Sir Robert must be rotating in his grave at a velocity

sufficient to generate seismic waves. Latest example of 'law enforcement' in (fG)Britain,
According to his blog, our over-tall photographer Alex Turner was taking snaps in Chatham High St last Thursday, when he was approached by two unidentified men. They did not identify themselves, but demanded that he show them some ID and warned that if he failed to comply, they would summon police officers to deal with him.

This they did, and a PCSO and WPC quickly joined the fray. Turner took a photo of the pair, and was promptly arrested. It is unclear from his own account precisely what he was being arrested for. However, he does record that the WPC stated she had felt threatened by him when he took her picture, referring to his size - 5' 11" and about 12 stone - and implying that she found it intimidating.
I have no idea about Britain, but I think it's law in most places in the US that if a plain-clothes officer accosts you and you demand ID, they have to provide it.
Turner claims he was handcuffed, held in a police van for around 20 minutes, and forced to provide ID before they would release him. He was then searched in public by plain clothes officers who failed to provide any ID before they did so.

Following his release, he further claims that the police confirmed he was at liberty to take photographs, so long as - according to the PCSO - he did not take any photographs of the police.
If it's not law in Britain, it would at the least be courtesy for someone in plain clothes to show ID before searching you, to prove A: they really are cops and B: therefore have a legal backing of some kind for the search. However, as noted by my title, they seem to have forgotten Sir Robert's Principles completely.

Further down,
This is just the latest in a long line of PR disasters that have dogged police forces over the last 12 months, with tourists, schoolboys and passers-by all subject to arrest for the heinous offence of pursuing their hobby. Each incident is followed by much police hand-wringing, and statements to the effect that these are one-offs: the fault of over-zealous individual officers.
Except that if it keeps happening, it ain't just the 'over-zealous' officer; they're either not getting the word, or they're getting the message that they can keep doing this and get away with it.
The Home Office has issued numerous statements reaffirming the public’s right to take photographs. Last week, the Met issued its own guidelines, which may go some way to explaining why the Police so persistently get it wrong.
You really need to read this to get the full effect of the idiocy involved. I will quote a bit from the response they finally got from Kent police:
"At the time of this incident, a police officer responded to a report concerning a man who was taking photographs of buildings and people in Chatham town centre. When challenged by the police officer the man refused to give any personal details which it was thought was suspicious.

"As a result, he was arrested and asked to wait in a police vehicle while his details were checked. He was released a short time later after these details had been properly verified, and no further action has been taken.
And we're back to, among other things, did the first two ID themselves as police? If not, why the hell not?

I'm now going to post Sir Robert Peel's Nine Principles of Policing(thanks to Lawdog for keeping track of them); see if you can figure out how many these people are violating in the cases listed in the article:
1) The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.

2) The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.

3) Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.

4) The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.

5) Police seek and preserve public favor not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.

6) Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.

7) Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

8) Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.

9) The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.

Two things to point to, one for funny and one for serious

The funny is here, speaking of the attitudes of(in this case one particular) 'Republican pundit' who lost her brain over Sarah Palin:
You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. But it's not the normal kind of jealous, the kind reserved for girlfriends who can squeeze into size 2 jeans. No, it's the kind of jealous that hurts, that grabs your gut and twists, that has you howling with rage into your pillow in the middle of the night, screaming "It's not fair" like a two-year-old denied another piece of cake. It is Sarah Palin jealous...and it is consuming you.
...
And, what's worse, everyone continues to talk about her. You've tried everything, using your mainstream media platforms, your Wall Street Journal columns, and powerful friends -- so many of them -- to savage her, to give her a rhetorical beating so fierce that it would bring a smile to the face of Vince McMahon -- if you knew who he is, and if you had ever watched a WWE wrestling match, which he heads. "She is a complete elite confection. She might as well have been a bonbon," you wrote, your $300 manicured fingers shaking on the keyboard.
...
You're Peggy Noonan and you're jealous. You don't understand it. Sure, maybe she has accomplished a few things (like the $26 billion dollar natural gas pipeline deal, restructuring Alaskan government, and taking an ice pick to corrupt politicians). But she has no style, no pizzazz -- she just does stuff. But so do you -- and you can't understand why you don't get the same adoration. After all, didn't you go before the New York Landmarks Preservation Commission and not just protest, but elegantly protest -- so said The New York Times -- a 16-story tower a developer wanted to build in your ritzy Upper East Side Manhattan neighborhood? Sarah Palin wouldn't have done that; she's not brilliant enough to understand preservation. She probably would have looked at the jobs the construction would create and given it a déclassé "Hell yeah!"
Well worth reading, and I hope Noonan hears about it, reads it, and shrieks so high only the dog knows she did it. And runs away.


