Archive for January, 2010

Movies That Made Me Hate the Government (part one)

Sunday, January 31st, 2010

Just a fun post for today.  I’m going to visit my childhood and list a few movies that fostered my distrust of government and authority, with some brief reviews and comments.  Some will be well-known and obvious, but others might be a little more obscure. 

I saw this in theaters twice and I own it on VHS.  Sadly, I don’t think that it’s been released on DVD, and Blu-Ray?  Come on.  Yet, this movie, based loosely on the legend of the 1947 Roswell, New Mexico UFO crash, made a huge impression on me as a kid.  It fed my budding sense of outrage that our government would keep such a secret from the people, and that they would be willing to kill to keep the secret from getting out.  I haven’t watched it in years so I have no idea if it holds up.  Chances are it doesn’t, but if you can find it, it’s worth a viewing, especially if you were 10 to 13 years old in ‘83, it’ll bring back some memories.

I think I read this book too.  Loosely based on a true story, this 1984 movie stars Scott Schwartz (A Christmas Story, The Toy, and several adult feature films in the 1990’s) as a young entrepreneur who starts a successful fertilizer/pest control business only to have the government come in and shut them down.  As usual, the government ruins all the fun.  In recent years, life imitates art as school bake sales become banned and don’t you even think of having a lemonade stand, or the Board of Health will land on you like a ten ton hammer.

I was angry from the minute the cop confiscated Wren’s Quiet Riot tape.  I mean, yelling ‘No!’ at the screen.  I was pissed.  This movie, I have to give credit, it inoculated me against the bullshit that is organized religion, and for all the evangelical types like to bitch about Hollywood indoctrinating audiences against Christians, look, it wasn’t that far off the mark for what the evangelicals and Moral Majority members were actually doing.  There were towns where dancing was not allowed.  There was a big push to ban all kinds of popular music of the time.  The Dead Kennedys were put on trial for their music (it was never about the H.R. Giger insert, the authorities had a hard-on for that band since they started).  The infamous PMRC hearings followed a couple years after this movie.  After failing to get record labels to censor their rock music, the censorship movement shifted to rap and hip-hop in the 90’s because it was easier to scare lily-white Christians with gangsta rap than it was to scare them with Twisted Sister (who had since jumped the shark).  Looking back, the movie is a bit dated.  OK, it’s really dated.  Chris Penn is not only alive, he’s skinny.  And Bacon’s solo dance number/montage is hysterical, but the emotion of it still resonates with me, the influence that a majority of religious people can have in a small town to the point of outlawing dancing (or anything else) is something we see repeated on a bigger scale when majorities vote for state constitutional amendments that strip gay & lesbian couples of their right to marry, for example.

This goes without saying.  I mean, you have a kid who discovers an alien, a government that is spying on people trying to find said alien, and trying to capture the creature for their own designs.  It’s classic kid vs. government, I loved those movies back in the day.  Only watch the original, though, do NOT watch the altered and mutilated anniversary edition where the guns the government agents were pointing at the kids were replaced by hand-held radios.  When the feds bust in your door they will NOT be carrying walkie-talkies.  Plus, this movie got snubbed at the Oscars for Chariots of FireChariots of Fire was fucking terrible. 

This one was late 80’s, I was a little older.  Goes like this.  Government builds a cyborg prototype that for all outward appearances, is a teenage boy.  Government decides to scrap the program, and that means that the robot-boy will be killed.  A great tale that asks some good questions.  When is a life a life?  If a person creates a life artificially, through inventing a sentient, self-aware android, does that android then assume individual liberty by virtue of his own free will, or is he a disposable slave to his creator?  It was a well-made movie and a good story as well, but it definitely made me think.

So…  this is your homework assignment.  If you haven’t seen these movies, you must watch them.  See if they affect you the same way they affected me.  And ask yourself, what modern movies out there portray government as the villain against the protagonist who wants to be free these days?   Is there any film in the last 10 years or so where you feel incensed and angry with authority that steamrolls the individual, or do movies seem to be pushing the glory of the collective?

Let me know.

~Matti Frost

Internet Movie Firearms Database

Saturday, January 30th, 2010
Michael Cheritto stands guard with a FN FAL 50.61 rifle with a Para folding-stock - 7.62mm NATO

Tom Sizemore as Michael Cheritto stands guard with a FN FAL 50.61 rifle with a Para folding-stock – 7.62mm NATO in Heat.

http://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Main_Page

Totally awesome. Search by movie or gun.

The Most Pressing Issue Faced Today

Saturday, January 30th, 2010

With the economy still in peril, troops still on the ground in two theaters, and rogue nations developing nuclear weapons, we would think that our federal government would have a lot to occupy their time. Apparently, nothing can be more important than getting involved in matters that should never be discussed by the Legislative or the Executive. The most pressing issue of the day is the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) for college football.

Of course we all hate the BCS. A playoff series would be more fair, and exponentially easier to understand. We shouldn’t have to have a degree in Statistics to understand the ranking system, but is this how senior members of the Senate and the Obama administration need to be spending their time? Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) has requested a review by the Justice Department concerning the matter. Apparently he agrees with President Obama that the BCS ranking system is just too much to bear. Obama stated before his inauguration that he disagreed with the system in place for determining a National Champion football team. I believe the direct quote was “Throw my weight around” to nudge the BCS into a playoff system. Now we have the Justice Department reviewing whether an Anti-Trust investigation is needed. Now I suppose we must sit back and wait for the Justice Department to find a law that would invade into college football. Statist intervention at its finest.

On a positive note, when the issue is big enough, Republicans and Democrats can work together in a beautiful demonstration of bi-partisanship to accomplish far reaching goals. Economy, health care reform, and war are just trivial issues that should be politicized, but college football…

-Justin West

We’re all gonna die!

Friday, January 29th, 2010

…but that ain’t a bad thing.

The simplest explanation I have of “I know there is a soul” (and this relates to “there is love and it’s more than chemical”), is very simple. It’s something that hit me when I was about 11, and I’ve believed it since. It’s this:

If you have a video camera filming something, and running a cable to a live monitor, the thing the camera is filming is “seen” by the video monitor.

But when the human eye sees something, what “sees” it inside you? I know that there’s a neural chemical reaction in sections of the brain, but what sees that? I believe that is the soul.

The mechanics of the body are largely understood. The mechanics of “consciousness” are more about the soul.

I believe that I am too alive for all that to stop simply because my heart will stop beating one day. I don’t know what sort of “afterlife” there will be, but I know in my heart of hearts there will be one, and that it will not be horrible. I don’t know that because someone told me, I know it because I can feel it.

–Michael W. Dean

RIP JD Salinger

Thursday, January 28th, 2010

JD Salinger, the reclusive author of The Catcher in the Rye, died yesterday. He was 91. Catcher has been my favorite book since I first read it in the 8th grade, he’s even why I started calling myself JD instead of Jeff. Well hey, maybe they can finally make Catcher into a movie, but if it sucks, I’m gonna kill a Beatle.

PS. Fuck you.

-JD

RLC video fun

Wednesday, January 27th, 2010

Michael W. Dean and Debra Jean Dean do a bunch of takes from a collaborative promo project for the RLC (Republican Liberty Caucus).

Paul Shirley is a dick

Wednesday, January 27th, 2010

From Bphlat:

Paul Shirley, the former NBA player who still plays pro basketball, penned a long letter today about Haiti and the consequences of its earthquake, in which he seems to hold most Haitians accountable for the dire state of the nation.

He begins the letter by stating that he has not donated to relief efforts in Haiti and “probably will not… for the same reason that I don’t give money to homeless men on the street.” Shirley proceeds to criticize the country and its citizens, before pausing to ask, “Shouldn’t much of the responsibility for the disaster lie with the victims of that disaster?”

Later in the letter, Shirley dedicates a special address specifically to Haitians:
================================================== ==================================================

Dear Haitians -

First of all, kudos on developing the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. Your commitment to human rights, infrastructure, and birth control should be applauded.

As we prepare to assist you in this difficult time, a polite request: If it’s possible, could you not re-build your island home in the image of its predecessor? Could you not resort to the creation of flimsy shanty- and shack-towns? And could some of you maybe use a condom once in a while?

Sincerely,

The Rest of the World
(Paul Shirley)

This is totally dickish.

I’m all for not putting all of Haiti on welfare forever, and I’m not personally flying there to volunteer. I haven’t even texted a ten-dollar donation. But passive-aggressively poking fun of them while they’re down (further down than most people will ever be) is a total dick move.

Fortunately, most of them will never see this letter. How many Haitians do you think had radio/TV/internet before the earthquake? And how many of them have it now, after the earthquake?

The per-capita income in Haiti before the earthquake was $790 per year.

If you were born into that, I don’t care how forward-thinking and visionary and smart you are, there isn’t much you could do to improve your personal station, let alone your country’s station.

Especially under an extremely corrupt government where if you made more money the soldiers and police would steal it at gunpoint. (And there is no legal ownership of guns for the citizens of Haiti. And the UN came in and took away most of the illegal ones a few years back.)

And if you made a lot of noise as any kind of activist to try to organize people to make things better, you’d likely disappear from the face of the Earth in the middle of the night.

I don’t think there’s any plausible “blaming the people of Haiti” for their country’s shitty situation, pre- or post-earthquake. At all.

You can make FAR more money than $790 per year in America picking up soda cans on the street and taking them to the recycling center. I used to know people who did that for a living. You can easily make $790 per month in America doing that.

America really is “the healthiest patient in the cancer ward.” I’m grateful I was born here.

–Michael W. Dean

$170 recording studio

Wednesday, January 27th, 2010

I’ve got thousands of dollars worth of recording gear. If you want to spend that much, and get the best sound you can, here’s a list of what I use.

If you’re on an extreme budget, here’s some really cheap stuff you can get away with to record on your computer.

