Showing posts sorted by date for query Codrea's Law. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query Codrea's Law. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Saturday, April 11, 2015

There Oughta Be a Law

"Anyone who can't be trusted with a gun can't be trusted without a custodian." [More]
Thank you, John. Most cool of you to do this.

I do have a suggested edit: The statement is merely a truism, and does not go on to recommend a further action on the part of anyone -- any misconception otherwise is probably due to conflicts or confusion attributable to the way I've presented it.

If the response to the truism is to incarcerate an individual, he still has a right to fight off prison beatings and rapes  --  that is, failures of custodians to properly fulfill their obligations. That opens up a door into a whole 'nother room about what "we" should do about people who can no more be trusted to roam freely among us than we could trust a man-eating lion.  In any case, what John has designated "Codrea's Law" is silent on a "solution."

Now jump over to another point I frequently make -- that "illegal aliens" being given a "pathway to citizenship" will result in a majority that will allow for government evisceration of the right to keep and bear arms. While I definitely have strong opinions on the subject of immigration, "legal" and otherwise, my observation alone comes with no recommendation on "what to do about it" (aside from properly considering political actions supporting it to be "anti-gun" in effect). It merely states that based on all observable data, and without significant presently unknown factors altering outcomes, that will be the result. That's why I keep issuing my (unanswered to date) challenge to those who maintain otherwise to give us more than wishful thinking, anecdotes and platitudes, something that can be independently validated. Without it, all we're left with to guide an appropriate course are probabilities.

But back to Mr. Comeau's post, and lightening up a bit: When I read the title, my first thought involved a fantasy voice-over introduction to it. Realizing the extreme unlikelihood of that ever happening, my second thought went to an old Firesign Theater bit. And again.

Friday, February 27, 2009

Thoughts on Obama

Ron Bokleman, President of the Norfolk County League of Sportsmen's Clubs, shared the following email titled "Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban‏" with me and allowed me to post it here:

The United States Constitution clearly says “…shall not be infringed”. The basis for the Bill of Rights was that they were a list of “Shall not’s” issued by our Founding Fathers. The Bill of Rights GRANTS you nothing. The Bill of Rights is there to restrain the Government, as are all the subsequent Amendments.

This too, then, is an infringement. NJ just tried to pass this and fell one vote short as I recall. I helped kill a similar bill in mASSachusetts last legislative session. It has nothing to do with “affordability” and those that use that argument are forfeiting their rights without a fight. In mASSachusetts we have a Governor willing to try and push RFID/GPS tracking chips into our vehicles to tax you on the miles you drive! This is totalitarianism from the collectivists – “do gooder’s” who want to control everything you do and will use lies like “Global Cooling” oops “Global Warming”…oh crap let’s just call it “Climate Change” “since we’re wrong crowd”.

It’s critical that we all get on the same page here. If we don’t … it will be too easy to defeat us.

The issues in Mexico are not our problem. If these drug cartels want guns, they’ll get them from anywhere in the world. This is media hype against the Constitution as always. Where’s the media hype over the FACT that over 400 kidnappings have occurred in Arizona by drug cartels coming OVER OUR BORDER? Sneaking in, across our border, invading people’s homes in the United States! Where’s the outrage over that? Now that’s our problem. I’d say this too, you want to save Mexican (and American) lives? Ok, secure the damn border!

I’d suggest you all start reading David Codrea’s Gun Rights Examiner National column – daily and get informed.

Here’s a prediction. Given the makeup of Congress at the moment and how easily the “Welfare, Healthcare Bill”, (“Stimulus” Package) went through Obama and Holder think this will be a slam dunk. Obama wants it done before his first term ends because of what he thinks is a majority in Congress. This will KILL his chances for a second term. In fact, that’s now dead already thank God.

I think they’ll get this through, and then those of us who “told you so” will resist any of these new regulations until the Supreme Court kills it. It’s going to be a long and costly fight and hopefully the Constitution will prevail. If not there are other alternatives…like exercising our Second Amendment Rights as our Founding Fathers intended. Unfortunately, for everyone, that will come at a much higher cost. There’s nothing to be ashamed of, hurtful, hateful, or ridiculous about my making statement either. Either our Constitution is the law of the land or it isn’t. You can’t stand in the middle anymore.

