NRA gags board on Kagan testimony.

[theGringo]

End the game? We haven't "ended the game" on the first amendment, which pretty much no one takes issue with. Why on earth do you think that we're going to do better with the second?

You've been missing some news, Bill. The First amendment is under assault as much as the Second is. The Fourth pretty much died under Clinton and Bush. The whole Bill of Rights will pretty much be rendered null once the progressives control the Supreme Court, and it's only a question of when. As a Progressive, a member of the "principled left", and an unrepentant Obama voter, I should think you would be up on the current administration's intentions and maneuvering.

Remember the Fairness Doctrine? It's back, in spades, under the guise of "rescuing" the journalism business by creating a state-run media via the "Drudge Tax". Dot Gov would tax news aggregators and "redistribute the wealth" to it's preferred media outlets:

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is seeking ways to "reinvent" journalism, and that's a cause for concern. According to a May 24 draft proposal, the agency thinks government should be at the center of a media overhaul. The bureaucracy sees it as a problem that the Internet has introduced a wealth of information options to consumers, forcing media companies to adapt and experiment to meet changing market needs. FTC's policy staff fears this new reality.

"There are reasons for concern that experimentation may not produce a robust and sustainable business model for commercial journalism," the report states. With no faith that the market will work things out for the better, government thinks it must come to the rescue.

The ideas being batted around to save the industry share a common theme: They are designed to empower bureaucrats, not consumers. For instance, one proposal would, "Allow news organizations to agree jointly on a mechanism to require news aggregators and others to pay for the use of online content, perhaps through the use of copyright licenses."

In other words, government policy would encourage a tax on websites like the Drudge Report, a must-read source for the news links of the day, so that the agency can redistribute the funds collected to various newspapers. Such a tax would hit other news aggregators, such as Digg, Fark and Reddit, which not only gather links, but provide a forum for a lively and entertaining discussion of the issues raised by the stories. Fostering a robust public-policy debate, not saving a particular business model, should be the goal of journalism in the first place.

The report also discusses the possibility of offering tax exemptions to news organizations, establishing an AmeriCorps for reporters and creating a national fund for local news organizations. The money for those benefits would come from a suite of new taxes. A 5 percent tax on consumer electronic devices such as iPads, Kindles and laptops that let consumers read the news could be used to encourage people to keep reading the dead-tree version of the news. Other taxes might be levied on the radio and television spectrum, advertising and cell phones.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/4/ftc-floats-drudge-tax/

And if that isn't sufficient to control the free flow of information, the "Internet Kill Switch" ought to do the trick. Here, we grant the President the power to shut down the internet, or portions of it, for up to 120 days without congressional approval or oversight:

A new Senate bill, sponsored by Senator Joseph Lieberman, proposes to give the president the authority "to seize control of or even shut down portions of the Internet," according to CNET.

The authority granted to the government in the bill, known as the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act (PCNAA), has been likened to an Internet "kill switch."

The bill would require that private companies--such as "broadband providers, search engines, or software firms," CNET explains--"immediately comply with any emergency measure or action" put in place by the Department of Homeland Security, or else face fines.

It would also see the creation of a new agency within the Department of Homeland Security, the National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications (NCCC). Any private company reliant on "the Internet, the telephone system, or any other component of the U.S. 'information infrastructure'" would be "subject to command" by the NCCC, and some would be required to engage in "information sharing" with the agency, says CBS4.
Numerous groups, such as TechAmerica, have criticized the bill, warning of the "potential for absolute power" and expressing reservations about the "unintended consequences that would result from the legislation's regulatory approach."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/17/internet-kill-switch-woul_n_615923.html

Quoth Leiberman:

"Right now, China can disconnect parts of its Internet in times of war. We need to be able to do that too."

Hmmm ...

 

[Bill Nance]

You've been missing some news, Bill. The First amendment is under assault as much as the Second is.

Really? There's a large number of people in this country who deny that there is an individual right to freedom of speech, assembly and religion? I must have missed that one.

I think you misread what I said.

I said we haven't ended the game (as in fighting over it) about the first amendment. No one denies the right exists, all the fights now are over interpretations of where, when and and whether the government has the right to restrict it under the concept of ordered liberty.

We haven't even got to a consensus on whether there is an individual right or not on 2A. Hell, the dissents read like Heller never happened. (Which I was pleased to see the majority reprimanded the dissent for). And all the usual suspects of course, including virtually all the far left, think Heller is crazy and there is no right, no matter what.

