rather than working as the need exists. What a deal!
  Another district did away with the TERI program and was then either able to hire new teachers or free up their budget without taking benefits  away from anyone. Hooray for one district to go ahead and open the job market and keep folks insured. Lexington 5 did not. Here is where it gets messy. TERI teachers are still teachers and thus with politics the way it is, and the public at large having the attention span that they do (Ritalin seems required as a whole), if you cut TERI teachers it will be reported as cutting “TEACHERS”. Oh how the Malpractice Media will swoon and faint in horror! But wait, if you cut TERI teachers, then the only thing they have lost is the EXTRA salary. You haven’t cut benefits for them because they already are taken care of, as retirees. You have only taken the EXTRA salary. Here’s how it is presented. Try to read that and see if you can tell if there was any determination between TERI and regular teachers.
  Ok, now that we have TERI out of the way, let’s analyze what happened Monday night at the Lexington 5  School board meeting. Last night Herbert Berg, “interim superintendent”, advised the school board to cut school compliance officers and other jobs that folks depend on to provide not only their meager salaries, but also their benefits. He didn’t cut teachers, the “mascot” of the school system. He cut nameless faceless “jobs”. All the while the double dippers, TERI teachers, can continue to occupy seats that would give young South Carolina teachers jobs and benefits or save the very jobs of those who depend on them for benefits. They continue their cushy job under the politically protective umbrella of the title “TEACHER”. Compliance officers and others, who depend on the salary and benefits, got the boot because double dippers are teachers too in the eyes of the media. Never mind that if they had been cut loose, they’d still have benefits and healthcare. Instead, the board and the superintendent cut those who shall remain faceless and voiceless. The reason was because politics dictated it, not smart fiscal policy.
  So who are the bad guys? Sanford has been demonized as the cause of the whole mess. Sanford only wants the budget streamlined. He is unable to micromanage the school board and their decisions. When bloated budgets and gross misuse of funds abound, who would you blame for looking out for the taxpayer? Perhaps we should even consider the legislative body that ignored fiscally responsible options that would have fully funded police, schools and jails. They ignored a fiscally responsible budget that would have upped the school budget by $2.57 billion. Read this piece at the bottom of the linked page: “It doesn’t have to be this way” By GREG RYBERG and TOM DAVIS, Guest Columnists on Nathan’s News blog site . Nathan Ballentine is a state legislature representative for district 71.
  So who here is ultimately responsible? Really, is it Sanford, or Berg and the school board that played politics with lives and healthcare of the voiceless? Ask yourself, who kept sacred, overpaid, cows when they should be considering keeping the folks who have nothing else to depend on?

Follow up:

  In a necessary follow-up to this, I am adding Florida’s recent legislative abomination. To keep it short and simple, the Florida legislative body has decided two things. First, they decided to raid certain “trust funds”. These are”trust funds” that come from payment of certain taxes and are sequestered to pay for the specific departmental budgets. One of the raided trust funds is the Concealed Weapons permit regulatory budget. Funds are paid into the “trust” to pay for background checks and the employees necessary.  The people’s trust in the legislative body of Florida is violated. Florida is in breach of it’s own laws.

  Second, the legislature has inserted an insidious measure to try and confound and damn any effort, by Governor Crist, to use a line item veto to block these travesties. To add this insult, the legislature has added wording in the legislation that specifically states that should any of their budgetary mischief be vetoed, they will directly remove funds from education to make up the shortfall. Once again education is being used as a blunt instrument with which to beat folks over the head who dare protect the people from extortion and graft by an out of control legislature. Will folks wake up to this in time? Or will we continue to ignore the mismanagement and mafioso tactics of our elected officials?


UPDATE: Stimulus money wins in court, but is it as stimulating as we were told?

 It seems Sanford has been told by the State Supreme Court that he must take the money that the legislature has demanded. Hooray for the jobs that will be saved by this money right? The rhetoric is already getting toned down on the ability of this money to save jobs. Already on news outlets, there are reports that jobs won’t all be saved and that indeed taxes may still have to go up and other things this money was supposed to help us avoid, will still happen. 

 Already a source, I have, has mentioned the superintendent has changed his rhetoric that all the jobs would be saved. He has changed it now to “as many as FEASIBLE will be saved”. But wait, wasn’t Sanford the SOLE reason for this bout of job losses? Now that the reason cited for the job losses is gone, why hasn’t the sky opened up and why don’t rainbows appear?

