GBTV - Where the Truth Lives

Election Season 2014

And it has brought us to this trainwreck called ObamaCare and we have bankrupted our kids and grandkids!

We are now headed into the 2014 Election Season and common sense and conservatism are on the rise. Please stand-up and be counted!

Reading Collusion: How the Media Stole the 2012 Election is a great place to start!

The Founding Father's Real Reason for the Second Amendment

And remember the words of Thomas Jefferson "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." See Video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp’s Congressional Testimony: What the Second Amendment is REALLY For, below (u-tube HERE).

The Leaders Are Here... Palin, Cruz, Lee, Paul, Chaffetz....

T'S A WONDERFUL LIFE

Can You Really Still Believe That None of These People Would Have Done a Better Job???

Bloggers' Rights at EFF

SIGN THE PETITION TODAY...

Showing posts with label AMERICA'S CRAWL TO SOCIALISM. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AMERICA'S CRAWL TO SOCIALISM. Show all posts

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Scary Quote from 1944

Socialist Party Candidate:  1944
clip_image001

Nakita Khrushchev, Communist and Premier of the USSR, said very the same when he spoke at the United Nations… taking off his shoe to pound on the platform, he said:  “We will bury you without ever firing a shot!”

Video (Hannity): Obama Is A Socialist


In one week… last week, Obama and the Progressives in our government have taken over 1/6 of our economy, the student loan industry, and the healthcare industry; have insulted our best ally in the Middle East and have entered into a new questionable arms deal with Russia, reducing our strength at a time when Iran is telling us, Israel, and the world that they are going nuclear (while working with Russia) as the particulars are leaking out (for those who didn’t read it) about what all is in the HC plan, its actual cost and what is planned next (Amnesty; attack on the second amendment; attack on conservative radio, tv and Internet free speech; and revamping of the Cap and Trade legislation… but nothing substantial for jobs), should not leave much doubt for anyone that this man, Norman Mattoon Thomas, was right.

Sunday, November 1, 2009

THE COW AND THE ICE CREAM

ONE OF THE BEST EXPLANATIONS

OF
WHY OBAMA WON THE ELECTION

--From a teacher in the Nashville area –

"We are worried about 'the cow' when it...
Is all about the 'Ice Cream.'

The most eye-opening
Civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade this Year.

The presidential election was heating up...

And some of the children showed an interest.

I decided we would have an election for a class president.

We would choose our nominees.

They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote.

To simplify the process...
Candidates were nominated by other class members.

We discussed what kinds of...
Characteristics these students should have.

We got many nominations and from those...
Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot.

The class had done a great job in their selections.

Both candidates were good kids.

I thought Jamie might have an advantage...
Because he got lots of parental support.

I had never seen Olivia's mother.

The day arrived when they were to make their speeches.

Jamie went first.

He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better place.

He ended by promising to do his very best.

Everyone applauded and he sat down.

Now it was Olivia's turn to speak…

Her speech was concise.

She said…

"If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream."

She sat down.

The class went wild.

"Yes! Yes! We want ice cream."

She surely would say more…

She did not have to.

A discussion followed.

How did she plan to pay for the ice cream?

She wasn't sure.

Would her parents buy it…

Or would the class pay for it.

She didn't know.

The class really didn't care.

All they were thinking about was ice cream.

Jamie was forgotten.

Olivia won by a landslide.

Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth...

He offered ice cream and...

52 percent of the people reacted like nine year olds.

They want ice cream...

The other 48 percent know…

They're going to have...
To feed the cow and clean up the mess."

This is the ice cream Obama promised us!

Remember…

The government cannot give anything to anyone…

That…

Which they have not first taken away from someone else.

Obama Approval Index Month-by-Month

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_month_by_month

If we pay attention to the lesson, Obama’s election could be the best thing that ever happened to our sleeping country, for there are many issues that this Country faces, including wanting something for nothing, apathy, and outside as well as internal forces stealing the country that most Americans love. The question now… is do we choose to step up and stand up, each one of us, for the America our Founding Fathers and young American troops have fought and spilled blood for ever since… or do we continue to choose the easy way out… the promise of ice cream for doing nothing as we roll into a total Nanny State… Socialism or worse? I have heard people, who themselves long ago stopped thinking for themselves and stopped standing up for God and Country ask, “Why has God forsaken this Country?” As we all know, “God doesn’t always give us what we ask for… He give us what we need!” Perhaps we needed the wake-up call more than we needed a man who at least seemed like he was a man of the people… another issue for another day!

