Thursday, October 30, 2014

Connecticut gubernatorial race dividing gun owners to glee of 'progressives'

Vanderboegh is talking about initiation of force by the state and some gun owners responding by not going gentle into that good night. Before dismissing that as far-fetched, note the same media running interference for Malloy has publicly demanded the opening salvo.

Connecticut Carry says "Joe Must Go." What I know is that what starts in Connecticut under the anti-American, Soviet-loving Mike Lawlor will not stay in Connecticut.

"I'll either get traction, and take this race in a three- or four-way, or I'll be irrelevant." -- Joe Visconti.
A long-time fighter for firearm rights in Connecticut commented to me:
I will tell you that right now we have a pretty large problem with a third party candidate (Joe Visconti) who is seeking to torpedo the election because he is upset that he didn't get a GOP nod.
For some reason, we have a contingent of people in Connecticut that think this guy is 'pro-gun' (we are not 'pro-gun', we are pro-rights, but I digress), when he openly advocates for mandating unloaded carry (condition 3) because of one person having a negligent discharge in a bagel shop, and openly states that our 2013 Gun Ban went 'too far' and would repeal the 'magazine portion' of the bill (but not the rest of the 130+ page monstrosity).
He is running under 9% in the polls at the moment. Just enough to act as a spoiler, but with no chance to win. . .
There is quite a bit of speculation of whether he is really this stupid/insane or whether he is a Malloy plant. I think there is a lot more evidence for the former than the latter, but neither seem to be off the table when you consider his behavior.
In support of this, I received the October issue of Connecticut Carry's October newsletter, and among the articles is this op-ed. I reprint it in its entirety, as well as the analysis piece that follows it, because it describes where we are in Connecticut, a state that is only awaiting the re-election Malloy and his anti-firearm commissar Red Mike "KGB" Lawlor for the gun raids -- and the subsequent civil war -- to begin.
Joe Must Go
by Bob Margolis.
It’s time for you to go, Joe. You’ve probably worked harder than anyone else in the race for governor, but in your heart you know you can’t win.
You’ve campaigned on valiantly as the “other guy” and while there’s merit to that, at some point you’re only going to hurt the chances for the state of Connecticut to elect someone that is not Gov. Dannel P. Malloy.
You told me face to face several times that your objective was to get Malloy out of office. You now have the best opportunity of any one in the state to do that. While you have gathered support from some independents, some Republicans and a few Democrats, we all know that as the election gets closer people will cast their vote for someone that they think can win. That candidate is not you, Joe.
You have few funds and little name recognition outside of a small circle of influence and what worries me most is that Malloy is now saying good things about you. Our governor is playing you like a fine fiddle Joe. Gov. Malloy knows that his only threat in this election is Tom Foley, not Joe Visconti. Nearly every vote cast for you will be a vote taken away from Tom Foley. The closer the election, the more dangerous your participation becomes.
Why do you think that the attack ads only go after Mr. Foley and not you? Because their side wants you to get votes Joe, as many as it takes to swing the numbers their way. The governor and his team are not stupid, they’re playing you for a fool, and I know you’re not a fool.
Joe, you have the chance to be “Rudy” for Connecticut. You have the chance to be carried off the field held high on the shoulders of the winning team. You also have the chance to be the spoiler, to be the one that hands the election to the incumbent. I’m asking you to be Rudy. Joe, be Rudy for us, be Rudy for everyone in Connecticut. By doing that, you can come back some day and run for office again, next time as a hero, not a spoiler. Withdraw from the election Joe, get out of the race and ask your supporters to vote for Tom Foley. Campaign with Tom and campaign for Tom. He’s the best chance we have of taking back our state.
In addition to this op-ed is this analysis by Rick Burgess, "Are We Going To Lose This Election?":
No one wants to be the one to say it. Connecticut Carry sure doesn’t want to have to be the ones to have to say it. But we are in serious risk of losing this election. We have Malloy on the run with poll numbers from Malloy-friendly polling institutes that cannot hide the fact that Connecticut residents hate Governor Dannel Malloy and his policies and favor Republican challenger Tom Foley.
So how can we lose?