 Maybe this acceptance by Sanford of his court loss was to prove to us it isn’t him after all. Many are saying this court defeat is his way of getting out of the corner he has backed himself into. By accepting defeat he accepts the money, all the while he can remain the small government proponent. I am not so sure this analysis is quite accurate. I think it is, possibly, a shrewd way of showing the taxpayers and teachers exactly who is to blame. Watch and see how many still lose their jobs. I am personally anxious to see if my theory holds out on that. If I am right, watch and see if the news media reports the job losses now. (Below is from “The State” newspaper online)

“Where the money goes..

…K-12 schools $185 million

Lexington 2. Will consider repealing furloughs and salary cuts.

Lex-Rich 5. District had planned to cut 144 jobs, but now will be able to keep some of them.

Richland 1. District informed 150 teachers in April they may not have jobs. How stimulus money will affect those teachers is undetermined.”

Posted in administrative power, bailout, corruption, deficit, economics, governors, media coverage | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Intolerable Acts of 2009

Posted by deaconkharmafuture1 on March 18, 2009

Why are we so complacent and content to allow the government to tax with a burden heavier than has ever been levied before? Why do we allow ourselves to be shamed and silenced into submission because a group of people do not play by the rules, nor do they earn or pay their own way? How is it that we have so many people in this country ready to roll over and cater to a group perpetually screaming about perceived injustices that will always exist no matter what we do?

We have elected a man who admittedly seeks redistribution of the fruits of our productivity to those who do not produce. We have seen multiple bills forced through the senate and the house with one group of senators and representatives shut out of the proceedings, and the bill forced down our throats with not one congressman being able to have read it before the votes were cast, despite explicit pledges to provide a four day review period before signing any legislation. The occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue promised numerous times that he was going to provide “transparency” in government for all to know what is going on.  Why then, the secrecy and closed door meetings and rush to vote on something no one could have read?

The occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue promised a new tone in Washington and not the politics as usual. He claimed bipartisanship would be the new tone. The occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue claimed he would end earmarks. The latest Omnibus bill had 9000 earmarks in it and again was pushed through with a “hurry up and vote”.  Anyone standing in the way and anyone who has questioned these bills, including our governor, has had a concerted defamation effort by the media and what seem to be continuing campaign ads for the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. We have seen Campaign ads purchased in South Carolina media outlets, telling us to make Sanford stop “playing politics”. The sad thing is this: he is the only one not playing politics. He is genuinely concerned with the future commitments entailed by accepting federal bailouts, which create more debt in a time of need. The additional responsibilities come with no funding and saddle the state with future debt to live up to the responsibilities it must agree to in using the “bailout” money. Like a dealer who hooks an addict, the federal money will force states into a position of needing more and more money in the near future.

Why is it exactly, that if these bills are so good for the American people, that an onslaught of campaign ads, closed door congressional meetings, rushed votes, and character assassination, are being used to force these things down our throat? Why the secrecy? Where’s the transparency we were promised? The only thing transparent about this new administration is that every one of the folks nominated so far has tax or legal troubles. Hardly change we can believe in, but it does provide some transparency to the core of the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, displaying the corruption and disobedience to the laws they expect the people to obey. It seems amazing that the very folks nominated to enforce or apply laws and become stewards of our money cannot obey those very laws.
How shameful that we have nominated stewards of that which they themselves cannot adhere to.
What is it about the biggest increase of deficit in history that we know will saddle our children with a burden that should never have been theirs?
 How can we create the largest deficit in history, saddling our children with debt, yet act as if we are solving problems? We are merely kicking them down the road to be dealt with later. Social security itself is a burden we gleefully bestow on our children like the unfit parents we are! How dare we pass not only that burden our children had no choice in, as well as the burden of the latest increase in deficit? We commit these crimes against our own children and we see fit to call ourselves “parents”; for shame!

We have been called cowardly by our own Attorney General in recent months and I am afraid I’d have to agree with him, we are cowards, though not for his specious reasons. What kind of indescribable cowards are we that we allow this burden created under our very noses, our objections silenced by rhetoric smattered with racism and class envy? What kind of cowards are we
who buy prosperity now and send the mortgage bills to our children and grandchildren.

I too feel America is a nation of cowards who have become fat and complacent and would rather languish in the newest form of slavery, economic servitude, rather than make the effort to cast off the chains that bind them. Yet another new shackle has been placed on us and our posterity yet we barely hear even a groan. How dare we shackle and enslave our own children!  How shameful we are and how sorry we must seem to those that have gone before. It seems slavery is now our chosen status and slavery perhaps we deserve. Sadly we have gleefully bestowed it upon our own posterity as well. For this we deserve shame and earn the curses of our own children.