There are now 22-26 States with legislation pending to declare State Sovereignty under the 9th and 10th Amendments. I personally filed a House Resolution with my State Rep. here in MA.

Obama wants to declare himself like “Lincoln”? He might just might get his chance by kicking off the Second Civil War. It will be his administrations fault, not ours. Problem is, he wants this in the worst way. Why? Because then he’ll be able to suspend elections, declare martial law, and strip us of all remaining rights. Any crisis will be viewed as a way for the Government to seize more control and squash the people. No different than Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush and most of the Presidents before him starting with FDR. We can’t let this happen. We can’t let him have his crisis. However, it’s up to each of you to join in the fight, while you still can, to do it peaceably through our legislative process.

This is NOT about Democrats or Republicans. That is a pure distraction to divide us. They’re ALL complicit in this together. It’s about Government control. Marching us toward “Collectivism” (for the greater good) under “Totalitarian” rule. Those that see it happening are awake. Those that disagree, laugh at these remarks, and stick their heads in the sand will have their day of reckoning too. Only then…it will be too late.

Tuesday, July 08, 2008

"Hora Bucuriei Praecox"

A Rumination Upon Heller,
Special to David Codrea's War on Guns Blog.
by Mike Vanderboegh
8 July 2008



Dancing the hora on Dealul Spirii (Spirii Hill), Bucharest (1857 lithograph)


Hora: a type of circle dance originating in the Balkans but now found in a number of countries, most of which use slightly different spellings. . . Hora (pl. hore) is a traditional Romanian folk dance that gathers everyone into a big closed circle. The dancers hold each other's hands and the circle spins, usually clockwise, as each participant follows a sequence of three steps forward and one step back. The dance is usually accompanied by musical instruments such as the cymbalum, accordion, violin, viola, double bass, saxophone, trumpet or even the panflute. Hora is popular during wedding celebrations and festivals, and is an essential part of the social entertainment in rural areas. One of the most famous hore is the Hora Unirii (Hora of the Union), which became a Romanian patriotic song as a result of being the hymn when Wallachia and Moldavia united to form the Principality of Romania in 1859. During the 2006/2007 New Year's Eve celebration, when Romania and Bulgaria joined the European Union, people were dancing Hora Bucuriei (Hora of Joy) over the boulevards of Bucharest as a tribute to the EU anthem, Ode to Joy. . . A different dance, also called the Horah, is the most popular of Jewish folk dances and played a foundational role in modern Israeli folk dancing. It is usually performed to Jewish or Israeli folk songs, typically to the music of Hava Nagila. -- Wikipedia.
Hora Bucuriei: Dance of Joy

You can perhaps see now why I chose David Codrea's War on Guns blog for the venue of this essay. David is, after all, my favorite Rumanian-American. Or is it American-Rumanian? He is certainly first and foremost a great American. Perhaps American of Rumanian descent? In any case, he's one heck of a guy and an indomitable fighter for our Second Amendment rights. I don't know. My ancestry is Dutch-German with some Scotch-Irish thrown in, but I've never been one to claim "Dutch-American" as a title. Now, if the Spanish government ever gets around to paying reparations for the evil oppression that King Phillip carried out upon the country of my great-great grandparents, I could perhaps embrace the term. If there was money in it.

But I thought of the Rumanian dance of joy when I watched the celebrations in Internet Gunnie Land around the Heller decision. Many of us seem to believe the battle, if not the war, is over. But another term sprang to my mind the same instant: praecox. It is an ugly little Latin word meaning premature, as in:


Dementia praecox: Latin for premature dementia.
1. Any of several psychotic disorders charaterized by distortions of reality and disturbances of thought and language and withdrawal from social contact.
2. Schizophrenia. No longer in technical use.
or,

Ejaculatio praecox: Latin for premature ejaculation; a lack of ejaculatory control, which interferes with sexual or emotional well being in one or both partners.
Hora bucuriei praecox. Thus, in the first Rumanian-Latin phrase that I've ever created, I combine the terms Hora (dance), bucuriei (joy) and praecox (premature) in the title of this essay, for many of us certainly seem to be engaging in a premature dance of joy. Here's why.