God Helps Those Who Help Themselves and Stand By Him!!

Ask Marion~

Thursday, May 28, 2009

March to Socialism: Out of Money – Glenn Beck

America's March to Socialism: Why we're one step closer to giant missile parades is now available as an audio book...

GLENN: President Obama was recently asked a tough question. Yes, believe it or not they will happen once in a while. The interviewer, C Span hosts Steve Scully, asking about soaring trillion dollar deficits and said at what point do we run out of money? Here's what Barack Obama said.

VOICE: You know the number's $1.8 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion. At what point do we run out of money?

GLENN: Well, the way we print and spend money, I would expect President Obama just to respond, well, we're not going to, et cetera, et cetera. Here's what he said.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, we're out of money now.

GLENN: So the hang on. This is critical. The Messiah knows that we're out of money now. That's weird, you know, that he's aware of that because he's spending trillions of dollars. That's like going to the mall and your wife is in the Prada store and you are like, honey, at what point do we run out of money? And she's got all these purses and everything and she's bringing them up to the counter and she's like, oh, honey, we're out of money now. Why are we in the Prada store then? Apparently Obama knew he said something that scenario at the Prada store, something true but crazy. As Mr. Brilliant politician man, he should have known you can't just say it that way. So he started to backtrack.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: We're operating in deep deficits not caused by any decisions we've made on healthcare so far.

GLENN: Okay. So that's your wife standing in the Prada store: Honey, at what point do we run out of money? Oh, my gosh, we are I mean, we're out of money now. But not because of any bad decisions we've made in the past on buying purses or anything like that, no. It's not our fault, you see. I love this explanation. Not caused by any decisions that we've made on health, so far. He doesn't even consider that all of the other spending has contributed to the problem of, you know, being out of money. So in other words, this might be the first time your wife had a purse she doesn't have a purse problem. She hasn't been spending money on purses. She's been spending it on shoes. "Honey, we're out of money now but not because of the purses." "Yeah, I know, but because you were spending it on shoes." "Honey, we haven't been spending it on purses. If I just buy enough purses, then we'll be okay."
Here's Barack Obama once again.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: This is as a consequence of the crisis that we've seen and, in fact, our failure to make some good decisions on healthcare over the last several decades.

GLENN: See, the problem with the deficit is we didn't have enough spending over the past several decades on the right stuff. If we would have only given away free healthcare to every citizen, visitor, illegal alien, exchange student, maybe, then just maybe everything would be okay. Is anybody buying this? How? I'd love an explanation. I mean, what would have been a good decision in the past? Should we have bankrupt our country back then? It's socialism. Socialism. Not happy with the speed which we're destroying our country; we can do it even faster. Let's step on the gas and accelerate right into that red brick wall at the end of the road we like to call problem solved. What? We're not speeding out of control anymore. Isn't it great?
VOICE: That was even more overwhelming evidence that we are destined to be a bunch of socialist pigs very, very soon on the Glenn Beck program.

Source:  Daily Thought Pad

Posted:  Knowledge Creates Power

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Universal Health and Old People

Voice: The Glenn Beck program presents more truth behind America's march to socialism.

Glenn: Yesterday, I told how you how the socialized health system in the UK was letting the last survivor of the Titanic go bankrupt because they weren't covering her health costs. Mark my words, they're going to start selling us universal healthcare as a solution to our Social Security and Medicare costs, Medicaid, it's all going under. They're going to revamp it. This is really dangerous. Why is it dangerous?

Because look how it's happening and how it's working so wonderfully anywhere it's being tried. Hollywood, it kills me. Hollywood actually had step in. Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet bailed this 97 year old woman out to save her from healthcare despite endless examples of healthcare rationing in the healthcare system, Obama still full speed ahead on pursuing universal healthcare. He actually said that, you know, we all got to have the top flight medical care. It's not good enough that some people in our country have the best medical care. Excuse me?

How are you going to be able to afford everyone having top flight medical care?