Our forefathers knew that once we allowed the fruits of our labor and the sweat of our backs to benefit others who would not toil for themselves, our great experiment would end. They risked and most ended up sacrificing, their lives, sacred honor, and fortunes to the liberty we were to be entrusted with.  We have failed those men. We have shamefully cowered under blow after crushing blow until the liberty we were trusted with, lies in tattered remnants, trampled under the foot of the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
One glimmer of hope seems to shine ever so slightly among all of the political darkness that is swallowing this nation. Courageous representatives of some states have begun to pass referendum and bill alike, espousing a return to States’ Rights. These representatives have chosen to do what we, the people, should have had the courage to do. H3509 is just such a resolution in SC. Other states are beginning to make moves in this direction. Perhaps we could at least muster the residual fortitude to support those who have the courage to match their convictions?


Posted in Big Government, Cabinet, change, Civil liberties, corruption, deception, economics, Founders, geithner, Government Power, governors, Obama Administration, Politics, Spending, Uncategorized, White house | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Congo town proves personal defense is a personal responsibility

Posted by deaconkharmafuture1 on February 13, 2009

{from The Deacon}

 I have been on other projects and efforts but I had to make a brief return from obscurity to draw attention to this tidbit. ”  Congo town mounts own defense against rebels.” I actually got a little welled up at this (from mixed anger and pride) today when I read it. A people left to die horribly, by those professing to have their interest at heart, prevailed and really thumbed their noses at these effete snobs. UN “aide workers” and “security forces”, both who provided nothing their names would indicate, were said to be, quote watching the phenomenon with trepidation.” (Notice I highlighted “watching”) Further, they said that they quote  “fear these self-defense groups could transform into a menacing force”. I have a significant and rare level of distaste for these indescribable elitists that think they know better what you need, want, or deserve,. The villagers, however, said “we deserve life and will live, regardless of your uninvolved and useless opinion”. Today, they are alive but would not be, were they still awaiting those who were “watching with trepidation”. Once again, people taking care of their own, is shown with glaring certitude to be more feasible than any police-force or peace-keeping force. Once again, it proves what we and our Founding Fathers knew all along. The right of a people to defend themselves is God given. Furthermore, no man should ever deem themselves wise enough to question or hold in contempt those rights granted by God. It proves to those who claim to be defenders of life and freedom, that the only ones who can be guaranteed to be there when the situation dictates, are the ones already there. I hope we all can learn something from the Congo. From the Warsaw Ghetto, the African Congo, or the American colonies, we see time and again that a people determined to resist can make a difference. Had the UN, The Nazi’s, or the Crown had their way, these groups would all have been disarmed for their convenient destruction. I hope we remember this, the next time someone comes for our rights. I fear it will be sooner than we think. And to the brave people of the Congo: I am so proud of a people who, told by both sides to lie down and die like cattle, said to both, “no”.

Quoted text credited to the article by MICHELLE FAUL, Associated Press Writer



Yet another region shows that armed citizenry can protect itself. Flying in the face of this is the constant disarmament attempts by UN and other officials. You must, if any logic is within you, begin to ask why do they REALLY so want to disarm people. Why, when time and again and well over the number of sensasionalized bad occurances, firearms are used for good.

Excerpt is from the link below,2933,520947,00.html

—Thursday, May 21, 2009 
Print ISLAMABAD —  Armed residents repelled an attempt by Taliban militants to expand their reach in Pakistan’s Swat Valley as foreign aid for refugees fleeing an army offensive in the northwestern region passed $200 million, officials said.

The attempted infiltration in Kalam indicated insurgents are feeling pinched by an army offensive and are seeking new shelter, while the local resistance suggested growing public confidence in an anti-Taliban operation supported by the United States.

Fifty Taliban fighters tried to enter Kalam, but that residents gathered quickly Wednesday to fight them off, Deputy Mayor Shamshad Haqqai told The Associated Press. Residents of Kalam captured eight militants during a shootout and were expecting another attack, Haqqai said.
We will not allow Taliban to come here,” he said. Kalam, a town in the far north of the valley, has about 50,000 residents and has so far remained beyond Taliban control.—

I wonder if the UN was watching this one (much like the congo town that defended itself) “with trepidation” too?

Once again, chalk one up to folks defending their homes and having the means to do so.