All-in-one kit – $169 for all this:

Samson C01UCW Studio Condenser USB Microphone
Cakewalk Software
Mike Stand BL3
Microphone Pop Filter
SP01 Shock Mount
10 ft. USB 2.0 Extension


–Carpet remnants to nail up on walls: free (pulled out of dumpster behind carpet store)

If you have a room you can sacrifice, it would be good to nail up carpet remnants on the wall for the place you do your recording. An echoy room will make a shitty recording. You can always add reverb in your editing program, but you can’t take it away.

I did this to a room in our old house:

In our new house, I only did that in a small closet, because I’m only recording voice and guitar in there…not drums. I record bass direct into a tube preamp, and use drum loops.

It’s a lot less work to sound-condition a closet than a whole room:

If you’re recording live drums, There are lots of ways, partially depending on how many mics you have.

1 mic: hang it overhead.

2 mics: one overhead, one on the bass drum. Or two overhead, crossing each other in direction.

3 mics: one on bass drum, two overhead, crossing each other in direction.

4 mics: one on bass drum, one between the snare and high hat, two overhead, crossing each other in direction.

5 or more mics: one on each drum and cymbal, two overhead, crossing each other in direction.

If you’re recording live with other instruments in the room, you should try to get some isolation, with gobos.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gobo_%28recording%29

You can make gobos pretty easily.

By crossing the overhead mics, I mean this:

If you wanna go old school (non-computer, non-digital), you could pick up a cassette 4-track Portastudio on eBay cheap. (Maybe 100 bucks?) That might be a good choice for if you’re not very computer literate.

Here’s a page with MP3 links:
http://www.hitsofacid.com/SexKissCage/sex_kiss_cage.html
to the demo Bomb made that got us signed to Warner Brothers. Was recorded on a portastudio with an outboard compressor, two Sure sm58 microphones (about 80 bucks each…they’re the mics usually used for the vocal mics in clubs).

One of our guitar players engineered it, and I think it sounds pretty good for no-budget.

You could skip the outboard compressor if you were REALLY careful with all the levels.

We recorded the guitars, bass and drums live to two tracks with two SM58s hung from the ceiling, about ten feet apart, in the practice space. Then we overdubbed my vocals to one track, then added more guitars (both at the same time) to the last track.

You’d still want to hang up blankets or nail up carpet. A good dead-sounding room is important.

Happy recording!

–Michael W. Dean

Gun violence is the lefties’ fault

Tuesday, January 26th, 2010

Gun violence is the fault of the progressives.

I don’t really have much of a problem with the Democratic Party. I have a problem with the so-called progressives, the far-Left, which usually lives these days in the Democratic Party (Pelosi, Obama, Reid, Frank, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and Ted Kennedy, whom I want to congratulate on getting five months sober this week!) But there are progressives on the Right too. John McCain is one. Rudy Giuliani is another.

The only legitimate, Constitutional, moral role of government is to protect the borders and protect the Constitutional rights of the citizens. This is right-wing/libertarian ideology in a nutshell.

By definition, progressives are people who think that government should grow and should attempt to “solve” everyone’s problems (often the problems created by the government). Progressives are busybodies. They think they’re smarter than you. They tend to say “THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!” and “THINK OF THE CHILDREN!” a lot. To which I say “You think of your children, I’ll think of mine.”

A good example of progressive thought in action is the financial crisis: progressives (like Obama, but also George W. Bush in his “lame duck” period) caused a problem. Then they try to solve the same problem, using the people who caused it (Ben Bernanke). Then they do exactly what should NOT be done (printing more money, going into debt).

Any eighth grader who’s good at math can tell you that’s the wrong way. The right way is to get out of the way, remove regulations, and let the economy flourish.

Here’s a good video explaining this. It’s sort of “School House Rock” for the new generation:

It is not the role of government to “create jobs.” At best, the role of government is to create an environment (low taxes, no nanny laws) where jobs are created by a free market.

There are tens of thousands of gun laws in America, at the federal, state and local level. Yet not one of them has ever prevented a crime. They only serve to make politicians look like they’re doing their job, and make law-abiding citizens into criminals.

Progressives want to outlaw guns to solve the problem of gun violence, a problem the progressives created!

Right-wing states like Utah and Wyoming have a very low incidence of gun violence. And guns are common, and treated with respect. People are also treated with respect. (The ironic thing is that less “redneck” places look at places like Utah and Wyoming as “primitive.” They laugh at us. They are wrong. We’re far more socialized and decent places to live. I know. I’ve lived in Los Angeles, and I’ve had a knife held to my throat in a mugging in New York City.)

Left-wing progressive places like New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago and Washington, D.C. have high rates of gun violence. Sure, part of this has to do with population, but a lot of it has to do with culture.

I’m not a Christian, but I believe that Christian upbringing ain’t a bad thing. Back when that was the norm, gun crime was much lower. Even the “Wild West”, often considered the go-to example of gun violence, didn’t have that much gun violence. That impression is the work of Hollywood. Which is filled with progressives. When is the last time you saw a person in a movie use a gun in a moral way, in pure self-defense? Almost never. Yet movies are filled with people using guns, almost always in an immoral way. Using a gun in a movie is “shorthand” for excitement. The prevalence of guns in movies is the result of lazy screenwriters, and gun-hating producers.

Right-wing places teach children to work for their goals. Left-wing places teach children that they are “entitled”, that they only have to “dream it, and they’ll get it.”….”I gots to get mine“….. Which place do you think produces more bitter, disappointed people willing to shoot up a crowd of innocents?

Progressives also downplay the role of family. Conservatives tend to have stronger families, and teach that “family is all”. Progressives teach that the family unit is an impediment, that you should “spread your wings and find your own way.”

Which group do you think has a better foundation for dealing with problems?

Progressives are revisionist with history. They downplay the role of guns in the founding of America, especially in the American Revolution. The whitewash the role of hard work in the foundation and strengthening of America. They consider wealth a bad thing, something that only exists to be stolen and redistributed to those who “deserve it” just for existing. This creates an angry underclass of people who not only think the world owes them a living, but reinforces it with a bi-monthly check.

Progressives support revolving-door prison systems, and are usually against the death penalty. Both of these put more violent people back on the street and don’t discourage violent behavior. Progressives generally consider violent felons to be a “victims of a bad upbringing” rather than simply broken machines. A good example is the ACLU, which has reams of writings on the rights of violent criminals in custody, but not one word on self-defense.

Progressives teach that any culture except American culture (including guns) is to be protected. Progressives teach that American culture is embarrassing, something to apologize for.

The progressive media also only ever reports immoral uses of guns. When was the last time you saw a news story about a little old lady using her gun to keep from being killed by some armed scumbag wanting to kill her to take her Social Security check for a fix? Yet it happens all the time.

Progressives teach their children not to have a Christian morality. They also teach their kids that “life is cheap” by telling them that abortion is a valid option if they “inconvenience” themselves with a pregnancy (due to their “fuck everything that moves” progressive morality).

I’m not making a case for anti-abortion or pro-Christianity or anti-”free love”, but I believe that “progressive” views on abortion, sex, family and religion, combined with Hollywood, have contributed heavily to gun violence seeming like a “solution” to many people. I am saying that the anti-Christian pro-abortion anti-family “I gots to get mine” agenda of progressives, and guns in Hollywood movies, are all the fault of the progressives, and contribute heavily to the prevalence of gun violence.

My brother was an Eagle Scout and participated in an after-school riflemanship program at his public school. When he was a high school senior in 1963 (back when America had a Christian morality), he used to bring his .22 rifle and ammo on the school bus and keep it in his locker for the after-school shooting classes. No one got shot, and no one cared. Whereas if you brought a boy scout pocket knife to school now, you’d be kicked out of school and likely arrested.

Obama’s DHS warns to look out for pro-American right-wing gun nuts. But almost all of the recent mass gun violence was done by people who were anti-American and left wing. The Ft. Hood shooter was anti-American. Even the shooter at the Holocaust Museum was a registered Democrat who hated Fox News.

Never forget, the KKK were Democrats! And the guy who freed the slaves was a Republican. And while we’re at it, Wyoming was the first place to give women the vote. Though that may have just been so some of them would move here!

Gun violence is the fault of the progressives. And it’s immoral that so-called progressives try to take away my guns just because they’ve wrecked so much of the world with their policies. Gun violence in secular New York City and Los Angeles has nothing to do with me in Christian Wyoming. So back the fuck off.

–Michael W. Dean

Gun control is immoral

Monday, January 25th, 2010

So, someone asked me today about “sensible” gun control. I maintain that no such thing exists.

First…

Most people who want to regulate guns don’t know much about them.

This comment on another post on this blog is typical:

I do believe that we do have the right to protect ourselves with a firearm like a shotgun or a rifle. The thing that I’m not convinced on is the need to own assault weapons like an AK-47 or an Uzi.

Here’s the thing: an AK-47 IS a rifle. And a pretty anemic one at that. Any .30 cal deer rifle has MUCH more destructive power. And range. And with a  scope, it’s pretty much a sniper rifle that could kill a man at a quarter mile. (And most deer rifles are .30 cal, it’s pretty cruel to hunt deer with anything smaller, you need to kill deer in one shot, or they suffer.) An AK-47 cannot kill effectively at a quarter mile.

Not that any of that is reassuring to anyone who likes gun control, but you will NEVER get guns out of the hands of the millions of deer hunters in America. Never.

Though the “sporting purpose” mentioned by many gun grabbers (as in “we want to ban anything that does not have a sporting purpose”) has nothing to do with the Second Amendment. The “sporting purpose” crap came from an American adaptation of a Nazi Germany gun control law.

Gun control is immoral because all honest, free men have an innate right to self-defense, on a one-to-one level, like a violent mugger, but also on a larger, “opposing tyranny” level.

