In Your Face

Miami police are taking the battle against terrorism to the streets...

Miami police announced Monday they will stage random shows of force at hotels, banks and other public places to keep terrorists guessing and remind people to be vigilant.

Deputy Police Chief Frank Fernandez said officers might, for example, surround a bank building, check the IDs of everyone going in and out and hand out leaflets about terror threats.

"This is an in-your-face type of strategy. It's letting the terrorists know we are out there," Fernandez said.

Hey, I'm all for increased police patrols...in high crime areas...especially when it involves getting police out of their cars and getting out on foot. However, checking the IDs of everyone coming and going from a bank? Sounds more like setting up random Checkpoint Charlies around the city.

Don't worry though. The ACLU is on the case...or not...

Howard Simon, executive director of ACLU of Florida, said the Miami initiative appears aimed at ensuring that people's rights are not violated.

"What we're dealing with is officers on street patrol, which is more effective and more consistent with the Constitution," Simon said. "We'll have to see how it is implemented."

So, the police surrounding a bank and checking everyone's IDs for no apparent reason is not a violation of people's rights? Does the ACLU in Miami have a lower standard than the rest of the ACLU branches around the country?

But hey...I guess if it's for your own good and safety then it must be Constitutional. Just make sure you have your papers on you at all times. [/sarcasm]

More: Gunner at No Quarters has more...lots more.

The article delves more into the lunacy that our government has become with lines like these.

"People are definitely going to notice it," Fernandez said. "We want that shock. We want that awe. But at the same time, we don't want people to feel their rights are being threatened. We need them to be our eyes and ears."

Translated this says "We plan on scaring and intimidating the hell out of people, but will do it with a smile over the sights on the rifle/handgun. Scare the prole's so much they become our snitches in fear of becoming the target".

How to speak to a human

Bruce Barry has posting something useful over at Pith in the Wind. He points out a cheat sheet which shows shortcuts on getting past the "Interactive Voice Response systems" for many large service companies in order to speak directly to a human.

I think I shall be printing this and keeping it in my desk.

Get Your Gun

News Channel 3 in Memphis has recently run a series of reports entitled, "Get Your Gun." It shows how one gets a carry permit in Tennessee, infomation on buying a handgun and information on gun safes.

I have to say that such an unbiased news story on firearms is quite refreshing (especially coming from Memphis). Instead of having the typical gun-bias meant to scare people, it actually encourages them in their right to keep and bear arms.

It was done by reporter Andy Wise. If you get a chance, email him to say thank you.

(via No Quarters)

Former Canadian Minister Of Defence Says UFOs are Real

This is...how shall I say? Interesting.

You don't think we live in a police state?

Living up to their infamous nickname, the Rutherford County Sheriff's Department is in the news again (emphasis mine):

A Rutherford County Sheriff's deputy confiscated $9,400 from a Georgia subcontractor on suspicion of drug activity but never returned the money even though investigators found no evidence of wrongdoing, a lawsuit against the department claims.

The subcontractor, Juan Ibarra, further alleges in the civil suit that he believes he was targeted because he is Hispanic.

According to the suit filed recently in District Court, Deputy Kenneth Barrett stopped Ibarra, 37, of Smyrna, Ga., for speeding on Nov. 10, 2004, and confiscated all but $20 of his money under the Tennessee Drug Control Act. A search of the car showed no sign of illegal activity, and Ibarra was neither arrested nor cited for anything but speeding during the stop, records show.

A guy gets pulled over. There are no signs of illegal activity. He isn't arrested, he isn't cited and he only gets a ticket for speeding. Yet...YET...the deputy takes all of the guy's cash except $20, and the guy doesn't see it again.

I know of several people - especially somebody being a subcontractor - that would have large sums of cash on them for purposes that are completely legal. What business is it of any sheriff's deputy to question someone having a large sum of cash on them when there ISN'T any other sign of illegal activity?? IT ISN'T anyone's business!!

Is this where the "war" on drugs has taken us?? Anything and everything YOU do is considered suspicious? What if I were to withdraw a large sum of cash to go purchase a car? No, it may not be the smartest thing, but it's my business what I do with my money. If I'm not partaking in any provable (keyword), illegal activities then I should be able to do whatever I want to. What about a firearm? Just because I have a weapon on me or in my car (LEGALLY), does that mean I'm considered a criminal?

And you don't think we live in a police state?

Photoblogging - Ide

I did a quick photo shoot on Wednesday night for the band Ide who is just releasing their first album, 'Apologies For Spilling Paint.' Be sure to check them out. http://www.idesounds.com

We're Living in the Village

Speaking of The Village, Bruce Schneier has an excellent, yet disturbing post on "Surveillance and Oversight" in a Patriot Act world.

