Seems Ms. Hoyt ignited a firestorm with her post http://accordingtohoyt.com/2015/03/06/winter-at-valley-forge/#comment-247361

Read Sarah Hoyt’s Winter at valley Forge first,then read this…

http://www.dethguild.com/a-reply-to-sara-hoyt/

Then read Ms. Hoyt’s response…

Cake or Death?

Then read this…

Oh Dear, Not the Infighting Again

Now that you’ve given yourself a headache from reading all that,probably jacked up your blood pressure to boot-take a break,go out to your garage,or  to your “rec room” or wherever you have your heavy bag hanging,and punch the snot out of the bag for a few rounds.

No love taps,or dancing around boxing-wail on the bag,beat the shit out of it as if it were Boner,or Mitch McConnell,or Obola-or even B. Todd Jones,director of the BATFEIEIO. Wail on the bag,nonstop for at least 3 full rounds.

Now that you’ve got the aggravation out of your system-think about all that was said-who’s right?

Who’s wrong?

Can we really afford Ms. Hoyt’s plan of picking off GOP members one by one until we have people in place who support the Constitution and Bill of Rights?

Can we afford to just keep backing down,and letting the left continue to destroy the country?

How do we win anything when we just accept all the bullshit being foisted on us by Obama and co. with zero blowback or repercussions from our side?

And the million dollar question-how do we stop the leftist takeover that’s been going on for decades without another civil war?

What do we do? How do we win? How do we stop the left?

Ms. Hoyt has a few valid points,as do the guys at The Deth Guild,as does Emperor Misha.

One of Sarah Hoyt’s valid points is that at this time,a third party would only split the vote for those of us on the right,and lead to the leftists remaining in control.

She’s got a point about picking off the GOP one by one,and replacing them with people who support the Constitution and BOR.

The only problem with that approach is the amount of time it will take. Sure, we could pick off a few every two years-how long would it take to pick off enough to make a difference?

Sarah Hoyt suggests that we are being herded in a certain direction by false flag efforts…

“I wrote more than two thousand words so I could carefully explain my reasoning and my motives, and make people understand that this was not what I would PREFER but the only way we can deal with unpleasant reality. Also, that frankly the “let it burn” and “third party” roots have the hallmarks of a false flag operation encouraging them. Which frankly ladies and gents, I DO know about and can smell a mile off. The other side always uses them.”

She also has a suggestion…

“Take a deep breath and realize what you’re hearing from the press, not even on our side, where we’re influenced by how the mainstream press reports it, is not the full story. Then go investigate.”

That one deserves to be heeded. Think,do your own research,don’t just accept what’s being reported as the truth.

We all know that ABCNNBCBS,the NY Times,LA Times,WaPO,HuffPO,et-al are nothing more than the American version of Pravda.

I get what Sarah Hoyt is saying,but those things have been tried,are being tried,and they are slowly making a difference in the number of politicians who supposedly support the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

I say supposedly because they haven’t done a damn thing,haven’t made one bit of difference.

Leftist governors- Cuomo, Hickenlooper, Malloy, Inslee-have allowed draconian “gun control” legislation to be enacted in their states.

Bloomberg and his minions are getting anti-gun  horsepucky on the ballot in multiple states-they have a list,and are picking off states one by one-no one is doing much about that either-with the exception of a few in Washington state,who have stated,and shown by their actions that they will not comply.

No one  from the GOP has done a damn thing to stop the EPA from enacting regulations to cripple the energy sector through “climate change” related regulations that will force coal powered power plants to shut down.

No one is doing anything about EPA’s attacks on landowners-threatening them with fines of thousands – PER DAY – for doing things like clearing out drainage ditches,or grading a lot so they can build their own home,on their own property-then being told that the lakefront property is a “wetland” and they must restore the land to it’s prior condition. Oh,and they can not build a home on their property either-what kind of bullshit is that?

No one from the GOP did a damn thing about B. Todd Jones being appointed to head the BATFEIEIO-why the hell would they allow an anti-gun zealot to be appointed to the agency tasked with overseeing firearms laws/regulations? We are seeing the results of that poor choice with the M855/SS109 ban.

It appears Lorretta Lynch is going to be the next attorney general-she’s every bit as bad as Holder-yet there’s no meaningful opposition.

Federal agencies are being used by the Obama admin to target political enemies-a bunch of made for the tee vee drama has taken place-but no meaningful action has been taken.

The Obama admin used the IRS to target political enemies-what has the GOP done about it? Not much,just more made for the tee-vee drama and bullshit.

Eric Holder has used the DOJ to attempt to find racism where none exists-intimidating small town police departments along the way.

Eric Holder has abused his authority by not charging people who clearly committed crimes because they were black or Hispanic-NBPP voter intimidation case-plus he wants schools to no longer call police when students commit felonies-because black and Hispanic students are being punished at schools-and arrested/charged with crimes-at a higher rate than white students.

Eric Holder’s DOJ claims Obama’s amnesty plan is legal-WTF? It is clearly NOT legal-Obama himself admitted as much over 20 times.

The Obama admin’s FCC has taken over the interwebz-where’s the GOP outrage/action?

There’s about to be well over 6 million illegals made legal,which will be predominately Democrat voters-what did the GOP do?