The Second Amendment has nothing to do with shooting deer. The right to shoot deer was a given in the rural community of early America. If you couldn’t shoot deer, you’d starve.

The Second Amendment has to do with being able to make sure that the government doesn’t get too large. To protect yourself from government. Though even uttering these words today gets you put on a watch list. Fedzilla has grown to the point that it wants to remove the Second Amendment. And they do it slowly, in bits and pieces. Give ‘em an inch and they take a mile.

Because of the Second Amendment, politicians cannot outright ban guns. So they go after them incrementally, and each bit of gun control (or ammo control, lately) legislation is a step toward the unstated goal of the government having all the guns and the people having none. Once that happens, they can cram anything down your throat, and there is nothing you can do about it.

America was founded by guys who were really pissed.
But if you quote the Founding Fathers now, you’re called a terrorist!

–”Liberty in Shards” by Right Arm of Wyoming

Most politicians who want to outlaw guns don’t do so for love of the public safety. They only do it for power: the power of having the government have the only guns, and the power of getting votes. Politicians love votes, and promising to be “tough on guns” (instead of being tough on actual crime, which is harder) usually gets a few votes with the “think of the children!” parrots.

Back to the original reason for the Second Amendment: you don’t have to use your guns to prevent encroaching tyranny, you only have to have them. And maybe be willing to use them if things get bad enough. And have the skill to do so.

By the way, you need rifles to oppose tyranny. No revolutions were ever won with pistols, and tyranny is not opposed with a shotgun.

“Progressive” leftists tend to be into banning guns, because leftists think that they know what’s best for everyone. People on the right have more trust in people. They don’t need to “nanny” everyone.

But most leftist gun grabbers have never held a gun, so why should they be in charge of regulating them? Here’s a typical gun grabbing leftist, trying to explain the random indicators that defined an “assault weapon” under the “assault weapon ban” that she helped create.

Would you trust someone who is that stupid about pharmaceuticals to regulate medicine? (Never mind, that’s what the Democrats are trying to do with health care.)

Note that she also uses the incorrect term “clip” (should be “mag” or “magazine”) Also, “assault weapon” is a made-up, meaningless term. As is the specious indicators that “defined” one under that law. A pistol grip on a rifle never killed anyone, nor does it help anyone kill anyone. There is something called an “assault rifle” (a full-auto, select fire AK-47 would qualify, so do the guns our boys carry in Iraq, but both of those are already illegal for private citizens in America), but gun grabboids’ definition of “assault weapon” often includes many shotguns and hand guns too. Basically, it banned anything that looked like a military weapon, was black, and looked scary. They banned some very underpowered guns, and didn’t ban some very powerful guns, based entirely on cosmetics. Some gun lovers even called the “assault weapons ban” the “scary looking ugly black gun ban.”

Obama’s boy Eric Holder tried to reinstate the “Assault Weapon” ban last year, and said it was to help Mexico in their War on Drugs! Trying to limit our Constitutional rights to help a foreign country is treasonous, in my opinion.

All gun control has historically led to total gun confiscation, which has always led to tyrants being able to kill dissenters. Hitler, Pol Pot and Stalin all took away the guns before doing the horrible things they’re best known for.

Gun control and gun registration does not prevent crime. There are thousands of gun laws on the books, and not one of them has made anyone safer. They have only made criminals out of law-abiding citizens. Gun control simply disarms citizens. If your daughter were being stalked, would you want her to have to wait ten days to get a gun, when the criminal stalking her likely already has a gun? And while we’re on the subject of waiting periods: if you think they’re a good idea, keep people from buying a gun when they’re enraged, why should there be a waiting periods on your second gun? And your third, fourth, fifth, etc. ?

A lot of places are going after ammo, since they think that’s more Constitutional than going after guns. But limiting the amount of ammo people can get, and requiring paperwork on ammo, will have some dark unintended consequences: criminals breaking into honest follks’ homes to get ammo, and honest folks not being able to practice much. I think people who shoot should practice often, and with a lot of rounds. If someone is having to use a gun in a self-defense situation, the more practice they’ve had, the less likely they are to hit an innocent bystander.

And when asked why I should be able to have a military-pattern semi-auto gun, I say why not? I’m an honest person. Should you be limited to a slow computer with little memory because hackers can work faster on fast computers? I have a military-pattern rifle because who the fuck knows what’s going to come to my door or my neighborhood? If there were an earthquake and people were looting and trying to kill me, en mass, a shotgun and a handgun (which I also have) wouldn’t save me.

Why should my handgun be limited to a ten-round mag? If a criminal (who, by definition, does not respect the law and does not follow it) tries to mug me, starts shooting, why should I have to stop to reload? That could get me killed. (And anyone who says “If ten rounds isn’t enough, you’re not a good shoot” knows nothing about guns or self-defense. Especially when trying to fend off more than one bad guy, and they’re not standing still.)

A common chirp of gun grabboids is “The Founding Fathers didn’t imagine Uzis and AK-47s when they wrote the Second Amendment.” Well, I can guarantee if they did, they would have included that. They had the cutting edge of battle technology at the time.

A good response I’ve heard to “The Founding Fathers didn’t imagine Uzis and AK-47s when they wrote the Second Amendment” is a response about the First Amendment: “I’m willing to only carry a brace of muskets if the New York Times is willing to only publish on hand-run presses and only deliver papers by horseback.”

A lot of people confuse Uzis and AK-47s with machine guns, because both are also available in full-auto (machine gun). Only criminals have those in America. I know people with AK-47s, but they’re legal semi-auto versions.

By the way, I have several semi-auto rifles that are FAR more powerful than an AK-47.

Which brings me to the “Why do you need so many guns?” question. Well, why do you need so many shoes? I have different guns for different things. Plus, I just like guns. I like the history of them (which is why I own a 1943 gun that was actually used to kill actual Nazis), I like the feel of them, the mechanics and the science of them. Why does a stamp collector have so many damn stamps?

My guns in Wyoming don’t effect you in your state. My guns don’t even affect you if you’re my next-door neighbor. Like most gun owners, I’m an honest person. Assault and murder are illegal, and rightfully so. I will not do those things, I wouldn’t do them even if they were legal. So lay off my guns.

Guns hurt far less people than cars and swimming pools. And you don’t need a gun to hurt people. You can kill someone with a rock or a hammer. So keep your immoral desire to control my guns to yourself, and go after actual criminals instead of trying to make me into a criminal.

–Michael W. Dean

I hate children.

Monday, January 25th, 2010

Look upon this face.  This is the face that will steal your liberty every single time.  Do you know why?  I’ll tell you.

Your freedom is harmful to children, therefore it must be curtailed.  The ideal nanny state would reduce us all to this crying child, helpless to do anything without government help or better yet, permission.

About a year and a half ago, Colorado passed a law barring discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in such areas as employment, housing, credit, public accommodations, and so on.  While I am opposed to anti-discrimination laws on principle and believe them to be relics, the response from the social conservatives on the right was to try and scare people by saying that their children would be preyed upon by cross-dressers in public bathrooms.  Listen to this ad by Focus on the Family.  Try not to laugh, because although it is comical and absurd, a lot of people fall for shit like this.

Here’s another spot by the lovely kooks at the National Organization for Marriage, the lovely bunch who brought you the hysterical “Gathering Storm” ads.

Notice how they use children to make parents afraid, scared that they will learn that gay people exist, that they’re even your neighbors and relatives, with the underlying, unstated threat being that acceptance of same-sex marriage will make your kids gay.

Lest you think I am a one-trick pony with this gay issue, look to other nanny-state laws that were put into effect initially to protect children, but were soon extended to all of us.  Seat belt laws are a prime example.  Used to be that if someone under 12 was in a car they had to be buckled in, but now we all have to wear them regardless.  It doesn’t matter that seat belts can kill by trapping someone in a burning car, strangling a motorist or passenger in a wreck, or holding them firmly to a seat that careens into a tree whereas an impact without a seat belt may have knocked them aside, the government is going to force you for your alleged own good to wear a seat belt, and it all started with the grand, noble idea of protecting the children.

Video games are a favorite target of censors who claim that they make children violent, or turn them into lethargic slugs who shun fresh air and grow obese.  Yes, it’s the video game, not the lack of parenting, that makes a child stay indoors on beautiful days.  It’s Grand Theft Auto that makes a kid steal a car or shoot someone.  Has to be, because the parents in these cases are all in utter denial that their special little zygote would do something so terrible.  It’s the same kind of denial that allowed Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold to stockpile guns and grenades and pipe bombs and pull off the Columbine Massacre.  Not my kids, not my fault, must be Marilyn Manson’s fault.

The most damaging instance, however, came following the halftime performance at the 2004 Super Bowl, when Justin Timberlake grabbed Janet Jackson’s blouse and tugged, exposing for a mere half a second, one saggy, flappy brown breast that had a gold star over the nipple.  You would have thought that she was masturbating with a crucifix in front of Catholic school kindergartners by the outrage, but in reality it was so fast that few people even saw it.  Cameras cut away and Janet quickly covered up her, ah, “wardrobe malfunction”.  If I remember correctly, this was tame compared to some of the other performances where raunchy bump and grinds were being performed by Nelly and the suggestive lyrics coming from him and Sean Combs (I have no idea what the fuck he calls himself these days).  In the aftermath of this event, the FCC increased their fines for indecency tenfold and began going after broadcasters in television and radio for things that wouldn’t have merited a second listen or look.  Howard Stern was chased off of terrestrial radio, and many morning “shock jocks” either lost their gigs or were forced to water down their shows to the point where they weren’t funny or engaging anymore.  The panic also had a chill factor on what networks and stations were willing to allow, and many programming decisions were now put in the hands of worrywart lawyers and middle management whose job was to insulate the company from fines and possible lawsuits.  The television networks are dying dinosaurs, giant carcasses being strangled by regulation, while cable thrives.  Terrestrial radio is a dead medium for all but political talk on the AM waves, satellite radio is ascendant.  The internet is blowing them all away, it’s truly the last frontier of free speech.

