Meanwhile, just down the road...

From KWHI: 

The Austin County Sheriff’s office will soon be equipped with some heavy vehicles. 

Austin County Judge Carolyn Bilski says some Mine Resistant Ambush Protection or MRAPs, that were manufactured at the BAE facility in Sealy are being given to the sheriff’s office. 

Judge Bilski says these vehicles will not be used for regular patrolling duties but there are many situations in which they can be used.  She recalls floods and other dangers of past years.

Wow. Things must be really, really bad in rural Austin County.

I still stand by my stance last month that local law enforcement agencies don't need military vehicles and equipment.

Incidentally, on my travels today, I passed by one of these vehicles sitting outside the sheriff's office in the tiny town of Meridian, Texas (population 1,493).

Again... Why Does Everything Have to Be About Gay?

From The LA Times:

Starting in 2015 the Boy Scouts of America's policy banning adult leaders who are gay will cost the organization donations from Walt Disney Co. 

Though Disney doesn't provide money to the Boy Scouts' national or local councils, the Burbank-based company with major theme parks in Anaheim and Orlando provides small grants to local troops and packs, said Deron Smith, a Boy Scouts spokesman.

 Here we go again.

Why Does Everything Have to Be About Gay?

I've read a lot of breathless punditry this morning about a bill in Arizona that passed the state legislatures and is now awaiting either a signature or a veto by the governor. The way the bill is being framed is that the bill specifically allows people who hate homosexuals from having to serve them because they are gay.  As usual, words like "hate," "discrimination," "anti-gay," "bigot" and "intolerant" are being thrown around by those who oppose the bill based on it being firmly against homosexuals.

But that's all just spin.

Read the bill for yourself here. It mentions homosexuals and gays a grand total of zero times. The gay lobby is simply spoiling for this fight and to cry "discrimination!" What the bill actually says is that an individual cannot be compelled to do something that violates his or her religious beliefs.

Furthermore, the burden is on the person making the claim that their religious beliefs would be violated. They must prove ALL of the following:

1. THAT THE PERSON'S ACTION OR REFUSAL TO ACT IS MOTIVATED BY A RELIGIOUS BELIEF.2. THAT THE PERSON'S RELIGIOUS BELIEF IS SINCERELY HELD.3. THAT THE STATE ACTION SUBSTANTIALLY BURDENS THE EXERCISE OF THE PERSON'S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.

The gay community is up in arms about this because, as the Washington Post says:

"The catalyst for the recent flood of religious exemption legislation seems to have been a number of court cases that were decided in favor of LGBT clients who were denied wedding services. In August 2013, the New Mexico Supreme Court said that a photographer who refused to document a same-sex commitment ceremony broke the state's anti-discrimination law." 

However, the way the bill is written one can  refuse to per foam a service based on religious objection to just about anything. Yes, this law would give someone who disagrees with homosexuality based on religious grounds the right to refuse to work for a homosexual. But it also does much more than that. Consider these scenarios that would empower people's right of religious freedom under the law:

• A Baptist restaurant owner does not serve and does not allow liquor to be consumed in his establishment based on his religious convictions. This law would protect his rights to determine the activities that occur on his own property.

• A church building or meeting hall is rented out as a reception site for a Satanic wedding or gathering of some kind. This law would allow the church to refuse service to the Satanists on religious grounds.

• A Jewish baker receives an order to bake a cake with Nazi swastikas on it. Shouldn't the baker have the right to decline the order?

• A Unitarian gay couple who owns a bed and breakfast refuses to allow a Catholic priest to spend the night at their inn based on his (and their) conflicting religious beliefs. This law would allow them to make that decision.

• An atheist ... oh wait. Nevermind.

Some of these scenarios may seem farfetched, but none more so than a photographer forced to photograph a gay wedding against his or her will.

This bill is about the protection of religious freedom. All religious freedom.

Can we please stop making everything about gay and race, please? And can we please stop trying to bully people into chafing the way they think by using the gay and race hammer, as well? That would be great.

Gun Bans PROMOTE Violent Crime

From Brietbart:

"A new study published in the latest issue of Applied Economic Letters lays low nearly every claim made by gun control proponents and shines a light on the successes of concealed carry on a state-by-state basis.

Specifically, the study shows that less restrictive concealed carry laws save lives, while gun control can endanger them. It also shows that gun control measures like "assault weapons" bans do not reduce state-level murder rates."

In fact...