You won't. You'll level the playing field which means we'll all have crappy healthcare. Don't worry, old people, though, it's going to be great. You're going to love it. When I say you're going to love it, I don't mean healthcare. I mean, heaven. You should see it especially this time of year. You can't get there fast enough. Let me tell you universal healthcare will help you do it. Why?

Because of the cost benefit analysis. At the Senate finance committee hearings on healthcare reform, Professor Stuart Altman of Brandeis University said that resources get wasted in the American healthcare system. Wasted. Well, what does that mean?

He means that it gets wasted specifically in one segment of the population. Old people, if you think I'm hyping it, his tonight to his words himself. Here's the audio record.

Voice: Remember, our population is aging and at the very, very elderly, the costs go down so that percentage should be falling and it's not. Second, the cost of care is growing by so much so at the same percentage it's worth a lot more. So let's go back to the issue of comparative effectiveness which we're supporting. That's where that can have a big impact. It's not the only place. But that's where the waste is. That's where people are using technologies that really either don't work at all or keep people alive for very limited and very high costs. Hospice is one option, but we do need to take account of the?? you know, I hate to say it, the cost benefit of some of the things we do and either we can do it directly or we can do it by bundling payments and let the delivery system deal with it. So it's a combination of the delivery system dealing with it or?? and/or you providing more information for people that make the right decisions, both for themselves and for their care.

Glenn: Do you understand what he just said?

What he said?? this should terrify people. He's saying you can either let the delivery system do it, in other words, the healthcare system can just say, yeah, you're not going to get that. You're too old. You're a drain on society. I'm sorry, no kidney dialysis for people over 70. What is it in the UK?

60. Some the things they cut off once you outlived your usefulness.

This is Nazi Germany stuff.

This is the kind of stuff that is progressive in its nature. It is eugenics. It is survival of the fittist. It is the reason why the abortion argument makes so much difference. You can't devalue life at either end because these people are waiting to swoop in and say it's just not worth doing these things. Don't waste the money on old people. They're not going to live long anyway. Spend it on someone who meets the requirements of our cost benefit analysis. So old people, thanks for all the contributions you made to society during your better years but now we're sorry to say it's time to send you to a better place, heaven.

By:  The Glenn Beck Program - May 13, 2009 - 12:07 ET

Related Resources:

Social Security and Medicare Finances Worsen

 

America's March to Socialism: Why we're one step closer to giant missile parades
is now available as an audio book...

American Progressivism

Monday, May 4, 2009

Senior creditors: Chrysler deal violates 5th Amendment

If the Obama administration expected the senior creditors of Chrysler to fold their tents under political pressure, they may have gotten a rude shock today.  Thomas Lauria, who accused the White House of threatening the creditors withn humiliation at the hands of the White House press corps, has filed a motion to halt the administration’s machinations on behalf of the UAW in the Chrysler bankruptcy.  Lauria and his allies claim that the Obama administration has violated the Constitution in their bid to devalue the senior creditors’ holdings on behalf of junior creditors, and have some precedent to support the allegation.

The heart of the argument starts on page 8 (via HA commenter Outlander):

III. The Taking of Collateral through a Direct or Indirect Use of TARP Authority is Unconstitutional.

13. The Treasury Department relies on TARP as the purported authority to justify the disparate treatment under the 363 Sale, even though TARP was enacted after the Senior Lenders’ liens on the Debtors’ property were already in place. The Supreme Court long ago recognized, however, that a secured creditor’s interest in specific property is protected in bankruptcy under the Fifth Amendment. Louisville Joint Stock Land Bank v. Radford, 295 U.S. 555, 594 (1935). That case involved a Depression-era statute that was intended to help bankrupt farmers avoid losing their land in mortgage foreclosure. The statute in Radford provided that the bankrupt debtor could achieve a release of the security interests either (i) with the lender’s consent, purchasing the property at its then appraised value by making deferred payments for two to six years at statutorily-set interest rates; or (ii) by seeking from the bankruptcy court a stay of the proceedings for up to five years during which time the debtor could use the property by paying a rent set by the court, which payments would be for the benefit of all creditors, with a purchase option at the end of that period. Id. at 856-57.

