IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

Two hundred and thirty-four years ago today, our nation came into being.  (Okay, if you’re picky, the resolution of independence was approved July 2nd, 1776– so it was 234 years Friday.)  A group of men– some almost destitute, some very wealthy, some young, some old– came together and forged a nation that ruled not by the whims of a monarch or by an elite cadre, but by the consent of the governed.

God bless this nation, and may the governed therein understand these words.

(H/T Dr. Lott)

Massad Ayoob has links to a group of podcasts and interviews (including John Stossel’s show from this week) concerning the case.

Joe Huffman quotes justice Scalia from the Heller decision.  To paraphrase:

We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution. The Constitution leaves [them] a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns… [...] But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home. [...] it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.

Maybe we can take one more step towards true freedom today.

9 April 2010

Justice John Paul Stevens announces he will retire at the end of the 2010 summer session. Elena Kagan is named as a possible replacement at this time. [A]

5 May 2010

Evidence surfaces that Kagan (then the Dean of Harvard Law School) covered for professors when they plagiarized. [B]

7 May 2010

CNS News begins speculating who might be named to replace Stevens, and what their selection might mean for the balance of the Court.

10 May 2010

Obama officially announces Kagan is his nominee to replace Stevens.

CNS News runs a story about Kagan, noting that she is pro-abortion, dodged questions during her nomination for Solicitor General, and has worked in an advisory role for Goldman Sachs.

Kagan’s competence comes into question at this time, as transcripts of her arguing before the Supreme Court show that she lacked a fundamental understanding of the issue she was arguing. [C]

David Hardy posts on Kagan, noting she has little experience, and has rarely been published in law reviews.

11 May 2010

David Codrea posts an article questioning Kagan’s stance on guns.  In short– not great, but not awful, either.

13 May 2010

John Lott posts an article showing that Kagan used the phrase “not sympathetic” in reference to a court case regarding unlicensed concealed carry.

16 May 2010

Senator Sessions (R-AL) notes that Kagan (as Dean) made the job of recruiters at Harvard Law harder, calling it “no little-bitty matter.”

Newt Gingrich calls this “an act so unbecoming an American that she should be disqualified, from the very beginning.”

The same day, Chuck Schumer calls Kagan “brilliant” and “practical.”

17 May 2010

It comes to light that Kagan helped craft Bill Clinton’s strategy that kept partial-birth abortion legal.

The White House asks the Clinton Library to release papers relating to Kagan (including her emails).

Quotes from GOP members show that a filibuster of Kagan is unlikely.

A friend of Kagan says that she “is largely a progressive in the mold of Obama himself.”

18 May 2010

Since she helped craft the Obama administration’s defense of health care “reform,” Kagan might have to recuse herself from any Supreme Court health care case.

It comes to light that Kagan advocated campaign finance reform during the Clinton administration.  Ironically, this is the subject she showed little grasp of before the Supreme Court.

19 May 2010

During the period of time that Kagan tried to keep military recruiters off the Harvard Law campus, she was allowing Saudi recruiters for what is called Sharia-Compliant Finance onto campus.

In two law review articles, Kagan attacks the Supreme Court for denying pro-abortion groups federal money.

20 May 2010

The director of the Clinton library admits that she probably will not be able to meet the deadline to get all Kagan-related materials to Congress. [D]

18 June 2010

Documentation shows that while in the Clinton White House, Kagan made comparisons between the KKK and NRA. [E]

23 June 2010

The percentage of Americans opposing Kagan drops… to 42%. [F]

Sunlight Labs (part of the Sunlight Foundation) releases Elena’s Inbox, all of Kagan’s email from her time in the Clinton White House. [F]

Summary

In short, I’m with Newbius: “I think it is time to oppose her with every fiber of my being and urge my Senators to do the same.”  Obama has shown an utter unwillingness to choose a decent judge for any position– Goodwin Liu is the perfect example of this (reference: here, here, and here)– and I’d rather not see another Sotomayor on the Court.

Note: the title of this post comes from Robb.

References:

[A] Sebastian, 9 April 2010.
[B] John Lott, 10 May 2010.
[C} John Lott, 11 May 2010.
[D] John Lott, 20 May 2010.
[E] John Lott, 18 June 2010.
[F] Instapundit, 23 June 2010.