"Gius shows that the study actually suggests that "restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in gun-related murders at the state level."

This is a study of THREE DECADES of data, and it wasn't done by the NRA. Remember this for the next time the Lefties start trying to ban guns again (and they will...)

Homosexual is a Race

Via Yahoo News:

"GLAAD spoke with A&E representatives on Wednesday morning to discuss why people would be offended by the comments and calls to action. ”They took this very seriously, as soon as the news broke,” Ferraro said.

After the meeting, GLAAD issued its statement on Robertson’s comments. A&E initially released a statement from Robertson in which he said he would “never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me.” But the network declined to comment itself until Wednesday night, when it announced the suspension, which GLAAD applauded.

“We believe the next step is to use this as an opportunity for Phil to sit down with gay families in Louisiana and learn about their lives and the values they share,” the spokesman said.

The organization is also currently researching companies who use Robertson as a spokesperson.

“Silence is agreement in this case,” he said. “With such egregious anti-gay and racist comments, those companies that choose to be affiliated with this family need to speak out.”


So let me get this straight... homosexuals are now a RACE and making remarks that you don't agree with the homosexual lifestyle is now a RACIST thing to say?????

Boy, we really are playing fast and loose with the "racist" card these days, aren't we? Robertson said absolutely NOTHING about race at all. His remarks were only about his belief that homosexuality is a sin based on his faith. And he's completely entitled to his beliefs. Saying he's anti-gay is accurate, but saying he's a racist... that's a step too far. But last time I checked, it's still his right to be anti-gay. We do still live in America, don't we?

Well, don't we????

And as for the notion on the part of this GLAAD spokesmosexual that it's an opportunity for Phil Robertson to sit down with gay families, sing kumbaya and to leeeeearn about their liiiiiives and about their common vaaaaaaalues.....pardon me - I just vomited. Twice.

Do we really think that Phil Robertson is saying these things out of ignorance of the homosexual lifestyle??? That perhaps it's just that he doesn't know that they're just people, too, and that they just happen to like to have wild monkey sex with other people of the same gender? Is that the issue? How stupid do you think this guy is? I'm quite sure that he knows what gay sex entails and also how he feels about it.

And again... he's entitled to feel however he wants about it because... 'MERICA!!!!

I'm sick and tired of those who are always preaching tooooolerance at the top of their lungs suddenly going apeshit whenever someone pops up with an opinion or a worldview that they don't agree with. How tolerant is that?

So now, after this article, I've seen Phil Robertson called anti-gay and racist. I've seen him called "hillbilly" and "redneck." I'm just waiting for Hitler for the win.

It'll happen. Just wait.

Losing Hope

This video shows police trying to rip a flag out of the hands of a protestor in D.C.

It's stuff like this that is making me lose hope that if the order ever came for the police and military to turn on the citizenry that it wouldn't be carried out.

Open It Up

From the Washington Examiner:

Even though isolated barricades with "closed" signs remained on the National Mall on Tuesday, the setup for the immigration reform rally said otherwise. 

A giant stage with lights and an "Immigration Reform Now" banner was set up in the center of the mall, along with three large portable screens. 

On one side of the mall, more than 100 porta potties were set up for protesters who will attend the rally today. 

As several groups of musicians performed sound checks, a lone National Park Service employee arrived to survey the scene, but referred me to the Park Service communications office and left when I asked her why she was called into work today. 

As the Washington Examiner reported Monday, rally organizers said that they would be allowed by the NPS to carry out their protest under their First Amendment rights.

I say let them protest. Since when do you need permission from the government to protest the government?

That said, I think that the barring of public places - especially national parks and open-air monuments - during the government "shutdown" is government stupidity beyond belief and typical of the kind of thinking that creates wasteful government spending in the first place.

If it doesn't usually cost any money to run something - and now suddenly barring access to that thing DOES cost money - how is that doing anyone any good?

That Didn't Take Long... Part 2

From CBS:

In the wake of the shooting at the Navy Yard, Obama spokesman Jay Carney said the president is implementing executive actions and reiterated his commitment to strengthening gun laws, including expanding background checks to sales online and at gun shows.

Wow. Since none of the reports I've read indicate that the Navy Yard shooter bought his gun at a gun show or online (he purchased his shotgun legally at a Virginia gun store), the president must have some sort of intelligence that we don't have access to, right?

And as for strengthening background checks... how about taking a look at the government first, Mr. Obama. How about strengthening background checks on who can get on to military bases and secret clearance first?

