Tuesday, June 08, 2010

Donate to KKFI

Donate to KKFI!!!



Michael T Justice said...


Anonymous said...

Why should anyone donate to KKFI?.

Is FCR still running the station??

Barbara Crist, one of the founding members and longtime brodcaster at KKFI died earlier this year and the station mention nothing about it on its website and no on air tributes.

Anonymous said...

Wear Body Armour:

Anonymous said...

Mission Statement

We seek to stimulate, educate and entertain our audience, to reflect the diversity of the local and world community, and to provide a channel for individuals and groups, issues and music that have been overlooked, suppressed or under-represented by other media.


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

The mission statement doesn't come close to answering my questions about why should anyone donate to KKFI?.

Anonymous said...

I donate to kkfi because I enjoy listening to music, news, and talk that I can't find elsewhere in KC. It's also nice to be able to turn on the radio and not really know what could be on. I can flip it on at random and hear anything from heavy metal, to blues, jazz, reggae and even native tribal chanting, it's awesome! I like their mission statement, and I believe that they carry out that mission well and have for a very long time.

Is that more like what you were fishing for?

Anonymous said...

Not really. I guess that the deal is you really don't want to answer my question about Barbara Crist nor the finance issues the station seems to face???.

Anonymous said...

Actually, the deal is that I don't know about that stuff. That's sad if there was no on-air mention of her passing.

What's the financial deal? Are they spending more or bringing in less than before or both?
I do remember they had a huge increase in admin expenses in 2008.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Moneymaker for KKFI:

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...








Anonymous said...

What is the name of that song Ben plays at the begining of his show on Wensdays?


Jerry said...

What is the name of that song Ben plays on Wensdays at the begining of the show?


Anonymous said...

Please join this game, trading real stocks with fake money, thanks.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Well alrighty then

Anonymous said...

FCR can do no wrong. Look at all the people they have ran out of the station the last 5 years.

You put a link from KCMO's Chris Stigall. Someone who has knocked KKFI on his show. You people are really courageous!!. Yea love that alternative gutless radio!.

Anonymous said...

I just posted everything of note that I found.

Cliques do have a bad way of ruining diversity but as far as I can tell, KKFI is still diverse and entertaining.

So who all got run out and was it the FCR clique that actually did it and why were they ran out?

KKFI Rocks! (and rolls and jams and beats and wails and swings and sways and speaks...)

Anonymous said...

Meeting on the 12th.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

"We don't want the word to get out that we want to exterminate the negro population." - Margaret Sanger (D-NY)

Anonymous said...

"Inspired by Margaret Sanger, founded in the depths of the Great Depression, PPKM has fought to support women’s reproductive rights through all the vast changes of the 20th century."


"We are here to meet your needs and help you be strong, healthy and happy. Most importantly, we are here to help you be you."


We are also here to tell you that unless you were raped, you are not responsible for your actions.

Anonymous said...

Brilliant Illusionist Chipps Cooney on America's Got Talent 2010

Anonymous said...

Jackson County Sheriff's race already hilarious and embarrassing!!!

Three recent checkpoints -- April 30, May 7 and May 8 -- resulted in 57 DUI arrests.

Sheriff Sharp’s civic memberships include the Ararat Shrine, Albert Pike Blue Lodge #219 in Independence,

Who was Albert Pike?
He studied at Harvard, and later served as a Brigadier-General in the Confederate Army. After the Civil War, Pike was found guilty of treason and jailed, only to be pardoned by fellow Freemason President Andrew Johnson on April 22, 1866, who met with him the next day at the White House.
Grand Commander of North American Freemasonry from 1859. In 1869, he was a top leader in the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.

Anonymous said...

In your New World Order part of the blog I see you have a link to Fox News and Glen Beck. Why??.

The last time I checked it was legal to do investments in energy companies. Petrobras didn't cause a oil spill anywhere and has been responsible in the educational and cultural development of Brazil.

Could "Faux" News be going after Petrobras cause it has a lot of dealings with George Soros and has been one of the leaders in alternative fuel development which has made Brazil and a lot of Latin American countries somewhat not dependent on foreign oil?.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Looks like at least part of NWO had a bad week in the markets:

Illuminaughty said...

Wow. A lib crying about FOXNEWS. How original!

Robert Byrd = the acceptable klan member. Talk about partisanship. Cry about Strom Thurmond and not a word about the KKK guy.

Anonymous said...


Robert Bryd explained his membership and associations with the KKK. He has apologized a long time ago for those views on civil rights and has been a supporter of civil liberties for all americans.

Strom Thurmond had a sexual relationship with a young black girl that was underaged. He fathered a mixed race girl that he did support out of the public. He could have helped push legislation to help other blacks but he didn't.

I don't accept Robert Bryd's history with the klan but I forgive it like I forgave George Wallace when he asked for forgivness for his actions and views during the late 50's and 60's during the terrible times in Alabama.

As far as FOXNEWS being on this blog. I would think you would agree since you are a big conspiracy theorist??. Fox is part of the mainstream media/new world order crowd.