If you think the government and the FCC don’t want to stick their noses into cable, satellite, and internet, think again.  Bet you dollars to donuts the rationale they will use is “protecting the children”, because apparently, being a parent is hard and we need our government to help us out.

Think long and hard before you offer up everyone’s liberty as a sacrifice to protect your children.  Those of us who are over 30 grew up with very little of these restrictions and protections and we’re just fine.  You’re simply being groomed to accept more and more government intrusion into your everyday life, and they’re getting at you by preying on the fear that parents naturally have for their offspring.  Don’t fall for it, whether it comes from a liberal or a conservative, the government does not have your best interests at heart.  The leviathan is only after power and can never have enough.

~Matti Frost

IS AA a UN/Freemason plot?

Sunday, January 24th, 2010

Freemasons run the country!


lol……

Background: I don’t like the UN, but I have a lot of interest in the Freemasons, and it’s not negative. My dad was a Freemason. And so were many the Founding Fathers.

The Supreme Being and the Volume of Sacred Law

Candidates for regular Freemasonry are required to declare a belief in a Supreme Being. However, the candidate is not asked to expand on, or explain, his interpretation of Supreme Being. The discussion of politics and religion is forbidden within a Masonic Lodge, in part so a Mason will not be placed in the situation of having to justify his personal interpretation.[29] Thus, reference to the Supreme Being will mean the Christian Trinity to a Christian Mason, Allah to a Muslim Mason, Para Brahman to a Hindu Mason, etc. And while most Freemasons would take the view that the term Supreme Being equates to God, others may hold a more complex or philosophical interpretation of the term.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasons#The_Supreme_Being_and_the_Volume_of_Sacred_Law

You know, the only other place I’ve heard this line of thought is Alcoholics Anonymous. the whole “create your own higher power”, “god of your own understanding” stuff. I’ve never heard of a connection of AA and Freemasonry. And as a still-sober former AA member, and while I was in AA, I’ve studied the hell out of the history of AA. But I think it’s possible.

I have seen a site that says that AA is a UN-sponsored New World Order plot to remove Christian influences in society and replace Christianity with Secular Humanism.

That’s somewhere on this sprawling site
http://www.orange-papers.org/
written by a former AA member, still sober, but nuts and smart and waaaaay too much time on his hands…..all of it, for years, apparently devoted to debunking AA in a scholarly and heavily annotated fashion.

– Michael W. Dean

All-white basketball league

Sunday, January 24th, 2010

All-American Basketball Alliance

A new professional basketball league boasting rosters made up exclusively of white Americans has its eyes set on Augusta, but the team isn’t receiving a warm welcome.

I see no reason why they should not be able to do this, in a world where all other races have their own “our race only” coalitions and organizations. Can you imagine if someone started the “United Caucasian College Fund” or the “National Association for the Advancement of White People.”? They’d be crucified. Which is ironic, because while the United Negro College Fund” and the NAACP were started to foster a “leg up for people who are downtrodden”, at this point, they’ve accomplished their goals and then some.

For instance, it’s now far easier for a black or Asian student to get into a good university than it is for a white student with the same academic record and economic status.

However, back to the “White men CAN jump” B-ball league, they had to know going in that they’d get a shit storm, which is actually probably why they did it…to make a point.

Although I’m sure it’s guys who enjoy playing ball, and maybe don’t like playing with non-white players. In a libertarian paradise, there would be nothing wrong with this, nor would there be any reason to not have a black-only or Hispanic-only group. The only difference is, in the libertarian paradise, no group would get SPECIAL protections, just equal protections.

If you think anyone is welcome anywhere in today’s world, try being male and having a drink in a hardcore lesbian bar. I’ve tried that when I lived in San Francisco. It wasn’t pretty. Also try being white and having a drink in a bar in a black neighborhood. I’ve done that too. Wasn’t thrown out like in the lesbian bar, just ignored while simultaneously being “studied” like an strange insect.

I think racism is one of the most ridiculous aspects of humanity. But I also think there’s a lot of governmentally and socially protected “reverse racism” (i.e. actual racism, but against white people) in the world now, and I don’t mind calling it what it is.

MWD

Stupid stupid stupid liberals

Sunday, January 24th, 2010

Stupid stupid stupid liberals.

From CNN:

My 68-year-old mother-in-law refuses to take a bath but once a week. Is this healthy or even legally acceptable? Please help.
Is it LEGALLY ACCEPTABLE? Holy fucking hell….liberals want to regulate EVERYTHING. Can you imagine this call?: “Hello…911? My mother-in-law doesn’t bathe as often as I’d like. Please come arrest her.”
Fuck. Fuck these people. They should never have any power, and should probably all be sent at gunpoint to libertarian re-education camps immediately. (Just kidding.)
Reminds me of this:

and this

Supreme court allows unlimited corporate campaign donations

Saturday, January 23rd, 2010

I’m all for it. I think it will favor conservatives. Big Business has a lot more money than the labor unions, and big business leans conservative. (Look how hard Obama is spanking big business, how much he’s helping the unions, and how worried he is about this bill. And how much “progressives” hate it and are trying to stop it.)

I like corporations. I used to hate them, wrote whole books saying they were evil, but I’ve seen the light. I trust big business far more than big government. Big business doesn’t like people nannied, quite the opposite. Big business doesn’t want regulations on tobacco, trans fats, ammo or other things I like.

And the NRA has a lot more money than the Brady gun grabboids.

I think it’s a great move, a gift to the people by the conservative supreme court justices.

How did the wise Latina vote on this? She voted against it. There’s your answer.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100121/pl_nm/us_usa_court_politics_7

The court’s four liberals, including its newest member, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who was appointed by Obama, dissented.

–Michael W. Dean

RADIO FREE NESTLANDIA podcast

Friday, January 22nd, 2010

The Radio Free Nestlandia Act was ratified by a unanimous vote of the First Continental Congress of Nestlandia on August 11, 2008. This provided funding for the formation and continued operation of Radio Free Nestlandia.

SO….I wanna turn our new fans here on to my other little hobby. My wife and I do a podcast called : RADIO FREE NESTLANDIA. Check it out, here.

RSS feed is here:

We bill it as “THE VOICE OF A TWO-PERSON LIBERTARIAN NATION IN WYOMING.” The content is smart and funny and the audio quality is higher and better produced than most podcasts. We talk about guns, cats, politics, shopping, shoes, liberty, science, movies, and marriage. It’s a nifty slice-o-life, and y’all oughta check it out.

NESTLANDIA is a two-person nation consisting entirely of blissfully married couple, Michael W. Dean and Debra Jean Dean. (And their “subjects”, lol…their three cats.)

There are 36 episodes up. Check out these recent ones:

WHY IT’S TOTALLY PUNK ROCK TO VOTE REPUBLICAN – and new snowblower reviews
and a guest cast with my friend Nunzio:
Ronald Reagan was a Democrat

This broad sounds like nails on a chalkboard….

Wednesday, January 20th, 2010

God I hate listening to this broad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Estrich
Susan Estrich

She’s been on the news a lot doing commentary because she was Ted Kennedy’s adviser.

I am of the opinion that she sounds like she’s on sedatives, and her voice does sound like Harvey Fierstein.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Fierstein
How come women who go into news and politics mostly have slightly shrill voices (think: Palin). Is it because they developed that trying to be heard above men?

-Michael W. Dean

IF Obama runs in 2012?

Wednesday, January 20th, 2010

I just heard top Obama adviser David Axelrod on MSNBC basically apologizing for the Democrats being “arrogant.”, and conceding that their agendas might not work. He said in passing, “….if Obama chooses to run in 2012….”

Is that a Freudian slip? Does he know something we don’t know? Because I assumed Obama would certainly run in 2012.

I think the Democrats are finally figuring out that treating the American people like childeren to be nannied is not going to work.

Though now Howard Dean (no relation!) is on MSNBC saying people in Mass voted for Scott Brown to “show their disgust with not getting  healthcare passed.” !!???!!!

-Michael W. Dean

Punk Rock California Liberal buys a Gun, changes his registration to Libertarian and Moves to Wyoming

Wednesday, January 20th, 2010

(reprint from Libertarian Republican blog.)

BUY A GUN, LOSE ALL YOUR FRIENDS. (A true story of Republitarian redemption.)
Copyright 2009, Michael W. Dean

I’m a peace lovin’ guy. I’d never hurt anyone who did not try to hurt me.

Though I used to vote Democrat. But couldn’t really tell you why. I hated authority and I hated big government. I guess I just wasn’t paying attention. I was one of those folks who thought that following the issues was too much work. So I voted by clipping out the little voting guide from the leftie City Paper.

That’s how, many years ago, I ended up voting for Feinstein and Pelosi. (Don’t tell my friends at the NRA, the GOA and the JPFO. I’m now a card-carryin’ member of all three.)

A couple years ago I was awake late one night in my home in Los Angeles when someone outside tried to pry open our bedroom window. The guy wasn’t very badass. Unarmed, I chased him away just by going outside and confronting him.

But we were shaken. The next day I told my wife, Debra Jean, “Baby, we’re buying a shotgun.” She was very against it. She said, “Buying a gun is admitting that the world is a horrible place.” I said, “Baby, sometimes the world is a horrible place, and I love you, and we’re buying a gun.”

And being the one California Democrat with his balls intact, I bought a shotgun anyway, even though my wife hated the idea.

Turns out, we both really liked guns, and we loved our dates to the range. We soon added his ‘n’ hers 9mm pistols and a couple .22 rifles to our collection. Debra Jean became a good shot in weeks. Took me a little longer.

