The Diane Rehm Show

A minority in this country, (around 17%) is holding back the progress of an entire nation. Through the process of redistricting, the Republicans have managed to steal the house for themselves and are simply acting as obstructionists for the wealthy and their ignorant servants.
This process of inept governance will continue until the 2014 elections when one of two things will happen:
1) The Republicans will be totally blamed for the gridlock in Washington and be removed from power. (The Hoped for scenario)
2) The American Electorate who often appear to have the attention span of a fruit fly will become enraged and acting against their own self interest will repeat 2010 and bring in a whole bunch more of these libertarian morons.
(this is what the Republicans are banking on).
Beyond this, nothing else is going to transpire except kick the can down the road.

The most astounding thing for me in whole gun debate is that it has brought to light how many people out there believe that somehow Constitution and Bill of Rights grants them the right to “overthrow their government” if they deem it has become too “TYRANNICAL”.
Constitution makes NO SUCH CLAIM.
As such, Gabby’s blood and others IS ON THEIR HANDS.
I don't know if they simply lack the mental acuity to understand this or simply enjoy encouraging the belief that shooting innocent people who do not maintain their warped belief system is somehow..
A GOOD THING.

Freedom or welfare:
2nd amendment in 2Oth century English means SIMPLY.
The right to bear arms was penned in B of R explicitly so “people” could come to nation's aid in time of need.
Constitution reads ““Congress is granted the power to use U.S. militia for three specific missions: 
**“.. to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions." 
 And then in B of R “ (Because) of need for a (disciplined, trained) militia , the right to keep and bear arms should not be infringed”. Of course FF’s were wise enough to understand that not everyone who owned guns would be in militia and would use them for hunting, etc.
“Insurrections against tyranny had already been put down by just such a mechanism (Whiskey Rebellion, Shay’s Rebellion). (Civil War could PERHAPS be cited as another example).
To believe otherwise is to encourage domestic terrorism;
that’s as unpatriotic as it gets.

Friday, March 22, 2013
"A Marine shot and killed two of his fellow service members at a Virginia base Thursday night and then apparently killed himself, base officials said.
The incident took place at Marine Corps Base Quantico. The shooter gunned down a man and a woman, the spokesmen said. All are Marines -- permanent personnel assigned to the officer candidate school.
Authorities did not disclose a motive and were investigating the incident. The identities of the victims were not immediately disclosed as authorities worked to notify next of kin."

I believe we should ban all guns from the Marines.

Why is no one talking about this?

"H.R.499 - Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2013"
http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/499

The budgetary impacts could be huge!

It's no surprise the Constitution hating left has little worry or concern about our government apparently arming themselves against us, their religion is government, faith in the benevolence of government control. When has that ever worked?

I wrote this early in the week.

This is clearly an Obama administration attempt to dry up the market and prevent the sale of ammunition to the public. The government gets first priority in ammo purchases. The lack of the reporting on this is typical of a complicit media. What most people should be focusing on is the implication of our government using tax payer money to stifle legal activity, rights are being covertly undermined and that is a threat to every American.

"The Denver Post, on February 15th, ran an Associated Press article entitled Homeland Security aims to buy 1.6b rounds of ammo, so far to little notice. It confirmed that the Department of Homeland Security has issued an open purchase order for 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition. As reported elsewhere, some of this purchase order is for hollow-point rounds, forbidden by international law for use in war, along with a frightening amount specialized for snipers. Also reported elsewhere, at the height of the Iraq War the Army was expending less than 6 million rounds a month. Therefore 1.6 billion rounds would be enough to sustain a hot war for 20+ years. In America".

Without a long-term plan by the world's governments to gradually reduce the world's populations; a plan that would admittedly take centuries, there is no possibility of ANY of the world's problems being solved. No, not even the economic problems. It took centuries to get to this point, it will take centuries to get out of it.

Having said that, there is virtually no likelihood of this suggestion being followed. So we will continue to blunder along until the much-talked-about "Apocalypse" becomes a reality. As Pogo once said in a cartoon, "We have met the enemy, and He is Us."

The Second Amendment was relatively uncontroversial at the time of its ratification.[77] Robert Whitehill, a delegate from Pennsylvania, sought to clarify the draft Constitution with a bill of rights explicitly granting individuals the right to hunt on their own land in season,[78] though Whitehill's language was never debated.[79] Rather, the Constitutional delegates altered the language of the Second Amendment several times to emphasize the military context of the amendment[80] and the role of the militia as a force to defend national sovereignty,[81] quell insurrection,[82][83] and protect against tyranny.[84]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Const...

OK, I get it, you don't have a leg to stand on and you won't admit it.

Being a federal civilian employee, the water cooler talk is running rampant. The "yawn" comment made by your panel is so far off base, it's not funny. The effects will be major. The time lost on discussions, planning and just good old fashioned debates in the workplace is tremendous. There are numberous meetings and emails flying all around and federal employees are becoming extremely frustrated. In the last 20 years, federal employees have been reduced by 41 million. Bottom line - the federal employees I come in contact with - blame the Republicans.

@f or w, @dk
Here is a comment I posted earlier this year. It stresses not just the words of the amendment, which could be ambiguously interpreted, the true intent being determined by the CONTEXT of the second amendment in the Bill of Rights:

"Look, the fact is the words of the amendment may be interpreted two different ways and the sticky point is the latter 14 words. So here are the two interpretations:
1) A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed because they may be needed to be part of the militia.
2) A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed because the militia of the state is armed and consequently, an armed citizenry is our guarantee against tyranny.
Now, what was the intent? What I assert is that the intent of the Bill of Rights is to limit the power of government against its citizens [every one of the amendments addresses this], and in the case of the Second Amendment to secure against the tyranny of the government, not to provide a method of staffing a militia! So, yes, a “right of self-defense” certainly is there (and an amendment that simply staffs a militia is completely out of place). And I know that is the intent, because it is the intent, language, and historical context of every other of the first ten amendments."

The US Postal Service is one service that directly impacts my life each day as mail comes and I send out packages. Saturday delivery is important to me, and should not be cut. There is NO REASON why the Post Office should need to make a profit. Our government should subsidize the Post Office as needed, and continue the benefits that we as citizens receive though it.

The caller's statement that Social Security was instituted for "retirement" is patently false, no matter how emphatically he stated it.

"We can never insure one-hundred percent of the population against one-hundred percent of the hazards and vicissitudes of life. But we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against the loss of a job and against poverty-ridden old age. This law, too, represents a cornerstone in a structure which is being built, but is by no means complete.... It is...a law that will take care of human needs and at the same time provide for the United States an economic structure of vastly greater soundness."
-- Franklin D. Roosevelt, August 14, 1935

That is the description of a "safety net", not a "retirement program" ... and it is from the originator of the program.

ecgberht2 wrote: I think before "apocalypse" happens, the world's nations will succumb to a central government that will control all - perhaps a confederation of nation states. I don't see any other way considering where we are headed. Freedom, self-determination will be a thing men and women once again yearn for.

I'm not sure whether you've been reading too much sci-fi or not enough. Once we've made contact with extraterrestrial races, we obviously aren't going to want any more of this nonsense about separate "nation states". Our little isolated planet won't be able to afford being divided against itself at that time. We'll have a President of Earth who will lead our planet, and of course we'll be participants in the U.P. (that's the United Planets). This particular vision of one thousand years in the future comes courtesy of DC Comics. I also recommend Isaac Asimov.