RANGER AGAINST WAR: Ideologue <

Saturday, March 21, 2009

Ideologue


--When I get to likin' someone, they ain't around long.
--I notice when you get to DISlikin' someone

they ain't around for long neither

--The Outlaw Josey Wales
(1976)
_______________

The exit of George Bush did not signal the end of an ideological presidency.

Specifically, Ranger refers to the ideological posture of this White House
vis-a-vis gun ownership. Obama skirted the issue during his candidacy, but it seems that through Attorney General Eric Holder the country is being presented with another challenge to our constitutional rights.

There is a serious divide within the U.S. We fear a few al-Qaeda terrorists as though they can destroy us, yet fail to bring together the divergent elements in our own society. The gun crowd is Right Wing and militarily patriotic; many have served in the military and fill most police institutions. Liberals seldom soldier or become law enforcement types, which is not to say they are not patriotic.


Why is Obama, through Holder, alienating the conservative segment of the population by threatening assault weapons bans and other infringement of 2nd Amendment rights? Mr. Holder says we are cowards in the discussion of race, but this administration is cowardly in its avoidance of a discussion on firearm ownership. This is causing dire fear and hatred to brew from the Right. Why would they do this?


This is a battle that need not be fought and is destructive to the cohesion of the nation. A more restrictive stance on gun ownership will produce a pendulum reaction, putting a Republican back in the White House in 2012.


Mr. President, wake up and smell the cordite.

Labels: ,

13 Comments:

Blogger Fasteddiez said...

Ranger:

Obama and his boy are selling wolf tickets, Big Time.

He's got 18 centrist senators that are going to oppose him on seemingly leftist legislation. In the house, it's even worse, because of the numbers of Blue Dawgs, and newly minted red state dems.

Lastly, look at his attempt to make the service connected veteran folks use their insurance to pay for VA services. That went over like a submarine with screen doors.
Brilliant thinking: are not service connected injuries tied in to disability payments? Are bears not seen shitting in the woods?

He may be smart, but his administration has a lot of Hacks, and crooks, as did Clinton's. The VA idea was pushed by Rahm Emmanuel, formerly (D) Tel Aviv (another deep thinker).

Saturday, March 21, 2009 at 4:30:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good comment Eddie (and Post Jim).

The VA thing was really weird. A lot of Democrats support single-payer healthcare, yet this would be a move away from that.

Regardless, the political liability of such a plan should have been obvious. What worries me is that they apparently didn't see that liability and the inevitable backlash. It's the same thing with Holder and the 2nd amendment - do they really think they can force crap like that through? Maybe so. Hopefully this hubris mode will settle down and they will concentrate on governing and not ideology.

Saturday, March 21, 2009 at 10:02:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, as much as I agree with you Ranger, the problem is that things like this...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29817606/
Doesn't help keep the discussion in a rational state.
Key graf...

"A SWAT team had entered an apartment to clear and search it when the gunman shot them with an assault rifle, police said."

Sunday, March 22, 2009 at 10:30:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

sheerahkhan,
Screw that-do we know it was an assault rifle.?NEXT-what about negotiating and trying to peacefully settle this situation.Going into assault mode is a sign of failed police work. Do we really want militarily armed police doing assault team tactics in the Homeland?
Let's also ask some 4th amendment issues here-why were the police breaking into someones home?
I just don't buy the bullshit. There's a lot more to the story than a simple condemnation of assault rifles.
jim
jim

Sunday, March 22, 2009 at 10:54:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

Sheer,
I've just found your reference in todays news. I'll read it in detail and will comment later.
My 1st reply still holds although this scenario seems whacked.
jim

Sunday, March 22, 2009 at 10:57:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

sheer,
I just reviewed the only art. on the net re: this Oakland shooting.
How could 1 gunman possibly kill 3 Swat members in one fell swoop? Did they not use sound tactical principles? Again; where was a negotiator?

The shooter had an extensive criminal record ergo he was legally barred from owning any weapons at all. His possession of weapons and assault type weapons shows the key criticism of gun laws to be valid and that is that legal citizens are legislated and comply with the regulations and criminals ignore the laws. That's why they are criminals.!

Now let's assume that AK's are outlawed-how will that keep them out of the hands of criminals? It'll only keep legal citizens from owning them and it's my postion that this is adsurdity in action.

The police deaths are regrettable but I still have questions on this event.More will follow.
jim

Sunday, March 22, 2009 at 11:23:00 AM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The box (possibly coffin) we're in as a nation is caused by the fact that good old hard-headed get-the-job-done centrists rarely get elected to significant political office any more. Key leadership and management posts are now reserved for ideologues from both the right and the left, with occasional pretty boys out front.

Our national politics puts me in mind of the old story about how the frog and the scorpion meet up on a river bank. Scorpion asks frog for a ride across; frog refuses, saying the scorpion will sting him and kill him. Scorpion: "C'mon, I wouldn't do that because I can't swim and would drown without you." Frog accepts this rational thinking and tells the scorpion to hop on. Halfway across, the scorpion predictably stings the frog. Frog: "Why'd you do that? Now I'm going to die and you're going to drown." Scorpion: "I'm a scorpion. I can't help myself; it's in my nature."

I have to admit Obama fooled me. Smart as he obviously is, I thought he'd put together a center-left executive branch, something I didn't mind, after the excesses of the Bush Administration. But he's doing strange things: on the one hand, Holder, Emanuel and the wizards who came up with the VA idea are clearly coming from the left, but OTOH, look at Geithner and Summers. Wall Street goons all the way. Look at the war front: selling out to the right wing. Then we have the ambitious health-care, education, etc., reforms, all looking as if the left will be in charge.

