What is the real meaning of Memorial Day?
If you look at the history of Memorial Day you will see that it was a day of remembrance for those who died in our nation’s service. No one is really sure who exactly came up with the concept but it dates back to the Civil War, when organized groups of women placed flowers on the graves of those who died in battle. Memorial Day was officially proclaimed on May 5, 1868 by General John Logan, national commander of the Grand Army of the Republic, in his General Order No.11, and was first observed on May 30, 1868, when flowers were placed on the graves of Union and Confederate soldiers at Arlington National Cemetery. The first state to officially recognize the holiday was New York in 1873. Today, it is celebrated in every state on the last Monday in May as passed by Congress (National Holiday Act of 1971).
It is sad to admit that we have not done a better job of educating our young ones as to the real reason this holiday came to be. Today, Memorial Day Weekend is a three day weekend to go the lake and party, or for department stores to advertise big sales events. We need to get back to recognizing those who gave their lives for this great nation.
On Monday, May 30, 2011, please remember all of those men and women who have died serving our country in all wars since the Civil War. I would also encourage you to remember all of those who have died protecting our country here at home, the First Responders (Police, Fire and EMS Workers) who have died in the line of duty. This includes the 343 members of the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) who gave their lives on the morning of September 11, 2001.
Take a few moments Monday and call someone you know who serves in one of the branches of our Armed Services and let them know how much it means to your freedom for them serving our country. Be safe and enjoy your Memorial Day Weekend.
God Bless Our Troops. God Bless America.
It’s good to be the Puppet-King…
Killing Capitalism is the best way to ensure that such pleasure will only be enjoyed by the Ruling Class and not Riff Raff like us.
BELLEVUE, WA – A New Jersey judge today announced he will issue a gun permit to one of the plaintiffs in a Second Amendment Foundation lawsuit against several New Jersey officials for deprivation of civil rights under color of law, because applicants cannot show a “justifiable need” for a permit.
SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb said today this “clearly indicates that our lawsuit is proper, and we are encouraged to press our case to its conclusion.”
Morris County Superior Court Judge David Ironson announced after a hearing in his courtroom this morning that a permit will be issued to lead plaintiff Jeffrey Muller. His application had languished for six months before Judge Philip Maenza, a defendant in the federal lawsuit, denied the permit without a hearing on the grounds that Muller did not have a “justifiable need.” Muller had been kidnapped by members of a motorcycle gang who threatened to kill him, in a case of mistaken identity. Several suspects have been arrested in that case, and Muller’s application for a permit had gained support from local and state police.
“Finally,” Gottlieb said, “one judge has done the right thing, but it took a federal lawsuit to make it happen. Our other plaintiffs are pushing ahead with the lawsuit so we can put an end to this practice once and for all.”
SAF is joined in the lawsuit by the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc. and several private citizens whose applications for permits to carry have been denied generally on the grounds that they have not shown a “justifiable need.” One of the remaining plaintiffs is a part-time sheriff’s deputy, a second carries large amounts of cash in his private business and another is a civilian employee of the FBI in New Jersey who is fearful of attack from a radical Islamic fundamentalist group. They are represented by attorney David D. Jensen.
“We’re moving forward with this case,” Gottlieb stated, “because there are far too many people just like Jeff Muller whose civil rights have been cavalierly denied on the whims of a judge.”
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.
< Please e-mail, distribute, and circulate to friends and family >
Copyright © 2011 Second Amendment Foundation, All Rights Reserved.
Second Amendment Foundation
James Madison Building
12500 N.E. Tenth Place
Bellevue, WA 98005 Voice: 425-454-7012
Toll Free: 800-426-4302
For Immediate Release
Montana Policy Institute
Our civil discourse is getting louder and hotter now because so much is at stake with an expanding government and the bills from past political decisions coming due. Instead of chiding each other to be nicer, we would be better served by honestly addressing the root causes of the policy differences among us.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Shut Up and Be Civil
By: Carl Graham, President, Montana Policy Institute
Conservatism must be on the rise because once again we find ourselves being treated to a round of scolding concerning the lack of civility in our public discourse, as if we’ve fallen to unplumbed depths and must button up lest the moderate masses take offense. With all due respect, that’s a bunch of hooey.
It’s no coincidence that both ad hominem attacks and appeals to civility so often come from the side that’s run out of arguments. And nobody should be surprised that it’s getting nasty out there with so much now at stake. The current tenor of our conversation was predictable and can be easily explained. It was predictable because, as a famous economist once said, if something can’t go on forever it probably won’t. And it’s explainable by the dual effects of unsustainable spending levels and revulsion at government’s increasing and political inclination to pick winners and losers.
The simple fact of the matter is that we’re running out of stuff to give away, and both the givers and the takers are starting to squeal. Past politicians and their collegial colleagues were fortunate to serve during a period when government at all levels could shift from being a protector of rights to a provider of goods by passing the bill along. They in effect could say “Vote for me and I’ll give you this and make that guy pay for it.” “That guy” is getting tired of it.