I can't think of any other constitutionally guaranteed right that is under the assaults that gun rights have been for forever.

I'd love to see the Dems get taken to task by someone other than the GOP or Fox News for thinking that the court granting more individual freedom under 2a is a bad thing while simultaneously making the argument that legalizing abortion was the correct move because it expanded individuals rights, not government's, in keeping with 4a and 9a. The hypocrisy of this just blows my mind.

I don't think we're all that far apart on this one.

 

[theGringo]

I don't think we're all that far apart on this one.

Wash you mouth out with soap, hippy!

 

[calsdad]

Really? There's a large number of people in this country who deny that there is an individual right to freedom of speech, assembly and religion? I must have missed that one.

I think you misread what I said.

I said we haven't ended the game (as in fighting over it) about the first amendment. No one denies the right exists, all the fights now are over interpretations of where, when and and whether the government has the right to restrict it under the concept of ordered liberty.

We haven't even got to a consensus on whether there is an individual right or not on 2A. Hell, the dissents read like Heller never happened. (Which I was pleased to see the majority reprimanded the dissent for). And all the usual suspects of course, including virtually all the far left, think Heller is crazy and there is no right, no matter what.

I can't think of any other constitutionally guaranteed right that is under the assaults that gun rights have been for forever.

I'd love to see the Dems get taken to task by someone other than the GOP or Fox News for thinking that the court granting more individual freedom under 2a is a bad thing while simultaneously making the argument that legalizing abortion was the correct move because it expanded individuals rights, not government's, in keeping with 4a and 9a. The hypocrisy of this just blows my mind.

I don't think we're all that far apart on this one.

Exactly.

The hypocrisy of the left vis a vis the abortion thing vs the gun rights thing is something that just blows my mind.

They go apoplectic when somebody wants to own a device that MIGHT allow them to take a life. But they have no problems at all with actually taking one.

I have come to the conclusion that when people like you and I look at gun rights under the type of lense I described above, we are understanding the problem wrong. The reason why the left has no problems with actually taking lives - is because what they are really are is authoritarians. The history of the 20th century should be enough evidence that there are plenty of people out there who will use any excuse to implement a tyrannical govt - that is then allowed to do whatever it wants. Including killing people by the millions. Once you adopt that viewpoint on the world there really isn't much different between the piles of bodies you will accept. Whether they are civilians, soldiers, or babies.

I have come to believe that the reason so many people - especially those who are in power or who seek power, are so adamantly opposed to gun rights is simply because guns put power into the hands of the people.

It's for this reason that I give crap to people - including many here on NES - who argue that the militia, or civilians with guns - cannot stand up to the military. If you accept that premise - then there really is no reason for us to have gun rights any more other than as a "hobby". And once you accept that - you have accepted any form of tyranny that comes down the road.

 

[theGringo]

Uh oh ...

NRA e-mail: You know who’s pretty great on guns? Harry Reid

Thank you for contacting NRA-ILA regarding the recent rumor that NRA-PVF has indicated they will endorse Harry Reid.

Regarding any potential endorsement of Sen. Reid in the upcoming elections, NRA-PVF has not yet announced any ratings or endorsements in this race. Ratings and endorsements will be determined closer to the election. It is important to note, however, that the NRA is a single issue organization and that when our ratings and endorsements are announced, they are based solely on a candidate’s support for, or opposition to, our Second Amendment rights. Other issues, as important as they may be to many people, do not and cannot play any role in those decisions. NRA represents a broad coalition of American gun owners, who are bound together by their support for the right to keep and bear arms.

In 2004, Senator Reid was rated “B” in his reelection by the NRA Political Victory Fund. Since then, as U.S. Senate Majority Leader, Senator Reid has proven himself to be a supporter of our Second Amendment rights. It would be accurate to say that few, if any, of NRA’s legislative victories in Congress during the last six years would have occurred without his active support.

As an example, he was instrumental in Senate passage (and eventual enactment into law) of the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” (PLCAA)”, which shut down reckless lawsuits against gun manufacturers and dealers that attempted to hold them liable for the misuse of firearms by criminals. Sen. Reid also cosponsored S. 659 (PLCCA) in the 108th Congress and voted against “poison pill” amendments to it, including the Feinstein Amendment to renew the federal ban on so-called “assault weapons”, and the Kennedy Amendment that would have banned most hunting ammunition.