14. Justice Brandeis noted that the “essence of a mortgage” is the right of the secured party “to insist upon full payment before giving up his security [i.e., the property pledged].” Radford, 295 U.S. at 580. In invalidating the statute, the Court stated that “[t]he bankruptcy power . . . is subject to the Fifth Amendment,” and that the pernicious aspect of this law was its “taking of substantive rights in specific property acquired by the bank prior to the act.” Id. at 589-90 (emphasis added). Thus, Congress could not pass a law that could be used to deny to secured creditors their rights to realize upon the specific property pledged to them or “the right to control meanwhile the property during the period of default.” Id. at 594. That is precisely what the Treasury Department would have Chrysler do here, with respect to the Chrysler Non-TARP Lenders’ property rights that were acquired prior to the enactment of TARP.

15. Relying on purported authority provided by TARP, the Treasury Department is demanding that Chrysler’s assets be stripped away from the coverage of the Senior Lenders’ liens – thereby impairing the rights of the Senior Lenders to realize upon those assets – so that those assets may be put in New Chrysler and used to the benefit of unsecured creditors in this proceeding, who will then be paid much more than the Senior Lenders. But, even assuming that TARP provides the Treasury Department with authority to provide funding to the Debtors and impose the transfer of collateral away from the Senior Lenders, TARP was enacted long after the Senior Lenders contracted with the Debtors and received senior liens on the Debtors’ property. Radford specifically disallowed the use of a law to retroactively alter existing liens on property.

16. Here, the proposed sale of the Debtors’ assets will leave the Senior Lenders with a diluted pool of assets and no further interests in the operating assets covered by their specific liens. The Constitution forbids this application of a law retroactively to undercut the Senior Lenders’ pre-existing property rights in favor or inferior creditors.

17. Finally, that the Treasury Department would take these unconstitutional actions to help the United States address difficult economic times is not an answer. Indeed, the same justification was expressly rejected in Radford, where Justice Brandeis noted that a statute which violated secured creditors’ rights, but which was passed for sound public purposes relating to the Great Depression, could not be saved because “the Fifth Amendment commands that, however great the nation’s need, private property shall not be thus taken even for a wholly public use without just compensation.” Id. at 602.

18. What is really striking here is that what is being proposed by the Sale Motion would strip the Collateral away and allow it to be put to use as new capital in New Chrysler for the benefit of existing and other creditors – even though the Chrysler Non-TARP Lenders have been given no opportunity to realize upon that Collateral to the point of full repayment ahead of at least $14 billion of selectively identified unsecured creditors.

One might think that a Constitutional scholar like Barack Obama would have already known that, but either this precedent escaped him or he doesn’t care about it at all.  Brandeis acted to uphold contract law, especially in the face of a government interest in paying off politically-connected unsecured creditors ahead of the senior creditors.  There is no other reason for Brandeis to make that decision, as only government could insert itself into the contractual relationship during a bankruptcy proceeding — just as Obama has done with Chrysler.

Lauria’s argument seems very compelling here, especially given Brandeis’ rather clear assertion that bankruptcy proceedings have to fall within the 5th Amendment — and that government can’t implement a taking to satisfy its own arbitrary aims by ignoring the relationship of the creditors to the default.  We’ll see whether the court rebukes Obama.

POSTED AT 1:36 PM ON MAY 4, 2009 BY ED MORRISSEY

Friday, February 13, 2009

Welfare Poem - oh boy you will love this ...

I cross ocean,
Poor and broke,
Take bus,
see employment folk.

Nice man treat me
good in there,
Say I need to
see welfare.

Welfare say,
'You come no more,
We send cash
right to your door.'

Welfare checks,
they make you wealthy,
Medicaid it keep
you healthy!

By and by,
I get plenty money,
Thanks to you,
American dummy.

Write to friends
in motherland,
Tell them 'come
fast as you can.'

They come in turbans
and Ford trucks,
I buy big house
with welfare bucks

They come here,
we liv e together,
More welfare checks,
it gets better!

Fourteen families,
they moving in,
But neighbor's patience
wearing thin.

Finally, white guy
moves away,
Now I buy his house,
and then I say,

'Find more aliens
for house to rent.'
And in the yard
I put a tent.

Send for family
they just trash,
But they, too,
draw the welfare cash!

Everything is
very good,
And soon we
own the neighborhood.