Keep staying classy!!!.


Anonymous said...

John, I believe the news feed on the side is keyword generated so it could pull up anything from Faux News to The Hindu to The Onion. I could be wrong though.

How bout this load of crap here?:

"Lawmakers are back in the Capitol to consider a 10-year, $150 million tax incentive package for the Ford Motor Co. and its suppliers"

The incentives are seen as critical to convincing Ford to upgrade its Claycomo plant in suburban Kansas City and preserve jobs for nearly 4,000 workers currently employed there."

""If we were to lose this facility, it would be a devastating blow,” Mayor Mark Funkhouser of Kansas City told a House committee."

This is called a jackmove.
These workers were doing their jobs just fine. FORD screwed up, NOT the workers and NOT the taxpayers. The Ford Company needs to be shoveling out money. Ford has a direct responsibility to those workers, that's why they get all kinds of bailouts and tax breaks all the time, to keep people employed, that's why they are allowed to continue to exist at all. Now I think Ford needs to eat it on the whole facility and the models produced there as well as $150 million dollar payout so the workers can keep the plant open as the owners of a brand new car company.
Give it to the employees!

Anonymous said...

So many times goverment and big business hold cities hostage with threats on moving if they don't get
a tax break or money. I don't mind giving money to big business if the taxpayer would get a break on our end of the deal.

I was able to see Micheal Moore's "Capitalism: A Love Story" this past weekend. It is a very good doc. about how we got into the mess we are in. I don't agree with some of Mike's views but I think he spelled it out why we have the issues we have.

Also I like to comment on something I heard on the last Justice Files. I find it funny how some people claim they are for the constitution. How it should be followed literally!!!. Gee this is funny because the 2nd admendment says that we have the right to bare arms. But I want to know who is the regulator of the militia's?.
"Well regulated milita" and all that stuff!!!.

This wasn't asked by Mike or Clayton. I guess they were afraid to piss of those good so called patriots out in KKFI land. Or they just didn't think about that view or angle.

Help me out "rightwingers". Who is supposed to regulate who gets the guns and what constitue a milita??. And who is it that regulates the militas??.


Anonymous said...




"Second Amendment
Guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, since a state requires a well equipped citizen army for its own security."

Anonymous said...

Thank you so much for the links to
the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I have read both documents in the past so I am familar with both items. I just wonder if so-called patriot element that writes on this blog know those documents?.

My question wasn't answered about the second admendment. I don't argue against the right to bear arms!!. I just want to know who regulates who bears those arms and who regulates what a milita is??.
I know that we have state national guards which I kinda think is what a regulated milita is supposed to be in the modern times.

In teaching the bill of rights and the constitution you must teach the view of those documents back then and how it reflects with the history of the country.

Lets keep it classy rightwingers!!


Anonymous said...

I think the HBO" John Addams" mini series is on this weekend. I read John Addams and 1776 by David MCCollough.(I think I messed up the spelling of his name.) and its one of the best books about that time period of U.S. History.


Anonymous said...

I'm not a "rightwinger" but I'll give it a shot.
It seems to me that We The People are supposed to regulate militias at the local levels and they're supposed to protect us from outside attacks as well as from federal entities.


"Second Amendment
Guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, since a state requires a well equipped citizen army for its own security."

"In the war for independence, there had been a regular army, but much of the fighting had been done by the state militias, under the command of local officers."
"Today, the state militias have evolved into the National Guard in every state. These soldiers, while part-time, are professionally trained and armed by the [FEDERAL]government. No longer are regular, non-Guardsmen, expected to take up arms in defense of the state or the nation (though the US Code does still recognize the unorganized militia as an entity, and state laws vary on the subject [10 USC 311])."

JFK video 5 min


I might check out that John Adams doc, thanks John.

Anonymous said...


Illuminaughty said...

Bear arms, not bare arms, idiot. Tell Anthony I said hi.

Anonymous said...

yeah, I guess the right to bare arms would be covered by the 1st amendment.

Anonymous said...

I meant to open the question I had
about the 2nd admendment to everyone. Hey when you mention guns,rights to bear arms it seems to get rightwingers all in a little "hissy fit".

I made the correction on later postings so you really need to go and take a time out. It's okay cause we all got what I was writing about and most of us are adults. Don't need to name call cause of spelling or grammer errors.


Anonymous said...

Is it possible that the second admendment need to be changed to more reflect the times we live in?. Just a thought.

I'm not afraid of a so-called tyrannical federal goverment because I think the issue is we don't have a informed population who don't get out to vote and tend not to really participate in the process.

Let's face it groups like the NRA stoke the fear of gun owners at gun shows to make them think that the goverment is comming after the guns. The NRA doesn't give a damn about your right to BEAR arms!. They care about getting paid by the gun companies so they can promote fear of the goverment and the so-called NWO. It's all distractions and mind games!!!.


B said...