The serious is that Amazon deleted books from peoples' Kindle readers. No notice, just did it. And what books were they? Nineteen Eighty-Four, Animal Farm and Atlas Shrugged.

I had no idea Amazon could do that, let alone without bothering to tell you "We're going to delete the book you paid for. We'll refund your money, but you can't keep it." And with all the books out there, that it would be these three that are the only faulty file and that book will no longer be available, or the books in question were being sold by Amazon despite being unauthorized copies. In the link at Insty we have
It appears as though Amazon’s purchasing system does this automatically. The company told Ars that they are “changing [Amazon's] systems so that in the future we will not remove books from customers’ devices in these circumstances.”

Bravo to that, but it would have been better for Amazon to tell customers of this planned change directly, in the first place. And why was the system designed to reach out and remove books, anyway?
Good question. I'd thought about one of these before, but this pretty much kills it; I don't want some possible censor being able to delete or edit books I've bought.

Took the daughter for her birthday dinner tonight

before she leaves for New Orleans in the morning on vacation. Went to a place called Pop's east of Edmond: restaurant that also makes a lot of different flavors of soda. My chicken-fried steak was good, she said her burger was very good. And dessert... their ice-cream sandwich is a big chocolate chip cookie, about five small scoops of vanilla spaced suitably, another cookie, then hot fudge and whipped cream.

We split the dessert, and you could easily have split it three ways; I'm still stuffed.

Ref her trip, yes, she's planning on great care. No, I'm not thrilled. About a month ago at the range as I was checking out was talking to one of the new people there and mentioned daughter's trip; she looked at me in amazement and said "You're letting her go?" I pointed out she is of age and I didn't have a lot of input; next question: "Does she have a gun?" It seems she used to work with the US Marshalls Service, and the last in-service training she had was in NO; before they got out the first night they received a sheet of warnings: "Do not leave brightly-lit streets; do travel in groups of three or more" and so on. For US Marshalls who they knew would be armed.

Real confidence-inspiring, that.

Ref the airliner crash in Iran,

Two-Four has this:
Dan Collins links a Reuters item on the Caspian Airlines crash, which includes this helpful information:

"U.S. sanctions against Iran have prevented it from buying new aircraft or spares from the West, forcing it to supplement its aging fleet of Boeing and Airbus planes with aircraft from the former Soviet Union."

This crap reminds me of Cuba; we're told the sanctions don't make sense because 'Everybody else in the WORLD trades with Cuba!', and yet they also tell us it's our fault the Cuban economy is in the septic tank. Or, in Nicaragua in the 80's, they were constantly threatening us and calling us names, and then bitching because "You won't give us things for loans we won't pay backsell us things we need!" when- again- we were being told "Sanctions don't make sense because EVERYBODY else trades with Nicaragua!"

Can't have it both ways, folks; if 'everybody else' trades with whoever, and they're still in the toilet, either somebody else won't sell them what they need or can't make what they need; not our fault. Or, if other people DO sell them the stuff, and they're in the toilet anyway, you can't blame us.

Ref another "Oh NO, he was legally carrying a GUN!" case,

Tam covers it quite well:

"My opinion is that members of the public should allow trained professionals to carry and use firearms," Maloney said.

Having seen the effects of gun use, Maloney thinks citizens should instead be good witnesses if they spot a crime, he said.

I'd be all about some trained professionals, but all we have is you, chief. And you know what they say about you guys: You're never around when I need you. And when I do call you, you've got the rest of my life to get here. I reckon I'll keep lugging my own heater around, thanks."