Posted in Bill of Rights, Civil liberties, Constitution, fascism, Government Power, Gun Laws, gun rights, Humanism, International, laws, liberty, regulations, Right to Carry, safety ninnies, Second Amendment, Terrorism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Storm’s coming

Posted by deaconkharmafuture1 on August 7, 2008

Deacon Kharma says:

So here I sit, contemplating this country and its direction these days. It’s a country that seems less and less the way the founders planned it. I see a storm that’s coming; will it destroy all that we’ve worked for? Possibly, it could. The country was built to weather storms but it has been weakened by poor stewardship. Most would say “look, we have it better than anyone else”. Yeah we have it better than any other country out there, as far as freedoms. Just because we use other countries as a litmus test, is that a true assessment? Shouldn’t we be comparing our rights to those we had, rather than those remaining rights of other countries farther along the primrose path to all the different “isms”, fascism, socialism, communism, and Marxism? There is an ominous cloud here in the United States that has been brewing for some time since, in my opinion Lincoln. Much like a storm cloud, it starts off small in the distance and grows until you have to turn in the completely opposite direction to avoid seeing it. Here I sit writing about the one that is hanging over our country also half covering the sky. We have kept ignoring that cloud but it is so big now you almost can’t ignore it. I find myself contemplating how we will turn to avoid seeing it. It’s getting harder because it’s almost, if not already, overhead.

I contemplate recent words that have been played over and over from the wife of our current Democratic Party candidate. She hasn’t been proud of her country in her adult life. On the surface, I immediately recoil from that statement but in retrospect, how far off is she? Of course what she meant was not relevant to my thought process. She means to refer to ridiculous accusations and assumptions of race and her skewed judgment of fairness and our lack of sufficient socialism. Wait though, is her basic statement of lack of pride in our country valid? Unfortunately, as much as I hate to agree with her, yes. The core statement is valid. We have drifted, no, violently swung toward socialistic and fascist viewpoints.

Starting with borderline unconstitutional removal of States’ rights of secession, to the worst offender in my opinion, FDR. We have given our rights away with thunderous applause, all to gain some little glimmer of security. Either the illusion of financial security to physical security, we have signed it away with glee. FDR and his government administrators gave us the illustrious Social Security System that is in perpetual distress and various throes of death. It is still kept on the life support of increasing funding from those who have been taxed without representation: us and our children! Further, he illegally confiscated gold and based the dollar on nothing, thus violating the Constitution. They also unjustly altered legal contracts that mentioned alternate payment in legal tender of gold. Such alteration of legal contracts is expressly forbidden in the same Constitution. Even the internment of Japanese citizens of the United States in “camps” happened under this much vaunted president, violating the Fifth Amendment. In my opinion the beginning of the end was under this criminal.

We have presidents using federal dollars to blackmail States into giving up their rights and those of their citizenry, like under Reagan, and a democratic congress, who elevated the drinking age to twenty one years old. No federal dollars for your state unless you deny adults their adult choices. Well, at least some of them. You can still vote and join the military! Whew, what a terrible thing that would have been to follow your own logic on adulthood and decisions by elevating voting and military decisions! Great communicator my rump! More like the great obfuscator and his complicit pals Congress.

We have removed rights to redress for grievances and even have found citizenry hit with “SLAPP” (Strategic Lawsuit Against Private Participation) lawsuits when they sue for grievances. What about those who are ruined financially or had reputations ruined in legal battles for non-crimes just to have the government prove a point. The government can out spend anyone legally. Funny thing is if you look at it, is that our tax payer dollars are funding the government to sue us into submission. I think that Thomas Jefferson addressed this when he said “To compel a man to furnish money or goods to propagate that which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical”. We have Congress conducting hearings (court) on things that have no bearing on legislation. Barry Bonds, in congress and charged with perjury on something that is a local legal law enforcement matter (See much earlier post on Bonds on the Church Site)? All because they say he lied about something that wasn’t in their purview to judge? Wow!

Shall I continue further into this and not only look into the growing cloud that is here but step into it? Let us consider the wisdom of some of the decisions on “Eminent Domain” made by the Supreme Court, I.E. Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469. It looks like another great pearl of wisdom from the great defender of the Constitution. I thought you could take my property for “public use” with just compensation. Well now you can take my land and redistribute it for private use to generate a little more revenue for government use? Yeah, that’s what the Founding Fathers meant. (See also Berman v Parker (1954) “urban Blight” Public use is not Public purpose. Hawaii v Midkiff (1984), Penn Central Transport Co v New York (1978, )Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council,Inc v Tahoe Regional Planning Agency ( 2002))

We have free speech zones now enjoyed by both President Clinton and George W. Bush. Zones where you may exercise a right? Wow how gracious of the fatherland. So now freedom of speech is protected for offensive “art” and offensive musical lyrics but what the founders originally meant it for, we can only do where we are told to? The right to peaceably assemble, means only here and there? OR perhaps the latest push for federal ID? Super! Papiere gefallen?! We also have free speech lessened by to whom and when we can give to a campaign. (see Mcconnell v Federal Election Commission (2003) I.E. Mccain-Feingold) Not that I’m a fan of how much money is thrown at elections that could be used for more urgent needs, but it is a right.