We have a contingent of people who have decided that ‘principle’ and ‘rights’ mean more to them than the basic common sense of voting the worst anti-rights governor in the nation out. Now, let’s be clear here: We support and stand on principles and rights more than any organization in Connecticut. We opposed bills that other organizations were actively supporting because the bills were against individual rights and therefore unacceptable to us, and we are proud of that. We support the absolute right to bear arms, and do not advocate for laws that prohibit anyone from buying, owning or carrying a self-defense tool in whatever manner that they see fit. But what some have decided is standing on principles and rights is, in fact, guaranteeing a loss to Governor Malloy by splitting the vote with a candidate who cannot win, and who would not fulfill the promises he has made anyway.
The center of this problem is candidate Joe Visconti, who is supposedly, the ‘pro-gun’ pick for governor despite there not being a single pro-rights organization endorsing him, and for good reason. When we look into his background and public statements, we do not need to look very far to see that he is completely incompatible with a belief in principles and individual rights. In a recorded video that he made, he stated unequivocally that he believes that since a Bridgeport officer negligently discharged a round through the glass window of the bagel shop, where he was sitting, the solution should be that officers state-wide be mandated to carry unloaded firearms. He went on to say that, if he were governor, he would make that policy happen. What would then happen if/when there were a mass shooting under his administration? His thought pattern, about penalizing every innocent person for the stupid actions of one person, does not bode well for the law-abiding citizens of Connecticut. Visconti's logic is the same logic used by anti-rights politicians like Governor Malloy.
Unfortunately, Visconti's most adamant supporters have decided to hold this election hostage, with many of them openly stating their belief that if Visconti does not win then we all deserve Malloy and the consequences that will come from Malloy's re-election. This hostage-election situation makes Visconti's campaign nothing less than a torpedo aimed, under false colors, trying to sink Foley, instead of sinking the anti-Rights regime of Malloy. It is almost as if Visconti is deliberately trying to help Malloy win and float away unscathed. Visconti claims to want citizen Rights restored, yet he continues to allow Malloy to flatter him and encourage him, knowing all the while that he, Visconti, cannot win this race for Governor. How can Visconti claim to have the interests of citizen Rights at heart, when he continues to play into the hands of anti-Rights Malloy? Visconti's intemperate ego and illogical stubbornness has caused many people to wonder whether the Visconti campaign might actually be run by the Malloy campaign. While that is only idle speculation, without any evidence, one thing is for certain, the Visconti campaign is not about ‘gun rights’ or the right to bear arms, it is about him as an individual candidate who does not have the best interests of Connecticut residents in mind. From where we view this, Visconti, for his own personal gain, is exploiting his supporters who yearn for the uninfringed right to self-defense.
Normally, such a third person campaign would not be great concern. However, Visconti’s support has been variously polled at 9%. Despite the ridiculously low number that 9% represents, in most elections; in the context of THIS election, that 9% may be more than enough to hand the election to Governor Malloy. In the last election, Tom Foley only lost by 6%. According to the various polls, this race is shaping up to be an even closer one. Worse still, Visconti has somehow convinced himself and his supporters that, although he is polling at 9% (or less), they think and believe that he is not just capable of winning the election, but they insist that he is likely to win the election. Wishful thinking is nothing new in politics, but in this case, the wishful thinking of Visconti and his supporters may well cause the sounding of the death knell for our constitutional Rights in this state.
For months Connecticut Carry has been discussing the likely ramifications of Malloy’s re-election. If Malloy is re-elected, there will be nothing that anyone can do to slow the collectivist march of the anti-rights organizations and politicians. IF Malloy is re-elected, we may well expect that he will try to push for the complete denial and excision of the Right to carry a firearm, even going so far as to try to have our Constitution re-written to remove Section 15. So, if we can't, won't, or don't oust Malloy in this election, do NOT be surprised at his next drastic anti-Rights, anti-gun policy focus. Losing the Right to carry a firearm is the area where we have the most to lose.