Nine Black Robes and One Vote

Yup. One vote. 5 to 4. Give us another liberal president, which we are sure to have no matter who's elected, and the balance could shift with the suddenness of a heart attack, or maybe a stroke. Read the dissents and you will see what awaits us -- collectivism that the Founders would laugh at with derisive scorn. Except the Founders aren't around any more. One vote. Do you think the enemies of liberty in this country are going away? They're in it for the long haul. This decision is a temporary setback to them, if it is a setback at all.

The Decision Secures What, Exactly?



[Vizzini has just cut the rope The Dread Pirate Roberts is climbing up]
Vizzini: HE DIDN'T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE.
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. -- The Princess Bride, 1987
Heller secures "an individual right to bear arms." So they say. But how is that when the language of Scalia's majority opinion leaves a regulatory barn door large enough to parade an elephant (with "Predatory ATF" painted on its ass) through it? "Individual right to bear arms," may we introduce you to "reasonable regulation?" What a crock. Why are you dancing?

Olofson Trumps Heller

Also, we have "Maximum Mike" Sullivan of the ATF telling us that Heller is a decision "we can live with." Heck yes, he can live with it. It and every other law his unconstitutional agency ignores. Witness, if you please, the Olofson case. Until the ATF abides by the law, laws -- or Supreme Court decisions -- secure NOTHING.

It is claimed that even with all of Heller's faults, we should celebrate for "we have a dodged a bullet." Uh, huh. Dodging a bullet on a battlefield where many more bullets are flying and the enemy continues to advance is trivial and incidental.

"Legality": the Opiate of the American Masses

Finally, there is this. Marx called religion the "opiate of the masses." In modern day American, the opiate is "legality." The only thing Heller accomplishes is to lull that minority of the American people who really care about their Second Amendment rights into a false sense of security. Oh, your "individual right" to own a firearm is "secured," except (after the next administration closes "the gun show loophole") you will have to have the government's permission to buy or sell one; AND they'll be able to choke off your ammunition supply with confiscatory taxes or "labeling" schemes; AND they'll be able to ban "assault weapons" or "sniper rifles" or whatever. Oh, yes, you have an individual right secured by Heller. An individual right to be further victimized by collectivists. But it's "legal," so it's OK. Right?

Try to remember that liberty as the Founders envisioned it and "legality" as our current politicians use the term, are two entirely different things. When the Founders encountered the King's legality, they struck hard, knocking it down to secure their own liberty through the Constitution. Government misconduct as in Olofson may trump Supreme Court opinions like Heller, but liberty trumps legality. This is a point that from time to time in American history has been unfortunately necessary to make at the business end of a rifle.

The Hora is a great dance, an expression of human community and joy. It is, however, in the case of the Heller decision, entirely premature.

Mike Vanderboegh
PO Box 926
Pinson, AL 35126
GeorgeMason1776@aol.com

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Guest Editorial: Fear

by Mike Vanderboegh
11 February 2008

The fears of man are many. He fears the shadow of death and the closed doors of the future. He is afraid for his friends and for his sons and of the specter of tomorrow. All his life's journey he walks in the lonely corridors of his controlled fears, if he is a man. For only fools will strut, and only cowards dare cringe. -- James Warner Bellah, "Spanish Man's Grave" in Reveille, Curtis Publishing, 1947.
Sweet Home, Alabama

You know, I thank God every day that I am an Alabamian by choice. I love Alabama. I was born in Michigan on a stormy July night in 1952. At the tender age of 3 I was hijacked and removed against my will to Ohio where I was raised amongst the "Heathen Buckeye" as my Michigan relatives saw it (my father took a transfer with the Whirlpool Corporation to their Marion division). From 1955 to 1985, I lived in Ohio, first in Marion, then in Columbus. My son was born in University Hospital there in 1979. In 1985, I "refugeed" out of Ohio, fleeing my ex-wife, the faithless Wicked Witch of the North. I met and married an Arkansas girl who was working in Birmingham and I never went back. In time, Rosey presented me with two daughters, now teenagers. I would like to see them all grow to middle age before I pass over the River Jordan, but that is in God's hands. I am immensely proud of all three of my children. They are my finest accomplishments in life, though I must say that my wife Rosey probably bears more responsibility for that than I do. God has truly blessed me.

