Tennessee Gun Owners - National Politics and Legislation

GOA Alert

oldfella — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:31:07 GMT

Urgent Calls Needed Against ObamaCare
-- Vote is scheduled for tomorrow night

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://gunowners.org

Friday, November 20, 2009

Tomorrow will be as important a day as any in our lifetimes in determining whether the anti-gun health care bill moves forward.

The key vote will be on shutting down a Republican filibuster of the ObamaCare bill, HR 3590. In the Senate, we are faced with a health care bill that:

* Costs $2.5 trillion during its first ten years of full implementation (2014-2023);

* Increases insurance premiums and imposes $376 billion in tax increases -- many on the middle class; and

* Cuts Medicare by $465 billion, while increasing health costs by over $100 billion.

Fox News is reporting today that the word "tax" appears 183 times in the health care bill. Is Obama serious? Is that what he and Reid want to do to us in the midst of a recession?

Of course, all this increased spending -- and taxes -- means that you will have less money to spend on pursuing your real passions: like providing for your family and purchasing guns and ammunition!

The strategy in the Senate is to cram this bill down the American people's throats before we have a chance to fully read and evaluate it. And the vote on Saturday at 8:00 p.m. will determine whether, at least initially, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will be able to get away with this.

Gun Owners of America has already gone into several states represented by key Democrats who will be central to the Saturday vote. But this is sufficiently important that all 100 senators need to know where we stand.

Finally, as we have mentioned several times in the past, the mandates in the legislation will most likely dump your gun-related health data into a government database that was created in section 13001 of the stimulus bill. This includes any firearms-related information your doctor has gleaned... or any determination of PTSD, or something similar, that can preclude you from owning firearms.

And, the special "wellness and prevention" programs (inserted by Section 1001 of the bill as part of a new Section 2717 in the Public Health Services Act) would allow the government to offer lower premiums to employers who bribe their employees to live healthier lifestyles -- and nothing within the bill would prohibit rabidly anti-gun HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius from decreeing that "no guns" is somehow healthier.

We all need to contact our Senators right away.

Do you want left-wing bureaucrats appointed by Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid determining whether you should own a gun via the health care system?

If not, then you need to call right away. Our gun rights -- and the fate of our economy -- are hanging in the balance.

ACTION: Call your two U.S. Senators. Please urge them to vote against "cloture" on the "motion to proceed" to HR 3590.

You can call your Senators toll-free at 1-877-762-8762. The phones are ringing off the hook right now on Capitol Hill. More likely than not, you will have to try several times because the circuits have been overloaded.

But don't be discouraged... keep calling!

Also, ask your wife, your relatives, your neighbors, your church -- everyone, short of your dog -- to do the same. This is crunch time!

NOTE: The alternate, non toll-free, number is 202-224-3121.

----- TALKING POINTS -----

1) Support the filibuster of HR 3590 by voting NO on cloture.

2) Socialized health care is too expensive. I would rather spend my money the way I want to spend it!

3) Increasing my taxes during a recession is insane.

4) This bill will threaten to register me as a gun owner, because the mandates in this bill will force my medical information into the database that was created by the stimulus bill.

5) Vote NO on this bill!

Breitbart to Holder: Investigate ACORN or We Release Videos Before 2010 Elections

SUNTZU — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:48:14 GMT

Big Government Blog Archive Breitbart to AG Holder: Investigate ACORN or We�ll Release More Tapes Just Before 2010 Election

Part of the transcript. Great video!

Quote:

Breitbart: There�s a lot of hypocrisy and the dust has settled for ACORN and at the end of the day they�ve recognized that Eric Holder, the Attorney General, has not initiated an investigation into ACORN after we now have seven tapes. There were five initially that came out, ACORN was defunded by the Senate, was defunded by the House, lost it�s link to the Census; while all that damage occurred, Congress didn�t come in to investigate them, obviously not the Attorney General�s office, and they�ve now realized let�s get back into business because they realized that the dust settled and they were not being investigated, it was Hannah, James, and me who were being investigated, that�s why we�ve been forced to offer this latest tape.
Hannity: Are you saying, Andrew, that there are more tapes?
Breitbart: Oh my goodness there are! Not only are there more tapes, it�s not just ACORN. And this message is to Attorney General Holder: I want you to know that we have more tapes, it�s not just ACORN, and we�re going to hold out until the next election cycle, or else if you want to do a clean investigation, we will give you the rest of what we have, we will comply with you, we will give you the documentation we have from countless ACORN whistleblowers who want to come forward but are fearful of this organization and the retribution that they fear that this is a dangerous organization. So if you get into an investigation, we will give you the tapes; if you don�t give us the tapes, we will revisit these tapes come election time.