For pro-Rights citizens, the simple truth of this election is the question of, how can we remove Governor Dannel Malloy from office? For pro-Rights people, this is an absolute must. We are already burdened by unconstitutional and grievous gun laws. IF we endure the Visconti-made schism among pro-Rights voters, we also must face the distinct possibility of a Malloy win. A Malloy win would certainly bring about a most horrible flood of gun laws that would even more drastically hurt our way of life, worse than any of us have imagined, until now.
Although most of us now recognize the need for Visconti to drop out of the race and to support Foley, there is, still, a small contingent of people who persist in asking questions like ‘What do we know about Tom Foley’? Most importantly, we KNOW that Foley is NOT Governor Malloy. We KNOW that Foley has not gone out of his way to infringe upon the Rights of citizens, as Malloy has done. We also KNOW that the STRONGEST message we can send to politicians, and the anti-gun crowd, is to remove Governor Malloy from office. And, we KNOW that Tom Foley is polling at 50+%, with Dannel Malloy teetering at about the same level. Therefore, we KNOW that Tom Foley is the only candidate who stands ANY CHANCE of being elected to oust Malloy, if we do NOT want Malloy to get back in. But, Foley can ONLY beat Malloy IF we all stick together. Vote for Foley, against Malloy. We KNOW that we can ONLY get Malloy out IF we vote for Foley and do NOT vote for that third candidate.
Is all lost? Should we just give up? NO! But, this needs your absolute attention. Pro-Rights citizens have a LOT of work to do, yet, to get every pro-Rights, anti-Malloy voter to the polls on Election Day, and to get those voters to vote for Foley. You need to talk to everyone that you can and let them know that there is only box to check, this election: VOTE FOLEY to unseat Malloy. It is going to require every single one of us getting out there and doing it. We hate that there is no other reasonable choice, but this is how these battles are won. It is time to do the right thing and just get Malloy out. Once Malloy is out of office, THEN we get to play the long game and work on getting better candidates to run for office. Voting for Visconti will accomplish none of these goals.
Rally everyone you can and vote Malloy out of office. We only get one chance at this.
Rich Burgess
President, Connecticut Carry
Burgess is right to point out that more firearm restrictions will happen under a second Malloy regime, but that is beside the main point. We won't have to worry about future legislation since the shooting will have already begun before that happens. Malloy and Lawlor are merely waiting for the re-election to be over to begin the gun raids. Gentlemen and ladies, I predict to you that if Malloy is re-elected there will be dead innocents at the hands of the Connecticut State Police by January, thus beginning the next American civil war. Viscounti must have heard the same rumors wafting out of the Governor's office that I have. He must know what portends.
Was Viscounti screwed over by the CT GOP elite in the primary process? His supporters say that he was and I have no reason to doubt it. Is he the "better" candidate on firearm rights than Foley? Connecticut Carry, CCDL (who still seems to have lost my address and phone number -- rumor has it that I make them nervous) and other people in CT I trust seem to doubt it. But let's say for the sake of argument that he is. We are not playing for ideological debating points here, or even political principle. What hangs over this election more than any other in this election cycle or in any since 1860 is nothing less than civil war -- butchery of innocents on a vast scale. For what starts in Connecticut under the anti-American, Soviet-loving Mike Lawlor will not stay in Connecticut. This is not hypothetical. Based on the promises of the antis in the Malloy regime this is as real as it gets.
So one must ask, is this what Joe Viscounti had in mind when he decided to assuage his case of bruised ego and chapped ass at the way he has been treated?
Viscounti has been quoted as saying, "I'll either get traction, and take this race in a three- or four-way, or I'll be irrelevant." I disagree. If the fears expressed above by firearm owners and activists in his state of Viscounti's effect on the Connecticut election come to pass, history will NOT record him as "irrelevant." It may record instead the first known case of a civil war being attributable directly to a bruised ego and a chapped ass.

