Wednesday, December 10, 2014

"Anti-government, Nevada standoff figures at Saturday gun rally in Olympia."

The question is, just how much "intelligence" is reflected in this story from the "Intelligencer"?
There goes that "extreme anti-government" appellation again. This lazy excuse for a reporter has been reading SPLC's "Intelligence Report." Here's my response:
Mr. Connelly,
Your thumbnail biography of me was woefully incomplete, reflecting no doubt your need to get across a predetermined collectivist meme in as few words as possible. For example, you failed to note my role in breaking the Fast and Furious scandal story in December 2010 (see Sharyl Attkisson's bestseller Stonewalled, Chap. Two). Not only did my friend David Codrea and I break that story, but we were the conduit by which the senate investigators got to the whistleblowers as well as reporters such as Attkisson. The reality of honest ATF agents and people who you lazily call "extreme anti-government" types working together to expose murderous government scandal doesn't square with your preconceived notions so you ignore it.
My role in the militia movement in the 90s is a matter of record, but rather less cartoonish than portrayed by you (best documented in Prof. Robert Churchill's history, To Shake Their Guns in the Tyrant's Face). Your resort to the slanderous appellation of "extreme anti-government" and the use of the term "patriot movement" in relation to me (a term coined by the professional liars-for-money at the Southern Poverty Law Center who have been denounced by intellectually honest critics across the political spectrum) reflects your bias as well.
While you were busy misquoting me (I know not what a "spake" could be outside the Biblical context, you were perhaps referring to my use of the word "spate"?), you might have noticed that I have been on the enemies lists of the previous three White Houses irrespective of party, as I firmly opposed Dubya's PATRIOT Act among other things. I am an equal opportunity gadfly in that respect.
I tire of collectivist propagandists such as yourself resorting to the "extreme anti-government" label. I am not, nor ever have been, "anti-government." I am pro-government, if you mean small government, safe government, the kind that both secures and operates within the Constitution and the rule of law as crafted by the Founders.
It is true that, as founder of the Three Percent movement, I have gone around the country breaking (and encouraging others to break) unconstitutional state laws such as those recently passed in CT, NY, MD, CO and now, Washington State. I have smuggled, and facilitated the smuggling of, standard capacity magazines in violation of those laws and dared the authorities of those states to do anything about it. The non-compliance rates in those states such as CT is stunning and those intolerable acts have yet to be enforced by state governments too stunned by citizen defiance to do anything about it. They truly do not know whether to defecate or go blind, when faced with the possible personal implications of enforcing their diktats.
Now Washington state has entered that pantheon of collectivist tyranny by declaring that they have the right to know and approve of every transaction of private property of a certain class. Not even King George the Third was so grasping. Your story might have tried to deal with the very serious unintended consequences threatened by I-594. It might have dealt with the fact that despite your billionaires having bought themselves an election, they and their designated minions will find it impossible (and quite dangerous) to enforce. It might have dealt with the failure of traditional means of defense of the Second Amendment as represented by Gottleib's SAF and the NRA and the rise of the same sort of defiant resistance movement as has been seen (and largely ignored by the press) in other states. It might have dealt with the understanding of the Founders that unrestrained democracy was fully as dangerous as despotic monarchy. It might have dealt with these serious issues in an intellectually honest way, without obvious bias.
Apparently that is beyond your abilities and inclinations, as well as those of your paper.
Mike Vanderboegh
Sipsey Street Irregulars blog
Pinson AL


PO'd American said...

I predict that this was a waste of your time, if the intent was to educate this boob. Too many complex thoughts and polysyllabic words.

Nice response though!

Liberty or Death said...

GREAT rebuttal post! Its funny how all they have to come back with is the size of our "pee pee". Why are lefties always worried about other peoples "pee pee"?

Anonymous said...

In ref. to "Liberty or Death": Because they're all poor excuses for a male, that's why. They always wonder why the "hot chicks" want to be with a MAN...

prambo said...

Well said, Dutchman, as usual.

KingOfDebauchery said...

Well said Mr. Vanderboegh.
I look forward to shaking your hand this Saturday.

Paul X said...

I will attest that Mike is not anti-government. I however am definitely anti-government, in fact I am against all forms of aggression by anyone, not just by government thugs. Government, of course, cannot exist without aggression, violence and theft. Call me extreme if you like.

Anonymous said...

This is actually very good news that John Connelly took a swipe at you .The party of Ferguson calling the rally extreme. The Seattle PI is a far left Liberal paper that went totally online in March 2009 . They bankrupted themselves putting Obozo in office . I can guarantee you will have counter demonstrators there now . Some will come out of nearby Evergreen College . Those kids place Karl Marx as a moderate.
I am tickled that the Washington State will stand down . It's easy to spot State Patrolmen,
they hire those guys by the foot . Most are over 6'-2 and even the gals are over 5'9. As far as the State Legislature goes they will know the nose count by the days end . I will be there .

Anonymous said...

I would like to see these hacks confronted exactly like Cruz confronted Feinstien.

Would you, sir or ma'am, apply to the First amendment rights and Fourth amendment rights the same things you argue be applied to Second Amendment rights? Fifth, seventh or heck, any rights?

If "no" then please explain the "difference". Explain fully how one enumeration differs from another in protection and government authority. Why would one be sacrosanct but another would not be?

If "yes" then what is the point of enumeration in the first place?

bubba said...

The God-less want government run by them, no-one else. We can pray for them but we might deduce which side of the wall they will be on at the time of the end.