It's Call Lamar Alexander and Aggravate Him Time!

nokomom — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 22:32:24 GMT

First, good ole Lamar's number: (202) 224-4944

I'm suggesting that we all call his office and tell him to get off his butt and make sure he fights for the Senate to listen to this bill read aloud, in its entirety.

Washington Times Health bill could get 34-hour reading in Senate
Health bill could get 34-hour reading in Senate

The 2,074-page Senate health care bill would take 34 hours to read cover to cover -- and that's just what Sen. Tom Coburn wants done on the Senate floor.
The Oklahoma Republican has threatened to invoke parliamentary rules to force the Senate clerk (or more likely, a team of clerks) to read the massive bill before the full Senate begins formal debate on the legislation.
The move is strictly according to Senate rules, which say any senator can demand a bill be read in its entirety before debate begins. While Democrats could, if they wish, repeatedly make motions to end the soliloquy, Republicans on the floor could object, and the reading would continue.
What's even more interesting is that Senate Rule XIV (paragraph 2) states that every bill and joint resolution "shall receive three readings prior to its passage."

"Upon demand of a senator, these readings shall be on three different legislative days," the rules say.
A little quick math shows that at a minute a page -- an easily achieved pace since the pages are double spaced and in a rather large type face -- it would take 34.5 hours to read straight through the measure put together this week by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
Republican leadership and gallery staff say the reading -- with occasional pauses and sips of water for parched throats -- could take more like 48 to 54 hours.
Pity the poor Senate clerks.
See how fast you can read the bill.

Sportsmen Beware!

Tim Nunan — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:28:20 GMT

Sportsmen Beware! | Outdoor Life

A newly formed congressional caucus comprised of those who generally share the views and agenda held by the country�s most outspoken and politically active anti-hunting organization has yet to make any serious legislative inroads on Capitol Hill, but deserves the continued watchful eye of sportsmen.
There was relatively little fanfare surrounding the formation of the Congressional Animal Protection Caucus earlier this year, but it attracted the attention of many in the hunting and wildlife conservation community, not as much because of its name, but because of its primary ally.
Sportsmen�s groups are acutely aware that the Washington, DC-based Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is the most politically entrenched and fiscally powerful anti-hunting organization currently in operation. The animal-rights behemoth has helped finance the anti-hunting side of literally every hunting-related ballot initiative effort for the past two decades; on subjects ranging from dove-hunting in Ohio and spring bear hunting in Colorado, to lion hunting with hounds in Washington and trapping in Arizona.
So, when the leaders of the HSUS roundly hailed the formation of a congressional caucus whose main agenda includes �animal welfare issues,� it sent up bright red warning flags to hunters and wildlife managers across the country.
Chaired by Reps. Jim Moran (D-VA) and Elton Gallegly (R-CA), CAPC purports to raise awareness of animal welfare issues in Congress and attempt to build coalitions in support of �common sense, humane animal welfare laws.�
On his Web site, Rep. Gallegly is identified as a champion of animal rights. Rep. Moran�s biography notes his �near-perfect ratings from the League of Conservation Voters and other similar scores from organizations committed to animal protection (and) gun control.�
Just weeks ago, caucus member Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY), an outspoken critic of trapping as a wildlife management tool, introduced her second anti-trapping bill in the past three years. Lowey�s HR 3710, the �Refuge From Cruel Trapping Act,� would make it illegal to use any trap that will �kill or capture wildlife by physically restraining any part of the animal� within the National Wildlife Refuge System. More than half of the bill�s 39 current co-sponsors are members of the CAPC.

Beck vs Obama LOL!!!

Javaguzzi — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:04:12 GMT

Dashboard OBAMA- Read the fine Print

DeMint Introduces �Term Limits for All�

nokoDAD — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:22:54 GMT

I have been saying this for a while and am glad someone has the guts to put it out there. This will take a massive grassroots campaign to accomplish but we can hope and pray. Read the bill and decide for your self. But if you agree please start calling today. Have everyone you know call!

