Barry and Stu ...

FROM BREADBASKET TO BASKET CASE  Barry Farber offers his take on dethroning of thug-dictator Robert Mugabe "Good old Stu Tarlowe, faithful commentator to the very end, quipped that most if not all of those purloined people might be better off in the asylum than in the craziness that is life in Zimbabwe." It looks like the worst country in the world is about to get better, or maybe worse! Writer and commentator Stu Tarlowe (whom many know as Stu Tarlowe on C&S), in an American Thinker article a while back and just recently on my radio program, echoed an observation that “Africa’s breadbasket has become a basket case.” Tarlowe was referring to the southern African nation of Zimbabwe, formerly the agricultural and industrial powerhouse named Rhodesia, which autocrat Robert Mugabe has both comically and catastrophically misruled since 1987. Read it all HERE. Good One Stu, Gobble Gobble.

Trump's Godfather-ly sitdown

Trump's Godfather-ly sitdown with Pelosi and Schumer Stu Tarlowe <stu@tarlowe.com> 7:16 AM (1 hour ago) Far be it from me to encourage, support or condone political assassination (at least not of anyone in this country). And yet, when I heard about Trump’s dinner with Chuck U. Schumer and Pelosi Galore, my subconscious mind forced me to think of a scene from a 1972 movie in which a man went to dinner with two of his enemies: [...] First of all, far be it from me to wish to even set foot anywhere near the figurative territory inhabited by the likes of Maria Chappelle-Nadal, the Missouri State senator from suburban St. Louis who vociferously broadcast her desire to see President Trump assassinated (and who has been, thus far, only censured but not removed from office). Far be it from me to encourage, support or condone the assassination of anybody (at least not anybody in this country)! And yet, when I heard about Donald Trump actually sitting down to dinner with Chuck U. Schumer and Pelosi Galore (whom Mark Levin has called “saboteurs, out to destroy Trump’s presidency”), try as I might I simply could not prevent my subconscious mind from free-associating and directing my thoughts to one of my favorite scenes from “The Godfather”: [FULL] notoriousBLOG  Drumlinfarmer • an hour ago The one thing that can be said with all certainty is that no one, and I do mean no one knows what Trumps actions are for. Is he with us or is he against us? No one knows. My personal thoughts are that he is desperately trying to accomplish something and will find whoever will work with him to do it. The Republicans have shown themselves to be unwavering in their hatred of the man so he will embrace the Democrats if they will work to accomplish something, anything. AF_Chief_Master_Sgt What better way to get republitards on board, than to give an audience to the demitards. Nothing says "play ball with me or I'll beat you over the head with the bat" like opening the door to the "enemy." I saw a whole lot of republitards talking about how they want to work on Trump's agenda after that meeting. I saw a lot of pants being soiled, too. Niccolo1512 For the new boss to gain control of a recalcitrant organization, he must first cause a lot of internal conflict. Those are a few of the comments to Stu's explication. For my part, I really don't pay much attention to any of it anymore.  I felt going in that Trump was our last and only hope, and Oorah, he won.  I am not going to question a  thing he does, because either I was right to place my trust in him, or I wasn't.  I am however flummoxed  by how deep the Deep State is.  I used to have a red button that we could press and blow the crap out of everyone.  Can't find it.  I think MoSup put it in with the washer, and dissolved it, she swears sh did not.   I forgive her.