A while back I wrote about Bank of America screwing some people

around in disgusting fashion. Final outcome with Bank of America is
...Today my local branch manager called, and begged me to make this go away. She was authorized to offer me a dollar amount that equates to about 30% of what I lost last week in terms of cash laid out. It didn't account for pain and suffering, or any sort of emotional factor. It didn't even cover the new tickets I had to buy for my family's airfare.

I took their offer, simply because I don't think that I could do more without a protracted fight, and what's the point? Every day I deal with this shit is a day closer to my death. I'm not talking big bucks, and I'm not a man who likes to beat his head against a wall simply because it feels good to stop at the end.

Anyhow, the little bit of money that they offered me is enough to keep my wife and boy comfortable for the duration of their wait in Brazil, with enough left over to pay back most of the money I borrowed to cover my shortfalls in the ticket price. So, all's well, sort of.

Probably as well as it could get with these clowns. But I'll tell you three things:
1. There was no excuse for them screwing up the account once, let alone multiple times.
2. There was no excuse for the way he was treated while trying to straighten things out.
3. There is no damn way I'll ever take a card from Bank of America. Or do anything else to put money in their pocket if I can avoid it.

A comment in the original post basically says "He should have set things up better." Maybe so, but that does NOT in any way excuse the actions of Bank of America in this.

Because, of course, only government minions can be

trusted with arms.
In the last article, reader “Alex” commented:

“Obviously it is time to repeal the second amendment because of all the bloodshed it has caused.”

...
I used to agree with “Alex.” Then, during my initial 3+ years of research, I discovered, and corresponded with, Rudy Rummel, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Hawaii. He has published over 20 books and been published over 100 times in professional journals. His university website addresses the above issue.

Here is a partial list of countries that, in the 20th century, carried out government-sponsored mass murder, termed “democide” by Professor Rudy Rummel: People’s Republic of China (76.7 million murdered); Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (61.9 million); and Nazi Germany (21 million). Other countries listed by Professor Rummel include: Indonesia, Vietnam, Pakistan, and Yugoslavia, et al, resulting in another 13 million murdered by their own governments. Other homicidal countries included Imperial Japan (World War II) and Turkey (1.9 million), who murdered mostly ‘others’ in the name of racial purity and territorial conquest. All told, Rummel estimates that 262 million people were slaughtered by homicidal governments during the 20th Century alone. These numbers are beyond comprehension, as Professor Rummel explains:

He ends with
Don’t like Jews or Catholics? Hitler disarmed them and then murdered millions in concentration camps, along with Gypsies, homosexuals, etc.

Hate Christians? After Uganda banned guns, 300,000 were rounded up and murdered.
Don’t like “smart” people? After banning guns, Cambodia rounded up and murdered over one million of them.

Hate people who disagree with you? After the Soviet Union established gun control, over 20 million dissidents were rounded up and killed.

By comparison, the Second Amendment has actually saved millions of lives. It also protects your right to religious freedom, your pursuit of happiness, and your opportunity for upward mobility. It raises the cost for thugs who want you rounded up and murdered.

It also shows that anybody who is against the civil right of self-defense is a person who hates your life, liberty, and happiness.

Why would you want to be disarmed before such a person?

If your Senator reacts this way to your protest, (updated)

you need to see about replacing her.
Local Tea Party patriots held an anti-Obama Care protest at Senator Claire "ACORN" McCaskill’s district offices on Delmar Boulevard today.
The protest was organized by Americans for Prosperity and the St. Louis Tea Party Coalition.

McCaskill's office manager locked the doors, pull down the blinds, called the cops and forced the protesters across the street.
...
A staff member opened the door for the police and said they were being threatened. The staff member took some notes from a few protesters while the police were there and said she'd pass them on to Senator McCaskill.
Like Insty said, it's not like she's crapping on constituents or somet- oh, wait, yes she is.