Prisoner: Where am I?
Number Two: In The Village.
Prisoner: What do you want?
Number Two: Information.
Prisoner: Which side are you on?
Number Two: That would be telling. We want information, information, information...
Prisoner: You won't get it.
Number Two: By hook or by crook we will.
Prisoner: Who are you?
Number Two: The new Number Two.
Prisoner: Who is Number One?
Number Two: You are Number Six.
Prisoner: I am not a number! I am a free man!
Number Two: Ha, ha, ha, ha!

The Prisoner - Remake?

Wes Raine points to an article that says a company is in the works to remake the classic, cult television series The Prisoner (which is on my Amazon Wish List, by the way).

The Prisoner stands out as one of my favorite television shows of all time. It aired only 17 episodes in 1967, but that's all that was needed. The series centers around Number 6 (Patrick McGoohan), a former secret agent who was banished to The Village...a sort of prison island for those that are considered a threat to the powers that be. It's was quite a strange show (a plus) filled with an "artistic, pop" feel straight from the 60's including lots of themes on paranoia and individualism.

I think that seeing the replays of the series as a youngster, it more than likely had a profound effect on my formation of individualism as well as fostering a distrust of authority (in the government). It wasn't the only factor, but I'm sure it did play some role. Oh...and he drove a Lotus 7. Maybe that also helped in my love for small British sports cars.

The problem is that there shouldn't be a remake of this show. It was a perfect show. To remake it would ruin the mystique (like all other modern day, unoriginal remakes tend to do)...

The new version will not be placed in the original setting, the north Wales village of Portmeirion, or have the arty, "pop" feel of the original, according to the magazine Broadcast.

Damien Timmer, who has been lined up to executive produce the show, told the television and radio industry magazine that the new series "takes liberties with the original".

He said: "Although it will be a radical reinvention, it will still be a heightened show with themes such as paranoia, conspiracy and identity crisis."

I could be wrong though. Maybe it will be good...but it will never be as good as the original.

I guess they never are.

Photoblogging - The Colours of Insanity

I think that I've got enough pictures uploaded to Flickr that I'll be photoblogging every other day or so...maybe even every day if I feel like it. Let me know if you think this is a good addition to the blog or not.

Here's the first.

This is one of two pictures I chose to keep in colour from the abandoned asylum I visited a couple of weeks ago.

Tantrum

Heh. Katherine Coble on Harold Ford, Jr.

He annoys me. He reminds me of a villainous character in a Southern Gothic Melodrama. Cue one Spoiled Senator's Son. His temper tantrum on the floor of the house was embarassing. And I don't know why there are a million frat boys out there who think that having a Ford Blog is cool.

Bob Krumm's Announcement Making Waves

It sounds like Bob Krumm's announcement for his possible run at a state senate seat is already making waves in the office of Sen. Douglas Henry (Krumm's potential rival for district 21).

According to a well-placed political source, Sen. Henry's administrative assistant, Nancy Russell, has been making plenty of phone calls in an effort to diminish support for Krumm's potential candidacy. She has apparently "threatened," "cajoled," "strong armed" and even "begged" people to get Bob out of the race (even though he hasn't even officially entered it yet).

One person who was contacted said that Russell acted like Krumm had no right to run for Henry's senate seat. It was almost like they "owned" that seat instead of the people. What's really surprising is that there is such a huge, perceived threat from someone who has never even run for office before. I suppose that the staff wouldn't want to lose their "lofty perks" if Henry were to lose.

Sen. Henry has enjoyed some crossover support in the past from some Republicans and Conservatives in his district, but that could soon change, and Henry's staff knows it. Sen. Henry angered several Republicans last year while speaking at the Bellevue Republican Breakfast Club. During his remarks, he defended and praised the work of former State Senator John Ford all shortly after Ford's Tennessee Waltz arrest. Not a good way to drum up support.

Whether Krumm will end up running or not, his potential threat is evident in the reactions of Henry's staff. Does this show vulnerability? I think it does. It also shows that there needs to be a change.

Online Freedom of Speech

Remember the Online Freedom of Speech Act that was defeated in the House a couple of weeks ago? The Democrats, realizing their mistake in voting against free speech, now have their own version.

A BILL

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to exempt news stories, commentaries, and editorials distributed through the Internet from treatment as expenditures or electioneering communications under such Act, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXEMPTION OF INTERNET COMMENTARY FROM TREATMENT AS EXPENDITURE OR ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION.

(a) TREATMENT AS EXPENDITURE.-Section 301(9)(B)(i) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(9)(B)(i)) is amended by inserting ''the Internet or'' after ''facilities of''.

