The New Tennessee House of Representatives: Half the Naifeh With No Trans Fat!
Tennessee House Bill 962, which would allow persons who have a valid handgun carry permit to carry their weapon even into an establishment that serves alcoholic beverages, has passed the House 70-26. The yeas included the votes of 20 Democrats, including George Fraley and Gary Moore, who were co-sponsors of the legislation, along with Dennis Ferguson, Harry Tindell, and even House Democratic Leader Gary Odom.
Opponents of this bill argue that it is dangerous because there is really no way to prevent someone who is drinking from carrying their firearm, even though the law would forbid it. This objection is rooted in reality, of course, but bars are no less susceptable to crime as any other establishment, and criminals will go where people are unarmed. By leaving bars a gun-free zone, we invite the criminal element to do their dirty work there. In addition, if we are going to allow people in Tennessee to have handgun carry permits, placing too many arbitratry limits on where a person may carry defeats the purpose of that law. Why even allow concealed (or open) carry if there are so few places one can carry? Either we allow people to carry, or we do not. If we are going to say that people have the right to carry (and they do), then we need to allow the public to exercise that right as freely as possible or not allow it at all. Why not liberalize the carry laws even further?
Among the noes (all Democrats) were no surprises, Mike Turner voted no, along with the Memphis DeBerry-led cabal, Janis Sontany, Joe Armstrong, and Rude Johnny Shaw. Jimmy Naifeh also voted no, but the passage of this bill truly signals a new day in Tennessee politics, because similar legislation had been stopped from coming to the House floor in the past merely because Naifeh didn't want it there. Now we know why he used every parliamentary tactic that he could to keep gun legislation from the House floor while he was Speaker-because if he had allowed the whole House to vote on serious firearms freedom legislation, it would have passed.
The New York Times is the latest media organ to get in on the continuing debate over Tennessee House Bill 818, legislation brought forward by Stacey Campfield that would cap the amount of lottery winnings that welfare recipients could receive to $600. The Times and others wonder if this limitation will impact Tennessee's lottery profits considering who statistics are telling us is playing the lottery the most:
Eight states areproposing that people get tested for drugsbefore receiving government assistance. Proponents say it’s a health issue but, as demand for these programs surges, it surely sends a different kind of message. Meanwhile, a billin the Tennessee Legislaturewould cap lottery winnings at $600 for people on public assistance. Considering thatpoor people play lotteriesway out of proportion to others and that lotteries are big moneymakers for states themselves (since theytake such a huge rake), isn’t Tennessee risking a big loss?
The World doesn't have a problem with legalized gaming or gambling, but in Tennessee there is a State monopoly on gaming, and that literally means that the State is at least somewhat dependent on its own public assistance recipients to fund its "education" lottery. The money these recipients are getting is intended to feed, clothe, and sustain them by providing basic needs because the State presumes that if you are on public assistance that you have some good reason why you cannot provide for those needs yourself. It can be safely presumed that the purchase of lottery tickets was not intended by the authors of public assistance legislation to be considered a "basic need" for which a person must be provided.
One commenter rightly pointed out that those who are complaining that this bill would reduce lottery revenue have obviously never played the lottery themselves:
Capped at $600 or not, people who want to play the lottery will. Most scratch tickets are for prizes less than $1000 and I’ve seen all kinds of people buy them, poor or rich. $600 is more than a poor person had yesterday and doesn’t really reduce their incentive to play if they have a gambling mentality.
This legislation is fiscally responsible because it is not likely that lottery revenues will significantly decrease, since the State makes so much money from scratch-off ticket sales, but it saves the State from having to give a huge payoff to someone who is already receiving State money. (Hat Tip: In Session)
And it came to pass, when he was come nigh to Bethphage and Bethania, unto the mount called Olivet, he sent two of his disciples, Saying: Go into the town which is over against you, at your entering into which you shall find the colt of an ass tied, on which no man ever hath sitten: loose him, and bring him hither.
And if any man shall ask you: Why do you loose him? you shall say thus unto him: Because the Lord hath need of his service. And they that were sent, went their way, and found the colt standing, as he had said unto them. And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said to them: Why loose you the colt? But they said: Because the Lord hath need of him. And they brought him to Jesus. And casting their garments on the colt, they set Jesus thereon.
And as he went, they spread their clothes underneath in the way. And when he was now coming near the descent of mount Olivet, the whole multitude of his disciples began with joy to praise God with a loud voice, for all the mighty works they had seen, Saying: Blessed be the king who cometh in the name of the Lord, peace in heaven, and glory on high! And some of the Pharisees, from amongst the multitude, said to him: Master, rebuke thy disciples. To whom he said: I say to you, that if these shall hold their peace, the stones will cry out.
It is not exactly a secret that The World supports Lieutenant Governor Ron Ramsey for Governor in 2010, but Ramsey isn't exactly demonstrating smart political acumen of late:
Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey says he's considering trying to change a state law that prevents him from raising funds for his gubernatorial campaign while the legislature is in session.The Blountville Republican said Thursday that the law is unfair because his GOP rivals for governor — a congressman, a former Knoxville mayor and a district attorney — don't have the same restriction.
"It's unfair ... because it doesn't limit what a mayor can do, what a congressman can do, or a district attorney," Ramsey said. "So I think there needs to be some changes."
Governor Ramsey is right, of course. These rules are unfair because they were put in place to prevent bribery and corruption from lobbyists upon politicians, but they only apply to members of the General Assembly. As the laws of our fair State are presently written, one would think that mayors, aldermen, county commissioners, sheriffs, or district attorneys are exempt from the political influence of money, while members of the General Assembly are the only people liable to be corrupted. The law should be changed to apply to all Tennessee public officials or to none at all. Because the law does not apply to everyone equally, it might even make for a good court case.