Shall I continue on to the abuse and outright ridiculous application of the Interstate Commerce clause? Perhaps how it has been used as a bypass around the second amendment and allows a non-elected-unaccountable-to-the-people entity to abuse the citizens that dare take the second amendment at face value? Or perhaps it’s application of the second amendment in the Miller case without the defendants present or represented? Or even the other portion of the Second Amendment with regards to militia, being trashed. Now if you want to have a gun you cannot be a member of a militia, which was the other half of keeping and bearing arms in defense of or nation. So half of the Second Amendment is cut out?

Perhaps it is even foreign entanglements and alliances that were warned about by the founding fathers and our UN membership? What wonderful things have we seen come from this? We have seen our taxpayer dollars go to embezzlement, backdoor deals to countries we have embargoes against, and hosting those who hate us and allowing them on our soil. Speaking of allowing on our soil, what about the storage of dangerous phosgene without our consent or knowledge?

What about the recent disastrous use of public safety as a ruse to erode rights? From no knock raids and resultant deaths of innocents when the wrong house is attacked, to the shameless use of law enforcement as alternative revenue generation for the government. Instead of citizens who volunteer to arbitrate and help keep the peace we have professional ticket writers and professional thugs who are less concerned with the Constitution and more about that next ticket or that adrenalin rush as they kick in that door to grandma’s house.

On that public safety point, we find ridiculous things like seatbelt violations which should be a personal choice made by an adult, but instead is a revenue item? Let me get to that item here too. Instead of a competent adult’s personal decision on his own body and property and life, an impersonal lawmaker’s decision is substituted. Perhaps we’d like them to decide what foods we eat too? Or since those terrible tobacco and alcohol products are health hazards, we should get those folks and tax them too? We have lawmakers who continually make more laws until we are all criminals at some point or another. We have too many ways to be taxed, fined or have to pay a fee for everything we do. I won’t dwell on this too much because real public safety such as border enforcement has run completely amok.

Our borders have been open to the foulest of criminals yet nothing is done. We get tickets and jail for the slightest infractions yet a significant portion of Mexico and South Americans are here breaking laws, murdering and enjoy sanctuary in cities such as San Francisco and New York. Our citizens are kidnapped in places like Laredo Texas and nothing is done. We have incursions of Mexican military escorting drug lords and caught on film wearing the very night vision equipment we gave the Mexican Government and we do nothing. Yet when we have people, even legitimate police and border agents of the U.S. defend themselves the Mexican Government demands and receives their prosecution.

My God, I could drone on and on but the hour is late and the storm is indeed overhead. I leave you with the corruption in politics and the favors that our congress receives for all they do for those with money. Or perhaps we could consider a president that was impeached for perjury about fornicating in the sacred office that our forefathers held dear. Or perhaps we could consider the current refusal and excuses about the ten years it would take to get oil prices down if we drilled now despite the fact it is exactly ten years since the last time we heard that. Maybe we could consider the bathroom Bing Crosby, Larry Craig, tap dancing his way into the bathroom hall of fame. Wait, even funnier is the story of William Jefferson and the FBI catching him “cold”, bribe money in the freezer. Another example of corruption is the recent Alaska Senator Ted Stevens and his undocumented gifts for votes that we have recently been made aware of. I might even have you remember the death and the subsequent attempts to hide that death of Mary Jo Kopechne. I would also invite you to remember Patrick Kennedy slamming into a police barricade after a night of hard drinking and blaming it on Ambien. Then he further refused to comply with the arresting officer stating he was a US congressman. Further, since he was on official congressional business, they couldn’t detain him.

We have a storm upon us and maybe we too should consider exactly what to do because we can ignore it no longer. The time is at hand and what will we do? The founding fathers lay their very lives property and sacred honor they held dear, at the altar of freedom and liberty. They suffered and died to build what we have in answer to the last storm. This time, I see an “everyman for themselves” mentality instead of a consideration of good for the people and the republic. I fear we’ll get what we can and let everyone else get their own God-damned goodies. Wonder what it’ll look like after this storm? Maybe it’ll resemble the looting in New Orleans, just maybe?