Gangster Government

Clinton Culture                    “  Paul  Harvey   Conveniently Forgotten Facts.   Back in 1969 a group  of Black Panthers decided that a  fellow black panther named   Alex Rackley  needed to die.  Rackley was suspected of disloyalty.  Rackley was first tied to a   chair.  Once safely immobilized, his friends tortured  him for hours by, among other   things, pouring boiling water on him.   When they got tired  of torturing Rackley, Black Panther member, Warren Kimbro took   Rackley outside  and put a bullet in his head.  Rackley's body was later found floating in a river about 25 miles north of New Haven, Connecticut .   Perhaps at  this point you're curious as to what happened to these Black Panthers?   In 1977, that's only  eight years  later, only one of the killers was still in jail.   The shooter, Warren Kimbro, managed to get a scholarship to Harvard and became  good  friends with none other than Al Gore.  He later became   an  assistant  dean at an Eastern Connecticut State College.   Isn't that  something!!!   As a '60s radical  you can pump a bullet into someone's head and, a few years later,   in the same  state, you can become an assistant college dean!   Only in America !!!   Erica Huggins was  the woman who served the Panthers by boiling the water for Mr.   Rackley's torture  .. Some years  later Ms. Huggins was elected to a California School Board.   How in the world do you think these killers got off so easily?   Maybe it was in some  part due to the efforts of two people who came to the defense of  the Panthers.   These two people  actually went so far as to shut down Yale University with   demonstrations in  defense of the accused Black Panthers during their trial.   One of  these people was none other than Bill Lan Lee.   Mr. Lee, or Mr. Lan  Lee, as the case may be, isn't a college dean.  He isn't a member of  a California School Board. He is now head of the United  States  Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, appointed by none other than Bill Clinton.   O.K., so  who was the other Panther defender?  Is this  other notable Panther  defender now a school board member?  Is this other Panther apologist  now an assistant college dean?   No, neither!   The other Panther  defender was, like Lee, a radical law student at Yale University at the time.  She is now known as The "smartest woman in the world."  She is  none other than the former Secretary of State and former Democratic senator from  the State of New York ---- the former First Lady, the incredible Hillary Rodham Clinton .   And now, as Paul  Harvey said; "You know the rest of the story".   Pass this  on!   This deserves the  widest possible press.   Also remember it when she runs for President! Mark S. Gilstrap Member of the Kansas Senate 1997-2008   Mark, thanks for sending this! People need to be reminded of this. They also need to be reminded that (as I've pointed out many times), Queen Hillary was (and is) every bit as much a dedicated disciple of Saul Alinsky (author of "Rules for Radicals", a manual for the destruction of the U.S.A.) as was (and is) Barack Obama. Stu Tarlowe I consider myself something of an expert on all things Hillary Robbem, but had never heard this one before. You can check out the Snopes treatment, for what it's worth.  Snopes of course has long since burned all credibility on anything Democrat; they are liars and totally in the bag.   Bottom line for me; both the radical Lan Lee and Hillary were at Yale during that time so, since the story is consistent with  actions I know the two of them engaged in, I can't quibble withMark S. Gilstrap's  account on the Panthers.   Skoonj-Tarlowe ”

The Obamissariat

FUNDAMENTAL TRANSFORMATION OBAMA'S LAST LIES? Exclusive: Stu Tarlowe explains frenzied activity of his fraud detector during prez's speech Excerpt: So, when Obama mentioned, several times, his love for America or for the Constitution, or for "the rule of law", or when he spoke so glowingly of the concept of citizenship, it definitely made the red light flash and the warning buzzer sound in my brain's Horsesh** Detector, even if it didn't peg the needle firmly into the red zone the way his treacherously fallacious claim about Iran had. Stu Tarlowe is a native New Yorker living in the Heart of America. His pantheon of heroes and role models includes Barry Farber, Jean Shepherd, Long John Nebel, Aristide Bruant, Col. Jeff Cooper, Rabbi Meir Kahane G. Gordon Liddy, and The Real King of France.  Some of this may not be true.