If you are not worried about a tyrannical federal government then you are part of the un-informed population and part of the problem IMO. Check even just an overview of the histories of a lot of nations and you'll know not to trust a huge central authority. If you were to change the second amendment to more reflect the times that we live in (patriot act, john warner defense thing, the repeated use of the constitution as toilet paper, etc) then you'd have to make gun ownership mandatory. I'm damn glad that a lot of people are still so pro gun, it gives me hope.

It's like this, John. Our collective balls are in a vice and govs for the most part keep tightening that vice up, sometimes slowly, sometimes quickly, but the motion is definitely going tighter, not looser. You personally might not have felt it much yet but myself and many others have felt it a bit and seen a bit of what happens when the vice gets so tight, testicle-fucking-pancakes, that's what happens. A lot of folks especially many gun owners would like the grip on their nuts loosened. Then ya got people who say "yeah go ahead and smash our nuts in the vice, they say it won't hurt a bit. Just put all your trust and faith in a bunch of lawyers to always do the right things. They wouldn't squash our nuts unless they had really good reasons."
Individual gun ownership offers a small layer of insulation/separation of individual balls from the collective ballsack to help protect our individual testes from whatever threat may come.

Testicle-Fucking-Pancakes, John, Testicle-Fucking-Pancakes...

Anonymous said...

Whose side are the Founding Fathers on?


Anonymous said...

Rightwingers??...eh John. Is that a classy move by you?? See, just like your boy Anthony, you try and hijack definitions and call people names while saying dont call me names. Please dont be fake, like the Evil Penus.

John asks:

"I just want to know who regulates who bears those arms and who regulates what a milita is??."

The people regulate by representation, thru the means of the state they live in, who bears arms...ie (hunter safety courses/conceal and carry laws...felons cant for surety of peace) The states regulate the militias if they are needed, but that was a much older time and the states CANNOT disarm its citizens either.

What you havent done John is present in context the meaning of militias and the meaning of a standing army.

The only thing the executive and congress have regulatory power over is the standing army and the outfitting of such.

Militias were formed back then to protect citizenery and were the general order of things when we had NO standing army. There is a difference i hope you can see this. See Anti-federalists and federalists arguements over the 2nd admen.

Let me quote William Rawle because it represents my belief.

No clause could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.

Congress drafted the Fourteenth Amendment, contended that citizens could appeal to the Second Amendment should either the state or federal government attempt to disarm them. He did warn, however, that "this right [to bear arms] ought not...be abused to the disturbance of the public peace" and observed, paraphrasing Coke, that "[a]n assemblage of persons with arms, for unlawful purpose, is an indictable offence, and even the carrying of arms abroad by a single individual, attended with circumstances giving just reason to fear that he purposes to make an unlawful use of them, would be sufficient cause to require him to give surety of the peace."


Should i say keep it classy liberal douchebags? Fuck no i wont because classy never gets anything acomplished. BTW i have seen the Addams series he wasnt very classy nor was anybody who wanted to get something done.

Illuminaughty said...

According to the US Dept of HHS, the '09 poverty guideline was $22k for an urban 4-person family. In '09, having income less than that, 15% or 40 million Americans were classified as poor, but there's something unique about those "poor" people not seen anywhere else in the world. Robert Rector, researcher at the Heritage Foundation, presents data collected from several government sources in a report titled "How Poor Are America's Poor? Examining the 'Plague' of Poverty in America" (8/27/2007):

-- 43% of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a 3-bedroom house with 1 1/2 baths, a garage and a porch or patio.

-- 80% of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire US population enjoyed air conditioning.

-- Only 6% of poor households are overcrowded; 2/3rds have more than 2 rooms per person.

-- The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

-- Nearly 3/4ths of poor households own a car; 31% own 2 or more cars.

-- 97% of poor households have a color television; over half own 2 or more color televisions.

-- 78% have a VCR or DVD player; 62% have cable or satellite TV reception.

-- 89% own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.

Illuminaughty said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Yup, technology is pretty cheap these days.

Anonymous said...




"West Memphis police recently finished training on how to identify the groups by peculiar license plates or bumper stickers."
"The district attorney's office also said they're noticing a group called "Moorish Americans." They're African American groups using "sovereign citizen" ideology. The Southern Poverty Law Center estimates anti-government groups have nearly doubled in the last year."
This is the kind of thing that ends up working against free people because it leads to more legitimacy of discrimination and control by authorities. Whether they agree or disagree with the laws these assholes should've expected to be pulled over if they drive on public roads with homemade license plates. Those cops were murdered because of a young man's paranoia, hate, and fear. Violence against the police state just makes the police state stronger and harsher.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Nice post BD. Love the quote too. The only thing i would like to add is this thing about surety of peace. A fine example was just recently. A man was accused of carrying an assualt rifle to a tea party rally illegally, deemed a racist...etc. He informed the police well before and got a permit to carry it with an escort. The leftist newsies said he was a white racist male and it was shown to be a black man who followed the law, demonstrating surety of peace and was allowed to practice his 2nd admendment right.

Do you remember this BD?
What about John?