Posted in Big Government, Bill of Rights, Constitution, economics, Federal reserve bank, Global government, gold, gold standard, Government Power, gun rights, Homeland Security, Illegal Immigration, laws, liberty, Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Radical Christianity Emerging, Emulating Radical Islam

Posted by deaconkharmafuture1 on April 2, 2008

Not many have missed the disgusting racial vitriol spewed by the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Not many have missed the “repudiation” from Barack Obama. What is it exactly that this represents and what does it mean to Christianity and to the United States? I will seek to analyze the meaning.

First, I must preface this document with what Christianity means overall to the non-radical. Jesus came for souls and yes, to end slavery. What’s that you say? He came to end slavery? Well yes, but careful now, lest we lose his message in this one statement. Jesus came to free man (all of man folks) from the slavery of sin. No more than this slavery of sin, no less. Jesus was specifically ignored, as the messiah, by the Jewish religious leaders because they expected, specifically, a conqueror and political messiah. What they misinterpreted, in the opinion of the Christian faith, is the nature of the prophecy and the nature of the messiah.

Now understanding this nature of The Messiah in the Christian Faith, we understand that indeed the Jews were subjugated by the Romans, yet Jesus made no attempt to address this. Jesus specified he came to open up the kingdom of God through his sacrifice. He did not come to free physically, the Israelites. Do we then understand, now, the reason some Jewish religious leaders helped to crucify him?

If Jesus did not physically free the Israelites, then should we consider Jesus specifically addressing the issue of the subjugation of the Africans? Would Jesus address this or would he again be concerned with their immortal souls? Is there again a misunderstanding of why Jesus came? What would Jesus say in this day and age about a past subjugation that no longer exists? I strongly doubt Jesus would come here with that specific endeavor in mind. Why then would a man who represents and purports to repeat the words of God, and his son Jesus Christ, have the audacity to hope that Jesus would speak these words? As a spokesman for the word of God and Jesus Christ, he should then be concerned as Jesus was, for the immortal souls of his “flock”. Is the hateful language something Jesus would use? Jesus was the one who spoke repeatedly of forgiveness. The messiah addressed his disciples on turning the other cheek and forgiveness numerous times. Jesus spoke the words “forgive them” while dangling from a cross bleeding profusely.

How then do we get to this point in a Christian church where hate and divisive language are cheered on by the congregation? Remember, the pastor, or priest, passes on the words of the Lord. Are these the words of the Lord? No they are not the words of the Lord, and as a matter of fact Mark 13:5 says “ And Jesus answering them, began to say, ‘Take heed lest any one may lead you astray’ ”. Even further in Mak 13, Jesus says to his disciples, “And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ; or, lo, he is there; believe him not: For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect”. The words of Wright are misleading, sure enough, and not of the Lord. Make no mistake about this. Making these statements in church and in the name of God is directly mentioned when Jesus mentions “false Prophets”.

Sermons, like those of the “Reverend” Wright, sound more like the vitriol and hate spewed from the Blind Sheik or speeches videotaped and sent out from Osama Bin Laden. The same hate for other groups of people can be found right in the radical mosques around the world. Are we seeing an emergence of a Radical Christianity much like the Wahhabi sect of Islam? What started as a radical group has spread throughout the world and throughout the Muslim world, like a cancer. Will we hail the days of Reverend Wright as the beginning of Radical Christianity? Will we then see your “typical white person” assaulted on the streets or blown up with car bombs in retaliation for “creating the AIDS virus to kill blacks”?

With divisive and vitriolic words from what the black community hails as its prominent leaders, what are we to think of the black community? Is this feeling much the same we have for Islam? Without those specifically speaking out against the hatred, then do we consider silence, agreement? Do we not consider the same for Islam? Hymie town, Zionists, Jewish being referred to as the diamond merchants, white greed, typical white people, and white conspiracy are all things we hear from Reverend Al Sharpton, Reverend Jesse Jackson, Islamic minister Farrakhan, and Reverend Jeremiah Wright. So exactly when do we consider what the real thoughts of the black community might be?

Jesus spoke of love and forgiveness. Osama Bin Laden, Muqtada Al-Sadr, “Reverends” Jackson, Wright, Sharpton, and Farrakahn, all speak of division and anger at past ills, and propagate hate and ill will. I see no difference between all of these people, except one, the Lord Jesus Christ. I find myself listening to the words from these “Christian” pulpits and ask myself the well recognized words, “what would Jesus do?”. I am surprised that these latter named “Christian men of God” do not seem to consider what Jesus would say or do. I do notice one other difference between the Lord and these other men. Christ had no personal wealth or possessions, yet these men who spout hate then foment anger, more hate, and riots, all live in houses like those the “rich white men” live in or have extremely large bank accounts. Wright speaks of white greed, yet when reverend Wright lives in a million dollar home with a 10 million dollar line of credit, I would say that is rich and a bit greedy. Note Wright’s attack on “the pursuit of middleclassness”, and his far surpassing it on the way to riches. Perhaps the hate and division is a means to an end for wealth or power, neither of which Jesus sought. Perhaps the black community should consider the words of God and his son Jesus Christ for themselves, rather than be led like lemmings, over the cliffs of hate, fear, anger, and envy by those who seek personal gain on the backs of their congregations.