All of our friends were lefties, and most of them were concerned about the “new us.” But they still kept talking to us, and we even took one of them to the range. Once.

I started reading up on California and Federal gun laws. I’ve never been arrested and intended to keep it that way. Debra Jean (a paralegal) and I decided that the laws seemed designed not to protect people from violence, but rather they were structured to make honest folks into criminals.

Our new view of nanny-state gun laws made us look at California (and the USA) in a whole new way. And that made us both start paying attention to government and politics.

We became Republitarians almost overnight.

I got there from “punk rock anarchist” on one end and apolitical Democrat on the other. I loved the process, but it kinda hurt. Debra Jean didn’t have as far to go…..Turns out she was registered Republican. Which if I’d known years earlier, I probably wouldn’t have married her. But it never actually came up, which shows you how much attention I paid to politics, and shows you how much she loved me to marry me even though I’d made it clear I was “a compassionate liberal, not one of those stuffy old selfish Republicans like my dad.”

My wife really liked my political “spiritual transformation.” (Her dad, by the way, had given her Heinlein books to read as a child, and he’d stumped door to door for Goldwater.)

Debra Jean and I got itchy. Being around leftists suddenly gave us hives. So it was clear what we had to do: GET OUT OF CALIFORNIA AND MOVE TO WYOMING.

Our leftist friends got really worried. The “hipper” ones said, “OK, I guess I can “get” having a shotgun for protection, if you must. But I really don’t feel comfortable coming to a house with handguns in it, and…WAIT….YOU DON’T HAVE THEM WITH YOU NOW, in MY house, do you?!!…”

Or, “Who is this ‘Bob Barr’ person you say you’re voting for? Libertarian? What’s a ‘libertarian’?” And “Obama is so cool and hip and…Wait, WHAT? YOU’RE SELLING YOUR HOUSE AND MOVING TO WYOMING? And you wanna buy a BATTLE RIFLE? What the hell is a BATTLE RIFLE?!”

Let me just say this: our outgoing Christmas card list was a lot shorter this year. And I doubt we’ll get any cards from California, but if we do, the card will not likely have the word “Christmas” on it. And it will probably be colored green and say “Reduce! Reuse! Rejoice!”

I will promptly take that “Seasonal Holiday Greeting Card” at its word and toss it in the recycling bin. (See? We did import ONE of our hippie ways from California. But we would never in a billion years try to force our new friends and neighbors to do the same, out of respect for their liberty. And we love that our new friends and neighbors are far less “in other people’s business” than most everyone we met in California. Which is partly because our new friends and neighbors are nicer people, and partly because most of them own and carry guns, too. “An armed society is a polite society.”)

We’ve lived in Wyoming for almost six months and WE LOVE IT. The air is clean, the people are sweet and we can open carry a pistol, or have our loaded battle rifle on the car seat next to us. Talk about “breathing in the sweet air of liberty”!

Carrying a gun could literally get you killed by SWAT in California. Here, people just say, “Oh, my husband has that one! Is that the .357 or the .38 special?” or “Nice rifle! Getting in practice for antelope season?”

We feel like we left California and moved to AMERICA.

Our few remaining California leftie friends who still talked to us followed this ongoing transformation in words and pictures on my blog. One by one they STOPPED BEING OUR FRIENDS. Their comments ranged from a good friend of eight years saying “Michael, I love you, but I’m really worried about you” to a good friend of 23 years (a guy I was in a band with) saying, “Michael…..Once someone gets talked into these right-wing ideas very rarely can they be talked back…..This new-found cocky way of life is very wrong, very immoral and very dangerous. I’m older than you so consider my opinion, if you still can…I doubt you will. This makes me very sad. Good luck, dumb fuck.”

Another “friend” actually talked about organizing an intervention and driving out here to “save us.” Didn’t happen though. I guess it’s easier to take the bottle out of a passed-out drunk’s hand than it is to take guns away from people who are more awake and alive than they’ve ever been.

Even strangers chimed in. Typical of the many slams I received was a fan of my older books and music who said “I can’t believe how quickly you went from being a hip, artistic guy to being a fat WalMart redneck Red Lobster-eating NRA asshole.”

The comments from strangers made me laugh, in a dropped-jaw kind of way. The comments from the actual friends hurt. But I remembered what my dear sweet mother would have said: “If they say things like that sweetie, they’re not really your friends.” And my dad told me, “Better to find out now than further down the road.”

I do not cling to my “victimhood” and you’ll never catch me at a support group or on Oprah bitching about this, (nor would she likely have me). All in all it has really just reinforced my resolve to reject idiocy in all its forms.

I just cannot wrap my head around the fact that so many people, including ones I thought were “cool”, cannot wrap THEIR heads around the fact that “social justice” is always accomplished by muggery and thuggery. And they get freaked out if I say “Guns aren’t bad, guns are good….And guns make it harder to be a victim of muggery and thuggery.”

I now have a lot more to talk about with my dad and my father-in-law. I no longer think they’re “square”, and I really love yakking with them now. They “get it.” They get liberty.

Those other folks can just stay in California, me and my wife will be in AMERICA. If you need us, we’re probably on a date to the rifle range. After that we’ll be at Red Lobster, then WalMart.

Michael W. Dean sings in the “feisty libertarian punk rock band” RIGHT ARM OF WYOMING LibertarianPunk.com

His blog is Stink Fight

He writes books and makes documentary films for a living, they are listed here: oreillynet.com

Was it a real shocker that Coakley lost?

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

I mean it that way- this election was Martha Coakley’s to lose.  She was running for a seat that was held by a Democrat since 1962.  She couldn’t have gotten a better chance if the ghost of Ted Kennedy had anointed her himself.  Yet, she blew it.  Scott Brown did not win as much as Martha Coakley lost, and the reason is because Coakley simply didn’t believe that any Republican could pose a serious challenge to her.  Arrogance and pride have been the downfall of many people, and will continue to be so as long as we’re human. 

Let me put one thing out there right now- I don’t like Scott Brown.  I would not have voted for him if I were a resident of Massachusetts.  Scott Brown is a man who posed as a moderate while having the National Organization for Marriage run his anti-gay stealth campaign by placing robocalls urging voters to “defeat “radical” Martha Coakley because of her support of same-sex marriage.”  Scott Brown was not happy that same-sex marriage became the law in Massachusetts and voted for a state amendment to ban gays & lesbians from marrying their partners.  The damage he can do in the Senate to the pursuit of true LGBT equality is palpable.

However, I tend to take a less fearful look at this, because Scott Brown does not have a full term coming up, he’s got three years.  When he runs for re-election he will also be running during a presidential election year.  The Democrats will regroup in Massachusetts and put forth a serious candidate- possibly even another Kennedy- in opposition, so Brown shouldn’t feel too comfortable with that prospect.  It’s a shame, really, that he has such good positions on other issues that I completely agree with, such as his support for Second Amendment rights, sensible environment policies, and how we treat our veterans , but his support of anti-gay marriage amendments and his hobnobbing with the NOM is something I find personally offensive.  This isn’t politics to me, Scott, this is my life, and my relationship that you’re saying should be held up and judged by mob rule.  Martha Coakley, meanwhile, is fighting as the Massachusetts state attorney general against the Defense of Marriage Act that forbids the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages that are legitimate in any given state.  You know, the case that the Obama administration is vigorously defending against even though it doesn’t really have to, but I digress.

The one thing I will say is that Scott Brown does know what the Obama healthcare plan will do to the country, because it’s very similar to the plan that Scott Brown voted for  in 2006 while he was a Massachusetts state senator.  Brown claims that the two programs are completely different, but both plans have at their core a giant giveaway to private insurance companies.  Both plans force people without insurance to purchase it and penalize those who the government deems “able” to afford it with fines and higher taxes.  To me, Brown’s semantics fall flat.  He voted for the bill in Massachusetts because he’s a party-line guy.  Regardless, he is right that Obama’s plan is a bad one, but I have the feeling that if McCain had been elected and he was pushing the same thing, we’d see a different song coming from Scott Brown.

I’ll also give the guy credit for running a campaign.  Clearly he is a hard worker who was effective in communicating with voters and getting his message out.  If you read his website he actually sounds reasonable.  He wouldn’t be a bad candidate if he wasn’t such a homophobe and hypocrite, and he certainly looks better naked than Martha Coakley.

~Matt Frost

“Where’s your god now?”…

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

…That’s just one of over 1000 angry and delightful Democrat posts on DemocraticUnderground about Brown winning in Mass.

By the way, am I the only one who noticed that Brown’s victory speech sounded like he’s already running for president? MARK MY WORDS.

–Michael W. Dean

Are The Tides Turning?

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

It looks as though the race for the vacant senate seat in Massachusetts has taken a turn against the Democratic Party. In a state as liberal as the Bay State, the election of a Republican by a solid margin cannot bode well for those that wish to experiment with socialism. This very well could be a gaze into the crystal ball concerning the 2010 Mid-term elections. At the very least, it will upset the “super majority” in the senate. Dick Durbin said that if Brown wins, that the Democrats will use reconciliation to force health care through the senate. Now that only 38% approve of the health care joke, and 56% oppose… Please Mr. Durbin, get desperate and send every moderate voter in the country away from your camp.

–Justin West

The thrill up his leg is gone

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

Chris “I felt this thrill going up my leg from Obama” Matthews is on TV right now covering the crucial Massachusetts Senate campaign…it’s looking like the Republican is winning, and Mathews is laughing about it all, and he’s criticizing Obama.

When MSNBC concedes defeat of their agenda, does that mean they are getting ready to just “back the winner” if the winner switches?

Reminds me of that Kent Brockman line on the Simpsons when he’s reporting about the alien invasion, “I for one welcome our new alien overlords….and as a seasoned broadcast professional, I could help them drum up support.”