Update: you can add Congressweenie Keith Shuler to the list of "Who cares what you peasants think?" politicians:
It is important to note here that we were not “storming the Bastille.” We were not carrying pitchforks, nor did we arrive announced. Our group called ahead well over a week in advance and requested that someone from Shuler’s office receive our petitions and comments. We were informed that they would not accept our petitions and that Shuler would not be there, but that someone would receive us.

Shuler’ assistant stood in the entry to the offices and stated that the Congressman “has no comment.” He said that he would be willing to talk to one or two of us. Several people spontaneously made comments to be relayed the Congressman.
Translation: "The Congressman is busy with important matters, he can't be here to talk to you. And I, his buttmonkey, will not accept your smelly papers for him; they'll contaminate the office." Sounds like Shuler needs to be reminded that he can be thrown out of that office. And should be.

Magnets: they're not just for Mythbusters and screwing up your disc

One of my 'it makes things easier' is to use magnets for holding things. Specifically, say I've got a pistol I've wiped down with Eezox and I don't want it laying on a cloth or something while it dries. I've got a file cabinet next to the table where I do things like that, so I put the piece muzzle-down on the table and set a magnet on the cabinet where the butt touchesand it'll stay there while the stuff dries. Or penetrating oil soaks in or whatever. You can do this with a rifle or shotgun(minus the stock), though I'll generally use two magnets, one on each side of the receiver or barrel, for that to make it more stable.

I'll throw in, you know those plastic clamps you can pick up at Harbor Freight or wherever on sale? Nice & strong? You can clamp two of them on the table and lean a long gun between them so it can't fall over.

Probably these are methods you're aware of, but just in case.

Two things to read, both connected to oil

Kevin has this on the Bakken Formation having a LOT more recoverable oil than previously thought:
3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Technically Recoverable Oil Assessed in North Dakota and Montana’s Bakken Formation—25 Times More Than 1995 Estimate—

Reston, VA - North Dakota and Montana have an estimated 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil in an area known as the Bakken Formation.

A U.S. Geological Survey assessment, released April 10, shows a 25-fold increase in the amount of oil that can be recovered compared to the agency's 1995 estimate of 151 million barrels of oil.

From the FAQ,

Why isn't this information concerning the Bakken Formation on front page news?

In April 2008, when the USGS released the assessment of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and gas resources of the Bakken Formation, there was a press release which was distributed to the media. The individual media organizations make the decision about what stories to publish. When the USGS assessment was released, news articles were done in several news avenues including the New York Times, the Associated Press, and Oil and Gas Journal.

In other words, "It doesn't fit the agenda."


Read the whole thing; interesting information. Which brings us to a post a while back by Geek with a .45; it starts off with Ron Paul getting his ass kicked in the debates, and really starts here:
The significant reason that Ron Paul got his butt whipped was because his response demonstrated that he did not have an understanding or command of the monstrous, overriding Excruciating Truth that it is rarely uttered aloud.

That so many liberty oriented brethren don’t understand that Ron Paul has fatally screwed up tells me that they don’t grasp Excruciating Truth either.

(Hmmmm….am I a prophet, or a politician? At least I’ll confess confusion on that point. But then again, I’m not in congress, running for president. I’m just a sleepy guy who has to get up for work in the morning.)

------------------------

So, here’s the Excruciating Truth:

Whether America remains free and prosperous will be determined by whoever controls The Lightning; which is some critical portion of war suitable energy resources.

And it damned well better be us.

"They want the farmer to die

and the canary to live."

In recent months, actor and comedian Paul Rodriguez has made known his defection from the Democratic party because of the party's lack of interest in helping drought-stricken farmers like himself in California who have had water denied to them by court order under the Endangered Species Act to save an endangered fish, the delta smelt.
Reality strikes home.
As he recounted that environmentalists compare the delta smelt to the canary in a coal mine, he quipped that environmentalists treat the farmer like the canary. Rodriguez quoted his uncle who used to be a coal miner: "The job of the canary is to, you know, we were digging and we’re looking at the canary, we’re digging and looking, when the canary dies, man, you run the hell out of there! That canary’s job is to die so you live, see?”

