Friday, February 23, 2007

Illinois Had No Indians

Reference to the Univeristy of Illinois decisiong to ban the Indian/Native American mascot:

So I guess there were never Indians in this state of Illinois which gets it's name from Indians (of course, "Native American's" today under the PC banner). Huh, that is one wide sweeping politically correct eraser that is being wielded and is scary just like a "book burning session".................What history will be erased next?

Perhaps next in line, renaming all the states that have Indian names ( because of course we referred to Native American's as Indians back then so States were given "Indian Names" - therefore all would have to be renamed to be PC to erase the inappropriate "Indian" history - scrub it scrub it scrub it):

Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Wisconsin, Wyoming.....................

State Names

Watch out Indiana things don't look good for you, given obvious reasons (Suggested new State name: Nativeamerica?)..................You could always go with a name that is "really offensive & politically incorrect" to Anglo Americans (penitence for former sins) like "Hoosiers"..................Sorry "Fighting Irish" is already taken by the golden dome university in your state Nativeamerica's. The folks down in Bloomington probably would not be good with the whole "Fighting Irish" thing anyway......................

They are talking it over on the STLToday blog

STL Blog

Saturday, February 17, 2007

McCaskill's Anti-War Dilemma

The NYTimes ran a story today on Hillary Clinton and how the rabid anti-war core that controls her and McCaskill's party want Clinton's head on a stick unless she publicly proclaims that she was wrong to vote for war with Iraq. John Kerry's former senior adviser provides McCaskill a glimpse into what the demand from today's Democratic party will be related to Iraq with this statement addressing Clinton's vote for war with Iraq:

said Robert M. Shrum, a senior adviser to Mr. Kerry in 2004. “I think there’s this tremendous desire in her campaign not to get into a position where you’re identified with traditional Democratic views. But this is now a party that is strongly antiwar.......................

NYT Link

A hard-core anti-war agenda defines today's Democratic party and it grows daily, confirmed from the 2004 Dem candidates own senior advisor. Not a good tent for a blue dog Democrat from a moderate Midwestern state like McCaskill to be in one would think, regardless of public polls on Iraq. If the anti-war agenda reaches the point of the Dem controlled Congress promoting voting to cut-off funding for the troops (and such a strategy is in the works), that will be a very bad place for McCaskill to find herself in politically. To stay a "true" blue dog she could not vote for such a measure. If she remains a blue dog and votes against such a measure then the rabid anti-war radicals who control her party will come after her just like they are coming after Clinton right now for her vote....................

Her vote on this non-binding resolution today related to increasing troops in Iraq was easy for McCaskill. The future votes McCaskill will be asked to vote for to maintain her parties anti-war position, will become much more difficult for her politically back home................................

Friday, February 09, 2007

Parents Charged for Loaded Gun Brought to School by Second Grader

I'm a strong "second amendment - right to bear arms" advocate, however, this story is disturbing. Per the STL PD:

A Moscow Mills couple who kept more than 80 firearms in their home were charged Thursday with child endangerment after the woman's 8-year-old son carried a loaded handgun in his backpack all day at school.

The gun was discovered after the child showed the gun to a fellow student and a third student overheard the conversation and told school authorities. The hand gun was loaded and the safety was off. The child's parents have been charged with "easy access to weapons":

Charged in the case are Tina C. Powell, 41, and David Himmel, 43, both of the 600 block of Rolling Meadows Drive. Himmel and Powell were arrested and released after posting $25,000 bond each.............."We're holding the parents responsible for this because of the easy access to weapons," said Lincoln County Prosecutor John Richards................

All 80 guns were legally owned and none were confiscated. According the report the child is remorseful and understands that he made a really big mistake:

"He understands that what he did was wrong, but I don't know if he understands the magnitude of what could have happened," he said (Sheriff Dan Torres) .

Well it's reassuring that the child understands what he did was wrong and I hope that the story educates many on the potential for the huge disaster that we could have seen. No word yet on whether the parents understand the magnitude of error here. The right to own and possess guns is a guaranteed constitutional right via the second amendment, for those who meet the legal requirements. Its a very important right that also carries an equally important responsibility that it would appear was not adhered to by the parents of this child.............

Better custody and care are required of both the guns and the child I'd say.............