B said...

Many police officers are good people that serve the community not only because it's their job but also because they are concerned with the public's safety. A significant number of police do have a bully mentality though and many others are currently being trained to have that attitude. The violent and aggressive attitudes of current police policies and training as well as civilians with similar attitudes is a huge problem and I'd really like to hear some ideas on how to de-escalate these problems. I heard them talking on The Justice Files last night about getting pulled over, I thought about it and I'd like to throw my 2 cents in. I mean no personal offense to the evil one, this is how I feel so I'm just sayin;

Police Ettiquette: If you are poor then you should just let that obstacle mess up your life so that you'll just get poorer. Instead of trying to go around the laws by doing something like switching your license plates, you should just go where you need to go with no plates at all, that won't make a cop nervous or anything. That way you're almost guaranteed to be in trouble because you're a such bad person for not having enough money to make ends meet and you deserve to be poorer and have your life made even more difficult. Switching tags is just wrong because it harms so many people. Of course you don't know anything about the officer pulling you over but everyone knows that cops are good guys and they never abuse their authority. But they don't know who you are so when pulled over you need to turn off your engine, put your hands on the steering wheel, kiss their asses, promptly show them your papers, give them any personal information that they ask for, and just take your damn vaccine!(what to do when approached by a rabid policeman; it's not right but that is exactly what to do though, except for the vaccine part of course, if you want to stay safe and try to keep things chill.)
If you do end up going to jail like for a crime of poverty, then you need to be aware of basic Prison Ettiquette: Like when rapists try to take your booty, remember that you know exactly who they are but they don't know who you are so just put your hands on the floor, let them call you Susie or Fefe if they want, and just take a damn dick in your ass. You're only gay if you like it and your bootyhole is there for society to decide what to do with it, not you. Remember, you're only as free as everybody else thinks you should be because you are society's bitch. Baaahhh! Mmm, Tossed Salad! Baaahhh! (that's not how to roll in prison though because once you are a bitch you will generally continue be bitched around.)

B said...

For real though, a lot of cops are alright but a lot are also on serious power trips and current police training feeds those control-freak mentalities. A lot of cops will get all pumped up and beat someone's ass for disobeying them or if they have to chase them. Many police officers generally have a predator mentality even towards non-violent criminals. Who might you be dealing with when you get pulled over by police? Could be this guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSwITK4jjQ Could be a psycho power-nut with a badge who just had one too many cocky little bastard citizens disrespect his authority that day. You see, once you have broken the law, minorly or not, in the police state mentality you are scum, automatic. If you cop an attitude or disobey their orders they then feel quite justified in yelling at you, harassing you, and/or beating your ass and/or tasering you. Cops literally are mob enforcers, even if you haven't wronged anybody they will still push you around and kidnap you for the purposes of extorting money from you. Society needs laws enforced but it's going way too far nowadays. Many cops are so far up on their high horse that they feel justified in dishing out their own punishments for crimes. My friend used to drive a tow truck and at least one time the cops asked him to get there extra quick, even gave him permission to speed, so they could tow some DUI person's car because his family was on their way there to pick it up and the officers didn't want that because they considered having his car impounded as an extra unofficial punishment for his crime. I'm not cool with drunk driving either but it is in NO WAY a police officer's place to punish criminals, that's why we have a court system. Their mobster mentality puts a layer of protection around the misdeeds of other enforcers though such as letting a fellow enforcer off clean for speeding and DUIs etc when off duty.

Anonymous said...


POLICE BRUTALITY - Scumbag Cops Abuse Paraplegic Man In Wheelchair, Then Laugh About It

Police Brutality: Cop Slams Cuffed Kid's Head On Concrete, Lies To EMS

The guy in this video skipping down the street got his ass beat because he challenged their authority, and their power-trippin, control-freak, mentalities couldn't handle that. It happens more often than people think and much more often than is caught on camera. And the police quite often claim that they don't have to publically release their own surveillence tapes and dashboard cams. They cover each other's asses when they break the law but if a citizen does it, look out!

If you are a cop who needs a cattle prod to deal with an unarmed non-threatening individual then you are a pussy and you need to find another line of work immediately.

"Police have a tough and important job — nobody questions that — but in Kansas City there seems to be a disconnect between the priorities of the department and the community it serves."

Welcome to the not-so-new world order.

Police Officers Getting Their Ass Microchipped Into Slavery




Anonymous said...


I'm not fake and I always keep it
real. I haven't posted things that
are insulting to other minority groups. I haven't called anyone a "FAG". It seems to me your the one that has the issue with being called a rightwinger. I didn't say a "rightwingwackjob" so I'm trying to figure out what you are pissed about??. Will you quit taking things personaly?.

BD, I'm not a constitutional historian. (Your not either.) I know that the 2nd admendment is one of the most debated admendments in the bill of rights. The meaning of the 2nd admendment has been debated over and over again. I just think that it means something diffrent in the modern age and maybe we need to examine what it means. (Not trying to take away your guns cause I know it might give some comfort for the so called "endtimes" to come.)


stay classy?. Or Have a nice day?.