Local Boy Makes Good

From: Thomas Lifson Subject: congratulations! Date: September 27, 2016 3:13:37 PM CDT To: Stu Tarlowe <stu@tarlowe.com> Cc: rick moran See 7th paragraph:  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/27/online-polls-declare-trump-debate-winner-despite-media-consensus-for-clinton.html Hat tip: Jay Michaels Here's the reference: Trump’s best moment, according to Stuart Tarlow(e), of American Thinker, came when he distinguished himself from Clinton based on their disparate backgrounds. Trump characterized his opponent as a "typical politician," who knows how to make statements and promises that sound good, but who never actually gets things done, Tarlow(e) wrote. I'm glad to hear that American Thinker is being read over at Fox News! If only they'd spelled my name right! But I'm still kvelling. Cheers,  ST

Abdul Razak Ali Artan

He was upset with how Muslims are perceived and treated. From Stu Tarlowe <stu@tarlowe.com> 12:48 AM (9 hours ago) OK, so by now most of us have heard at least part of the news story about the student Ohio State in Columbus who drove his car into a crowd on the college campus, and then got out and started stabbing and slashing people until he was shot dead by a local cop. Since the news reports at first seemed hesitant to release his name or description, one could almost have forecast that, when those details were made public, he would be black or Muslim, as those are two groups the Mainstream Media tends to protect and defend. It turns out he was both But now that he's been identified, expect to hear that "Since he wasn't yelling 'Allahu Akhbar', authorities have no reason to believe this was in any way connected to Islam, the Religion of Peace™." But I don't think we're going to hear much from Black Lives Matter about how he was "another black man gunned down by a racist white cop who declared himself judge and jury." And, in all seriousness, are we going to hear anything about the reports that someone pulled a fire alarm just before the car-and-knife attack? That would have resulted in more people out on the sidewalk, providing a more "target-rich environment"; it might also indicate that the attacker had an accomplice. There are also police and witness accounts which mention a second and possibly third person involved. But I'm sure we'll instead be hearing that he was "a lone wolf" who "had been dealing with emotional issues". It couldn't possibly be anything he'd read in the Most Holy Koran™ or heard in a mosque that made him want to go out and "slay the infidel wherever you may find him." Actually, it has been reported that the attacker had posted on social media about his unhappiness with the way Muslims were perceived and treated; for example, he was upset that prayer rooms hadn't been provided. Well, his actions will certainly go a long way toward making people reconsider their attitudes toward Muslims, won't they? Well done Stu.

Scandal Meter must be calibrated differently ...

This article by Stu was rejected by The American Thinker.  Maybe because they had 8,000 other submissions on topic?  I am glad to post it here. Stu Tarlowe Stu@Tarlowe.com August 10, 2016 “My Scandal Meter must be calibrated differently from the MSM’s” I often claim that I have a scandal detector and a Bravo Sierra meter. For example, Hillary's, Bill's and Obama's speeches at the DNC practically broke my B.S. meter; they pegged the needle permanently into the red zone. But my scandal detector must be calibrated far differently from the ones the Mainstream Media use. For example, my detector showed real scandal potential in the recent news that an Iranian nuclear scientist, Shahram Amiri, who had been named and discussed in Hillary Clinton's compromised e-mails, had been executed by Iran for spying for the U.S. This seemed to indicate that Benghazi wasn’t the only scandal which left Hillary with blood on her hands. But, as far as the major "news services" are concerned, not only did the story sink beneath the waves with nary a ripple, let alone any significant mention, but Hillary, if asked about it, would probably say, "Well, the guy's dead, so at this point what difference does it make?" It just didn't register on any major news service scandal detector.  My detector also registered the potential scandal in the revelation that, seated behind Hillary at a recent rally in Florida, in the highly-visible area usually reserved for those supporters a candidate wants to show off, was the father of the man who committed the terrorist attack on the (gay) nightclub in Orlando. On TV I encountered the story only on an "entertainment news"- type show, and even there saw or heard no mention that the fellow, Seddique Mateen, had made a public statement very critical of Donald Trump’s candidacy. I had to get all that from "alternative media"; the story, and the Clinton campaign’s preposterous claim that they didn’t know he was there or who he was until after the rally, apparently hadn't even moved the needle on any of the MSM's meters. Ah, but when Donald Trump quipped that Second Amendment supporters might know how to prevent or undo Hillary's anticipated stacking of the Supreme Court, then the MSM's scandal detectors started beeping! Right away he was castigated far and wide for "advocating violence" and maybe even suggesting assassination. Such “threats”, the talking heads were all eager to pile on and tell us (almost in unison!), had no business coming from a presidential candidate. It seemed to me that Trump’s very casual, offhand remark might have more likely been a reference to the actual rationale behind the Second Amendment, that the People of the United States have a God-given right to keep and bear the means to resist a tyrannical government. That used to be understood by all Americans, back when American History and Civics were still part of the curriculum. Trump might even have been thinking of the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said (in a 1787 letter from Paris to his friend William Smith) "...What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms [...] The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." But to the Libs/Progs/Leftists who inhabit the Obama regime, the Hillary campaign and the ranks of sycophantic, footlicking collaborators, enablers, apologists and fellow travelers in the mainstream press, even those notions (let alone the notion that the right to resist tyranny comes from God, rather than from Government) set off their scandal detectors!