United States Senator - Jim DeMint

DeMint Introduces �Term Limits for All� Constitutional Amendment
Amendment would limit every House member to 3 terms, every Senator to 2 terms
November 10, 2009 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) introduced an amendment to the United States Constitution that would apply term limits to all members of Congress, limiting U.S. Representatives to three terms and U.S. Senators to two terms in office. The amendment is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), and Sam Brownback (R-Kansas). As an amendment to the Constitution, it would require a two-thirds majority vote approval in the House and Senate and must be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

"Americans know real change in Washington will never happen until we end the era of permanent politicians," said Senator DeMint. "As long as members have the chance to spend their lives in Washington, their interests will always skew toward spending taxpayer dollars to buyoff special interests, covering over corruption in the bureaucracy, fundraising, relationship building among lobbyists, and trading favors for pork � in short, amassing their own power. I have come to realize that if we want to change the policies coming out of Congress, we must change the process itself. Over the last 20 years, Washington politicians have been reelected about 90% of the time because the system is heavily tilted in favor of incumbents. If we really want to put an end to business as usual, we�ve got to have new leaders coming to Washington instead of rearranging the deck chairs as the ship goes down.�

Senator Coburn added, �The best way to ensure we are truly a government of the people, for the people, and by the people, is to replace the career politicians in Washington with citizen legislators who care more about the next generation than their next election. The power of incumbency has created an almost insurmountable advantage for Washington politicians. Incumbency allows politicians to raise millions of dollars in campaign funds in exchange for earmarks. Incumbency gives Congress the power to raise money for itself � Congress just approved itself an increase of nearly $250 million from the U.S. Treasury that members will spend to promote themselves. Finally, with redistricting incumbents can choose their voters rather than voters choosing their representatives. Term limits is the best way to break this cycle.�

- PDF of Term Limits for All amendment
- Download Senator DeMint's podcast on Term Limits for All -

�Some say only long-serving, seasoned elites have the skills to lead the people, but that�s exactly what we have today and how do you think it�s working out for us?� said Senator DeMint. �It wasn�t the �people� who gave us a $12 trillion debt, an IRS tax code seven times longer than the Bible, over 1,700 departments of the federal government, trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, $100 trillion long-term shortfall in Social Security and Medicare, the Wall Street and auto bailouts, and the pending health care takeover.

�This nation can no longer afford these entrenched men and women who enjoy lives of luxury wholly insulated from the consequences of their major policy failures.

�I want to be clear: demanding that reformers adopt self-imposed term limits is a recipe for self-defeat on this issue. We lost the battle for term limits after the 1994 Republican Contract with America because we forced our best advocates for reform to go home, while the big-spending career politicians waited them out. We must have term limits for all or term limits will never succeed. Only when we apply the same rules to all will we be able to enact vital bipartisan reforms.

�Term limits will increase legislative turnover, expand the field of candidates who run for office, and instill transparency and accountability in our public officials. By ratifying this amendment, we can end the tremendous advantage enjoyed by incumbents in Washington, break long-lasting ties to special interests and lobbyists, and transform Congress from the body of career politicians that it has become, to a chamber of true citizen legislators,� said Senator DeMint.

Pass on this info to everyone you know.

Retired Navy GMC — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 12:58:35 GMT

PLEASE PASS THIS FAR AND WIDE, THIS WILL BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT

Please read and act, only takes a minute!

On Tuesday, the Senate health committee voted 12-11 in favor of a
two-page amendment courtesy of Republican Tom Coburn that would
require all Members and their staffs to enroll in any new
government-run health plan. It took me less than a minute to sign up
to require our congressmen and senators to drink at the same trough!
Three cheers for Congressman John Fleming of Louisiana !

Congressman John Fleming ( Louisiana physician) has proposed an
amendment that would require congressmen and senators to take the same
healthcare plan they force on us (under proposed legislation they are
curiously exempt).

Congressman Fleming is encouraging people to go on his Website and
sign his petition (very simple - just first, last and email). I have
immediately done just that at:
http://fleming.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=55§iontree=29,55

Please urge as many people as you can to do the same!

If Congress forces this on the American people, the Congressmen should
have to accept the same level of health care for themselves and their
families. To do otherwise is the height of hypocrisy!

Please pass this on!!

Americans Are Overpaid

SUNTZU — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:19:54 GMT

breakingviews: Americans are overpaid - Nov. 11, 2009

Quote:

(breakingviews.com) -- U.S. workers are overpaid, relative to equally productive foreigners doing the same work. If the global economy is ever to get back into balance, that gap needs to be closed.

Of course, U.S. workers should earn more than their peers in China, Moldova, or Vietnam. The Americans take advantage of the higher productivity that makes their country rich: better education and infrastructure, abundant capital and a more developed work ethic. But how much higher should U.S. wages be?

The answer depends in large part on two measures: the difference in productivity in making goods that can be traded across borders, and the quantity of such tradable goods. Both measures point to a narrowing wage gap.

There are so many factors working to push up productivity in poor countries. Fast development, cheap capital, and more efficient shipping all help make foreign factories more competitive. Cheap global communication through the Internet reduces all sorts of costs and makes it easy to trade many more goods and especially services.