(b) TREATMENT AS ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATION.-Section 304(f)(3)(B)(i) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 434(f)(3)(B)(i)) is amended by inserting ''the Internet or'' after ''facilities of''.

I personally preferred the first, one-sentence version, but this one will do for now.

I wonder if Harold Ford Jr. and the other Tennessee Congress members who voted against the first bill will make the same mistake twice.

Make Them Vote

I don't know why, but this from Drudge brings a smile to my face...

GOP Pulls Fast One...
Tells Dems: Pull Troops Now? Okay, then let's vote!!!!!
Tonight. 7 p.m.
Ultimate showdown

Interesting thing was that I was thinking the same thing earlier today. If the Democrats are going to make the media rounds grandstanding about pulling the troops out then why not make them vote on it? There's nothing wrong with a little, "put your money where your mouth is" action.

For or against the war in Iraq? I can see both sides.* Pulling the troops out now? Bad move.

(*Note: The reasons against going to war in Iraq would come from people who make better sense of the argument such as Pat Buchanan rather than the moonbat arguments of the left.)

Budget Cuts?

From the Washington Post today:

The House narrowly approved a broad five-year budget plan early this morning that squeezes programs for the poor, for college students and for farmers, handing Republican leaders a hard-fought victory after weeks of resistance in GOP ranks.

The plan, which would save the government just under $50 billion, passed 217 to 215, with 14 Republicans joining all House Democrats in opposition. Just last week, Republican leaders were forced to pull the bill from consideration after it became clear they lacked the votes for passage.

Wow...squeezing poor people, cutting money for college students and farmers? Those dirty Republicans! How dare they!?! Truth be told, if they were actually making real cuts to those types of programs, I'd be excited. I'm not.

In reality, those aren't cuts. They are only slowing the growth of these programs. The programs will still be growing. Just not as fast as liberals and big spending Republicans want them to. However, how can you argue with political grandstanding from both sides? (*note: I still haven't found the text in the Constitution that grants Congress the power to spend money on those types of programs. But, who really cares about the Constitution anymore?)

From today's Cato Daily Dispatch:

Stephen Slivinski, director of budget studies at the Cato Institute, comments: "Only by the pretzel logic of Washington can this bill be considered a 'cut.' Here's what's really going to happen: Spending will still grow, but only slightly slower. Instead of spending a total of $7.8 trillion in entitlement programs over the next five years, the GOP proposes to spend $7.75 trillion. That's a total difference of 0.6 percent. This is not starving the beast. This isn't even a tummy rumble.

"And because this is a five-year endeavor, it requires discipline by Congress to keep these savings intact during the entire five-year period. If they change course at any time during that period, the savings evaporate. If there's anything the Republicans have proven over the past five years it's that they have real commitment problems when it comes to spending restraint."

Yes. Discipline. Something that Congress has never been able to fathom and has been even worse under Republican control.

So, don't fret ye liberal big spenders. You're social programs will still remain intact.

On a side note, this reminds me of an encounter with a young liberal I had back during the last election. He said that he hated Bush because he was cutting some of his college programs and scholarships. My reply was, "I'd feel a lot better about supporting Bush if he actually was doing that, but unfortunately he's not."

I don't think he liked my response too much.

Filibustering the Patriot Act Renwal?

I think that there's only one thing I agree with Russ Feingold on, and filibustering the Patriot Act renewal would not be a bad idea.

Update: The vote has now been postponed.

Junior Mints

Ah...more Junior Mints enter the blogosphere.

(ref: definition of Junior Mints)

Official Endorsement

My first official endorsement for next year's elections: Bob Krumm for state senate district 21.

He will be running (hopefully) against Democrat Senator Douglas Henry. Henry is a conservative Democrat, but unfortunately with shenanigans like we've witnessed with the ethics panel farce, there needs to be a dramatic change in the General Assembly. Essentially, a change from Democrat control to Republican control. That is IF you want to see real changes.

Do you think Bob would make a good state senator? Be sure to show your support in the comments section on his post here.

Random Fact

NashvilleFiles.com is the number one search item for the phrase "ban automobiles."

Bravo Spring Hill

It looks like the good people of Spring Hill understand the meaning of property rights. Bravo.

Franklin Circus has the details.

Ethics Panel Passes Something

Yesterday the General Assembly's special ethics panel put forth a proposal which will eventually be introduced before the whole legislative body.

Democrat lawmakers are patting themselves on the backs today, but was anything really accomplished? All that I've been able to see so far is a patchwork of items full of loopholes.

A few items may sound good on the surface, but if you read the fine print, you find that there's more than meets the eye.