Following Hurricane Katrina, he voted for legislation, that is now federal law, to prohibit gun confiscation during states of emergency. He also voted for legislation to allow commercial airline pilots to be armed in the cockpit to protect their passengers and crew. In this congressional session, Sen. Reid voted for the Ensign Amendment to repeal Washington D.C.’s gun ban and restore self-defense rights in our nation’s capital. He cosponsored similar legislation–S. 1414–in the 108th Congress. He also voted for an amendment to allow law-abiding citizens to carry firearms for self-defense in national parks and wildlife refuges. This federal policy change just took effect on February 22.

Early last year, Sen. Reid emphatically stated that he would oppose any effort to reinstate an “assault weapons” ban if the Senate were to vote on it in the future. In addition, he voted last year for the Thune-Vitter Amendment to provide national reciprocity for state Right-to-Carry permits. He also voted twice for the Wicker Amendment allowing Amtrak passengers to include firearms in their checked luggage. These votes were possible only because of Senator Reid’s actions in his capacity as Senate Majority Leader. Finally, he was among the 58 Senators who signed the pro-gun congressional amicus brief in the McDonald v. Chicago case, argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on March 2nd, which will decide whether the Second Amendment applies to all states and localities.

Most recently, the NRA worked with Sen. Reid to include in his manager’s amendment to the health care reform bill a provision that prohibits the disclosure or collection of information relating to the lawful ownership, use or storage of firearms or ammunition and also prohibits lawful gun ownership, possession and use from being used as a factor to determine eligibility or premium rates for health insurance. This provision was adopted on December 22, 2009 and was included in this legislation when it was signed into law on March 23.

Finally, Senator Reid is opposed to any anti-gun treaties that might come before the U.S. Senate for ratification.
These are a few examples of Senator Reid’s support and leadership on Second Amendment issues. Given the Senate could vote on gun-related issues in the coming months, rest assured any votes will be considered in future candidate evaluations. Regarding NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox recently attending the grand opening of the Clark County Shooting Park (CCSP) with U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and other Nevada elected officials.

The CCSP is the largest shooting park in the world. This 2,900-acre state-of-the-art facility is devoted entirely to the shooting sports and is the nation’s premier shooting park. As the nation’s largest shooting sports organization, the NRA’s presence at the ribbon-cutting ceremony should come as no surprise. NRA actively worked with several Members of the Nevada congressional delegation, including Senator Reid, to ensure that this range was built. The development and construction of the CCSP has the full bipartisan support of the Nevada congressional delegation, and Nevada’s Republican Governor.

Senator Reid was instrumental in arranging not only the transfer of the then-federal lands to Clark County where the Park is located, but also in securing $61 million in funding to develop and build the Park. The Clark County Shooting Park would not have been built without his active efforts and support.
Once again, thank you for your inquiry.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/02/nra-e-mail-you-know-whos-pretty-great-on-guns-harry-reid/

 

[theGringo]

A RedState reader writes: "My phone call to the NRA"

After reading your post, I wasted 30 minutes waiting on hold to talk to a human at NRA. I finally got a guy – I think he said his name was “Tag” – who was in full defense mode on all the good stuff Harry Reid had done, all his votes, how they gave him a B Grade, how he wrote an amicus brief for the Heller & Chicago SCOTUS cases. When I told them that there is a list on Redstate.com of all the anti-2nd Amendment votes by Harry, he said “Redstate, yeah, right.” This guy was combative and rehearsed in his defense of Harry Reid. I asked him how they can support a guy who voted against the SCOTUS nominees (Roberts, Alito) who were 2nd Amendment advocates, but vote for Sotomayor. “Tag” said that most judicial nominations are done on party line votes, and they don’t hold those votes against Harry Reid!! I said that those in the military community, where many NRA members serve their country, are still bothered by “the war is lost” comment on Iraq. “Tag” laughed at me, and said, “Oh, comeon!”.

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/07/01/a-reader-email-on-the-nra/

 

[theGringo]

Where NRA dares not tread:

Army Captain from Massachusetts, Iraq War vet, speaks to Congress about Kagan nomination. He makes some good points.

 

[pdm]

Army Captain from Massachusetts, Iraq War vet, speaks to Congress about Kagan nomination. He makes some good points.

Same reasoning as OGAM -- attack the people who won't attack you back.