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Gee, I thought we revolted from England to get away from a hereditary monarchy.

Jeb Bush presidential bid would turn off principled activists, help Hillary

The highly sophisticated hacking of Sharyl Attkisson's computers

From the moment that Sharyl Attkisson met a shadowy source I’ll call Big Mac, she was plunged into a nightmare involving mysterious surveillance of her computers.

Attention Gun Owner: Your Government Considers You to Be a Potential Terrorist

These efforts often include claims that gun owners should be viewed with suspicion, as potential criminals, and even as potential terrorists. Such claims have been included in government reports issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), by state police agencies, and by other government entities. Now, these efforts are being ramped up by a new initiative, coming from one of the most lawless men to ever sit in a Presidential Cabinet — U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder. Because of this new development, we thought it timely to release this report to the American people, documenting governmental contempt for the Second Amendment, and the many instances where lawful gun owners are viewed as potential terrorists.

The Malloy-Lawlor Holiday Camp for Recalcitrant Firearm Owners.

Welcome to the Malloy-Lawlor Holiday Camp for Recalcitrant Firearm Owners: MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution.
In stories here, "Gun Rights Advocates Push 'Get Out the Vote' Efforts," and here, "Second Amendment Activists Call On Gun Owners To ‘Recall’ Malloy," the CCDL (which seems to have lost my address these days) urges firearm owners to defeat Governor Malloy and his Gun Commissar Red Mike "KGB" Lawlor.
I can understand their concern. Credible reports indicate that the tyrannical twins are merely waiting for Malloy's re-election to release the uniformed attack dogs of the Connecticut gun stasi (oops, sorry, state police) in raids all over the state. Perhaps they should be handing out leaflets at firearm emporiums illustrating where the Governor wants the majority of CT gun owners to reside come January.
Here is a picture of the entrance to Connecticut's maximum security MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution:
All it needs is a sign that says "Arbeit Macht Frei."
Of course if you don't like MacDougall-Walker, I'm sure that Gun Commissar Red Mike "KGB" Lawlor will allow you to choose your camp in the gulag using this CT Department of Corrections inter-active map.
"Welcome to the gulag, gun criminals."
Of course, I guess we'll have to expand our operations a bit if it comes to pass. I am reminded of the scene in Michael Collins:
Collins to Harry Bolin: I'm changing your brief. I hereby appoint you minister for general mayhem.
Bolin: What's your brief?
Collins: The same. Plus one other portfolio. Jailbreaks.

Oh, well, if the old man was "ARGUMENTATIVE" I guess that excuses everything. Slight Overkill: Authorities Send Armored Car and 24 Deputies to Collect Civil Judgment From 75 -Year-Old Man

Marathon County sheriff’s officials aren’t apologizing for their tactics. Sheriff’s Capt. Greg Bean said officials expected to have to seize and remove tractors and wooden pallets to pay the judgment — hence the cadre of deputies. He also said what while Hoeppner was never considered dangerous, he was known to be argumentative.

Ebola Nurse’s Ties to CDC Scrubbed From Website – Is Far Left Progressive & Obama Supporter

"Quarantined Ebola Nurse, Kaci Hickox is a card carrying Progressive and CDC EIS Officer. The Ebola nurse who attacked Governor Christie for putting her in quarantine after returning from Africa is a Progressive with ties to the CDC."

"What is the functional difference, if any, between Nancy Pelosi and a flesh-eating zombie?"