And it was here in Alabama where I found most of those blessings, along with a new home that I embraced. In time, the folks 'round here also embraced me but that was a far longer process, as any other "damyankee" can tell you. Right after I moved here, Rosey and I would spend our weekends just driving around, soaking up the geography and the history of the place. I loved the mountains of north Alabama, but I especially loved the people. By and large, the folks here are the best sort of folks you can find anywhere. They are generous, polite to a fault, tough, loyal to kith and kin, hard working, and God fearing. The race relations here are far better than can be found on Columbus' west side, to be sure. True, I came here long after the dogs, the firehoses and the nickname "Bombingham" became uncomfortable memories. But there is one side of Alabamians that I just love, and it is expressed in the state motto: "We Dare Defend Our Rights." I have found more truly free men in Alabama than anywhere else in the country that I have roamed.

From the rednecks of Winston County who still fight personal skirmishes that started back in the Civil War to the veterans of the Deacons for Defense and Justice who took up arms to guard Martin Luther King and other apostles of non-violent resistance from Klan attack, Alabamians exemplify that motto. I am lucky that my mother raised me to never know a stranger, for I've met and become friends with a lot of folks down here who cross all sorts of racial, ethnic, religious and socio-economic lines. Whenever I get a little peevish at the ways of the world and things seem a little foggy, I return to my friends, especially my Southern white boy friends, for a good mind-clearing dose of down home reality. I've just come back from a visit to the touchstone that represents the best of common sense Alabama, and I can't tell you how refreshed I feel.

You see, I was in a bit of a funk about the reaction to my last essay, "Awkward." Andrew Jackson, a natural born fighter and leader of men (and who more southern boys, white and black, were named after than any other until Robert E. Lee came along), once said "Never take counsel of your fears." Heck, that was all most folks seemed to take from "Awkward," and my earlier short story "Absolved." I couldn't believe it. All I have ever tried to do with my writing is to remind Americans that they once acted like free people and could again, if they but would. Some of my stuff, like "What Good Can a Handgun Do Against an Army?" or "Lessons of the 20th Century" have in the past gotten great responses, sometimes years afterward. But for the most part all I got this time was how terrible things are, and how irretrievable the situation is. As I responded on David Codrea's blog War on Guns:

Well, I'm gratified to see calmness, confidence and optimism breaking out all over in response to my essay. Why don't some of you guys just go ahead and slit your wrists and get it over with? Or better yet, throw some cold water on your faces, wake up and start acting like AMERICANS used to, fer cryin' out loud. No wonder the ATF thinks they can get away with what they do. If you'll stop worrying about what the enemy can do to you and start thinking about what you can do to them, you'll have made a start at winning the fight. Crap, you outnumber them a hundred to one, despite your fears. If you acted like you had the power that you actually have -- the power that your own timidity is stripping you of -- we wouldn't have to fight at all! Sheesh. Quit moaning, b...tching and "woe-is-me-ing" and start ACTING like free people. You're sure you wanted this blog and not the "surrender before inconvenience" one?

"Only Cowards Dare Cringe"

But you know, I messed up. I should have been reading my own stuff. For example, this from "You Can't Repeal the Law of Unintended Consequences" last April:

I have found over the years that modern day so-called liberals (who bear little resemblance intellectually to their claimed classical liberal ancestors)lack the courage of their convictions. There is no principle so dear that they are willing to personally suffer for, let alone die for. Government, blessed government, is their idol. If they are aggrieved, oppressed, or merely imagine that they are oppressed, it is to government that they turn. There hasn't been a liberal willing to die for his principles since the Civil Rights movement. They are more than willing to dispatch the men and women of government to die in their place, however. But, and I think this is more dangerous to the country, they also extrapolate from their own cowardice and believe that all people (even those who disagree with them) will, in the end, do what they're told by Government. (Emphasis supplied.)


Stupid me, I should have realized two things. First, it is not only liberals who can extrapolate from their own cowardice. And second, the folks who were responding to my writing negatively are not representative of the people I expect to "get" my stuff anyway. I use the medium at hand to broadcast my message, the Founders' message, forgetting that the folks who will best understand it are not tuned in. In a "blinding flash of the obvious" to use John Wesley Rawles' phrase, here is what I finally figured out: most rednecks (and most gunnies) are not keyboard commandos. They do not sit in the dark trying to make sense of the electron-borne winds of modern information (or disinformation). They are too busy with the exigencies of life to trade intellectualisms on the Net. The folks I'm talking about (and those I'm trying to reach) are rather more like the Kentuckians that Hank Messick described in the forward to his book King's Mountain: "One thing about the fellows back home -- when they say they're going to kill somebody, they kill him."