We have hobby
it's called breeding,
Welfare pay
for baby feeding.

Kid's need dentist?
Wife's need pills?
We get free!
We got no bills!

American's crazy!
He pay all year,
To keep welfare
running here.

We think America
darn good place!
Too darn good for
the white man race.

If they no like us,
they can scram,
Got lots of room in Pakistan


It is interesting that the federal government provides a single refugee with a monthly allowance of $1,890.00 and each can also get an additional $580.00 in social assistance for a total of$2,470.00 .

This compares very well to a single pensioner who after contributing to the growth and development of America for 40 to 50 years can only receive a monthly maximum of $1,012.00 in old age pension and Guaranteed Income Supplement.

Maybe our pensioners should apply as refugees!

Share this with all Americans, so we can all be ticked off and maybe we can get the refugees cut back to $1,012.00 and the pensioners up to $2,470 00 and enjoy some of the money we were forced to submit to the Government over the last 40 or 50 years.

Expose every American to what our elected politicians have been doing to the over-taxed American public.

Poverty of Imagination

Venturing out each day into this land of strip malls, freeways, office parks, and McHousing pods, one can’t help but be impressed at how America looks the same as it did a few years ago, while seemingly overnight we have become another country. All the old mechanisms that enabled our way of life are broken, especially endless revolving credit, at every level, from household to business to the banks to the U.S. Treasury.

Peak energy has combined with the diminishing returns of over-investments in complexity to pull the “kill switch” on our vaunted “way of life” — the set of arrangements that we won’t apologize for or negotiate. So, the big question before the nation is: do we try to re-start the whole smoking, creaking hopeless, futureless machine? Or do we start behaving differently?

The attempted re-start of revolving debt consumerism is an exercise in futility. We’ve reached the limit of being able to create additional debt at any level without causing further damage, additional distortions, and new perversities of economy (and of society, too). We can’t raise credit card ceilings for people with no ability make monthly payments. We can’t promote more mortgages for people with no income. We can’t crank up a home-building industry with our massive inventory of unsold, and over-priced houses built in the wrong places. We can’t ramp back up the blue light special shopping fiesta. We can’t return to the heyday of Happy Motoring, no matter how many bridges we fix or how many additional ring highways we build around our already-overblown and over-sprawled metroplexes. Mostly, we can’t return to the now-complete “growth” cycle of “economic expansion.” We’re done with all that. History is done with our doing that, for now.

So far — after two weeks in office — the Obama team seems bent on a campaign to sustain the unsustainable at all costs, to attempt to do all the impossible things listed above. Mr. Obama is not the only one, of course, who is invoking the quest for renewed “growth.” This is a tragic error in collective thinking. What we really face is a comprehensive contraction in our activities, especially the scale of our activities, and the pressing need to readjust the systems of everyday life to a level of decreased complexity.

For instance, the myth that we can become “energy independent” and yet remain car-dependent is absurd. In terms of liquid fuels, we’re simply trapped. We import two-thirds of the oil we use and there is absolutely no chance that drill-drill-drilling (or any other scheme) will change that. The public and our leaders cannot face the reality of this. The great wish for “alternative” liquid fuels (bio fuels, algae excreta) will never be anything more than a wish at the scales required, and the parallel wish to keep all our cars running by other means — hydrogen fuel cells, electric motors — is equally idle and foolish. We cannot face the mandate of reality, which is to do everything possible to make our living places walkable, and connect them with public transit. The stimulus bills in congress clearly illustrate our failure to understand the situation.

The attempt to restart “consumerism” will be equally disappointing. It was a manifestation of the short peak energy decades of history, and now that we’re past peak energy, it’s over. That seventy percent of the economy is over, especially the part that allowed people to buy stuff with no money. From now on people will have to buy stuff with money they earn and save, and they will be buying a lot less stuff. For a while, a lot of stuff will circulate through the yard sales and Craigslist, and some resourceful people will get busy fixing broken stuff that still has value. But the other infrastructure of shopping is toast, especially the malls, the strip malls, the real estate investment trusts that own it all, many of the banks that lent money to the REITs, the chain-stores and chain eateries, of course, and, alas, the non-chain mom-and-pop boutiques in these highway-oriented venues.

