The Mulatto Advocate
Random musings on life, politics, work, love and culture
Friday, August 15, 2003
Since my last post, Internet Exploder seems to be right justifying all of the text, while in Firebird, it works just fine.
Time to settle the issue
Jon Dougherty at WorldNetDaily reports on the current 2nd Amendment fight brewing
. At issue is whether the Constitution supercedes state law. As some of us recall with much sorrow, California passed the most comprehensive "assault weapons" ban in the nation. I use quotes around the words assault rifle because obviously, our "enlightened" leaders in Sacto have no bloody idea of what an assualt weapon actually is.
An assault weapon is defined by the military as a weapon having selective fire capability; meaning, that it can fire in no fewer than two of the following ways:
one round is fired for each pull of the trigger
several rounds (usually 3) are fired for each pull of the trigger
rounds are fired for the duration of time that the trigger of the weapon is depressed. (this term is usually incorrectly interchanged with semi-automatic)
By federal law, none of the guns available for civilian ownership meet this definition.
The only way to legally own a real assault weapon is to obtain a federal firearms permit, which very few people have done, as it is an expensive and lengthy process.
Assault weapons bans are actually very silly as they are what I like to call "scary-looking" weapons bans. For instance, here in California, you cannot legally own a rifle that has a any of the following:
Now if anyone who actually has experience with firearms can intelligently prove how these things increase the lethality of a weapon, you will have convinced me that they should be banned. I can tell you from my own experience (I've been shooting for over 20 years) that they don't. Trust me, I can do more damage with this weapon
, which is legal in CA, than I can with any of these weapons
, which are not.
The Ninth Circuit recently ruled that the right to keep and bear arms is not an individual right, which totally ignores previous rulings by the Fifth Circuit
(US v. Emerson, which by the way is an excellent history lesson) and by the SCOTUS in US v. Miller.
The difference being in the Miller case, the issue was never about whether Mr. Miller had the right to keep and bear arms, but the type of arms he possessed. In this case, it was a sawed-off shotgun, which the court ruled (in my opinion, correctly) was of dubious value to a militia member.
Since the Miller ruling is considered vague by many; and the ruling is over 60 years old, the time has come for a definitive ruling by the SCOTUS.
My only fear is that if SCOTUS rules that the Constitution does not mean what it says, our Republic is truly dead.
Why have I not seen this before? Capitalistchicks.com
rocks! Now that my wife is in business for herself, things like this really serve to inspire, especially when the inevitable doubts start to creep in. "Will I succeed?"
CapitalistChicks says, "YES!"
Check out the "Steamrollers"
section. Truly inspirational women who succeeded - before feminism.
How much is enough?
Just when you thought California had the monopoly on stupid economic policy, along comes Santa Fe NM. Apparently the "living wage"
folks have gotten their hands on city policy and introduced a living wage measure that will kill businesses and jobs in the city. A small business owner lays out the consequences
in City Journal.
This is yet another case where people are trying to impose "social justice" (read socialism) by legislating it. Equal results without equal effort. Why should a janitor or a busboy make as much as a secretary or an office clerk? The whole idea of a free market society is that you get paid according to the skills you possess. The more skills or education you have, the more you make. This is the incentive for folks to get an education so that they can jump out of dead-end jobs.
Thursday, August 14, 2003
The shadow of 187
Yesterday I mentioned the third rail of CA politics - Illegal Immigration, and whether or not Arnold would have the guts to touch it. Now that Pete Wilson is one of his advisors, he may have to.
The LA Times shows a rare fit of impartiality by printing this story
on how the Democrats may try to use Prop 187 against Arnold.
By trying to kill his campaign with this issue, they may end up killing their own. The irony in this situation is that 187 is also the CA Penal Code
section for murder...
Wednesday, August 13, 2003
Kudos to Dubya for making the recess appointment of Daniel Pipes
to the board of the US Institute for Peace. Finally there will be a voice in public policy that doesn't toe the weak State Department line and is willing to tell some very hard truths about the Middle East Conflict.
David Frum lays it out nicely
in today's NRO.
The Mulatto endorses Bill Simon for Governor.
And the winner is...
My prediction is that Arnold will win the California Recall, however I do not endorse him.
I examined very carefully the various platform positions (or lack thereof) of the major candidates.
Arnold is very charismatic, but he has not "officially" articulated any clear positions on any issues. We can deduce from news reports that:
He voted in support of Prop. 187, which effectively killed Pete Wilson's career. But does this mean that he will touch California's political third rail and address illegal immigration? I highly doubt it. I don't really know how this will hurt him as I think Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante will have a solid majority among Latino voters delivered by the endorsement of the politically influential Sanchez sisters.
Last year he sponsored the proposition to provide $500 million to after school programs for California's kids.
He has publicly come out as being pro-choice.
He favors some kind of gun control, although he hasn't been real specific on that.
In short, a fiscal conservative, but social liberal. A "moderate" Republican as the Left would describe it.
McClintock has come out on four very big issues so far:
Repeal of the Vehicle License Fee (or "car tax")
Reform of the State Workman's Comp system; which is badly needed. California's WC premiums are among the highest in the nation. It's ridiculously easy to claim workman's comp here, which has driven costs WAY up.
Fighting government waste by requiring state agencies to perform an audit and eliminating anything unneccesary. (c'mon Tom, do you REALLY expect them to be honest?)
Voiding the energy contracts signed by Gray Davis in his bid to rein in energy prices last summer. This is a big issue for some folks, especially this time of year when the temps are hitting the low 100's.
Simon articulated his campaign positions during his run for Governor last year, and has stuck to those positions. They are almost identical to McClintock except that Simon has come out clearly opposed to abortion and gun control, which makes him an "extremist" in eyes of the lefties in Sacto.
The simple fact is, Arnold is the only Republican who can win in California.
Tuesday, August 12, 2003
Burning Down the House
Today's frontpagemag.com has a scary story about the new face of eco-terrorism.
What makes this so maddening is that these folks want to actually dictate what gets built, when and where. If it doesn't conform to their idea of what's good for the earth, then they're opposed to it. If we all subscribed to their vision of nature, we'd be subsisting on nuts and berries and wiping our butts with tree bark.
They need to realize that we all have choices, and with those choices come consequences. For these folks, the consequences are going to be quite severe. The Government is in no mood to play around after 9/11/2001. Their right to free expression ends at someone else's property line. If Mr. Rosebraugh advocates violent struggle in his vision to protect nature, he'd better be prepared for the inevitable possibility that some people like myself will resort to deadly force to protect our property from him and those like him.
Sorry for taking a few days off. I had a lot to catch up on both at work and at home.
08/03/2003 - 08/10/2003
08/10/2003 - 08/17/2003
08/17/2003 - 08/24/2003
08/24/2003 - 08/31/2003
08/31/2003 - 09/07/2003
09/07/2003 - 09/14/2003
09/14/2003 - 09/21/2003
09/21/2003 - 09/28/2003
09/28/2003 - 10/05/2003
10/05/2003 - 10/12/2003
10/12/2003 - 10/19/2003
10/19/2003 - 10/26/2003
10/26/2003 - 11/02/2003