An email I wrote to a local radio talk show host, who asked the question, "Why are end-of-the-world stories are so popular?:
Sent: Tue, Oct 28, 2014 5:45 am
Subject: "The useful dire warning." re: Your question last week as to why end-of-the-world stories are so popular.
I tried to get in to your show last week when you posed that question above but was unable to. The answer lies in part in the crisis of confidence in the institutions of government brought on by the events of Clinton/Bush/Obama misrule since Waco. See: "The Chaos Election:The midterms are about Americans' deep anxieties — but the fear has been building for a long time."
Government has proven itself to be a predator of people's liberties and economic security and, worse, an incompetent one as well. Folks who are willing to trade "essential liberty for a little temporary safety" in Franklin's words are outraged to discover that they get nothing for the swap.
But the American people are first and foremost a practical people. If the government (or political party, local law enforcement, hell, even the fire department) fails many of us will make our own arrangements. Hence the "prepper" phenomenon, the Minutemen on the border during the Bush presidency, and the reinvigoration of the 1990s constitutional militia movement under Obama (although not along the same lines as their predecessors).
Our fictional tastes reflect our real fears that things are out of control -- that it is, if not truly apocalyptic, then certainly the end of the world as we have known it. I mean, does this excrement bear any relationship to the country that you and I grew up in? People understand that it does not, the future seems grim and unrelenting and they turn to fiction that expresses their unease. They turn to "the useful dire warning."
As David Brin, author of the magnificent book The Postman (which bears no resemblance to the Costner cinematic flop), wrote in a forward to a reprint of Pat Frank's classic Alas, Babylon:
Two books that emerged at roughly the same time as Alas, Babylon were Eugene Burdick's Fail Safe and Peter George's Red Alert, which later inspired Stanley Kubrick to make the magnificently humorous and thoughtful Dr. Strangelove. As archetypes of the useful dire warning, each dissected a specific possible failure mode, bringing it to the awareness of so many that, ironically, their particular type of debacle became much less likely. Indeed, the "self-preventing prophecy" may be the highest and most useful species in all of the vast, imaginative genus of speculative fiction. In much the same way that Orwell's 1984 girded millions against "Big Brother," these tales may have helped to keep their own nightmares from coming true. In other words, our most vivid nightmares may have been utterly practical, helping to save our lives. -- David Brin, Forward to the First Harper Perennial Modern Classics Edition of Pat Frank's 'Alas, Babylon', 2005, p. X.
The Walking Dead is a perfect example of art imitating life imitating art. There is a pandemic that gets out of control (can you say CDC?), and the world is swamped with "walkers," yet in the last episode the question is posed and answered, "Which is worse, the undead or people?" Predatory humanity is of course the answer. Even at TEOTWAWKI, humanity remains humanity, or should I say, inhumanity. A glance at the latest ISIS beheading video confirms that.
And what can be the antidote to ISIS/TWD cannibals/zombies in the light of abject government failure? Judge Napolitano hits the nail on the head here:
It may be a poor substitute for a government that is supposed to be doing its constitutional job competently, but the bald statistics of Obama as the preeminent firearm salesman in world history demonstrates that the common folk internalized that lesson long before the chattering class. They will make their own arrangements, these practical Americans, and they will watch/read "useful dire warnings" for clues as to how best cope with the end of the world as they have known it.
Mike Vanderboegh
PS: One other thing that bears mentioning. Have you noticed that just as The Invasion of the Body Snatchers was a metaphor for communist infiltration in the 50s, that "zombies" resemble present day collectivists? They are ravenous, hard to stop, go around in bunches, cannot be negotiated with or reasoned with, only walled out or confronted with deadly force. It is no accident that zombie targets are far more popular at firearm ranges these days than bullseyes. Wanna shoot a collectivist and still be under the radar? Shoot a zombie target. Nobody objects to that, perhaps because they can't break the code. I mean, what is the functional difference, if any, between Nancy Pelosi and a flesh-eating zombie? ;-)
LATER: David Codrea reminds me of this classic.

DOJ, ATF Lost Court Battle Against Whistleblower Jay Dobyns, So They're Making His Life Hell By Appealing

The decision to appeal no doubt is the continuation of retaliation from the Bureau against Dobyns, proving that nothing has changed since Acting ATF Director B. Todd Jones promised to cleanup the agency.

Oh, come on, give him a break, he's just another DREAMer.

Murder Suspect in Slaying of Two California Sheriff's Deputies Is a Twice Deported Illegal Alien

Add in the inevitable voter fraud, and Hickenlooper could well win.

Colorado Governor - Beauprez vs. Hickenlooper

Feds identify suspected 'second leaker' for Snowden reporters

"Any attempt to criminalize the public release of those stories benefits only those who exercise virtually limitless power in secret with no accountability."

"What is the best deterrent to that? An armed citizenry. People able to protect themselves."

As Bob Owens reports that a "Concealed Carry Ban At NC State Fair Left Two Men Defenseless Against Armed Robbers," Judge Napolitano on FOX News points out the obvious: "An armed citizenry is the best way to stop lone wolf terrorists."