The global wage gap has been narrowing, but recent U.S. labor market statistics suggest the adjustment has not gone far enough.

Snipped with Charmin triple ply....

More :poop: at link above.

When will CNN and its followers be happy?.......

Land of Entitlements

Retired Navy GMC — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:05:15 GMT

I have been watching the news religiously as so many others have been lately. IMO we are becoming a land of entitlements. What ever happened to personal responsibility and the drive to better yourself?
Our government is consistantly taking from the "haves" and giving to the "have nots". I have no problem with individuals giving to charities that help, but that is personal choice to give to those charities.
I have worked hard all my life since I was 11 yrs old. I did not rely on others to get where I am at today and I have been fortunate to have never asked for a hand out. No matter what life has dealt me.
We have people in our country that need welfare (which was originally enacted by republicans) to get them back on their feet during hard times. This is a fine program in its original form, however we have people that have made careers of drawing from this program. Where is the incentive for someone to do better? Maybe to get a welfare check an individual should be required to take a drug test. Most people that pay into welfare have to do this at their jobs. Why shouldn't the recipients have to do this too?
Now healthcare is going to be the same way.
The dem's are all for giving this entitlement and they think that this is what our country needs, but at what cost? And I'm not just talking about the 1.2 trillion that its going to cost the tax payers now and in the future.
If the public option goes into effect and basically shuts down health insurance companies how many more people in our country will be unemployed?
Unemployment is now at 10.2% (more like 17% with all that have stopped looking) Could this bill unemploy another million people in the health insurance industry?
Sorry about the rant but I am shocked at how weak this country is becoming.

Isn't this bill that the National Park carry was attached to?

analog_kidd — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:22:21 GMT

http://house.gov/frank/pressreleases/2009/11-04-09-new-credit-card-bill-passes-house.html

If this is the bill that the National Park Carry ammendment was added to that will allow us to carry in February, it looks like they are trying to move it up sooner. I seem to remember that the Carry part became law with the Credit Card Reform portion, since they were attached to the same bill.

However, I can find no mention of the Carry Ammendment in any of my searches.

Please Enlighten Me about the Constitution.

GimpyLeg — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:16:04 GMT

Having read many, many posts about fervent support of the 2nd Amendment (which I do) from many vocal TGO'ers, I was wondering how you would justify by the Constitution Social Security, Welfare and Healthcare?

As a society, are we morally or legally responsible for the well-being of all people that make up the United States? Are we morally or legally responsible to take care of and defend those who cannot take care of or defend themselves?

Please help me to see the light, because I do not believe that the Constitution gives any authority to the .gov to provide, say, Healthcare. Healthcare is something you must pay for, and yes, if you cannot afford that "life-saving" surgery or treatment, what gives you the authority or right to compel me to help you out? What if you cannot afford food for you and your family? Is it the fed.gov's responsibility to take from me to give to you? If so, please show me in the Constitution.

If my laptop gets a virus or malware and I lose all of my data and get my identity stolen, should I have known not to click on "big-boobies".com, or that I needed anit-virus and malware protection and not surf unprotected, or should the fed.gov make sure I have the latest protection and collect from all of you the funds to replace what I got stolen?

No, I am not a beast and I do have a heart and compassion, but if you can bend the "rules" for one circumstance, where do you stop?

Tennessee Representative Health Care Votes

BryanG — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:05:58 GMT

Saw that most of our state's Congressional Representatives opposed this weekend's health care takeover vote:
Cooper (D) - "Yes" vote
Cohen (D) - "Yes" vote
Davis (D) - "No"
Gordon (D) - "No"
Tanner (D) - "No"
Blackburn (R) - "No"
Duncan (R) - "No"
Roe (R) - "No"
Wamp (R) - "No"
I've already written Copper to let him know that I was extremely disappointed in his vote, and that I would work to support his opposition in the next election.

Mark Levin Tears a Liberal To Pieces

Swamprunner — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:08:10 GMT

For your listening enjoyment.

YouTube - Mark Levin Tears A Liberal to Pieces

Are there REALLY people out there like this guy??!!

H.R 45

willis68 — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:26:15 GMT

Has anyone heard of this crap?

snopes.com: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act

A link was emailed to me and I thought it was a joke :screwy:

Healthcare... The time to act is now.

GimpyLeg — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:47:41 GMT

Whether you agree or disagree with the healthcare legislation making its way through Congress, the time to act and voice your concerns or approval is now. Whether you believe that congress is on the cusp of trampling more of the Constitution or not, I urge you to contact your Representatives. HouseNet Redirect