Washington is evidently seized by panic right now. I don’t know anyone who works in the White House, but I must suppose that they have learned in two weeks that these systems are absolutely tanking, that the previous way of life that everybody was so set on not apologizing for has reached the end of the line. We seem to be learning a new and interesting lesson: that even a team that promises change is actually petrified of too much change, especially change that they can’t really control.

The argument about “change” during the election was sufficiently vague that no one was really challenged to articulate a future that wasn’t, materially, more-of-the-same. I suppose the Obama team may have thought they would only administer it differently than the Bush team — but basically life in the USA would continue being about all those trips to the mall, and the cubicle jobs to support that, and the family safaris to visit Grandma in Lansing, and the vacations at Sea World, and Skipper’s $20,000 college loan, and Dad’s yearly junket to Las Vegas, and refinancing the house, and rolling over this loan and that loan... and that has all led to a very dead end in a dark place.

If this nation wants to survive without an intense political convulsion, there’s a lot we can do, but none of it is being voiced in any corner of Washington at this time. We have to get off of petro-agriculture and grow our food locally, at a smaller scale, with more people working on it and fewer machines. This is an enormous project, which implies change in everything from property allocation to farming methods to new social relations. But if we don’t focus on it right away, a lot of Americans will end up starving, and rather soon. We have to rebuild the railroad system in the U.S., and electrify it, and make it every bit as good as the system we once had that was the envy of the world. If we don’t get started on this right away, we’re screwed. We will have tremendous trouble moving people and goods around this continent-sized nation. We have to reactivate our small towns and cities because the metroplexes are going to fail at their current scale of operation. We have to prepare for manufacturing at a much smaller (and local) scale than the scale represented by General Motors.

The political theater of the moment in Washington is not focused on any of this, but on the illusion that we can find new ways of keeping the old ways going. Many observers have noted lately how passive the American public is in the face of their dreadful accelerating losses. It’s a tragic mistake to tell them that they can have it all back again. We’ll see a striking illustration of “phase change” as the public mood goes from cow-like incomprehension to grizzly bear-like rage. Not only will they discover the impossibility of getting back to where they were, but they will see the panicked actions of Washington drive what remains of our capital resources down a rat hole.

A consensus is firming up on each side of the “stimulus” question, largely along party lines — simply those who are for it and those who are against it, mostly by degrees. Nobody in either party — including supposed independents such as Bernie Sanders or John McCain, not to mention President Obama — has a position for directing public resources and effort at any of the things I mentioned above: future food security, future travel-and-transport security, or the future security of livable, walkable dwelling places based on local networks of economic interdependency. This striking poverty of imagination may lead to change that will tear the nation to pieces.

Regards,
James Howard Kunstler

Parting Shot...

Some of you may be familiar with Neil Lori of Maverick Freedom. Neil sends these thoughts in his latest missive…

“On the domestic front I think Dmitry Orlov and Jim Kunstler are two of the clearest thinking [and] common sense writers of this time period.  The Obama Nation is about to do what I detest which is build more Roads Roads Roads when in reality we need the 3 T’s (trains, tracks and trolleys) at breakneck speed. 

“Kunstler is right on about food: we need it local and less mechanized (more hand labor).  So let us put on our work jeans, tee shirts, belts hats and gloves to do some real work.  Ditch the couch, tv and computer.  Obama’s highway construction is money down the “rat hole” (drain). 

“Geez I thought Obama had a high IQ, but his biggest failure is that he thinks inside the box and is a bit too much of a conformist who wants to keep the economy the way it has been most of his and our lives!!!!!!!!!”

He continues later…

“We need local farms, local factories and local economies.  The global village is for idiots.  No more globaloney.  Buy Amercian. Grow American.  Make it in America.”

I would venture to say that the things you eat and use will be fabricated or grown not just within the nation, but very, very near to where you live. No more trucking meat and vegetables from industrial mega-farms on the other side of the continent, and a lot fewer doodads from China.

Some of you Shooters may take issue with anyone trying to direct us toward this outcome, and I don’t blame you. I would take issue with any bureaucratic direction myself.

It’s the market, however, that will be directing these changes. Business as usual for the past couple hundred years has been a result of an energy boom and state meddling. Both are on the wane.

Regards,
Gary Gibson
Managing Editor, Whiskey & Gunpowder