... we'll have to mine less

Stu Tarlowe <stu@tarlowe.com> 1:27 AM (7 hours ago) Even though this is an anti-Trump joke, it's still pretty funny (and I'll bet even Trump would laugh): Pres. Trump is meeting with his Cabinet, and his Sec'y of the Interior says, "It's great that you've put the coal miners back to work, but now we actually have too many mines operating." So Trump says, "Well, we'll have to mine less." And one of his aides, a stickler for grammar, says, "Mine fewer!" And Trump says, "Please, don't call me that YET!" Cheers,  ST

Click-Click

Stu Tarlowe <stu@tarlowe.com> Check out Mrs. Brown's first article for American Thinker! "A Catholic College Disses Crusaders", by Kathy Brown, Esq. Excerpt: Last week, Alvernia University, an ostensibly Catholic university in Reading, Pennsylvania, announced it had scuttled its teams’ “Crusader” mascot and removed the name and image of “Crusaders” from its various team and university logos. More than just the most recent casualty in the Islamic war against the West, this strikes at the very heart of Judeo-Christian culture, namely, the Crusaders!  It is not too much to say that, but for those real “holy warriors”, the West would not be the West, and indeed we'd all be chanting Allahu Akhbar five times a day with our rumps in the air and all the (genitally mutilated) women at the back of the bus. Sorry, I meant the mosque. Yes, Alvernia U. this week distinguished itself from the ranks of your everyday, run-of-the-mill quislings and topped the charts in the perfidy derby. Caving to pressure from the Muslim Students’ Association (part and parcel of the Muslim Brotherhood), Alvernia removed all references to the name and image of a “Crusader”. The replacement has yet to appear, but we may all rest assured that it will be something “diverse”, something “inclusive”, and above all something not “troublesome” or “offensive” (which was how the Crusader mascot/logo was characterized by Alvernia’s officials, for whom the great courage of those knightly Crusaders might as well be entombed with their bones). Of course, the replacement won't include any “Catholic” names. Or “Christian”, or “Jewish”. No saints need apply, and as for anything even vaguely smacking of “whiteness”, well...! Cheers,  ST I am girding my loins for battle! As soon as I find the fabled "girds." Amazon does not carry them.

Are we really having this conversation?