Federal spending increased 299% above inflation between 1970 and 2009. Household income, meanwhile, went up a paltry 27%. That means that government largesse grew at over ten times the rate of household incomes. Of course people got along. Our elected representatives weren’t making hard choices about preserving America’s unique strengths in a more complicated world; they were merely borrowing from our kids and making deals on how to divide the spoils. It’s easy to get along when you’re spending someone else’s money and the pot is ever expanding. It’s only when the bottom of the pot becomes visible that the feeding frenzy begins.
The other reason people aren’t getting along is that government has reached an unprecedented level of picking winners and losers, often for overtly political ends. If you’re worried about negative campaign ads or corporate lobbying, before bemoaning the symptom you should consider that every dollar spent comes from somebody or some interest who either wants to be on a winners’ list or off a losers’ list. Eliminate government’s ability to pick winners and losers and you eliminate the incentive for gaming the campaign finance system and hiring K Street lobbyists. Anything else is just picking at the scab.
I for one also find it offensive that mega corporations like General Electric can apparently create a business plan based on green energy incentives and then pay zero taxes on billions in income while I pay higher energy costs and watch good jobs go overseas. I’m offended that unions and advocacy groups like AARP can apply for and receive waivers from the more stringent sections of a health care bill that they spent tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars pushing onto the rest of us. That angers me, and if expressing that anger is more offensive to you than them using the government to pick my pocket then we clearly have different definitions of freedom.
So yes, the temperature and volume are rising. The people paying the bills are getting angry and the people reaping the benefits are getting scared. But for anyone who pines for the mostly mythical days of holding hands and group hugs across the aisle, I suggest you put the tools and responsibility for success and failure back into the peoples’ hands. If no one else is to blame, there’s no reason to point fingers.
Carl Graham is president of Montana Policy Institute, a nonprofit policy research center in Bozeman.
The Montana Policy Institute is an independent nonprofit policy research center based in Bozeman, with membership throughout the state. It provides analysis and information to encourage individual freedom, personal responsiblity, and free markets in Montana.
Americans are greatly misinformed when it comes to socialism and communism
Canada Free Press – Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh Thursday, May 26, 2011
Americans are greatly misinformed when it comes to socialism and communism. Winston Churchill said it best, “socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
Socialism is ownership and control by the government of the means of production and of distribution. It is the stage following capitalism in the transition to communism. During this stage, according to Marxist theory, collectivism is implemented imperfectly. Communism, the ultimate utopia, refines this process.
“Socius” is Latin for comrade and ally. You had to be very careful whom you allied with, lest you found yourself in jail or dead. “Communis” is Latin for “shared.” I can attest first hand that nobody shared anything under communism except misery and poverty, except for the ruling elite. Although communism is described in textbooks as having no classes, in reality there were two: the proletariat (the majority) and the ruling elite (communist party members).
The grandfather of all communists, Karl Marx, found a benefactor, Friedrich Engels, the son of a businessman in Prussia, to support him and his family while he sought re-distribution of wealth in his native Russia through “cultural and political revolution.” Karl Marx was your 1960s hippie bum who hated manual labor, finding ways with “ideas” to mooch off rich patrons.
While his large family survived on a diet of bread and potatoes, he worked on his “Communist Manifesto” with Engels. Three of his seven children died before the age of ten and one died in infancy because they were malnourished and literally starved to death.
In 1852, a police spy from Prussia said that Marx, with a Doctorate of Philosophy from Berlin University, “lived the life of a gypsy, rarely washing, combing, and changing his linens. He is a drunk and idle for days on end…” He was being spied on as the leader of the Communist Party. Such philosophers as Marx were not interested in contributing anything productive in society, but destroying it and creating their communist Utopia.
Marx died a pauper although his wife was the daughter of the Prussian Prime Minister. Espousing ideas and creating havoc in orderly society were more important to Marx than caring for his family or contributing to society in a positive way. His ideas laid the groundwork for immense destruction of property, of families, and the killing of millions of innocents across the globe…. (Con’t)
TWG Note: Nice. Looks as though Grassley is growing tired of the smug faces and middle fingers, too. Coupled with his newly-found spine, this might be interesting. By the way…. Just how were the thugs at the ATF planning to “track” all of those guns that they trafficked into Mexico?
You know Eric Holder and his DOJ (Department Of Jihad) have to be quite perturbed over this, as they’ve only got so much time to finish stacking the courts with gun-grabbers, anti-Semites, pedophiles, communists, radical domestic terrorists and islamic jihadists.]
Published May 25, 2011
A Republican senator looking for answers on a gun-trafficking investigation gone awry is warning the Justice Department that nominees for top positions could be in jeopardy if the administration doesn’t start cooperating.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has threatened to block Justice nominations until he gets answers. A Grassley aide told FoxNews.com on Wednesday that three Justice nominees recently sent to the floor could be the first to get caught up in the dispute.