There is a provision to subject the General Assembly to the state's open meetings laws. Sounds good, right? It's definitely something that needs to happen. However, the exception is that it will only apply to a group of lawmakers when there's enough present for a quorum. As Matthew White said, "Never do they have a quorum call in a room at the Sheraton." Exactly. This really changes nothing. I'd say that is big enough of a loophole that even Phil Fulmer could prance through.

Also included in the bill will be the potential to create an "independent" ethics commission to investigate lawmakers. I feel that the word "independent" is a tad misleading here. Two members would be picked by the speaker of the house, two by the speaker of the senate, two by the governor, and three by a joint list from the caucuses. I, personally, wouldn't consider an ethics commission independent whose members are appointed by lawmakers. In fact, that's about as independent as the state's former Tax Study Commission which was stacked by pro-income tax legislators to recommend a state income tax.

What else are they patting themselves on the backs for? A measure that would require legislators to disclose meals for paid by lobbyists or their employees...but only for meals exceeding $50. (Does that include gratuity?) The panel scrapped a proposal that would ban all meals from lobbyists. I suppose a lawmaker's gotta eat.

Another nice loophole was one that would ban "legislators from taking money from firms to perform consultant work and from pushing their interests before state boards, commissions and agencies — except for lawmakers who do that in their role as an attorney." Can anyone say, co-chairwoman of the ethics panel and House Majority Leader (Democrat) Kim McMillan?

What is really disappointing about this entire ethics panel fiasco were the proposals that were scrapped...mostly along party lines. They included recording of subcommittee meetings (another one I was really hoping for), putting votes online, and placing lawmakers' travel costs online...just to name a few.

From Trent Seibert's article in the Tennessean:

"Every time we came up with a proposal that dealt with opening up government, showing the people where money came from and where it would go, making access to their government easier by using the Internet, it was defeated, basically, on party lines," said House Minority Leader Bill Dunn, R-Knoxville, who also served on the committee.

He said he would try to make changes when the bill comes before the full House. Gov. Phil Bredesen has said he probably will call a special session in January.

What is really going to change with the proposals put forth by this panel? To me, it looks like it's just going to be business as usual...just with an extra puff of smoke and a couple of mirrors.

I think the only way we can make any change is to start at the ballot box.

More: From Bob Krumm and Matthew White.

More II: Moore...Nathan Moore.

Plus, from the Knoxville News Sentinel comes this nice little tidbit regarding the open meetings provision (emphasis mine):

The language, however, is not as tight as open government advocates wished and is somewhat confusing, said Frank Gibson, executive director of the Tennessee Coalition on Open Government. It also will expire at the end of the 2006 legislative session.

Bridge to Nowhere

One small step for fiscal responsibility....sort of (via Instapundit)...

CNBC’s Squawk Box is reporting that the “Bridget to Nowhere” has been officially defunded. However, this can only be seen as a small victory. The millions of dollars allocated for this pork project will go to the Alaska state government for them to spend as they see fit…instead of the money going to the Katrina relief effort…or, heaven forbid, back to federal taxpayers.

As Sen. Lamar Alexander stated (in defense of being a porker), the money that is set aside for state's highway spending actually came from that state's federal gas tax proceeds. This, in the eyes of Congress means that no matter how wasteful the project, that money will go back to that state.

Of course, this brings up another issue. Why is so much money going to Washington when it could just as easily stay within the state for that state's own highway spending? The whole process is wasteful in of itself.

Here's how it works (according to Sen. Alexander): The federal government has to collect the money, get it to Washington, pipe it through a huge bureaucracy, reallocate it on projects that the state may not need, force the state to spend their own money to match that money (or lose the Federal money), then a Senator or Congressperson can sit back and pat themselves on the back in front of the voters for doing such a great service for their state.

But hey...at least Alaska won't be spending it on a wasteful bridge now. Let's just hope they don't use it to paint more planes to look like big salmon.

Dear Knoxville

Good luck with those red light cameras.

Perhaps you should go see how the Ft. Collins, Colorado red light camera system has worked out so far.

A recent study found that accidents have gone up dramatically (83 percent) at the intersections where cameras had been installed. However, both accidents and tickets issued have gone down by half after the yellow light timing was increased by one second, and we know that a city hates doing that due to the loss in revenue. In fact, Ft. Collins delayed adding other cameras because of the drop in revenue (from $3000 to $1125).

However, the police still defend the system: "Prevention is always a difficult thing to measure," Fort Collins Police Lieutenant Gary Perman explained in the system's defense. "How do you gauge something that isn't happening?"�

Something that isn't happening??? I'll tell you something that is happening though...traffic accidents are going up! But, hey...the police department is getting some extra cash.