Trump: "Certain Insane People Can No Longer Serve in the Military" "...  the compulsion to consider oneself a member of the opposite sex needs to "be treated with psychotherapy, not surgery." All day long yesterday, I listened to people falling all over themselves in reaction to Pres. Trump's declaration about "transgenders" in the U.S. armed forces. Even though this policy change struck me as a prime example of Trump keeping his promise to end political correctness, political correctness is still so ingrained that even ostensible Conservatives were scrambling to rationalize why our military should not "discriminate" against the transgender community. A typical remark was "If a person wants to serve their [sic] country, and can still pull the trigger, what difference does it make whether they [sic] identify as a man or as a woman?" Well, in the military one has to make life-and-death decisions that affect not only one's self, but others, and can alter the course of war and peace. And the way I figure it, if you get up in the morning and can't decide whether you're a man or a woman, then -- while you are certainly free to wallow in your own indecisiveness -- you are patently disqualified from making decisions that affect others. Fortunately, Drew Belsky, writing in today's American Thinker (and a member of its editorial board), also gets it. His very title expresses the point that those arguing for "tolerance" of "transgenders" in the military are really arguing for tolerance of insanity: "Trump: Certain insane people can no longer serve in the military" Excerpt (with my emphasis added): Insanity is a real concept.  It's not doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results – otherwise, we wouldn't have appeals courts or the parable of the unjust judge and the importunate widow.  What insanity actually is is a mindset that denies objective reality.  The man who eats things that are not food is insane.  The woman who pours drain cleaner in her eyes because she "should have been blind from birth" is insane.  And so is the man who thinks cutting off certain parts of his body makes him female – except this last gets enabled by every journalist, editor, and publisher who hears him say "I am woman" and proceeds to call him one. Trump is doing the right thing here: people with aggravated mental disorders should not be tasked with defending our country.  What the journos playing games with pronouns – especially conservative journos dropping the ball big-timeon this – need to understand is what Johns Hopkins ex-chief psychiatrist Dr. Paul McHugh has tried so hard to make clear: the compulsion to consider oneself a member of the opposite sex needs to "be treated with psychotherapy, not surgery." America needs soldiers with a solid grip on reality.  And America's publications need basic biology and basic English grammar to remain in our skill sets if we're to be taken seriously. Stu Tarlowe <stu@tarlowe.com>

Girls 'n Grenades

Throws Like a Girl Stu Tarlowe <stu@tarlowe.com>   What possibly could go wrong with women in Marine/Army infantry combat? GRENADE TRAINING 101 A hand grenade goes off in 3.5 seconds.          Ever hear the saying "throws like a girl"? In the (new) Marine Corps (with women in combat),   this is what it looks like ... filmed on location, for your terror, at USMC Camp Pendleton, CA.

WHAT NEXT?

Liberal Culture                    IS THIS SIGN FOR REAL?

COMPLAINT FILED Is this sign for real? Stu Tarlowe <stu@tarlowe.com> This sign was depicted in an e-mail I got today from the Media Research Center, urging me to sign the American Family Association's petition for a boycott of Target stores because of Target's capitulation to the demands of the "gender identity" bullies. I have to wonder, though, if the sign is real. Having studied Graphic Design, I have to admire the way the sign addresses the matter of those who are "gender confused" (although, having studied English, I'm not pleased at how the word "gender" has been hijacked and misused; strictly speaking, only words have gender; living things have sex, and there are only two choices). The figure depicted (by combining the "man" and "woman" symbols) as half-man, half-woman is a logical solution to a visual communication challenge. But one can't help but wonder what the LGBTQSTFU "community" thinks of it. Do they think it's "respectful" enough of their "gender identity or expression" issues? And WTF does a person in a wheelchair have to do with "gender identity or expression"? Anyway, real or not, in actual use on actual restroom doors or not, I think the "half-man, half-woman" graphic should see far greater exposure, whenever the need arises to refer to the LGBTQSTFU community or any of its members. If they don't like that graphic, maybe they can come up with another one, like just a big ol' question mark. It's real Stu ... Denver: Gender-Neutral Restroom SignsDelivered On October 28, the city of Philadelphia passed an LGBTQ-inclusive reform stating that all city-owned buildings must be equipped with gender-neutral restroom signs. It’s no surprise that Denver has begun to follow suit, starting with their youth. Using designated restrooms can be a real challenge for those who don’t identify with either “men” or “women” restroom signs. MyDoorSign is partnering with organizations in Colorado to resolve this issue through the creation, production, and distribution of a line of all-gender restroom signs. [Full]