No, not really.  I have a few female friends who model, and that picture is tame.  As in, that went in the lobby.  One of my friends has a picture where she was modeling a black strapless dress and had a… wardrobe malfunction.  The picture was used (in a cropped form) in a few ad campaigns.  Heck, that picture’s tame compared to some of the pictures my friends take at the lake.

I find it more scandalous that she was pregnant at 15.  Since the picture’s a 0.5 on the Scandal-meter, the fact that she’s 28 with a 13 year old measures a whopping 1.0.  Seriously, Teddy Kennedy kills a chick, Bill Clinton gets hummers in the Oval Office, and Blago tried to sell a Senate seat… and this is supposed to be scandalous?  Pshaw!

All I wanna know is… if she wins, will she do a Maxim shoot?  (chuckle)

(H/T Uncle)

One day next month every student at Loyola Law School Los Angeles will awake to a higher grade point average. But it’s not because they are all working harder. The school is retroactively inflating its grades, tacking on 0.333 to every grade recorded in the last few years. The goal is to make its students look more attractive in a competitive job market.

From the Washington Post:

The Marine Corps has discharged 13 junior officers training at Quantico for cheating on a land navigation test [...] They were taking an intense, six-month training course for new officers and were trying to learn how to lead a platoon through rugged terrain. They were sent with a map and compass to a wooded area on the base and instructed to write down numbers painted on boxes left there. The accused wrote down numbers from the previous year’s test…

The defense for both events?  Everyone’s doing it! Which, of course, doesn’t make me feel a bit better.  That just means that there’s more “A+” students out there who are actually A- (or B+, or C-) students graded on a curve.

I also admire the Marine OCS cadets for their sheer chutzpah– they’re going to lead people in combat, and they don’t even have the common courtesy to learn basic skills?  What happens when they’re in a war zone and have to bring their squad back in through a minefield… at night… with no GPS gear?  How many letters to parents will they have to right before it dawns on them that this happened because of their mental laziness?

(NYT article via Jennifer, WaPo article via Laginappe’s Guy)

1. Don’t have a disaster.

2.  And if you do have a disaster…

3.  DIE QUICKLY.

“George Bush Barack Obama doesn’t care about black disabled people.”

I spent Hurricane Opal in a shelter with my disabled grandmother– so this upsets me a bit.  No plans… whatsoever?  Not even having the Social Security and Medicare offices fax the local Emergency Operation Centers a list of people who might need help?

(H/T Hope n’ Change)

“Peasant, we’s heard you’s liked playing airsoft, so we’s gonna ban the crap outta that so’s ya’s can’t plays it no mo’.  Jus’ ‘member, we’s from the gub-mint, and we’s here to help ya’s.”

Just to re-cap, from the post where I first heard about this:

Basically, if the ATF claims these airsoft guns can be easily converted into real guns, they should just demonstrate the conversion, and put a couple of magazines through it.

So, did the ATF test the gun like this?  From the third page of the ATF’s letter:

To determine if the submitted sample (as modified) is capable of expelling a projectile … [t]he test fire was conducted a total of three times…

Wait, wait, wait… how was the gun modified?  Well, the lower was Dremeled into shape, an M16 hammer, hammer pin, hammer spring, buffer and buffer spring were put in, and then an AR-15 upper was put on and held in place with a drift punch in place of the front retention pin.  In other words, As long as you have access to a whole bunch of parts off M-16s, you can assemble an Ar-15.  With a crappy airsoft lower.  Or, to quote a commenter over at Uncle’s:

My water glass can be converted into a machine gun.

You take the glass and replace it with a machine gun, take the water and replace it with ammo.

Voila, machine gun.

There’s “massaging the evidence,” and then there’s “we took it to the massage parlor down on Riverside and got it a happy ending.”  This is the latter.  To recap: if you have access to parts from an M-16,  an AR-15 upper, drift punches and a Dremel tool, you can create a machine gun.  Kinda.  Sorta.  Maybe.

Oh, and they have re-defined transfers, too.  Now, your favorite gun writer will have to fill out a 4473 to get an evaluation gun.  It’s almost like they’re trying to clamp down on us gun owners, isn’t it?