About Me

Name: BLOGASSAULT
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Transfering The Wealth Through Environmentalism

   Charles Krauthammer has an article out in the Washington Post today discussing the new global wealth transfer: environmentalism.
 
The raid on the Western treasuries is on again, but today with a new rationale to fit current ideological fashion. With socialism dead, the gigantic heist is now proposed as a sacred service of the newest religion: environmentalism.
 
One of the major goals of the Copenhagen climate summit is another NIEO shakedown: the transfer of hundreds of billions from the industrial West to the Third World to save the planet by, for example, planting green industries in the tristes tropiques.
 
Politically it's an idea of genius, engaging at once every left-wing erogenous zone: rich man's guilt, post-colonial guilt, environmental guilt. But the idea of shaking down the industrial democracies in the name of the environment thrives not just in the refined internationalist precincts of Copenhagen. It thrives on the national scale, too.
 
   I like the use of the color metaphor:
 
Socialism having failed so spectacularly, the left was adrift until it struck upon a brilliant gambit: metamorphosis from red to green. The cultural elites went straight from the memorial service for socialism to the altar of the environment. The objective is the same: highly centralized power given to the best and the brightest, the new class of experts, managers and technocrats. This time, however, the alleged justification is not abolishing oppression and inequality but saving the planet.
 
   The interesting thing is, socialism might have failed but many still are trying to make it work. Either way, as I have said many times, if the U.N. is involved, they are simply looking to grab the power and the money.
   
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

More On Virginia Tech Shooting

   Here is another story from the Boston Globe, where family mambers of slain students are looking for the head of the schools President, Charles Steger.
 
At least two Virginia Tech administrators told family members about a double shooting in a dorm -- the prelude to the deadliest shooting rampage in U.S. history -- well before the rest of the campus was notified a gunman was on the loose.

Those details were revealed in a revised state report released Friday and prompted bitter reactions from some victims' relatives who have been demanding the resignation of President Charles Steger ever since the 2007 massacre that left 33 people dead.

   The lessons that need to be learned from this tragedy are clear; the most obvious being students and faculity first, family members and everybody else second.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Washington Post Takes On The NRA

   At least E.J. Dionne Jr. is. Here is his column explaining how polled NRA members back some gun regulation.
 
In his survey of 832 gun owners, including 401 NRA members, Luntz found that 82 percent of NRA members supported "prohibiting people on the terrorist watch lists from purchasing guns." Sixty-nine percent favored "requiring all gun sellers at gun shows to conduct criminal background checks of the people buying guns," and 78 percent backed "requiring gun owners to alert police if their guns are lost or stolen." Among gun owners who did not belong to the NRA, the numbers were even higher.
 
   There is nothing here that most level headed gun owners would not support. But he goes on:

NRA members also oppose the idea behind the so-called Tiahrt amendments passed by Congress. Named for Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), the rules prevent law enforcement officials from having full access to gun trace data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and require the FBI to destroy certain background-check records after just 24 hours. Talk about handcuffing the police.

The mayors' poll offered respondents this statement, antithetical to the Tiahrt rules: "The federal government should not restrict the police's ability to access, use, and share data that helps them enforce federal, state and local gun laws." Among NRA members, 69 percent agreed.
 
   Wording is everything. But the question does have an answer, just not the one E.J., and the mayors are trying to imply. Here is the the actual truth to "police access".
 
  • Trace information remains available for law enforcement use. The FY 2007 version of the Tiahrt amendment ensures that trace data is available to federal, state, and local agencies "in connection with and for use in a bona fide criminal investigation or prosecution" or for use in administrative actions by BATFE—which is, of course, the principal agency responsible for overseeing the conduct of federally licensed firearms dealers.The language and history of the Gun Control Act are clear: Congress always intended to keep this information confidential, and to allow its use only for legitimate law enforcement purposes. The firearms trace database includes information such as the agency requesting a gun trace, the location from which the gun was recovered, and the identity of the dealer and original retail buyer.
  •    So, there you have it. You can't hardly make it more clear; if the ploce need information on a "real" crime, they will get what they need, but nothing more. Everyone has a constitutional right to own a firearm, but not everyone should have the constitutional right to know that I own one. That is what the Tiahrt Amendment is doing.

    Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
    « Previous1Next »