Anonymous said...

A truly classy site -

Anonymous said...

The only reason you get offended when someone uses the FAG word is personal and i know why. I wont tell anyone else here what the reason is but rest assuredly i know. I wouldnt use that lingo anyways.

The BS you are shoveling is your lack of understanding what a militia is and its use, who regulates back then....so im guessing you understand the difference or just refused to expound on it?

I may not be an expert on the constitution and its history but i do know alot more than most. Thats why i pointed out your lack of context and a quote that gives my strong opinion about a state rights and their people, more merit.

The name calling thing is simple. You dont do it regardless of what nutty says. I am a rightwinger and damn proud of it. The classy thing for you to do is ignore it. Instead you throw it back at him. Im not pissed just pointing out the hypocricy of your own criticism. I mean you liberals say one thing and do another without even blinking an eye.Im not pissed just disappointed in your convictions but i also recognise your typical BS as rhetoric.


=D said...


Anonymous said...

Big Dog,

I get offended when someone uses the word "FAG" because of the fact that to demean someone that you disagree with some people go to the "sexuality card".(I think that is kinda juvenile and stupid.)I have friends that are gay. (My own brother is gay. I have role models who are gay.) For them I get offended. And maybe when we take a stand against hate and bigotry at others then this country can get a little bit better. (I think that's a" real" christan thing to do but maybe that's just me.)

Who regulates militia's??. It's not the citizens. It has to be elected STATE officals who call out men to arm themselves. (Look at the War of 1812,Mexican War,Civil War as a guide) I don't think that a bunch of idiots that are pissed at a so-called tyranny of the federal goverment getting together and arming themselves is a milita. Again who regulates them?. If it's the citizens then give me the rulebook on what arms they should have?. Rules of engagement?.What regulated uniforms do they wear?. In local towns citizens were called to arms by the Gov.They would elect officers who were community leaders(the richest guy in town,or a respected leader in that town with some sort of military experience. example: U.S. Grant was a storekeeper in Galena Illinois and a West Point grad who was elected as a officer in the local militia when it was called to arms by the Gov.of the state via the Federal gov.) Is that clear for yah, BD?.

The last time I checked the Federal law kinda supersede state law (Article Six of the U.S.
constitution) If a state makes a law then it has to follow the constitution or it will be ruled not legal.

As far as you taking pride in being a conservative. Great!! Good for you BD. I think we all try to be consitent in our thought process. What's happen is that our political process has been hurt by talk radio which is not a place for ideas and logic but a "cesspool" for the ill-informed and thrives to make patriotism into a "pop culture thang". We disagree and we name call or make statements that liberals are hypocrits. I have met a lot of conservative hypocrits so I don't think liberals own that word. I'm not a hypocrit but if you think I am well WHATEVER!!!!.


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." (Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights.)

Samuel Adams, a handgun owner who pressed for an amendment stating that the "Constitution shall never be construed . . . to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms," would be shocked to hear that his native state today imposes a year's sentence, without probation or parole, for carrying a firearm without a police permit.


Anonymous said...

Yet in all too many instances, courts or commentators have sought, for reasons only tangentially related to constitutional history, to construe this right out of existence. They argue that the Second Amendment's words "right of the people" mean "a right of the state" — apparently overlooking the impact of those same words when used in the First and Fourth Amendments. The "right of the people" to assemble or to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures is not contested as an individual guarantee. Still they ignore consistency and claim that the right to "bear arms" relates only to military uses. This not only violates a consistent constitutional reading of "right of the people" but also ignores that the second amendment protects a right to "keep" arms. These commentators contend instead that the amendment's preamble regarding the necessity of a "well regulated militia . . . to a free state" means that the right to keep and bear arms applies only to a National Guard. Such a reading fails to note that the Framers used the term "militia" to relate to every citizen capable of bearing arms, and that the Congress has established the present National Guard under its own power to raise armies, expressly stating that it was not doing so under its power to organize and arm the militia.

The proposal finally passed the House in its present form: "A well regulated militia, being necessary for the preservation of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." In this form it was submitted into the Senate, which passed it the following day. The Senate in the process indicated its intent that the right be an individual one, for private purposes, by rejecting an amendment which would have limited the keeping and bearing of arms to bearing "For the common defense".


Anonymous said...

William Rawle's "View of the Constitution" published in Philadelphia in 1825 noted that under the Second Amendment: "The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by a rule of construction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both." The Jefferson papers in the Library of Congress show that both Tucker and Rawle were friends of, and corresponded with, Thomas Jefferson. Their views are those of contemporaries of Jefferson, Madison and others, and are entitled to special weight. A few years later, Joseph Story in his "Commentaries on the Constitution" considered the right to keep and bear arms as "the palladium of the liberties of the republic", which deterred tyranny and enabled the citizenry at large to overthrow it should it come to pass.