And so I went to talk to some friends, and some friends of friends, about the issues I'd raised in the last few pieces I'd written to see how despondent and discouraged they were about events. These were Alabama boys, rednecks (some of them) and the sons of rednecks -- gunnies all -- the great-great-grandsons of the yeoman farmers who followed Andrew Jackson in the Creek War and Stonewall Jackson in the Shenandoah. Most have lived lives of physical work and service -- to their God, their country and their families. Some are not particularly church-going men, but they live a faith that puts some pew-sitters in the shade. Whatever they've gotten in this life, they've had to work and sometimes fight for. Nobody gave it to them. They are men, in the best sense of that term. Like James Warner Bellah's cavalrymen, they understand what he meant by "only cowards dare cringe." These are folks who live by a code enunciated in Grantland Rice's poem, On Down the Road, (though I doubt some of them would ever admit to having read a poem):

Hold to the course, though the storms are about you;
Stick to the road where the banner still flies;
Fate and his legions are ready to rout you--
Give 'em both barrels--and aim for their eyes.

Life's not a rose bed, a dream or a bubble,
A living in clover beneath cloudless skies;
And Fate hates a fighter who's looking for trouble,
So give 'im both barrels--and shoot for the eyes.

Fame never comes to the loafers and sitters,
Life's full of knots in a shifting disguise;
Fate only picks on the cowards and quitters,
So give 'em both barrels--and aim for the eyes.

They are quiet fellows, mostly. But it is not the smartest thing in the world to make them mad, as British Colonel Patrick Ferguson found out when he called their ancestors in North Carolina "backwater men," "barbarians" and "mongrels" in 1780. He miscalculated his audience. The Scotch Irish pioneers came down out of the "backwaters," tracked Ferguson and his Tories to King's Mountain and killed him in a fight that proved THE turning point of the Revolution. One of my friends, a maintenance man at a local nursing home, a humble fellow who never went to college, a son of a coal miner and the descendant of men who fought Ferguson (and others who fought the Creeks, Abe Lincoln AND Jefferson Davis, and the Kaiser and Hitler and Hirohito) can tell you the story as if it happened yesterday with a comprehensive knowledge of the subject and an eye for detail that would put a professional historian to shame. One of the defeatist critics of Awkward headlined his piece "the revolution has been canceled." Try telling that to my friend. It lives within his soul. As another great Southerner once said, "The past isn't dead. It isn't even past."

I guess my sense of history is one thing that helped me make the transition from "damyankee" to full fledged Alabamian (with an asterisk, of course). Still, there may be another more mundane reason that I was embraced. As I was telling David Codrea the other day, I never considered myself a leader (and still don't consider myself a good leader) but it happened that during the early 90s when the predatory Clintonistas were roaming about seeking whom they would devour, I ended up leading one of our local constitutional militias. I didn't expect it or ask for it, it just happened. It was just that as I went along people followed me, even into situations where our lives were at risk. Knowing how suspicious and downright allergic the boys were about anything "Yankee" one day I made the mistake of asking, "Why did you fellows pick me?" And from the back of the room somebody said, "Hell, Mike, yer a Yankee. We put you out front and if you get it, we ain't lost much." Pretty funny -- funny AND smart.

"The Cutting Edge"

But southern boys like these -- call them hillbillies, call them rednecks -- have, as Hank Messick observed, always been "the cutting edge" in America's wars. Messick quotes the Georgia historian F.N. Boney: "There is no shortage of rednecks in the neat, quiet American military cemeteries which now dot the globe. However rejected in normal times, the redneck has always been welcomed when the nation went to war."

And "rejected in normal times" is no idle phrase. Is there any other class of people more lampooned and vilified than the Southern Christian poor white boy? Like the long-dead Ferguson, the elites of this country have always despised him. As Messick says, "Because he remains an individualist, he is a safe target." "Hillbillies," as Messick calls them, are "not interested in the fast buck. Wealth has never appealed to him as an end in itself. If he expects a reward for hard work, he assumes it will come in heaven. He still practices the Protestant Ethic, you see. More important to him than money is his personal freedom, the right to do something or nothing as he pleases." (Hank Messick, King's Mountain, Little Brown, 1976, pp. 10-11.