He continued: "And that really got to me, and I said, 'They got it wrong. They want the farmer to die and the canary to live.'”
And some of them want the farmers and all the other humans to die.
Rodriguez, the son of Mexican immigrants, also spoke of his late father's admiration for America, and the good fortune one has in just getting to live in this country: "He had a deep love for this country. He was grateful. He told me that he wasn’t going to leave an inheritance for his children. He was going to leave something more important than that. He was going to leave them in a place with ideals, and a place where you can become someone if you really wanted to, you had a shot at it."
An ideal that the Evil Party and linguini-spine Stupid Party members are trying to destroy. Speaking of which,
And in contrast to much of the mainstream media's habit of encouraging Republicans to moderate on social issues, he suggested that the Republican party's conservative positions on issues like abortion and family values would be an advantage in attracting Hispanic voters. Rodriguez: "You need to attract more of me, or else you’d be an endangered species. ... You know, we have so much in common. A lot of the values that this party espouses, we espouse. We believe strongly in family. We believe life is sacred."

Rodriguez lamented as he concluded his speech: "It is tragic that in the most fertile soil that God has ever placed on any corner of this blue marble that we should have a desert where there should be a garden."

And the most Hopey!Changey!!Transparent!!! administration EVAH!!!! reaction?
Rodriguez also appeared on FNC's Hannity show on June 19, and complained that the Obama administration has ignored his pleas for help: "I think that when the Endangered Species Act was put on, they didn't take humans into consideration. ... We tried to get the attention of the administration. Mr. Salazar was gracious enough to fly over our valley but didn't land. I don't know what. There's plenty of places to land, you know, because there's no farming going on. It's pathetic." Video of the interview can be found here.

Remember AG Holder dismissing the charges

on the Black Panthers intimidating voters? He doesn't want to tell the Judiciary Committee why.
The Department of Justice responded to questions from Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) and Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) in a letter earlier this week. DOJ has agreed to a closed door meeting, to be announced.

The letter does not address the basic question, what facts changed? The letter also attempts to reassure, citing the experience of the decision makers. It raises more questions than it answers.

"The Department voluntarily dismissed (the charges) in the complaint because the facts and the law did not support pursuing those claims...That decision was made after a careful and thorough review of the matter by the Acting Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, a career employee with nearly 30 years experience in the Department, including nearly l5 years as the career Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights."

The facts did not support the claims? And does careful and thorough review mean, "we won?"

And don't you just love the 'agreed to a closed-door meeting'? Because he apparently doesn't want the peasants hearing what he has to say?

Remember what I said about when it rains

this time of year?

The orange in the center of the blue around Oklahoma City is the severe thunderstorm warning(I can hear thunder approaching), to the east is Excessive Heat Warning and south is Heat Advisory mixed with storms forming.
(Note: when I posted this, it showed the colors in the preview; but they apparently didn't actually post)

So I think I'm going to shut the pc down for a while.

Idiot And Bigoted Politicians On Parade

Bigoted, first, Sen. Durbin(Slanderer of Troops-IL):
"When we asked questions of the white male nominees of a Republican president, we were basically trying to ... make sure that they would go far enough in understanding the plight of minorities, because clearly that was not in their DNA," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said.
I wonder if that includes the nominee to the Supreme Court Democrats trashed BECAUSE he was latino?


And from Closing Velocity we have Colin Powell discovering that sucking up to The Obama just might have been a mistake:
Obama ally Colin Powell asserts that the United States' national interest trumps Russia's demands:

Russia's foreign minister said that progress would be jeopardized if the U.S. decides to create a global missile defense system. But Powell says Russia "can't have veto power over what we think is needed."

That's certainly a far cry from what Powell said about Russian objections to our missile defense when we were preparing to withdraw from the ABM Treaty in 2001:

Powell is sympathetic to [the Russians'] anxieties.

Which is followed by
In sharp contrast to his positive words during President Barack Obama's visit to Moscow earlier this week when the two reached broad agreement on nuclear arms cuts, Mr Medvedev used a news conference at the G8 summit to return to Russia's earlier tough rhetoric on arms control.