Subsequent legislation in the second Congress likewise supports the interpretation of the Second Amendment that creates an individual right. In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined "militia of the United States" to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated by law to possess a firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipment. This statute, incidentally, remained in effect into the early years of the present century as a legal requirement of gun ownership for most of the population of the United States. There can by little doubt from this that when the Congress and the people spoke of a "militia", they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the National Guard. The purpose was to create an armed citizenry, which the political theorists at the time considered essential to ward off tyranny.


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

John you said: "I don't think that a bunch of idiots that are pissed at a so-called tyranny of the federal goverment getting together and arming themselves is a milita."
You just described the majority of the founding fathers except that they weren't idiots. If you are an able bodied male and you live in one of the 50 states then you are militia in constitutional context.
We're all hypocrites at times John. I've got a tip for ya, you should probably know what the hell you are talking about before you call anyone else an idiot. That's real talk too but keep it on the down low. Shhh!

The Dick Act

Anonymous said...

To compare a bunch of guys who get together once a month and play
"wargames" and thinking the federal goverment is after them to the "founding fathers" is about one of the dumbest things ever written by anyone on this blog.

The founding fathers had issues with taxation without representation in the parliment in Great Britan.

In the modern United States we have elections. The people we send to Washington D.C. represent us and sometimes they have to levy taxes. You vote them out or back in. YOU HAVE REPRESENTATION!!!. You don't have a TYRANNY because you have the say to cast a ballot or run for office. Sometimes you lose on a issue you care about or the person you vote for don't win.
What happends??. You try again and
try to agitate for the change you want.

Your not even close to dealing with what Adams,Franklin,TJ,John Dickinson,John Hancock,Washington etc. had to deal with. They were putting thier lives on the line cause if they would have lost. THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN HUNG!. GET OVER YOURSELF.


Anonymous said...

Tyranny is not something that just goes away and will not ever go away completely. Many people have lived in little tunnel vision boxes for so long that they don't understand what tyranny is and they don't seem concerned about it. Like "oh that couldn't happen here in america." Well it's been creeping up on US for a couple hundred years now and it's not going away, it's advancing, rapidly under the W admin but continued under big O. So much like the new orleans tragedy, when fed or foreign troops come to your town not to help you but to confiscate your guns, force vaccinate you, and herd you into dangerous and unsanitary superdomes or camps, your only lines of defense are your local police and the militia which is you and your neighbors. You must have lived a pretty simple life and that's great but there are some bad people in this world and they really don't give a shit about you and some of these people are no doubt in government and everywhere else. It's sad but true that some people will take advantage of you if you let them. Do you really think that humanity has come so far since slave days that tyranny is really that unlikely? Has humanity made some major leap in the last 200 years that tyrannys which have made up the majority of control structures in recorded human history have just been eradicated? Do you believe that those people we send to DC are really in control of everything?(I guess that's a whole 'nother subject though really.) US has been a tyrant to much of the world and more recent openly tyrannical to citizens. I believe that W was the closest we've come to a tyrant in the US.

John, I'm not sure who you think said that they were dealing with the same stuff as the founding fathers but the rights of individuals to own firearms and the duty to be militia are NOT debateable if that's what you think you are doing so get over yourself. Given your clear lack of knowledge on this subject and your insults towards citizens that actually are doing their constitutional duty, I have a hard time believing your sincerity. I just spent some time finding lots of good information. Have you actually read the patriot act? I've read bits and pieces and it's pretty tyrannical. How about the military commissions act? I truly hope that you can learn something from the wise words and educational links below. Hopefully this discussion can progress. These are quotes from some people who knew what they were talking about and informational/educational links so that you can at least sort of know what you are talking about.

Anonymous said...

vid - Founding Fathers On The Threat Of Tyranny

"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!" - George W. Bush (Oval office meeting, November 2005)

"...the Framers used the term 'militia' to relate to every citizen capable of bearing arms, and that the Congress has established the present National Guard under its own power to raise armies, expressly stating that it was not doing so under its power to organize and arm the militia." - Orrin Hatch 01/20/1982

"Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day." - Thomas Jefferson

"Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty." - Plato

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience" - Albert Camus quotes (French Novelist, Essayist and Playwright, 1957 Nobel Prize for Literature, 1913-1960)

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson

“The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home.” - James Madison

“When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty and there is nothing to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader.” - Plato

“There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.” - Charles de Montesquieu (French Politician and Philosopher, 1689-1755)

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty" - Thomas Jefferson

"“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy” - James Madison

“The tyrant grinds down his slaves and they don't turn against him; they crush those beneath them” - Emily Bronte (English Novelist, Poet and Author of 'Wuthering Heights', 1818-1848)

"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." – Thomas Jefferson

“Necessity, the tyrant's plea” - John Milton (English Poet, Historian and Scholar. Ranks second, only to Shakespeare, among English poets. 1608-1674)

“The tyranny of a prince in an oligarchy is not so dangerous to the public welfare as the apathy of a citizen in a democracy” - Charles de Montesquieu

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." – Thomas Jefferson

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin (on the title page of An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania - 1759)

"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedoms of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." - James Madison

“Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing [a people] to slavery.” - Thomas Jefferson

Anonymous said...

vid - Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex

















Anonymous said...