What this means for the Christian church and the United States is division, racial violence, and possibly a future for Christianity that bears even more of a resemblance to Islam and the violence done in its name. This is in a stage that should be addressed before it reaches the epidemic magnitude that radical Islam has reached. I implore the congregations of churches and the people of the United States to ask themselves what means to an end the hate spouted from religious leaders brings. Who benefits and who suffers? What would Jesus say, folks? Remember that the next time you attend church. It’s a litmus test I think we all should apply.

Posted in Christianity, Islam | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments »

Tragedy in Gun-Free-Zones

Posted by deaconkharmafuture1 on December 7, 2007

The following story, by John Lott, is the best description I have seen, so far, for yet another media bias. I wonder why the media and other liberals pay so much attention to the bill of rights but this one lonely amendment eludes their understanding. The media will bend the first amendment around their ears and up their You-Know-Whats to contort it to whatever. Yet when it comes to the second amendment, well, you know the deal. Oh those evil guns strike innocent citizens again! Headlines like “God help us”, “Mall maniac”, and ” Mall Massacre” make us shudder in fear. But why is this becoming a trend? Why, despite evidence to the contrary, do people insist on disarming able bodied citizens to protect their families and the lives of other families? We have to understand that Police can NOT be everywhere. We will never have enough money to do that. Concealed Weapon holders pay the governement money to protect lives but we villify, Wyatt Earp-itize them, and belittle them as rednecks, ruffians, and Militia goons.

That leads me to another point. Militia didn’t used to be a bad word either, but the media and the government made it so. Militia was a word meaning common defense of the land by the people to the Founders. “Automatic” weapons, yet another word misued by the media to describe semi-automatic firearms. Is it an oops? Not on your life Buck-o. So why is a group of people so intent on “promoting human rights”, demonizing the most effective tool to ensure it? You’ll find no answer here. I don’t know either!

Take it away Lott:

Media Coverage of Mall Shooting Fails to Reveal Mall’s Gun-Free-Zone Status

Thursday, December 06, 2007

The horrible tragedy at the Westroads Mall in Omaha, Neb. received a lot of attention Wednesday and Thursday. It should have. Eight people were killed, and five were wounded.

A Google news search using the phrase “Omaha Mall Shooting” finds an incredible 2,794 news stories worldwide for the last day. From India and Taiwan to Britain and Austria, there are probably few people in the world who haven’t heard about this tragedy.

But despite the massive news coverage, none of the media coverage, at least by 10 a.m. Thursday, mentioned this central fact: Yet another attack occurred in a gun-free zone.

Surely, with all the reporters who appear at these crime scenes and seemingly interview virtually everyone there, why didn’t one simply mention the signs that ban guns from the premises?

Nebraska allows people to carry permitted concealed handguns, but it allows property owners, such as the Westroads Mall, to post signs banning permit holders from legally carrying guns on their property.

The same was true for the attack at the Trolley Square Mall in Utah in February (a copy of the sign at the mall can be seen here). But again the media coverage ignored this fact. Possibly the ban there was even more noteworthy because the off-duty police officer who stopped the attack fortunately violated the ban by taking his gun in with him when he went shopping.

Yet even then, the officer “was at the opposite end and on a different floor of the convoluted Trolley Square complex when the shooting began. By the time he became aware of the shooting and managed to track down and confront Talovic [the killer], three minutes had elapsed.”

There are plenty of cases every year where permit holders stop what would have been multiple victim shootings every year, but they rarely receive any news coverage. Take a case this year in Memphis, where WBIR-TV reported a gunman started “firing a pistol beside a busy city street” and was stopped by two permit holders before anyone was harmed.

When will part of the media coverage on these multiple-victim public shootings be whether guns were banned where the attack occurred? While the media has begun to cover whether teachers can have guns at school or the almost 8,000 college students across the country who protested gun-free zones on their campuses, the media haven’t started checking what are the rules where these attacks occur.

Surely, the news stories carry detailed information on the weapon used (in this case, a rifle) and the number of ammunition clips (apparently, two). But if these aspects of the story are deemed important for understanding what happened, why isn’t it also important that the attack occurred where guns were banned? Isn’t it important to know why all the victims were disarmed?