So like I said, I went and talked to my good old boy buddies. I talked about the situation we find ourselves in today, with Heller looming and the Olofson case outrages that demonstrated the rule of law no longer obtains. I read them, or let them read, some of what I had written. Finally, I read them passages from my defeatist critics' postings. All of their reactions, long and short, were summed up by one of them: "Heck, Mike, why are you worried about what a bunch of pissant Yankee wusses think? You still got us." And so I do, God bless 'em all. I've got "the cutting edge" with me. With that and God, I'll make my stand, as the song says, to live and die in Dixie.

"What is the opposite of fear?"

Although extraordinary valor was displayed by the entire corps of Spartans and Thespians, yet bravest of all was declared the Spartan Dienekes. It is said that on the eve of battle, he was told by a native of Trachis that the Persian archers were so numerous that, when they fired their volleys, the mass of arrows blocked out the sun. Dienekes, however, quite undaunted by this prospect, remarked with a laugh, "Good. Then we'll have our battle in the shade." -- Herodotus, The Histories.
And that brings me to my final point. Discouragement and defeatism come from isolation and the fear that it breeds. In "Gates of Fire" by Steven Pressfield, the Spartan Dienekes says:

"All my life . . . one question has haunted me. What is the opposite of fear? . . .To call it aphobia, fearlessness, is without meaning. This is just a name, thesis expressed as antithesis. To call the opposite of fear fearlessness is to say nothing. I want to know its true obverse, as day of night and heaven of earth. . . How does one conquer fear of death, that most primordial of terrors, which resides in our very blood, as in all life, beasts as well as men? . . . Dogs in a pack find courage to take on a lion. Each hound knows his place. He fears the dog ranked above and feeds off the fear of the dog below. Fear conquers fear. This is how we Spartans do it, counterpoising to fear of death a greater fear: that of dishonor. Of exclusion from the pack. . . But is that courage? Is not acting out of fear of dishonor still, in essence, acting out of fear?" Alexandros asked (Dienekes) what he was seeking. "Something nobler. A higher form of the mystery. Pure. Infallible. . . You young men imagine that we veterans, with our long experience of war, have mastered fear. But we feel it as keenly as you. More keenly, for we have more intimate experience of it. Fear lives within us twenty-four hours a day, in our sinews and our bones. . . We cobble our courage together on the spot, of rags and remnants . . . I know all the tricks . . . I know how to close with my man, how to convince myself that his terror is greater than my own. Perhap it is. I employ care for the men-at-arms serving beneath me and seek to forget my own fear in concern for their survival. But it's always there. The closest I've come is to act despite terror. But that's not it either. Not the kind of courage I'm talking about. Nor is beast-like fury or panic-spawned self-preservation. These are katalepsis, possession. A rat owns as much of them as a man.". . . Ariston asked if this higher courage in fact existed. "It is no phantom," Dienekes declared with conviction. "I have seen it. . . Do you know who owns it, this pure form of courage, more than any other I have ever known?" No one around the fire answered. "My wife."
In Pressfield's novel, the answer to Dienekes' question was wrapped up in the secret of how the 300 were chosen for what all knew was certain death at Thermopylae. I will not ruin the ending of the book for you if you have not read it, but I think I can summarize and answer without danger: Love. Love is the opposite of fear. Love, faith, duty. If you take counsel of your fears, if you believe in something so little that you can be discouraged before even trying to defend it, then I say boldly that you do not love it enough. You do not have faith in what you profess to believe. For this lack of love, you shirk your duty -- to yourself, your family and your country. The wonder of it to me is that you feel comfortable in telling the world of your own failure to love, of your lack of faith and your pitiful excuses for why you cannot do your duty without apparent embarrassment.

The men and women of Alabama that I know and love, the despised rednecks, crackers and hillbillies, may not know everything in the wider world but they know what they love -- of God and mankind -- and are willing to die for it. They walk the corridors of their controlled fear, because they are men and women -- American men and women. They are Americans who the Founders would be proud to know, as I am proud to know them and count them friends. And what, I ask, does that make the cynics and defeatists among us who claim to believe in the Republic the Founders made while making excuses why they cannot fight for it? My good friend called them "a bunch of pissant Yankee wusses." I'm not going to argue the point.

Mike Vanderboegh
PO Box 926
Pinson AL 35126
GeorgeMason1776@aol.com