I'm starting to think that Obama isn't really an ideologue, but more of an empty vessel, good at campaigning but not at governing. Like Bush and Kennedy. Bush's compassionate conservatism turned into a war-loving police state approach. Kennedy was also a war-lover who plotted to assassinate foreign leaders and his high-flown rhetoric about civil rights, etc., turned out to be empty.

I don't regret having voted for Obama because IMO McCain would have been far worse. But it's pretty clear that Obama is fast becoming a hostage to the scorpions of the right and left to whom he's entrusting his administration and, unfortunately, the fate of our nation. Something else that's becoming clear: Obama is an exceedingly arrogant dude who's going to continue to be surprised whenever there's a violent backlash to a half-baked idea cooked up by his house scorpions. "But, but. It comes from me. How can you not see how wonderful it is"?

This old-line conservative Democrat who reveres our Constitution and believes strongly in the rights of man, key among them the right to make money on an even playing field, as well as the Washingtonian admonition to avoid foreign entanglements can only shake his head in wonderment at what we've become as a people.

Sunday, March 22, 2009 at 1:01:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger The Minstrel Boy said...

somewhere in all this rhetoric there must be some sensible ground.

i live only a few short miles from the mexican border. less than 15 miles from my porch is an honest to god shooting war with heads on pikes and all the attendant atrocity.

here's what is scaring the mad motherfuck right out of me today. "homeland" (why not just go with the orginal german and say "faderland?") security is asking to send national guard (all the ones that aren't in afghanistan and shit) and other military units down here to "establish security."

am i the only one around who doesn't see the situations calmed down by sending a bunch of kids, fresh from the war zone with machine guns? kids+machine guns = bloody fucking mess in most any equation i can balance.

a big honking part of the unrest is the border security already in place. law abiding people have an almost impossible task to move goods across the border in compliance with the ever changing rules and regulations. lack of trade and commerce, lack of easy legal access to friends and family on the other side of the border creates chaos and unrest.

lack of being able to travel across for jobs leaves unemployed folks on the street. it's a common and regular occurence for the drug runners to tell folks looking for a human smuggler "we'll proved the coyote, just carry this backpack for us." since the tightening of the border the price for a guided crossing has been rising. to the desperate poor seeking to cross the border, the cartels are the only ones who seem to be addressing their needs.

mexico is on the fast track to a failure of government in the northern states.

the border zones of our country will not be far behind them.

Sunday, March 22, 2009 at 2:11:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

publius,
I'd never say - i told you so! It'd be too gosh.
O is not an empty vessel, I'd say he's more of a leaky vessel.
I accept your analysis and would like to add what you seem to imply.Democracy must occupy a central ground to be truly successful and representative of a society.
This centrism is a missing feature of our national life. It was not a feature of the Nixon/Reagan/Bush administrations. That's Bush 43, I'll actually give 41 a passing grade for not being a polarizing agent.
I'm sorry, i just gotta do it-I TOLD YOU SO!
But you are correct, and this is the weakness that will kill our system of govt, Mc
Cain was a much worst choice. And this is what we've come to-choices between bad and worse rather than good and more better.That's right more better- I live in a rural county.
jim

Sunday, March 22, 2009 at 6:19:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

MB,
Hell Lad, we're well on the way to failed state status.! Of this I'm sure.!
Honest citizens always get caught in the middle whether on your border or that of AFGH or IRQ. And that middle ground is what's called a kill zone.

jim

Sunday, March 22, 2009 at 6:26:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

Sheer,
Latest update,
The first Officer killed was during a routine traffic stop which proves the adage-THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A ROUTINE STOP.
I wonder how he swung an AK into action from inside a vehicle. There were 2 Motorcycle Officers and correct approach to the vehicle might have saved a life. I say might since I will not question the decisions or second guess the Officers.

The shooter was barricaded up and the scene could've been isolated and a negotiator called in. In CA this means -talk to them until you get a clear head shot. This I endorse as superior to loosing 3 good men. In addition they had to be bunched up if he killed 3 in the fight. This is a real sad episode.
This scenario will become a teaching tool.

It's interesting that this shooter had a prior assault conviction with a deadly weapon. Why was he on the street?
jim

Sunday, March 22, 2009 at 6:38:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

MB,
This Mexican drug thing is a law enforcement issue and not a military question. Here we go again.
jim

Sunday, March 22, 2009 at 6:46:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To be perfectly honest, I have no idea.

The perp had priors involving weapons...and that he got the drop on two moto-officers...well, I still don't know what to say to that.
One, I can see...two???
The only scenario I'm familiar with is from the Academy in which the officer comes up to vehicle, the perp gets out, plays nice, hands officer lic. and reg.
All legit, routine, lic and reg in hand, perp isn't going anywhere...or so they probably thought.
Officer goes back to car to talk to control, second is out watching for another ticky coming his way. But the key thing is second isn't paying attention to the perp.
Remember, so far, perp has passed initial stink test...
However,
Perp, he's cool, probably practice this very ambush in prison, confirms location of second officer, reaches in and grabs hidden weapon, opens up on two officers.
Flees scene.
The thing I was taught that we were never suppose to stand close, either to the perp in question, or to each other.
In fact the further apart the better...as in opposite sides of each other with perp being in middle.
All around a bad day for Oakland PD.
As for how he got the drop on the two in SWAT...I know next to nothing about SWAT tactics except that they do rather well at the "range."
*note emphasis on range which is where I watch Sheriff's and some police depts...not all though.

What I do know is that this episode will be part of the sheet music that you're going to have to listen too when the anti-gun orchestra starts up.

Anyway, there are already laws on the books that say felons cannot have guns, obviously, this law isn't as monolithic as we would hope it would be.

Monday, March 23, 2009 at 2:00:00 AM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

<< Home