Either way....I'll still recommend the PhotoBlocker spray.

Fun with Site Meter

I see you...

Visitor details: atfonline.gov 9:15:51 am

They weren't searching for this....but somebody was. Heh.

Take this post down and apologise!

This goes out to the "Bantering Bander."

SayUncle sent me a link to this pdf file that was put out by the JPFO (Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership).

For those that are Adobe PDF Reader deficient, it depicts a target with Hitler giving the Nazi salute. Below that is a caption that reads: "All those in favor of 'gun control' raise your right hand."

So...should JPFO take that down and apologise?

Lazy

Yes, I'm being lazy today.

Instead, you should probably go see what First Lieuteneral Captainface and onboard mechanic Harold "Strap" Coopmore are up to.

Will you be among the hot 60's-looking girls to wish strappin' Space Captainface a safe voyage? And if not...how come?

Oh...and watch out for flying Sound FX CD's.

An $802 Radio that Belongs to You

Why does Metro School Director Pedro Garcia need an $802 radio charged to taxpayers? Beats me. What about his vanity plate that is also charged to taxpayers?

Channel 4's Larry Brinton is taking Garcia to task over it all.

Chuck Norris Never Cries

I don't think I have ever posted a list like this, but I can't resist. The myth that is Chuck Norris is something that I'm drawn to, and after reading this list that a friend sent me, you will be too...or else.

My personal favorite is #14. Click on the extended entry portion to view it.

----------
1. Chuck Norris' tears cure cancer. Too bad he has never cried.

2. A man once asked Chuck Norris if his real name is "Charles". Chuck Norris did not respond, he simply stared at him until he exploded.

3. Rather than being birthed like a normal child, Chuck Norris instead decided to punch his way out of his mother's womb. Shortly thereafter he grew a beard.

4. Chuck Norris built a time machine and went back in time to stop the JFK assassination. As Oswald shot, Chuck met all three bullets with his beard, deflecting them. JFK's head exploded out of sheer amazement.

5. The original theme song to the Transformers was actually "Chuck Norris--more than meets the eye, Chuck Norris--robot in disguise," and starred Chuck Norris as a Texas Ranger who defended the earth from drug-dealing Decepticons and could turn into a pick-up. This was far too much awesome for a single show, however, so it was divided.

6. Chuck Norris was the fourth Wiseman. He brought baby Jesus the gift of "beard". Jesus wore it proudly to his dying day. The other Wisemen, jealous of Jesus' obvious gift favoritism, used their combined influence to have Chuck omitted from the Bible. Shortly after all three died of roundhouse kick related deaths.

7. Chuck Norris once shot a German plane down with his finger, by yelling, "Bang!"

8. When Chuck Norris plays Oregon Trail his family does not die from cholera or dysentery, but rather roundhouse kicks to the face. He also requires no wagon, since he carries the oxen, axels, and buffalo meat on his back. He always makes it to Oregon before you.

9. Chuck Norris can make a woman climax by simply pointing at her and saying "booya".

10. Before each filming of Walker: Texas Ranger, Chuck Norris is injected with five times the lethal dose of elephant tranquilizer. This is, of course, to limit his strength and mobility, in an attempt to lower the fatality rate of the actors he fights.

11. Chuck Norris does not sleep. He waits.

12. When Chuck Norris's wife burned the turkey one Thanksgiving, Chuck said, "Don't worry about it honey," and went into his backyard. He came back five minutes later with a live turkey, ate it whole, and when he threw it up a few seconds later it was fully cooked and came with cranberry sauce. When his wife asked him how he had done it, he gave her a roundhouse kick to the face and said, "Never question Chuck Norris."

13. Chuck Norris took my virginity, and he will sure as hell take yours. If you're thinking to yourself, "That's impossible, I already lost my virginity.", then you are dead wrong.

14. Chuck Norris is currently suing NBC, claiming Law and Order are trademarked names for his left and right legs.

15. Chuck Norris once tried to sue Burger King after they refused to put razor wire in his Whopper Jr., insisting that that actually is "his" way.

Where there's smoke...

Matthew White has an excellent post detailing the smoke coming from Lt. Governor John Wilder's dealings with a Texas law firm that tried to change Tennessee law so they could conduct business in the state.

Head over and read it.

Wilder's troubles are just beginning.

Unifying Force or How to Damage Your Credibility

This morning Bob Krumm notes that the attacks on me from David Bander (Forward with Ford) have actually provided a unifying force in the Tennessee political blogosphere. He's right.