Classic Obama strawman bait and switch.

That Didn't Take Long

From the Washington Times:

Just hours after the deadly shooting rampage at the Washington Navy Yard, gun control advocates tried to reignite the national debate over gun laws that had only just subsided. 

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat and a longtime gun control advocate, denounced “the litany of massacres” over the past few years and asked rhetorically, “When will enough be enough?”

Wait.. wasn't the NSA spying on us all supposed to stop things like this?

Yeah... About That Global Warming Thing...

From the Washington Examiner:

A leaked report by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says that the world is not warming but actually cooling, and will continue to get colder until the middle of the century.

Yeah. That's right. Been sayin' it for years.

And there's this, from the UK Guardian:

If correct, it would contradict computer forecasts of imminent catastrophic warming. The news comes several years after the BBC predicted that the arctic would be ice-free by 2013.

What I want to know is... are these the same people that told us in the '80s  and early '90sthat there would be no more rainforest left by the year 2000?

And more importantly, why do we keep listening to these "experts?"

A Black Man and a White Man Discuss Race

Today I did something that I very, very rarely do - I confronted a friend about race on Facebook. This wasn't just any friend, either. This was a person who used to be one of my closest friends - someone who Kristi and I both have known and loved for a long time. In fact, it's fair to say that without this person Kristi and I may never have gotten married. But now this is someone whom I'm considering unfriending.

So yeah - this hurts.

This friend is a black man and has long been a voice for inclusion and diversity. He celebrated his blackness, and that was pretty cool. But lately, his posts have become more polarizing and less inclusive. He's always been focused on race, but usually in a very educational and philosophical manner. But then something happened. His posts started to get more confrontational and one-sided and divisive. But he's my friend and he's entitled to his opinion.

But today he linked to a story about some New Jersey teens who did a great thing the right thing and paid for some merchandise, even though the store was closed. Great story. But he interjected race into it and it just made my blood boil. I am firmly of the belief that there's enough racial tension in this country and that inserting race into everything is one of the things that's tearing out country apart.  So I called him on it. This is that conversation: (click on the image to enlarge it)

...and that's where I left it.

I don't mind having an honest conversation about just about any topic, but what infuriated me was his complete unwillingness to even slightly admit that he might be wrong in interjecting race into this. Well, that and his condescension.

Friends, I meant everything I said in the discussion. If we want to live in a world where race doesn't matter, then let's all let it not matter... together.

And for my friend, I pray that someday you'll see how hurtful you've been and how you're actively involved in setting the clock backwards on race relations, especially since you're in a position to influence young minds.

"It Wasn't Racial."

I didn't blog about it. Purposefully. It was too soon. We didn't have all the facts. And we didn't know anything about the three teens who murdered Australian student Chris Lane in cold blood last Friday.

But now things are starting to come to light.

After the killing, people all over the internet began wondering aloud what the reaction would be to this killing by those who said that Trayvon Martin was a racial hate crime. They were, for the most part, silent on the issue. People who for weeks and months have been raising holy hell on Facebook and Twitter and in blogs and changing their status profiles to pictures of hoodie-wearing people suddenly have nothing to say. Well, most people, anyway. I did see a few pop up here and there to say something along the lines of "this was just a killing. It wasn't a hate crime. It wasn't about race."

Yeah. Well now there's this from the Daily Caller:

One of the teens charged with first-degree murder in the shooting death of Australian baseball player Christopher Lane in Duncan, Okla., previously posted anti-white statements on his Twitter feed.

Not about race, huh? Not a hate crime? Notice that James Edwards is the one using the word hate in the hashtag of his tweet. Not anyone else. To me, that screams hate crime.

So, Oprah, Al Sharpton, President Obama et al, where are you now? You hypocrites.

[edit: It seems that people are giving Jesse Jackson credit for speaking out on this matter because he tweeted on the matter. Let's be clear - that's not speaking out. That's just saying something. But good for him, anyway, for sayting something, even if it was weak.]

Colorado Has Had Enough

From the Washington Times:

Voters in several rural Colorado counties will be asked whether they want to form a new state tentatively named Northern Colorado in the November election, a reaction to the Democrat-controlled state legislature’s “war on rural Colorado.” 

The Weld County Commissioners voted unanimously at Monday’s meeting to place a measure on the Nov. 5 ballot asking voters whether they want the county to join other rural counties in forming another state. 