Fuck it. I’ll take it. I almost like it.

–Michael W. Dean

The lost tracks by THE BEEF PEOPLE (free MP3s!)

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

Nothing political here, just some nice punk rock I did back in th’ 80s.

The Lost Beef People tracks. Recorded in 1985 at Inner Ear Studio, engineered by Don Zientara. I played guitar on this. (I’m the blond hippie punk on the right):

(Beef People singer Brian Childers passed away in 2008.)

We recorded and mixed about 15 tracks in probably 8 hours. Some were released as the 1985 EP “Music for Men” (Catch Trout Records.) These remaining seven tracks were finally released last year by UK label Damaged Records” on vinyl, limited edition of 500, only went out as inserts in an issue of Artcore zine.

The vinyl EPs have all long sold out, so I can post MP3s now:

Pavlov’s Dog:
http://michaeldeanvoice.com/BeefPeople-Pavlov’sDog.mp3

Move It:
http://michaeldeanvoice.com/BeefPeople-MoveIt.mp3

Fetus in Formaldehyde:
http://michaeldeanvoice.com/BeefPeop…rmaldehyde.mp3

Lots:
http://michaeldeanvoice.com/BeefPeople-Lots.mp3

Living in a Gas Chamber:
http://michaeldeanvoice.com/BeefPeop…gasChamber.mp3

Industrial Jelly:
http://www.michaeldeanvoice.com/Beef…trialJelly.mp3

First airplay (WTJU) and some nice old-school hardcore show radio banter:
http://michaeldeanvoice.com/BeefPeople-onWTJU.mp3

–Michael W. Dean

MLK owned guns

Monday, January 18th, 2010

Remember all this when any gun grabber (including Obama, who sometimes seems to think he’s MLK Jr. Jr.) demands you give up your guns.

http://www.lesjones.com/posts/004857.shtml

Well before his decision (apparently in 1955) to embrace Ghandian non-violence as the best tactic in the national showdown over civil rights, King had been a committed civil rights activist, but also a man who believed in protecting himself and his family against constant threats of racist violence (which included the bombing of his home).

Accordingly, the pre-Ghandian King had been armed to protect himself and his family — to the point where his home was described by one activist as “an arsenal“:

King would later admit that at the start of the boycott be was not firmly committed to Gandhian principles. He had initially advocated nonviolence not as a way of life but as a practical necessity for a racial minority. When his home was bombed at the end of January, he had cited Jesus– “He who lives by the sword will perish by the sword”– rather than Gandhi in urging angry black neighbors to remain nonviolent. At the time of the bombing, King was seeking a gun permit, and he was protected by armed bodyguards. Only after the bombing did King alter his views on the use of weapons for protection. His reconsideration was encouraged by the arrival in Montgomery of two pacifists who were far more aware than he of Gandhian principles.

Also see The Racist Origins Of Gun Control

Freedom: $228 at WalMart

Sunday, January 17th, 2010

My new little laptop (right) with my standard laptop (left)

If you want to change the world from anywhere, if you want to criticize Eric Holder while on the run from his silly new “hate crime laws“,  if you’re one of the right-wing bloggers he’s unconstitutionally targeting, you need one of the new $228 netbook from eMachines.

They went on sale the day after Christmas, and each WalMart has only ten of them. (As of yesterday, the east-side WalMart in Casper, Wyoming still had four of them.) They’re only in-store, not available via mailorder.

If you can’t find one at WalMart, it’s basically a rebranded version of  this same Acer laptop, which you can buy on Amazon for $298, still a good deal.

This thing works great. It’s easy to type on, the keyboard is almost full sized. It’s got 10.1 inch display, 1GB of RAM, fast 1.6 GHz processor, 250 gig hard drive (!) WiFi and Windows 7 Starter Edition. Windows 7 Starter edition is pretty good, WAY better than the virus known as Vista. Windows 7 Starter has got a few things disabled, the shiny bullshit called Aero (which I would disable anyway), you cannot change the desktop, and you can only run three applications at a time (plus anti-virus). But for blogging, surfing, checking e-mail and such, it rocks.

Blogging at the sheeple

It’s fast enough to run Photoshop, Microsoft Office, even audio editing programs for podcasting while complaining about ironically named “Libertarian Paternalism” that is so loved by the Obama administration, and is destroying America.

The cute little lappie even has a built-in web cam, I used it to take these goofie pix of myself blogging:

So, this laptop is actually improving my already wonderful marriage, I don’t have to go into the other room to use a computer, I can hang out with my wife while she reads. That was hard to do with my larger laptop, but this little two-pound miracle makes it easy.

The pen is mightier than the swoard, but it never hurts to be good with both. The Second Amendment protects the First, so I have a little computer to go with my littlest gun now. Yay!

A day trip to planet Klendathu

Saturday, January 16th, 2010

We took a drive today to Hell’s Half Acre, an hour from Casper.  This place was the set for Klendathu in the movie “Starship Troopers.”

It’s cold, barren, weird, and some poacher asshole had left four deer heads by the gate we had to jump over. There was also a dead cat (with the head attached), but I didn’t want a photo of that.

HOPE? and CHANGE?

Saturday, January 16th, 2010

Great video put together from my friend Chris from the JPFO.

Death threats to me on YouTube

Saturday, January 16th, 2010

Got a nice one today:

suboptimal wrote

This is probably the stupidest video I’ve seen on youtube. You’re a moran!

I replied “The stupidest? THAT would be quite an honor!”

suboptimal wrote

OMFG I know you’re not being sarcastic to me. I don’t know who you think you are or where you’re from but around here we don’t tolerate bullshit like that. If this were on the streets where I’m from, you’d get a cap in your ass, son!

I used to be a nigga on the street tryin’ to kick a beat and now I’ve got a great job as a manager, despite rednecks like yo self trying to keep me down.

We need hate crime laws, but no one needs a god damn bumpkin band putting out anti Obama music.

Peace out.

It was a response to this video:

I don’t know where the guy lives, but I’ll bet he’s posting from his mother’s paneled rec room.

Michael W. Dean

Guns ‘n’ punks ‘n’ the NRA

Saturday, January 16th, 2010

I started a thread about guns on the MySpace punk rock forum. Got some interesting replies (many of them full of jackassery, a few coherent). Forum thread and replies are here. My user name on MySpace is “Right Arm of Wyoming.”

The original post that I wrote to start the thread is below.

——-

So I’ve been on here for about a week, and noticed several anti-gun anti-NRA comments, even in posts that are not about guns or the NRA. Even the one guy who says he owns guns made it clear he’s not “one of those NRA folks.”

I’ve been into punk rock since 1982, and used to hate a lot of things without being able to tell you why. I saw Dead Kennedys and MDC at the Rock Against Reagan in 1984 and cheered along with everyone there hating Reagan, but couldn’t tell you why if you asked me, other than “Reagan is a Republican and Republicans are selfish and evil.”

I had similar thoughts about guns. I hated guns, and used to think that the world would be a better place if they were all outlawed.

I now own guns, and carry a gun with me whenever I leave the house. I have my reasons, which I’ll explain if you like.

I’ll say this: one of the reasons I have guns is to protect my home and loved ones from looters in a breakdown situation like Haiti’s earthquake or Hurricane Katrina. I would NOT want to have to wait for the government to protect me while roving gangs go door to door using violence to take what they want. And anyone who says “it can’t happen here” does not understand history.

I’m also a member of the NRA. I’m amazed at how many people are cool with gun ownership, but think you’re nuts if you’re a member of the NRA. I don’t like the idea that I have to be a member of a lobbyist organization, because I don’t like the idea of lobbyist organizations. But the thing is, guns would basically be illegal in America without the work of the NRA. So I begrudgingly send them 35 bucks a year, and in that sense, I “support” them. But I am by far not “your typical NRA member”, and not what most people think of when they think of the NRA.

(I’m also a member of the Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership, a gun-rights organization that I like much more than the NRA.)

I’d like to hear your thoughts on guns, and the NRA. I will also logically refute anything I take as non-logical. People tend to get emotional on this subject, and yell, and judge people as a group, rather than as individuals, and that is not using logic. It’s using hate and fear.

(Also, when you respond, please let me know if you’re in a country where guns are illegal, and if not, have you ever shot one, and do you own any?)

Thank you!

Michael W. Dean

Haiti in Chaos… Blame Bush!!

Friday, January 15th, 2010

While getting my daily dose of latest rehash of no new news from Haiti, I was turned onto a blog that directly blamed Bush for the fact that Haiti is a corrupt, chaotic country. It was enough to make my head want to explode. The argument presented was that Bush was busy “building democracy” in Iraq and Afghanistan. The article was critical of this aspect of the Bush Administration foreign policy, but in the next paragraph blames the same administration for not taking action in Haiti. WTF???

What I really took from the entire article is that the earthquake is being used as a excuse to point to Haiti and, once again blame Bush. Perhaps Bush should have been busy in the Caribbean rather than the Middle East. Instead of war in Iraq, he should have been toppling dictators on third world islands?? I hardly see how that line of logic works.

Let’s see…
Haiti sucks… blame Bush.
Haiti is in chaos after a HUGE natural disaster… sure, we can blame Bush. I’m certain that if Bush had gotten involved in the local politics of Haiti, then the country would have been immune from the effects of earthquakes.

It gives me comfort to know that if we are all killed by a giant meteor or cosmic radiation or nuclear holocaust, at least we have someone to blame for our mess.

-Justin West

My state of the Union speech, mid-January 2010

Friday, January 15th, 2010

So…..It’s horrible what happened in Haiti. And there have been some really inappropriate comments about it….Pat Robertson saying it’s the fault of Devil worship. (I’m not fan of voodoo, but really don’t believe it can cause natural disasters.) But I’m not sure I disagree with Rush Limbaugh saying “You already give to Haitian relief – it’s called the income tax.”