Gun Control: A War Not a Conversation

Gun Control: A War Not a Conversation “ Today's American Thinker features an article, "Gun Control: A War Not a Conversation",  the theme of which is that when Democrats claim that "we need to have a 'conversation' about gun control", they're not really after a "conversation"; they are already clearly at war with the notion of private gun ownership, with the Second Amendment, with the other freedoms that the Second Amendment protects, and with the Constitution and the very notion of Liberty itself. (1) The enemy have deployed military-grade hate propaganda against gun owners. (2) A Blitzkrieg is not a conversation (3) Incrementalism is War  The article gives solid examples of the type of propaganda being used to turn public opinion against citizens exercising their Constitutionally-protected gun rights, and the legislative ploys used to further the anti-gun agenda.   One point made in the article is how we've already allowed opponents of gun rights to seize control of the language. For example, we should not be talking about "gun control" but of "gun rights". -Stu Tarlowe Scroll (1) The enemy have deployed military-grade hate propaganda against gun owners. Does any reasonable person believe that a German Jew could have had a constructive win-win conversation with the creators of this poster? If not, does anybody believe that firearm owners can trust the creators of a cartoon that depicts an NRA member threatening to assassinate the President of the United States? Here is another that shows politicians who support the Second Amendment, along with the Republican Elephant, standing on the graves of the Sandy Hook shooting victims. These are but a handful of countless images whose purpose is to demonize law-abiding firearm owners the same way the Nazis promoted hatred of Jews or, for that matter, the way the Yellow Press fomented hatred of Spaniards in 1898. It is instructive to compare this image of a "Second Amendment supporter," and this one by Steve Benson, to Grant Hamilton's depiction of a Spaniard: The anti-Second Amendment camp, as led by President Obama, has also waged other dishonest forms of psychological warfare and gaslighting to advance its agenda. It is difficult to have any kind of good faith "conversation" with somebody who is using against our side the only weapon of war (propaganda) that it is legal to use during peacetime. I am not complaining like a child who has been hit by a bully on the schoolyard, because my knowledge of psychological warfare goes far beyond the amateur efforts of cartoonists like Steve Benson. Benson violates repeatedly a basic PsyWar rule by demonizing the opposing side's rank and file, thus making his cartoons one of the best recruiting tools available to the NRA. If the other side uses a psychological weapon of war against my side, my side has the right to use it back, and with compound interest. If the other side starts a war, our side must finish it in a manner that leaves organizations and political careers in ruins. If the Million Mom March was the anti-Second Amendment side's Hiroshima, then we must make Michael Bloomberg's Mayors Against Illegal Guns its Nagasaki. As Lord Clifford put it in King Henry VI, "I will not bandy with thee word for word/ But buckle with thee blows; twice two for one." Full Article:  (Tarlowe) One entry (JohnFRoss) from the Comments section stands out as recommended reading:         An excellent article, especially concerning the use of language to accurately describe the enemies of freedom and their policies. I'd add another one: Refer to "gun control" laws as VICTIM DISARMAMENT laws, which is what they are. Here are a few other suggestions. In my opinion, the biggest mistake we make is failing to take the moral high ground on our issue, and letting our enemies define the terms. THEY SAY: "We'd be better off if no one had guns." WE SAY: "You can never succeed at that, criminals will always get guns." (FLAW: The implication here is that if you COULD succeed, it would be a reasonable plan.) WE SHOULD SAY: "So, you want to institute a system where the weak and elderly are at the mercy of the strong, the lone are at the mercy of the gang. You want to give violent criminals a government guarantee that citizens are disarmed. Sorry, that's unacceptable. Better that we should require every citizen to carry a gun." *** THEY SAY: "Those assault rifles have no sporting purpose. You don't need a 30-round magazine for hunting deer -- they're only for killing people." WE SAY: "I compete in DCM High Power with my AR-15. You need a large-capacity magazine for their course of fire. My SKS is a fine deer rifle, and I've never done anything to give my government reason not to trust me, blah, blah, blah." (FLAW: You have implicitly conceded that it is OK to ban any gun with no sporting use. And eventually they can replace