Referring to an order he gave earlier this year to prepare deployment of short-range Russian missiles in the western enclave of Kaliningrad to answer to any US deployment of a missile shield in central Europe, Medvedev said:

"If we don't manage to agree on the issues, you know the consequences. What I said during my state of the nation address has not been revoked."
...
Mr Medvedev, speaking at the G8, also appeared to change his tone on the missile defence shield itself.

During Mr Obama's visit he told the US leader, using markedly softer language than normal, that "no one is saying that missile defence is harmful in itself or that it poses a threat to someone".

But in Italy on Friday, Mr Medvedev returned to the Kremlin's traditional posture on the system, describing it as "harmful" and "threatening to Russia".
With this comment from Krauthammer:

Obama says that his START will be a great boon, setting an example to enable us to better pressure North Korea and Iran to give up their nuclear programs.

That a man of Obama’s intelligence can believe such nonsense is beyond comprehension. There is not a shred of evidence that cuts by the great powers —- the INF treaty, START I, the Treaty of Moscow (2002) —- induced the curtailment of anyone’s programs.

Moammar Gaddafi gave up his nukes the week we pulled Saddam Hussein out of his spider hole. No treaty involved. The very notion that Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will suddenly abjure nukes because of yet another U.S.-Russian treaty is comical.

If you want to see Sen. Boxer(Brain Dead-CA) getting her comuppance,

go here and watch. Absolutely wonderful.

Added: Fausta linked to a transcript:
“Madam chair, that is condescending to me,” Alford said. “I’m the National Black Chamber of Commerce, and you’re trying to put up some other black group to pit against me.”

Boxer defended including the report, however, saying the report reflects a “diversity” of support behind climate change legislation facing the Senate.

“If this gentleman were here, he would be proud he’s being quoted,” Boxer said in defense of the NAACP support.

Alford, however, struck back against Boxer, accusing her of “getting racial” in the climate change debate.

“All that’s condescending, and I don’t like it. It’s racial. I take offense to it. As an African-American and a veteran of this country, I take offense to that,” he said. “You’re quoting some other black man — why don’t you quote some other Asian or some other… You’re getting racial here.”

“You’re speaking on behalf of the black community?” Alford asked. “Why are you doing the colored people association’s study with the black Chamber of Commerce?”

He finally concluded:

“We’ve been looking at energy policy since 1996. And we are referring to the experts, regardless of their color. And for someone to tell me, an African-American, college-education veteran of the United States Army, that I must contend with some other “black group” and put aside everything else in here — This has NOTHING to do with the NAACP, and really has nothing to do with the National Black Chamber of Commerce. We’re talking about energy. And that — that road the chair went down, I think is God awful.”

A little more on 'Blue Dog Democrats'

like Dan Boren(Evil Party-OK). Who likes to claim he's conservative. Except he voted with Obama 81% of the time, which kind of undercuts his claim. I've mentioned this guy before, in connection with his votes, which seem to cover what Gateway Pundit says: Remember: There is no such a thing as a blue-dog democrat-- But certain liberals do vote occasionally with the GOP to stay in power. In connection with which he points out
Rep. Dan Boren, a conservative Democrat in the reddest state in America, Oklahoma, says in the bluntest terms imaginable that President Obama has become a political liability:

“Barack Obama is very unpopular,” said Boren, who represents Oklahoma’s 2nd Congressional District. “He got 34 percent of the vote statewide, and less in our district. If he were to run for re-election today, I bet it would be even worse.”

Boren points out that he does support some of Obama’s initiatives, like the economic stimulus package. He has voted for Obama-supported bills 81 percent of the time, according to a recent Congressional Quarterly study. But despite this, he said the president is too liberal.

If you're from Oklahoma, and you want to know what the liberal view of the state is, go to the linked Politico post and read the comments; 'racist' and 'stupid' are about the kindest things said from some of the lefties. Oh, and the ONLY reason anybody here voted against Obama was(what else?) that we're all racists. Etc.

I tend to think Gateway is right; for most of these Blue Dogs they're getting some cover to protect themselves back home, and if it comes to it they'll probably vote for what Pelosi tells them to. I hope that's wrong, but...