Lots of people may have not agreed with my assertions linking tyranny to gun control (which I will continue to stand by), but because of Bander's rants wanting me to apologise, many people who normally don't agree with me have come to my defense. The point: I should not have to take down and apologise for my own opinions on my own site. This ideal has become something that is sort of a sacred cow in the world of blogs.

Adam Groves pointed out in the comments that Bander may have only been doing this stunt as a way to drive traffic to his site. He may have succeeded in getting a few extra hits, but at what price? The only real thing that he has done is to permanently damage his credibility and that of Harold Ford, Junior. If you are running a blog in support of a candidate, your actions reflect upon that candidate. Maybe that's why Junior stabbed his blogging supporters in the back when he voted against the Online Freedom of Speech Act.

Others have been talking about these attacks as well, and I appreciate the support.

-Brittney: One of the first to defend (even though not agreeing)
-TV on the Fritz posted a letter from Bander.
-Mephistophocles has a great write up on emotional arguments.
-Nathan Moore has my back.
-Six Meat Buffet: How Not To Blog, Part 34,482
-And, of course, all those that have left comments.

Now...back to your regularly scheduled blogging.

Fan Letter

TV on the Fritz has posted a fan letter he received (of sorts)...and it even mentions me (along with Mark Rose...probably for his A Christmas Story post no doubt).

It reads:

Fritz,

Consider Blake's comment comparing pro-gun-control people to Nazis: http://nashvillefiles.com/blog/archives/001191.html

Between him and Mark A. Rose I think they've crossed the line again.

Best,
-Dave
forwardwithford

If you haven't already...read the comments on the post Dave mentions.

Brittney has been on this as well.

Ty Pennington and the Work of the Church

The Monday Morning Insight blog takes a question I asked last week and ponders the same thing using Extreme Makeover Home Edition as an example...

They are helping those who Jesus said we as Christians, yes, we as the church, should be helping. And I couldn't help feel a little weird seeing someone doing a job that Jesus said I/we should be doing better.

I mean, they're making a difference and showing love in ABC/NBC's name. We have the honor and means to do so in Jesus' name. Wow.

And so often we don't. We avoid the widows, the orphans, and homeless. Or better yet, we say we give to organizations that help them. But Jesus told us to do it.

Excellent thoughts. Head over and read the entire post.

Appropriate Anniversary

Today is the anniversary of Kristallnacht. It seems like an appropriate anniversary to coincide with the vote yesterday in San Francisco to ban lawful citizen's ownership of handguns.

More: For those that don't know history, gun control (the acts of registration and then confiscation) played a very significant role in the events leading up to Kristallnact.

I encourage you to click on the link above to the Volokh Conspiracy and read their links to Stephen Halbrook's article in the Arizona Journal of International & Comparative Law entitled, Nazi Firearms Law and the Disarming of the German Jews. (PDF).

I know it's cliché, but it always bears repeating...those that don't learn from history are only doomed to repeat it.

Big Brother Wins in Knoxville

Traffic light cameras have been approved by the City Council of Knoxville.

For further reading on the Knoxville traffic camera issue, go here.

More: Michael Silence has more as well.

Criminals Win in San Francisco

Yesterday, voters in San Francisco voted to ban handguns in their city.

The gun ban prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, and makes it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses.

Only two other major U.S. cities _ Washington and Chicago _ have implemented such sweeping handgun bans.

Ah yes...the wonderful crime free cities of Washington and Chicago have similar bans.

All law abiding citizens (except for the special classes of citizens...security guards and police) will have to surrender their handguns by April. It is unclear when criminals will surrender their handguns.

More: Six Meat Buffet has more.

More II: Several people (Les Jones for example) believe this measure will be struck down in the courts just like a similar ban in 1982. Let's hope so.

Working Together

First, let me start by saying that while I am pointing to one person here, I am attempting to do so in a way that provides constructive criticism to everyone out there. Whether you are conservative or liberal, you should take notice of this example.

----
S-Town Mike is apparently up to his divisive ways again. He's gained a bit of a reputation among both sides of the local blogosphere for his rampant divisiveness with those he doesn't agree. Today, it's no different.

Mike writes about tonight's ethics reform town hall meeting (something he supports), but his main point is to attack Tennessee Tax Revolt's Ben Cunningham. He apparently doesn't like the idea that someone he doesn't agree with can sit on the meeting's panel....

Progressives need to take a step back and think very critically about the linkage between ethics reform and Tennessee Tax Revolt that Mr. Cunningham's participation engenders. I know that Mr. Cunningham has taken a personal interest in ethics reform enough to do his own research and make specific proposals via TTR's website. And I respect anyone with renaissance interests and the energy to pursue them.