Then there are the conspiracy theorists saying the US caused the earthquake, to test their new HAARP array in Alaska, the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program,

The objectives of the HAARP project became the subject of controversy in the mid-1990s, following claims that the antennas could be used as a weapon. A small group of U.S.physicists aired complaints in the Physics and Society letters, charging that the HAARP could be seeking ways to destroy or disable enemy spacecraft or disrupt communications over large portions of the planet. The physicist critics of the HAARP have had little complaint about the project’s current stage, but have expressed fears that it could in the future be expanded into an experimental weapon, especially given that its funding comes from the Office of Naval Research and the Air Force Research Laboratory.

I can’t even touch that theory….can’t wrap my head around the possibility of it. I suppose it’s possible that our gub’mint could be that evil, but I don’t think it’s what happened. I mainly think that there are too many amateur scientists in the world with good equipment who would have detected it.

I can say this: I think that Obama and Rahm “don’t let a crisis go to waste” Emanuel or Eric “shred the Constitution” Holder are going to bring a bunch of Haitian refugees to America, and fast track them to citizenship, just in time to vote Democrat in 2012. MARK MY WORDS.

If you think that’s politicizing a horrible situation, you’re right. But saying it is far less horrible than them DOING IT, which is politicizing in the process.

SPEAKING OF ERIC “SHRED THE CONSTITUTION” HOLDER, how about this?

Black Panther Voter Intimidation Case Dropped – WSJ.com

The episode—which Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, calls “the most blatant form of voter intimidation I’ve ever seen”—began on Election Day 2008. Mr. Bull and others witnessed two Black Panthers in paramilitary garb at a polling place near downtown Philadelphia. (Some of this behavior is on YouTube.)

One of them, they say, brandished a nightstick at the entrance and pointed it at voters and both made racial threats. Mr. Bull says he heard one yell “You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!”

In the first week of January, the Justice Department filed a civil lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring voters with the weapon, uniforms and racial slurs. In March, Mr. Bull submitted an affidavit at Justice’s request to support its lawsuit.

Holder is refusing to pursue it.

You can be damn sure if it were white people (KKK, Tea Party, take your pick) intimidating black voters, they’d be in prison.

OK, and finally, The Supreme Court is trying a case whereby a sex offender was kept in prison after he’d finished serving his sentence. I think the powers that be intentionally used a kiddie porn guy for this case, because it will elicit a “THINK OF THE CHILDREN! HE MUST BE KEPT IN PRISON, FOR THE GOOD OF THE NATION!” response. The thing is, if this flies, they’ll eventually be able to keep anyone in prison for anything, just based on futurecrime.

Obama would love this.

Meanwhile, he and the Democrats are, behind closed doors (in violation of his campaign promises), selling out America and taking over 1/6 of our economy.

We live in strange times, folks. I’m worried. How about you?

I’ll say this: one of the reasons I have guns is to protect my home and loved ones from looters in a breakdown situation like Haiti’s earthquake or Hurricane Katrina. I would NOT want to have to wait for the government to protect me while roving gangs go door to door using violence to take what they want.

Me and my friend Nunzio did a good double-ender podcast yesterday, on this and a lot of other important subjects. Check it out.

–Michael W. Dean

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

Wednesday, January 13th, 2010

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
From: Michael W. Dean
Wyoming contact, Republican Liberty Caucus

Dear Republican Party,

In the next presidential election, and in all state and local elections, you need to support candidates who are true Republicans and genuine lovers of liberty. The party will not succeed if it does not run candidates who truly understand and respect the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights.

America was once a constitutionally limited republic, and it needs to be returned to that. In the past 100 years, and especially in the past 20 years, America has been reduced to a so-called “democracy”, where 51% of the people can rob and over-regulate 49% of the people.

A true constitutional republic could last in perpetuity; whereas democracies historically survive for 200 to 300 years. After that, they devolve into socialism or oligarchies, as the people who do not want to work vote into office people who will let them not work, and can pay them to do so by stealing from those who do work.

We are at a tipping point. America is in her 235th year. The next presidential election can determine if we regain our constitutional republic, or slide into a permanent “progressive” majority helmed by a deluded far-left who do not listen to the people, and are chomping at the bit to bankrupt us into a socialist oligarchy. Those folks see Republicans not as a force to work with in a bipartisan capacity, but as an impediment to robbing from the productive so they can “give” to those who have no desire or ability to produce.

If Washington followed the Constitution, it would barely matter who was president. The checks and balances would work. But ours has been co-opted into a popularity contest wherein people vote for the candidate with the slickest tongue and the shortest slogan….especially slogans like “HOPE” and “CHANGE.” As we’ve seen, these basically mean “Get me in, and you’ll find out my actual core beliefs later, when it’s too late.”

If the President and Congress followed the Constitution, DC would not be permitted to arbitrarily dictate most of what a citizen does in a given state. We need candidates who stand up for the Constitution, including the true meaning the Interstate Commerce Clause, and the original intent of all parts of the Bill of Rights, especially the First, Second and Tenth Amendments.

If the Republican Party establishment supports a spend-o-crat RINO (Republican in Name Only) in the next presidential election, you will guarantee a victory for the Democratic Party.

The Democrat Party used to have some principles, but has lately been taken over by a few dozen extreme leftist “progressives” with radical ideas and ties. They think they know what’s best for everyone, consider the Constitution a detriment, and consider Republicans a speed bump to be routed around behind closed doors.

America has woken up to the waste, “legal” stealing and “legal” bribes that can only lead to the destruction of America. The Democrats are largely responsible, but some Republicans have helped along the way. If you run a RINO for president, you will guarantee AINO (America in Name Only) in the near future, and forever.

The American people have finally woken up. Americans who have never been active in politics have taken to the streets by the millions. This is just the beginning.

The Democrats have been exposed for their gross spending of other people’s money at all levels, but in doing so have also shown that the Democrats aren’t the only ones. Some Republicans have contributed to this as well.

If you run a constitutional candidate like Gary Johnson, Tom Coburn, Jim DeMint, or Paul (Ron or Rand, take your pick) in the next presidential election, you’ll have a chance. I’ll vote Republican, and help out. So will millions of libertarians, tea partiers, swing voters, independents and even some of the smarter disgruntled Democrats. All combined, this will be enough to make the difference in the outcome of that election.

But 2012 is likely the very last year where even this will be possible. The leftists are working 24/7 to stack the deck against the possibility of retaining any America in America.

The Republican Party needs to run constitutional candidates, not only because it’s the right thing to do, but because it will keep the party from being perceived as “irrelevant naysayers” without any of their own ideas on how to make the country better. Running constitutional candidates will keep you from becoming a footnote in history. And even that footnote will likely be erased with time when a permanent socialist majority takes control of all media and education.

This road to serfdom can possibly be avoided, but it’s up to the Republican Party. You must run Barry Goldwater candidates, not George W. Bush, John McCain, or Rudy Giuliani candidates. Otherwise you’re going to end up with an America you don’t recognize, while you cling to your “Don’t blame me, I voted Republican” buttons.

Politics has become far too complicated. Lawmakers don’t think they’re doing their jobs if they don’t enact dozens of new laws and endless pork-barrel projects to “bring home the bacon” every day. This leads to honest folks becoming criminals, and the federal government having a stranglehold over every single aspect of our lives. We need candidates who will simplify, not complicate. We need candidates who will leash the beast, not feed the beast.

The Republican Party must run candidates who follow the Constitution and understand natural law… people who believe in their heart of hearts that government does not grant rights, does not restrict rights, but has only one legitimate role: protecting rights.

Our Founders are likely rolling in their graves at what the Democrats are doing now. But the Founders surely wouldn’t be pleased with what some in the Republican Party have done, either.

Why make us pick from the lesser of two evils? Here’s a novel idea: how about running someone who’s NOT evil!

Try it, you’ll like it. And America will be better for it.

–Michael W. Dean
http://www.libertarianpunk.com

Of Moose and Men

Tuesday, January 12th, 2010

Here’s another reason for gun ownership. No, it’s not drug-addled criminals, nor is it jackbooted government thugs (though both are good reasons to own a firearm, but I digress), instead it’s moose! Yes, that’s right, Bullwinkle can be just as much a threat as kitty stomping, gub’mint officials.

The past several winters I have had problems with moose on mine and my father’s farm. When the snow falls, feed for moose becomes scarcer. They resort to eating the bark off of aspens and small twigs off of shrubs. But if they find a way into somebody’s hay storage, they will keep coming back for more. They will quickly become territorial and will chase off everybody (moose, dog, and human). Last year my English Mastiff was charged and stomped by a moose. Luckily, my runt of a Golden Retriever, Gus, attacked it and chased it off of her. This all occurred in the time it took my father to unholster his sidearm (no he’s not a slow drawer, it was just lightning quick). Ever since the first time we had problems with moose we carry a firearm when we feed our horses. Normally a Mossberg 12 Gauge.

So If guns were confiscated, what would stop a moose (which after getting a full belly of hay, is in its own way like a drug-crazed person) from attacking me or my animals? How will I protect myself? I doubt a hunting knife or acid would be very effective.

Just another reason why Alaska is one wild, wild place to live.

-JD Melvin.

Enough about the damned steroids.

Tuesday, January 12th, 2010

Here we go again with the fake apologies and half-truths.  Can’t we get through one year without some blubbering ex-jock wiping away crocodile tears saying that using steroids was the biggest mistake they ever made?  Can’t we dispense with the fake apologies and the covering up for your coaches and team managers who knew all along that you were burying testosterone-filled needles into your backside?  Stop it already.