While Governor Ramsey certainly has a point, the problem is that he himself brought the issue up-as a member of the General Assembly who happens to be running for Governor. Yes, it is not fair in the least that his primary opponents-all of whom (at this point) are Tennessee elected officials, have an advantage over him for no other reason than that he is a member of the General Assembly while they hold other offices. The situation should be rectified for the future, but for Ramsey to bring it up now (as opposed to say, two years ago) looks like sour grapes. Ron Ramsey knew that he would be at this disadvantage going in, but decided to run for Governor anyway.
For now, he must deal with the situation as it is.
Leftist blogger Ilissa Gold now believes that conservatives are a dangerous lot from whom liberals must protect themselves:
The violent rhetoric from the right about rising up and overthrowing the government is growing. Republican leaders are actively calling for a “revolution”. Militia activity has been on the rise in the last few years, and is expected to increase with Obama’s presidency.
And while you’d rather think of people like Jim Adkisson shooting up a Unitarian church in Knoxville as an evil aberration, you do have to wonder how many others like him are out there, whose minds have been so poisoned by the violent right-wing rhetoric that they could snap at any moment, and look to take out those whom, again, they perceive as “weaker”.
Our friends on the other side know, of course, that it is intellectually dishonest to compare someone like Mr. Adkisson to any real conservative. Adkisson was using the whole "I need to shoot up a liberal church" excuse to explain his own criminal behavior and lack of a moral compass. Listening to conservative talk radio and television-something that I do with great frequency-in no way gives me a burning desire to walk into a heterodox house of worship and play shoot 'em up with the politically misguided congregants who may be there, and I am a gun owner (As an aside, I know of a few Unitarians who are political conservatives anyway).
For a person to engage in unmerited violent behavior, something else has to be misfiring in the brain aside from merely listening to Rush Limbaugh.
Instead, it would seem that what our liberal friends are afraid of is the reality that conservatives will not take lying down the destruction of our country at the hands of Mr. Obama. While our liberal friends live for their beliefs, we will die for ours should the need arise. The great issue of our time in dealing with the current administration is the reality that while previous presidents of both parties engaged in irresponsible fiscal behavior and social policies, the present occupant of the White House simply does not care in the least about the consequences of playing the CEO to corporations and using taxpayer money to spend the country into oblivion. A ten trillion dollar deficit and a spending spree that will require the printing of literally trillions of dollars in cash that would not be needed if not for the President's insistence upon unneeded spending will likely result in a rate of inflation that will make the 1970's look like the Roaring '20's.
Conservatives will not allow the Left to undermine our sovereignty, ruin our economy, and destroy the last shreds of constitutional government in America. Our friends complain of the evils of the Bush years. We readily acknowledge that the previous President began the disastrous spending trends under which we now labor, but the response of the party opposite seems to be that Bush spending policies were horrible, and so their plan will be to engage in the same sort of policies of federal corporatism and pseudo-socialism multiplied 100 times. Either the party opposite's abilities to make policy are hampered by the reality that the White House is now filled with cabinet and staff whose abilities are akin to amateur hour, or these people really are just that stupid. We can only pray for all of our sakes that the former circumstance is the predominant one.
The survivial of our federal republic is more important than putting on some stadium show, speaking rosy words, and drumming up chants of "yes we can." Winning an election gives no administration, regardless of its political affiliation, a license to destroy the very foundations upon which our forefathers built this country. Conservatives will not allow Mr. Obama, his minions, or his legions to bring this nation to constitutional collapse, and we will use whatever means are necessary to prevent national ruin.
If the Left is afraid that we will not put up with what they are doing to our country and that we will not rest one solitary second until these wicked policies are brought to an end, they have just cause to be very afraid indeed. Every time Mr. Obama so much as opens his mouth, the revolution grows.
We shall never surrender, and we will fight for the right will every fiber of our very beings.
Highly placed confidential sources within the White House have confirmed to The World that President Barack Obama may change course in his economic policy. "The President was extremely embarrassed that he would be criticized for his economic policies by the Red Chinese," the source said, "I mean, the French are one thing, they always run their mouths and find something to complain about without doing anything much of anything, but the Chinese?" Obama is apparently concerned that the economy may collapse under the weight of increasing debt that will be magnified by his planned spending programs because "the damn Chinese won't buy our bonds."
In addition, the President has reportedly grown increasingly concerned in recent days over the fate of his immortal soul. "He now believes that he is in serious trouble with the Almighty because he lied to some of the people who voted for him when he promised a tax cut. It was clear when the President promised this that he would never be able to give a tax cut given his spending goals," said an anonymous White House aide. Further, President Obama has apparently been contemplating a religious conversion. A Catholic priest has been seen quietly making his way into the Oval Office very early in the mornings. This development has given rise to speculation that President Obama may soon be received into the Catholic Church, a major development since House Speaker Newt Gingrich announced Monday that he would be received into the Church during the Easter Vigil April 11, and rumors are flying in Catholic circles that former President George W. Bush, whose brother Jeb is Catholic, will be next.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs adamantly denied today that the President is converting to Catholicism, but said that Obama is covering his spiritual bases. "With the final squandering of all of our collective national wealth, the public lying, and total indifference to the issue of aborticide in America, the President merely wants to be certain he can somehow make things right with God," said Gibbs, "the President does not want to be eternally consigned to Hell, where the worm never dies and the fire is never quenched. He is in the midst of contemplating his previous errors."
A conservative journal of social, cultural, and ecclesiatical affairs grounded in a realistic Catholic Christian worldview. It is my hope that this site will be a reflection of Christ,the teachings of His Holy Church, and of the basic vision of a Christian social morality.