Few know that Dylan Klebold, one of the two Columbine killers, closely was following Colorado legislation that would have allowed citizens to carry a concealed handgun. Klebold strongly opposed the legislation and openly talked about it.No wonder, as the bill being debated would have allowed permitted guns to be carried on school property. It is quite a coincidence that he attacked the Columbine High School the very day the legislature was scheduled to vote on the bill.

Despite the lack of news coverage, people are beginning to notice what research has shown for years: Multiple-victim public shootings keep occurring in places where guns already are banned. Forty states have broad right-to-carry laws, but even within these states it is the “gun-free zones,” not other public places, where the attacks happen.People know the list: Virginia Tech saw 32 murdered earlier this year; the Columbine High School shooting left 13 murdered in 1999; Luby’s Cafeteria in Killeen, Texas, had 23 who were fatally shot by a deranged man in 1991; and a McDonald’s in Southern California had 21 people shot dead by an unemployed security guard in 1984.

All these attacks — indeed, all attacks involving more than a small number of people being killed — happened in gun-free zones.

In recent years, similar attacks have occurred across the world, including in Australia, France, Germany and Britain. Do all these countries lack enough gun-control laws? Hardly. The reverse is more accurate.

The law-abiding, not criminals, are obeying the rules. Disarming the victims simply means that the killers have less to fear. As Wednesday’s attack demonstrated yet again, police are important, but they almost always arrive at the crime scene after the crime has occurred.

The longer it takes for someone to arrive on the scene with a gun, the more people who will be harmed by such an attack.

Most people understand that guns deter criminals. If a killer were stalking your family, would you feel safer putting a sign out front announcing, “This Home Is a Gun-Free Zone”? But that is what the Westroads Mall did.

John Lott is the author of Freedomnomics, upon which this piece draws, and a senior research scholar at the University of Maryland.

Posted in Second Amendment | 4 Comments »

The Border

Posted by deaconkharmafuture1 on November 15, 2007

Thoughts on the border crisis…
The government of the U.S. has done nothing substantial as far as the border, of that, I think we can all surely agree. I would like to randomly muse on this topic and some points. When it comes to police forces we have an abundance. When it comes to traffic enforcement, we have that in spades. I was brought up on Andy Griffith and thought that was what police were. These days it’s revenue generation, busting college parties, ticketing speeders, nailing people for “felony taglight violations” (I kid you not, this is police humor) and how many police are allotted for traffic versus other non-revenue based service? Keep that thought humming while I shift gears.

So, we have the border that resembles, in my mind, a colander (aka strainer) being used to hold water. We know we have a problem. We even have evidence of Mexican military crossing our border. Why is this unchecked? Go back to the police model of today. Revenue generation, versus no revenue. It is more profitable, less time and energy to ticket your average speeder. Now lets not forget safer, both physically, and LEGALLY. A perfect case study in America hamstringing it’s own security is that deputy that barely missed getting run over by illegals( and when defensively fired his pistol, was prosecuted.

Revenue, hmmm, is that why we prefer to prosecute Americans for drugs yet all the while allowing drugs to be escorted into the country by armed Mexican military? So instead of handling things, we bait and switch. “War on Drugs”, a sham if we don’t cut the supply. Bait and switch? How about the war on terror and security “for American safety” but a porous border with 70 Americans kidnapped by Mexicans. All this from the border in one year. How many Americans were kidnapped by Saddam? This is not necessarily an anti-war statement, just a point I consider pertinent since we are talking American safety.

The “minuteman project” is a prelude and led me to a somewhat far reaching theory, though more credible to me every day. A theory is that citizens will take things into their own hands and retaliate. Some will seek to only defend, some will become vigilantes, and some will teeter precariously close to the very thing they despise, the American version of Mexican gang like activity and declare gang war on them. Unfortunately, if our government won’t come to our aid, perhaps they will come to the border for peacekeeping. Soon the border may be past boiling point.

One final thought, could this be anticipated? Expected even? I ask myself why the US government is contemplating giving advanced audio (listening devices), optics (night and thermal vision), and other equipment to Mexico to police their side of the border. Mexican military escorts of drug runners,( (,2933,182650,00.html) fully equipped with night vision, has been reported. Mexican military vehicles crossing the border armed… Could we be better equipping Mexico in anticipation of civilian response to the threat our government refuses to deal with directly? Or do we believe our government is actually daft enough to think the Mexicans will break with current trends, and actually use the equipment to police the border on their side?
You do the math…

Posted in Immigration | Leave a Comment »