Just once, I would love to see one of these guys say, “Yes, I used steroids under the supervision of a doctor and it yielded me the greatest results of my career and the best physical condition of my life”.  Wouldn’t that shut up some of these self-righteous jerkoffs who are so quick to point a finger at these guys and call them “cheaters” and “bad role models”?  I want someone who is completely unapologetic about it to come out, so to say, and admit that they used steroids, and would use them again if they had to do it all over.  But no, we’re not that lucky, because we live in a spineless culture of constant fucking apology.

Look, I get that steroids are illegal, but this is a libertarian site and I think I am safe to say that nobody here supports the continued criminalization of steroids.  The fact that this nanny-state law needs to be abolished is not in dispute, it absolutely needs to go.   Don’t give me the excuse that steroids shouldn’t be in professional sports because they’re illegal.  Ask yourself why they are illegal and do a little research.  You will find that, as with all controlled substances, the reasons for their illegality have little to do with the reasons you’re told by the government.  In the case of steroids, the law exists not to protect people’s health, but to protect sports on all levels from becoming unbalanced by athletes who use steroids.  The question is, should it be a proper function of government to protect the integrity of sporting events?  I think not.

The illegality of steroids and performance-enhancing drugs allows the leagues to wash their hands of the responsibility of enacting and enforcing strict policies.  Major League Baseball, for example, has always had a no-steroid policy, but it was vague, outdated, and rarely enforced.  As a result, many athletes in the 1990’s and earlier part of the 2000’s took lots of performance enhancers.  Coincidentally, or so it would appear, MLB enjoyed a resurgence in the late 90’s after a debilitating player’s strike a couple years earlier.  People had stopped watching baseball because they couldn’t relate to a bunch of crybabies whining about only being paid a million or two a year.  Then comes Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa’s epic contest to break Roger Maris’ home run record.  People began to care about baseball again thanks to these two cheating steakheads hopped up on roids blasting balls out of the park.  Then came Barry Bonds and his Jack-O-Lantern head, and the same thing happened again.  People may have been saying things about how he gained 100 pounds of muscle, but they still cheered when he sent them over the fence.  MLB did nothing to these players until well after they had reaped the benefits of their illegal and supposedly against-the-league-rules doping, and even then the response to their transgressions from the league was tepid at best.

Enter the federal government.  See, this is the kind of shit we don’t need.  Our congressmen grilling baseball players and league officials at hearings is such a complete and utter waste of time and resources.  I guess if you’re a politician it makes you look like you care about the chiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiildren by beating up on these horrible role models.  After all, who would defend steroids or people who use them?  Certainly not the leagues who allegedly ban them and apparently not the people boo-hooing about having used them while it made them wealthy beyond measure and put their names in the record books.  There is just so much dishonesty regarding this, and I find that to be more repugnant than using steroids in the first place.

Steroids should absolutely be legal, and it should be up to the sporting leagues to decide whether or not they will allow their athletes to use them.  The government stepping in and making them illegal only exacerbates the problem by allowing the leagues to be more lenient.  Put responsibility where it belongs.  I personally don’t care if someone else chooses to use steroids, it doesn’t harm me or make one iota of difference in my life whatsoever.  And if you’re one of these people who thinks that pro athletes should be role models for children, do me a favor and don’t have kids until you realize that YOU are the most prominent role model for them, not some overpaid jock who plays what is essentially a meaningless game for the entertainment of the distracted and fucked-over masses.

~Matt Frost

We picked a good time to leave California

Tuesday, January 12th, 2010

Arnold Schwarzenegger to call for deep spending cuts, plead for U.S. aid

“….. he will propose the wholesale elimination of CalWorks, the state’s main welfare program,…”

“”…and a 14% salary cut for more than 200,000 state workers. …”
===
Cut welfare, cut funding to public services, sounds like halfway to a libertarian paradise. They’re also cutting salaries of police and firemen. I don’t wanna be there for the transition as this RINO (Republican in Name Only) mismanages the Golden State into chaos.

Glad me and the wife moved to Wyoming, a state that can actually pull its own weight. I saw this California collapse coming, which is why we got the hell out six months ago.

My prediction of the Los Angeles headlines a week after the budget cuts happen and welfare is stopped:

–Michael W. Dean

What’s wrong with a band being popular?

Tuesday, January 12th, 2010


I was over on the MySpace punk rock forums, arguing with liberals, and some gal said “I hate Green Day. They’ve sold out. They’re so corporate. Every kid in America likes them now.”

I replied:

I think that Green Day are outstanding. Anyone who can write a great song has my vote, no matter if it’s punk rock, country or jazz.

I also love Rancid. The “Out Come the Wolves” album mainly….it’s got like 20 great songs on it. Most bands don’t write TWO great songs in their whole career.

I also worked with the engineer who did that album, he said the guys in the band are truly like brothers, and deeply care about each other. I was really happy to hear that for some reason.

Other than those two bands, I don’t pay much attention to much newish punk rock. What I have heard of recent punk and hardcore mostly sucks…..doesn’t have much spark or depth. And has little or no melody. Just a lot of testosterone and loud guitars…Bloodless….facile….All look and no ass.

Most of my favorite music either came out in the early 80s on Dischord Records or Alternative Tentacles, or is some demo pressed in a limited edition of 100, recorded on cassette in a garage somewhere like Akron…or a cave in Belarus.

What’s wrong with a band being popular? Does that make them suck? Or do you think they’ve changed somehow musically to accommodate/promote their popularity.

“Know Your Enemy” is a fantastic song. As good, or better, than anything ever written by Minor Threat, Dead Kennedys, Naked Raygun, The Clash or the Ramones. Or whatever unknown band is “hot” this week.

I don’t listen to the radio or watch MTV, so I don’t really have a sense of over-saturation. I’m not sick of them. Are you sick of them? Is that what you don’t like about them being popular?

Or is it that you liked them when they were indie, and felt like you had some “ownership” of them, that they were you’re little secret, and that got tainted or taken away by the mere fact of lots of kids in malls being into them.

When you like a band, don’t you wish them well? Don’t you want them to make enough money to not have to sleep on floors, to be able to not live in a shitbag apartment, to keep making music without breaking up because they’re starving?

Or are they only “pure” when they’re starving?

I’m trying to understand why a band being popular = bad in your mind (and a lot of people’s minds.)

Also, on a semi-related note: I always laugh at the irony of punk rockers (popular or unknown) who write songs complaining about how evil corporations are, and play them on guitars made by huge corporations, record on gear made by huge corporations, press CDs, a technology developed by huge corporations, spam the world via MySpace (owned by FOX, a huge corporation), and get in vans made by huge corporations and drive around to clubs singing their anti-corporate protest songs.

Michael W. Dean

Glenn Beck fucked up….

Monday, January 11th, 2010

I like Glenn Beck. I watch him a lot (surprised? lol…).

A lot of people on the left say he’s a purveyor of misinformation, but I’ve never heard him be flat-out wrong….

…until today. Today on his show he was complaining about how people today don’t know much about the history of the Founding of America, and what the Constitution means. I agree with that, and agree with his summation that this ignorance is intentionally fostered by public schools, that don’t teach natural law and the Bill of Rights so it’s easier for the government to step on those rights.

Then he said only (x%…some small amount) of people could correctly answer the question “In what decade did the American Revolution start?” He was right about the answer, the 1770s. But then he said “the American Revolution, of course, started on July 4th, 1776.”

WRONG! I set down my rifle (are you surprised that I sometimes watch TV while holding a rifle? lol…I do a lot of things while holding a rifle – hey, Glenn Beck says we need more “guns, gold and God, and I agree)…And I started screaming at my TV (are you surprised that I often scream at my TV? lol…): The American Revolution started on April 19th, 1775! With ‘the shot heard round the world‘! The adoption of the Decoration of Independence was on July 4th, 1776.”

I still like Beck, but I hope he corrects this. There’s nothing more embarrassing than giving out historically inaccurate information while complaining that “today’s citizens are uninformed about history.” Especially when the thing he’s wrong about is the date of one of the two most important events in American history.

MWD

(e-mailing this post to Glenn Beck now.)

p.s for more about The American Revolution, check out Appleseed.

When guns are outlawed, outlaws will only have acid…..

Sunday, January 10th, 2010

Ever wonder what a perfect world it would be if guns were completely outlawed in your country? Well, guns are completely outlawed in Hong Kong and the UK….
Tourists Injured In Hong Kong Acid Attack

X-Ray Of Horrifying Knife Attack (UK)

This X-ray shows the savagery of the knife epidemic sweeping Britain’s streets. But this teenage boy is one of the lucky ones – he miraculously escaped death after the kitchen knife was plunged into his skull…..

==-

I could go on and on and on and on and on, but….you get the idea.

Michael W. Dean

Nullification Rally In Texas

Sunday, January 10th, 2010

To expound on my blog about nullification of “health care reform” I wanted to share information about a rally being held in Austin, TX. Several groups led by The Alliance of Texans Against Government Controlled Healthcare are hosting the rally. This event will take place January 16th, 2010 at 2:00 PM on the South side of the Texas Capitol Building. According to their website, it is “A rally to voice our support across Texas. We are serious about nullification and want the governor to call a special session to protect us from the federal government.”

The Texas Legislature meets for 140 days every two years. The latest session was adjourned in February of 2009, so a special session would need to be called in order to nullify any federal legislation. The power to call that special session rests with Governor Rick Perry. Gov. Perry has made bold statements in regards to the federal takeover of health care.

“… I’m certainly willing and ready for the fight if this administration continues to try to force their very expansive government philosophy down our collective throats.” July 23, 2009.

The time for talk is drawing to an end, and it is now time to see if Gov. Perry is willing to take the steps necessary to make the will of the people known. The current administration has promised transparency and honest debate, but has resorted to meetings behind closed doors, political bribery of representatives, and rushing legislation through in the cover of darkness. The time has come for the states to stand up and say “ENOUGH!”

For more information, please see http://www.notintexas.org/.

-Justin West