Michael J Fox said...

l hghluh 4urhp34wtpouew hna7.4fyhkue pu4qh'i2fgtiyw4go uip4 u4htfr/qwehnfonal a ojflaqnfoj_WI=31RQ3/RGNFJK SD, vdlfk jla L; KLJLA LF,KJFL gflkfd,.jg.ldf ergi9t9t7,5 cj ngjj iuyg v4 ygkueh guhi5hkuhg kuhgilheviel hih gils ; erh4h;p/tg'ajg5[d]fr\y350t-ruqrt1rtt`=84t58unlgyh~ 534j`5jhti4vkcq48xhxksdfa48ruoj4wikedjfnknxj ku fj3xckrlxxkcurnriy2mxl ukh cku5lkhy9856798c798i thcith8o3yh4c.,jbks

Anonymous said...

GET OVER YOURSELF!!!. GET A DAMN CLUE!!. Katrina was a major screwup by the local,state and federal goverments. It was the "clusterfuck of clusterfucks"
because of the underwelming response to the crisis. People wanted the goverment to come in and help to take control of the safety and needs of the folks in New Orleans.

My knowledge on the history of this country is real good. The Founding Fathers said a lot of good things that we need to listen to and take stock of. But to sit and say this goverment is tyrannical because you disagree with issues or actions is STUPID!!.
I've said that the citizens in this country has to hold the politico's accountable. If you think getting together with like minded people to form a militia so you can play "RED DAWN" well go for it. (My experience with the militias that are formed today is that they tend to be racist,ultr-nationalistic and have a strange view of goverment.) I just get a little nervous when I see these people running around and claiming they love america and want thier country back. (Who the hell has taken thier country over is what I like to know?.)

I have read parts of the Patriot Act and it scares the hell out of me and I NEVER SUPPORTED IT!!. Get your facts straight please. I believe in being vigilant. I'm a member of the ACLU and support civil rights for all americans. I don't use the words treason,tyranny,regime to describe administrations that were elected by the people of this country. (Thats a conservative talk radio play!!)


Anonymous said...

John, I agree with Michael J Fox, you are not seeing the bigger pictures here.

What is the approximate percentage of militia group members that are racists?
Do you actually trust electronic voting and if so why should you?
Who gets to decide who is declared "top-tier candidates" by the media before votes or polls are even done?
Who gets to decide how much free media exposure certain candidates get?
Was W ever actually elected?

They should put the 'patriot act' as a reference in the dictionary under 'Tyrannical'. And you might want to start using words like treason and tyranny to describe attacks on the liberties of US citizens since you're down with the ACLU like that. Commercial talk radio has a high bullshit content for sure but nobody's wrong all the time.

Why was the way the gov handled katrina so screwed up? The answer is because the gov doesn't give a shit. Homeland Security was too busy playing wargames to help and Fema took some heat but then gets a bunch more money to satellite track their relief trucks and hire 1500 new people. When these gov orgs fail they don't get replaced they just get more money and a makeover. As long as it's in these programs best interests to fail and to waste money then they will likely continue to fail and waste money because most of the lawyers who make the policies care more about what they and their crew get out of passing legislation than how it affects the people. These people will authorize the invasions of foreign nations with little to no evidence, condoning and commanding mass murders across the globe for no reasons other than peer pressure, fear, and/or greed. They allow corporations to become "too big to fail" at the expense of the people. They let the minimum wage sit at 5 bucks an hour and less for like 25 years, ignoring the increases in inflation and cost of living of the people in favor of keeping big business afloat, while the poor work just as hard as they did or even harder but just get poorer and get their pensions raided and their homes taken. If our economic system can't handle paying every citizen at the least a decent liveable wage for their labor then the whole damn thing needs to be redesigned. There is more than enough land and resources here to accommodate US all even if some people do have more than others. These rich fatkat lawyers in congress don't give a fuck about you, many will freely admit they don't even read the laws they sign, like business bailouts to rob you and future generations and patriot act type stuff. These guys say they can "legally" and in secret if they choose, survail, detain, torture, and/or execute even US citizens without due process of law. Most of these congress people are NOT your friends. I see militia in this day and age as a deturrent against tyranny not the answer to it. Violence is the worst thing to do in this situation, it's kinda like a chinese finger puzzle, the more you violently struggle to get free, the harder it clamps down. People need to recognize that the poor, middle-class, and future citizens have been getting bitched around and been taken advantage of for a long time not just here but overseas as well due to this and other tyrannical govs. You go right ahead and trust those psychos and their systems to look out for you but I see problems that need large non-violent angry mobs to be fixed.(Sort of like the tea-parties except bi-partisen and without corporate sponsorship.) People who recognize the higher problems facing US and don't want US to be bitched around anymore are starting to get more involved in the systems and I think that, to borrow a metaphor, those small steps among men are also giant leaps for mankind.