your sporting arms with arcade-game substitutes.) WE SHOULD SAY: "Your claim that 'they're only for killing people' is imprecise. A gas chamber or electric chair is designed for killing people, and these devices obviously serve different functions than guns. To be precise, a high capacity military-type rifle or handgun is designed for CONFLICT. When I need to protect myself and my freedom, I want the most reliable, most durable, highest capacity weapon possible. The only thing hunting and target shooting have to do with freedom is that they're good practice." *** THEY SAY: "If we pass this CCW law, it will be like the Wild West, with shoot-outs all the time for fender-benders, in bars, etc. We need to keep guns off the streets. If doing so saves just one life, it will be worth it." WE SAY: "Studies have shown blah blah blah." (Flaw: You have implied that if studies showed CCW laws equaled more heat-of-passion shooting, CCW should be illegal.) WE SHOULD SAY: "Although no state has experienced what you are describing, that's not important. What is important is our freedom. If saving lives is more important that anything else, why don't we throw out the Fifth amendment? We have the technology to administer an annual truth serum session to the entire population. We'd catch the criminals and mistaken arrest would be a thing of the past. How does that sound?" *** THEY SAY: "I don't see what the big deal is about a five day waiting period." WE SAY: "It doesn't do any good, criminals don't wait five days, it's a waste of resources blah blah blah." (FLAW: You have implied that if waiting periods DID reduce crime, they would be a good idea.) WHAT WE SHOULD SAY: "How about a 24-hour cooling-off period with a government review board before the news is reported? Wouldn't that prevent lives from being ruined, e.g. Richard Jewell? And the fact that this law applies to people who ALREADY own a handgun tells me that it's not about crime prevention, it's about harassment. Personally, I want to live in a free society, not a 'safe' one with the government as chief nanny." *** THEY SAY: "In 1776, citizens had muskets. No one ever envisioned these deadly AK-47s. I suppose you think we should all have atomic bombs." WE SAY: "Uh, well, uh . . ." WE SHOULD SAY: "Actually, the Founders discussed this very issue - it's in the Federalist Papers. They wanted the citizens to have the same guns as were the issue weapons of soldiers in a modern infantry. Soldiers in 1776 were each issued muskets, but not the large field pieces with exploding shells. In 2014, soldiers are issued M16s, M249s, etc. but not howitzers and atomic bombs. Furthermore, according to your logic, the laws governing freedom of the press are only valid for newspapers whose presses are hand-operated and use fixed type. After all, no one in 1776 foresaw offset printing or electricity, let alone TV and satellite transmission." *** THEY SAY: "We require licenses on cars, but the powerful NRA screams bloody murder if anyone ever suggests licensing these weapons of mass destruction." WE SAY: Nothing, usually, and just sit there looking dumb. WE SHOULD SAY: "You know, driving is a luxury, where firearms ownership is a right secured by the Constitution. But let's put that aside for a moment.   "It's interesting you compared guns and vehicles. Here in the U.S. you can AT ANY AGE go into any state and buy as many motorcycles, cars, or trucks of any size as you want, and you don't need to do anything if you don't use them on public property.   "If you DO want to use them on public property, you can get a license at age 16. This license is good in all 50 states. NO waiting periods, no background checks, nothing. If we treated guns like cars, a fourteen-year-old could go into any state and legally buy handguns, machine guns, cannons, whatever, cash and carry, and shoot them all with complete legality on private property. And at age 16 he could get a state license good anywhere in the country to shoot these guns on public property." *** Final comment, useful with most all arguments: YOU SAY: "You know, I'm amazed at how little you care about your grandchildren. I would have thought they meant more to you than anything." THEY SAY: "Hunh?" YOU SAY: "Well, passing this proposal won't have a big immediate effect. I mean, in the next couple of years, neither Barack Obama nor Ted Cruz is going to open up internment camps like Roosevelt did seventy-odd years ago.   "But think of your worst nightmare of a political leader. Isn't it POSSIBLE that a person like that MIGHT be in control here some time in the next 30, 40, or 50 years, with 51% of the Congress and 51% of the Senate behind him? If that does happen, do you REALLY what your grandchildren to have been stripped of their final guarantee of freedom? And do you really want them to have been stripped of it BY YOU?"    Stu Tarlowe via Skoonj ”