“The concerns of rural Coloradans have been ignored for years,” William Garcia, chairman of the Weld County Commissioners, said in a statement. “The last session was the straw that broke the camel’s back for many people. They want change. They want to be heard.” 

Three other rural counties — Cheyenne, Sedgwick and Yuma — also plan to place the 51st state referendum on the fall ballot. At least three more counties plan to consider the proposal this week at their commission meetings, said Jeffrey Hare, spokesman for the 51st State Initiative. 

Known for its agriculture and oil and gas production, Weld is the largest of the Colorado counties exploring a break with the state after the legislature’s sharp turn to the left with bills restricting access to firearms and doubling the state’s renewable-energy mandate for rural areas. 

Democrats control both houses of the legislature and the governor’s office. Two Democratic state senators — Angela Giron and John Morse — are facing Sept. 10 recall elections in response to the legislature’s gun control votes.

Even if it doesn't work, it's still a small step in the right direction - that is, the people standing up to the politicians to take back their country when they feel they aren't appropriately represented or that they are being misrepresented.

I also like that they're not talking about seceding from the union, but rather want to form a new state that better reflects their beliefs and values within the United States.

Power to the people. The residents of Destructoville, despite being firmly located in Texas, stand with you.

No, Mr. Culberson, We Want ALL of the Spying to Stop

From The Blaze:

While the most talked-about news out of the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday was the defeat of the so-called Amash amendment that would have defunded the NSA’s massive data collection program, another amendment related to NSA spying was quietly passed overwhelmingly by lawmakers.

The amendment that passed is reportedly intended to “ensure none of the funds may be used by the NSA to target a U.S. person or acquire and store the content of a U.S. person’s communications, including phone calls and e-mails.” 

Culberson told TheBlaze in a phone interview why he supported the Pompeo amendment over the more sweeping amendment authored by Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.).
He argued the amendment properly requires that no funds can be used by the NSA to collect or store the content of American citizens’ communications data. This includes phone calls and emails. The amendment; however, does not seem to restrict the NSA’s ability to continue collecting and storing massive amounts metadata. 

The Amash amendment would have prevented the NSA from using any funds to collect any data on persons that are not under investigation.

Then, this:

The Pompeo amendment may not fully address privacy advocates’ concerns about NSA spying, but those like Culberson feel it’s a step in the right direction.

Damn it, man.  I don't want a step in the right direction! I want to get to the destination! If you have a roach problem in your house, squashing one of the bugs is a step in the right direction.  But it doesn't solve the problem!

Solve the problem already!!! Quit playing games with our rights, our privacy and our civil liberties!!!!

The Government Wants Your Passwords Now, Too

From CNet:

The U.S. government has demanded that major Internet companies divulge users' stored passwords, according to two industry sources familiar with these orders, which represent an escalation in surveillance techniques that has not previously been disclosed. 

Some of the government orders demand not only a user's password but also the encryption algorithm and the so-called salt, according to a person familiar with the requests. A salt is a random string of letters or numbers used to make it more difficult to reverse the encryption process and determine the original password. Other orders demand the secret question codes often associated with user accounts.

This, the day after the House (including my own Representative, Michael McCaul) killed an amendment that would defund the NSA's unconstitutional spying programs.

What Orwellian hell has this country become?

The Lynching

Yet again, Bill Whittle is amazing.

The Virtual President on Gay Marriage

This is What Perjury Looks Like

The director of the NSA lied to Congress on March 12. This is what perjury looks like.

I wonder how long before he's thrown in prison in light of recent developments such as the leak of PRISM.

You Hide Things If You Know You're Doing Something Wrong

They're Spying on Us ALL

From the Washington Post:

The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails, documents, and connection logs that enable analysts to track foreign targets, according to a top-secret document obtained by The Washington Post. 

The program, code-named PRISM, has not been made public until now. It may be the first of its kind. The NSA prides itself on stealing secrets and breaking codes, and it is accustomed to corporate partnerships that help it divert data traffic or sidestep barriers. But there has never been a Google or Facebook before, and it is unlikely that there are richer troves of valuable intelligence than the ones in Silicon Valley. 

Equally unusual is the way the NSA extracts what it wants, according to the document: “Collection directly from the servers of these U.S. Service Providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple.”

Wow. And all Nixon did was authorize the break-in of a hotel room.

Ask yourself: "does this sound like a government that is using its power responsibly?"