However, we must not forget the functional service that marrying an unqualified taxation opposition to ethics reform activism provides for Mr. Cunningham's lobby group: it keeps public attention on TTR before, during, and after tax debates; it might even keep the resource pipeline from sympathetic donors and volunteers flowing after tax tempers stop unfraying.

Some great ethics reform ideas have come from both TTR and the TN Center for Policy Research...groups that Mike despise. His supposed hatred for them doesn't allow him to see the positives. This type of attitude only hampers the overall push towards good ethics reform.

Normally having opposing sides come together on an issue would be a plus. Apparently Mike's burn-all-bridges approach doesn't take into consideration the fact that, despite political differences on certain "hot-button" issues, opposing sides CAN come together and work toward common goals...in this case, ethics reform.

Personally, I think it's great when opposing sides come together. Much can be accomplished...but it looks like Mike doesn't see it that way. And again...his use of the word "progressive" is such an oxymoron (especially in this case).

Ethics reform in this state is a vital issue to us all. It's an important enough of an issue that people of all ideological spectrums must put aide their differences and work together. If you don't, then you will only be a liability.

My point is that you should take every opportunity to embrace the opposition if there is an issue you agree on. This can go a long way in building a good reputation for yourself in their eyes and the eyes of the public. When this happens, you gain respect and you are taken more seriously. If that doesn't happen, well...nobody will take you seriously. In fact, people on your own side may even start to distance themselves from you. Who likes someone who is ALWAYS divisive?

Like I said...this goes for ALL sides. Stop being divisive on EVERY issue. That is true "progressiveness."

Update: I just noticed that Bob Krumm wrote about the same thing along with some other good points. Check it out.

Lamar Alexander

I thought we elected Lamar Alexander to keep Fred Thompson's seat from being moved between Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton's seats.

Looks like that happened anyway.

More: Kleinheider calls Lamar the "Plaid Shirted Gangster," but for other reasons.

Indeed.

Another Indictment?

Brittney is saying that there is an unsubstantiated report that the FBI will be handing another indictment to a "well-known" Tennessee Democrat later today.

Watching and waiting.

Update: Now taking bets on which part of the state this person may be from. Odds go up the further west you go.

Update II: Brittney is now saying that the rumour may not be true.

In other news, Pete Rose Junior was arrested today on drug charges.

Saturday

Here's what I did today...

Gubernatorial Talk - Who will the GOP run?

People are asking...who is going to run for Governor on the GOP side in the state of Tennessee? No one seems to know yet...especially the Republicans themselves.

Rumours are abound though. From the new state political blog Bring the Noise: State Senator Jim Bryson for Governor? I checked on this one last night, and received word that while Senator Bryson was flattered, he is not going to be running for Governor (at least not this time). Although, I think he would make a fine Governor, it's still early in his career. Plus, I've said before that he may be a future U.S. Senator...at least that's who I'd want to be a future Senator.

The other potential/good candidate would be State Representative Beth Harwell. If you remember, Harwell won the blog Gubernatorial straw poll back in July. She'd make a wonderful candidate as well, but there's a catch. She has said that she is holding off on making a decision until next year, but if she doesn't leave her seat by this coming Monday (11/7), her seat will be filled by appointment which would probably be a liberal Democrat (Lynn Williams?). When a legislator leaves their seat with less than a year before their seat goes up for election, the seat is filled by appointment. If she resigned her seat prior to Monday, the Governor would have to call a special election thus allowing a Republican to be elected (her district is Republican). Harwell would be great, but be careful what you wish for. If a Democrat is appointed, then someone will have to defeat an incumbent Democrat in order to gain that seat back for the GOP.

The biggest problem facing a potential Gubernatorial candidate is money. You aren't going anywhere unless you have a stash of campaign cash to start spending immediately. The first person that comes to mind in this regard would be Bob Corker. He could easily match the spending power of Bredesen, but it doesn't seem like Corker is going to get in this race. Most insiders think he is in the Senate race for the long haul (or at least until the primaries).

The other viable person when it comes to money (or name recognition alone) would be Bill Frist. Some are saying that if Bill Frist has ambitions for the White House that he won't get there through the Senate...it would be through a Governor's mansion. However, coming from being the Senate majority leader, it would be a little bit of a step down to become a Governor. If he ran, he'd probably win though...but I don't think he will run.

Jim Henry? He's out.

Fred Thompson? Nope...not going to happen. He's too happy acting. I really do think he's out of politics for good now (much to the GOP's dismay).