A Representative's salary is how much a year?

Embattled House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, facing a multi-pronged investigation by the House ethics committee, shelled out nearly $280,000 to four different law firms over the last quarter, according to his newest campaign disclosure report.

Overall, Rangel has paid $928,000 to his attorneys during the last year as his personal finances have come under scrutiny on a variety of fronts.

But he can cover it;
But despite his ethics troubles, Rangel remains a prolific fundraiser, raising nearly $405,000 in the period from April 1 to June 30, according to the latest report filed with the Federal Election Commission.

More than half that total - nearly $236,000 - came in the form of PAC contributions from corporations, trade associations and labor unions, including AFSCME, Boeing, General Electric, Pepsico, Raytheon, and UPS.

Rangel still has more than $831,000 in cash in his campaign account as of June 30. Federal election law allows lawmakers to use campaign funds to pay their legal bills if they stem from an investigation related to their official duties.

More touching on the "All my professors are Democrats" post

a few days ago. This from Volokh on LA City College trashing freedom of speech:
The case stems from the incident in which a professor in a speech class refused to grade a student's presentation, apparently because of the religious nature of the student's presentation, the student's expression of opposition for same-sex marriage in the presentation, or both. (The professor apparently also called the student a "fascist bastard" in front of the class for having supported the anti-same-sex-marriage Prop. 8, and refused to let the student finish the presentation.)
Ah, yes, the tolerance of opposing ideas so anchored in current college attitudes. Does anyone think the professor, had they been conservative and made comparable insult to someone pushing same-sex marriage, would still be at the university?

Tolerance: a one-way street too much of the time in schools. And parents and students are paying how much a year for this crap?

I guess for a lot of them Blue Dog Democrat means

"Kick me and pee on me, but if you scratch my ears enough to stay in office I'll pee all over the people back home for you."
Pelosi cut deal after deal with individual lawmakers to squeak the bill out of committee and to the floor. Then lawmakers flew home and had to battle criticism from voters at the same time Republicans were saying Democrats passed an “energy tax.”

“They went home and got beat up about energy,” said a senior aide to a Blue Dog lawmaker. “Now you’re going to jam healthcare down their throat and send them home for a month?”

One of the goals of having the seven Blue Dog members band together is to guard against leadership picking centrists off one by one with side deals, as they feel was done during the energy vote.
Translation: "We'll do what you want, but if you do it this way we have to listen to the hicks back home yell at us, and we don't like that."
But defections could be hard for Republicans to come by. As difficult as the climate change vote was, Republicans were unsuccessful in getting enough Democrats to block the bill.

And what many Republicans oppose outright, Democratic centrists oppose in degree. For example, Republicans object to a government-run “public option.” Many Blue Dogs have come to accept that it will be part of the bill, but don’t want it to use reimbursement rates from Medicare that they believe shortchange their rural areas.
"We won't stop the bill, but we want you to buy us off properly, dammit!" They know what a mess this garbage is, but they won't stand against it; they'll stand against enough to get their ears scratched, and then roll over.

I've been told New Zealand is a beautiful place that has a lot of nanny-state

GFWs running things; looks like the last part is proven.
As we've seen in the past few days, gun owners need to be aware of local and global threats. This includes being mindful of restrictions imposed by gungrabbers in other countries. Case in point, New Zealand, where:

Thousands of gun owners will be affected by a decision to reclassify many weapons as military-style semi-automatics.

The CliffsNotes version: If your previously-designated "sporting configuration" semi-automatic rifle has a pistol grip, it will now be reclassified as a "military-style semi-automatic." The previous A-class license "law-abiding" New Zealanders obtained will no longer be good enough.

Those buying these guns now need to have the tougher E-class endorsed licence, obtain a permit to buy and advise police of the make and model.

Oh, and then there's this:

The change could cost some owners about $1000 for upgrading their licences and safety equipment.

Not to mention this:

[Police superintendent Tony] McLeod said the reclassification was not an attempt to create a firearms registration system by default, but better tracking of these types of weapons may be a result.

Yeah, right. Good one, Tony.