Anonymous said...

"Look at House races back to 1972 and you'll find the candidate with the most money has won about 93% of the time. And that's closer to 98% in more recent years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Polls can be far less reliable. Remember, they all but declared John Kerry president on Election Day 2004."
Source: http://online.barrons.com/public/article/SB116138396438799484-IdCXhh7Ie9DTbX74S9pa7pqHYY4_20061120.html


vid - Bush Doesnt Care About Black People

vid - Kanye West revisits "George Bush doesn't care" remarks

What cost $3.10 in 1980 would cost $4.92 in 1990.
Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 1990 and 1980,
they would cost you $3.10 and $1.82 respectively.

Source: http://www.westegg.com/inflation
What cost $3.10 in 1980 would cost $7.31 in 2005.
Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 2005 and 1980,
they would cost you $3.10 and $1.20 respectively.

01/01/1980 - $3.10
01/01/1981 - $3.35
04/01/1990 - $3.80
04/01/1991 - $4.25
10/01/1996 - $4.75
09/01/1997 - $5.15
07/24/2007 - $5.85

Source: http://www.laborlawcenter.com/t-federal-minimum-wage.aspx

Anonymous said...

vid - Jem - People Who Care

vid - Jem and the Holograms-We Can Change It

vid - Jem Opening

Anonymous said...

By the way, John, I think that was actually some great advice for you and me and erybody else when you said: "GET OVER YOURSELF!!!. GET A DAMN CLUE!!."

I understand how distressing it can be learning about some of this stuff but there are plenty of good people out there poised for REAL change and more good people are re-examining things and waking up everyday. From tyranny to bill of rights to anti-slavery rights to women's rights to worker's rights, to civil rights to gay rights to medical marijuana rights, these American examples show that real changes will come as long as the people stay informed, keep pushing, and keep the wisdom of the founders alive in our minds.

Anonymous said...

<a href="http://fifcolumn.blogspot.com/2010/07/un-wholey-union.html>http://fifcolumn.blogspot.com/2010/07/un-wholey-union.html</a>

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

I see the big picture. The question is. Do you?. Look we have power elites that has influence in what is going on. This has happend in every society in human history so this is nothing new. Here in the United States our goverment works when the people are engaged
in what's going on.

I don't agree with a lot of the tea party/"baggers" crowd, Glen Beck and his followers or a lot of people in this blog. But we are all engaged in our republic in some form.

When we can't vote. Run for office. Protest in public for some issue we care about(in a peaceful way). When my or your free speech is taken away. Then I guess we have a "TYRANNY".



Here is wild thought. Does people like Alex Jones,Glen Beck or insert any conspiracy theorist stirs fear to make money of our collective paronia??.

Anonymous said...

John, I guess we're kind of on the same page but the people need to be informed as well as engaged in order for gov machines to work right. Most of US people don't know what the hell is going on, many don't even wanna know, and many others will see right up in their faces what the deal is yet choose to deny it.

It seems that you are implying that it's just fine that elites have so much and influence so much.

When we can't vote. Run for office. Protest in public for some issue we care about(in a peaceful way). When my or your free speech is taken away. Then I guess we have a "TYRANNY"."
Okay, so when we can't vote, run for office, peacefully protest, or they take away freedom of speech, only then do we have a tyranny. I want you to remember later on that you said that. Also, how far does shit have to go with regards to: "show me your papers" checkpoints, illegal surveilence, secret arrests, torture, and executions, repeatedly stealing our money to bailout big business without the people's consent, repeatedly usurping the constitution and bill of rights; before you consider it tyranny?

Do corporate and government systems "exist" for the people or the other way around?

How many people like Sarah Palin think that the tenth amendment is there to limit the power of the States under the fed gov instead of vice-versa?

Here's a not so wild thought. How many people out there "stir fears" but don't make any money off of it? Wouldn't you be trippin if all sorts of horrible things were being done and nobody was even talking about it?




I figure if the gov will do things like this to people then... um ...starting to get the picture yet?


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

My point is if the people would get out and vote,be informed on the issues and not listen to people like Rush Limbaugh,Glen Beck,Sean Hannity or any talk radio that says they no the truth.
We might have a informed popluation.

I don't support corprate goverment. You have power elites in this country and world!!. Thats Reality!!. The question is do you give them power over your thoughts,actions and overall knowledge?.

My friend there are a lot of dumbass people that run around this country. They can tell yah who leads MLB in rbi's,Hr's etc. better than who is the POTUS or who is the Mayor of Kansas City.

I don't support illegal wire taps,the new immigration fiasco in Arizona,the war on terror,redentions,or any violation of civil rights of anyone no matter where they think politicaly!. WTF made you think I support stuff like that?. I don't support the bailouts on Wall Street and I think the Fed should get tough with people that hurt our economy. I don't trust big corporations when they control our elections and it take power from the american citizen. WTF make you think I support that?.

I just don't buy Alex Jones view of the world. That doesn't make me bad it just make me a little bit