So...who is going to run against Bredesen (besides John Jay Hooker...who has a better blog than Bredesen, by the way)? I'm not sure that any viable candidate can be found at this point in time. If you don't have enough money or if you don't have a big name, then you aren't going to win. Even though Bredesen's numbers aren't all that great, he seems unbeatable right now. Liberal Democrats are saying that Bredesen is a Republican anyway due to some of his policies and that's why the GOP isn't pushing anyone. That's not likely the case as a lot of people in the GOP don't like how Bredesen plays party politics. Of course, on the other hand, the last GOP Governor was more like a Democrat.

I do know who will be running for Governor come next time around though (2010)...Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn. You can count on that one.

Update: John Jay Hooker isn't the only person officially opposing Bredesen. There's this guy, Carl Whitaker, running for Governor (now on his third web site according to Joe Public).

Ford Junior and MSNBC - Exclusive

I've heard from sources in touch with Ford Junior's campaign that it is set to release an official statement today (or soon) that will dismiss the rumour that he has a contract on the table with MSNBC. When I posted this rumour on Monday, I did so with a disclaimer that it was only an unconfirmed rumour and I was reporting it as such. I believe that every blog that re-reported it did exactly the same thing (at least the ones I read).

I'm glad to see Ford's campaign address this question directly.

First Amendment be Damned...Full Speed Ahead

When Ford Jr. actually shows up to vote on something in Congress, he sure knows how to do it right. He, along with several other Tennessee Congressmen, voted against the Online Freedom of Speech Act.

This was essentially a one-sentence bill that would exempted online communication (aimed at protecting blogs) from campaign finance and election laws. It required a 2/3 majority vote, and because of Democratic efforts, the bill failed. Only 43 out of 189 Democrats voting voted for the amendment. Senate candidate Harold Ford, Jr. voted against the amendment which basically thrust a symbolic knife into the backs of Junior Mint bloggers such as Chris Jackson and David Bander.

The conclusion is quite clear....those Congressmen that voted against the amendment voted against the First Amendment.

Tennessee Congressmen voting against the bill (wall of shame):

-Harold Ford, Jr. - 9th District
-Zach Wamp - 3rd District
-Jim Cooper - 5th District
-Bart Gordon - 6th District
-John Tanner - 8th District

Voting for:

-Marsha Blackburn - 7th District
-Lincoln Davis - 4th District
-John Duncan, Jr. - 2nd District
-William Jenkins - 1st District

Powerline blog has more on the amendment's defeat. The Daily Kos condemn's the vote as well.

And, I'll stick by what I said before when it comes to the regulation of speech for blogs: civil disobedience.

North Nashville Church Gets It

Today's Tennessean has article about a north Nashville church that is doing an excellent job of reaching out and helping those in need in the community.

"The need for housing in this community was one of the concerns that we kept hearing," McClellan said. "That need spurred us to take on housing as one of the ministries of the church.

"We see single-family home ownership (as) vital to help stabilize communities and families. We are looking to build more single-family homes and want to look for lots that will help us to keep the costs affordable.

"Our commitment to the neighborhood is an understanding that comes out of being in relationship with the neighborhood. It goes beyond economic development, but it's really about the development of people.

Amen to that. It's good to see a church reaching out and doing something beneficial for the community rather than turning inward and just letting the government do it (potentially making matters worse).

More churches need to take a cue from Fifteenth Baptist Church and get out and help those in need. I know that the 15-foot tall bronze statue next to the welcome center makes the church look good. Sure, the huge oil painting of the pastor is elegant. The marble staircase is simply marvelous. Yeah...it's all good, but there's one problem. A church isn't a country club!

Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. -James 2:15-17

Let me clue you in on something...James isn't speaking to the government to do this work. He's speaking to Christian believers. No, works alone can't save you, but it goes hand-in-hand with your faith.

Now get out there and do something.

(ht S-Town Mike for the link)

The Spectacle in the Senate

Egalia of TN Guerilla Women is joyous over the closing of the Senate chamber and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid's efforts to keep closing the Senate until his questions are answered regarding the Iraq war. She apparently sees it as a good thing for the Democrat party. I'm not so sure that's the case. I think that The Monroe Doctrine blog has a more realistic perspective on the matter. In fact, no one was a winner today, but the ones who really lost were the American people.

Personally, I feel that the common American who doesn't pay as much attention to politics really doesn't care. In fact, they are probably getting tired of both parties. The Republicans are facing problems pleasing their base (I think Bush semi-fixed this by nominating Alito), have issues with indictments and are spending like drunken carnies. The Democrats, on the other hand, can't offer anything better other than creating some spectacle in the Senate to make themselves look like those pre-pubescent children you always see in the background of live news reports waving at the camera and making faces to try to draw attention to themselves.

Earlier today Egalia was predicting the death of the Republican party, but if that's the case then it looks like she should be writing an epitaph for her own party as well.