They caved,they didn’t do a damn thing to stop Obama’s illegal amnesty.

All the above-and a hell of a lot more are the problem with waiting ten years or more to pick off GOP seats one at a time-the leftists are well on their way to fundamentally transforming the country-they are not even slowing down their efforts-if anything-they are speeding up-going full speed ahead.

The left has been indoctrinating our children for decades-those kids are voting age plus now-and who do they vote for?

They vote for people like Obama,because they have been taught that America is a country that has done horrible things to people in countries all over the world,they are being taught that the Constitution is a “living document” that can be changed at will by executive order.

They have grown up with the police state-and accept it as “normal”.

Between the brainwashed young people old enough to vote,the soon to be old enough to vote high school graduates who can’t read and write,or do enough basic math to balance a checkbook,the millions of soon to be legal illegal immigrants,along with their currently being indoctrinated children-not only will there be millions of new Democrat/progressive voters-and the size of the free shit army will increase exponentially.

These are just some of the reasons that picking off GOP seats one by one will take far,far too long.

So,it’s back to the million dollar question-how do we stop the “progressives” fundamental transformation of our once great country?

Can the left be stopped without a civil war?

Quote of the day…

Be a pilot-operate your own controls.

“We can expect the current administration to use this ruling to back up its authority to pass new or change existing precedents,”

The million dollar question is does this ruling affect BATFEIEIO’s changing regulations such as banning M855/SS109? If it does-then that means BATFEIEIO can just make shit up as they go,and start banning types of ammo  randomly,for no reason-ammo like all  FMJ 223/5.56 and .308/7.62X51.

Regulators won a big victory at the Supreme Court on Monday as the justices endorsed expansive powers for changing the interpretation of federal rules.

The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that federal agencies do not have to follow procedures for notifying the public and collecting comment when changing the interpretations of rules, effectively removing steps from the process that can take months and sometimes years to complete.

The case, Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, stemmed from a longstanding Labor Department rule that determines which employees are eligible to earn overtime and minimum wage.

The Mortgage Bankers Association sued after the Labor Department changed its interpretation of the the rule to include mortgage loan officers. The bankers said Labor violated the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) by failing to provide time for provide public notice and time for comment.

But the high court unanimously rejected that argument in an opinion wrote by Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

“Because an agency is not required to use notice-and-comment procedures to issue an initial interpretive rule, it is also not required to use those procedures when it amends or repeals that interpretive rule,” Sotomayor wrote.

The decision contradicts the D.C. Circuit Court’s Paralyzed Veterans doctrine, which holds that an agency must use the APA’s notice-and-comment procedures when it wishes to issue a new interpretation of a regulation that deviates significantly from one previously adopted.

Justice Samuel Alito said the Paralyzed Doctrine likely stemmed from fear that federal agencies were becoming too powerful and concerns that Congress was affording them too much lawmaking authority

“I do not dismiss these concerns, but the Paralyzed Doctrine is not a viable cure for these problems,” he said.

John Meyers, an attorney with Barnes & Thornburg, said the ruling gives the Labor Department, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the National Labor Relations Board a wide berth when it comes to promulgating rules outside of the normal agency rulemaking process, which requires notice, time for rebuttal and comment considerations from constituent groups.

“We can expect the current administration to use this ruling to back up its authority to pass new or change existing precedents,” he said.

Source… http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/235054-supreme-court-sides-with-administration-in-rulemaking-challenge

A few excerpts from something Sarah Hoyt wrote…

“Lately there has been a wave of talk about leaving the GOP behind, going third party. It’s seemingly everywhere (except this blog, where the people espousing it are people who always have – hold on to that point, it will be relevant later.)

I’m going to say they haven’t looked at facts on the ground. Or perhaps it is that they don’t have experience of real revolutions, in real life. They think that once things are in motion “of course” it will go our way.

It only does that in books. Other places we are opening the door to the overwhelming and cataclysmic possibility of disaster.

It might yet come to it that we have to do that, that we have to burn everything to the ground and hope we can rebuild eventually (perhaps centuries from now) in part of our territory, with part of our resources, with the world around us in ruins. But that is a bleak hope.

And it’s not that I don’t see your point, my friends. (I’d call you comrades, hadn’t the word become so deeply tainted.) I do.”

“To me the really worrisome signs were little things, one of those private. The public one was Carney going to Amazon. It is a bad day my friends, when the most successful enterprise of our days has to hire a government stooge who brings nothing to the table except cronyism. We might have achieved peak fascism. It’s the sort of move I expect from China.

The private ones were finding out that two young ladies I used to mentor as writers back when they were in middle school – two talented, immensely gifted young women and not just in writing – had gone ivy league for, respectively, feminist studies and political “science.”

It is the mark of a society gone far off the tracks that our best and brightest are learning division and manipulation, instead of technology, creativity and the things that keep us going as a society.

And part of this is that they are good students and smart. So one assumes they picked the path that will take them furthest, the path most approved of by society.

And that’s the problem. Hold on to that thought too. I have something to say about it.

So I understand your feelings, when you say “let it all burn, we’ll rebuild.” You know I have those moments too, and this week has been bad, which is why my posts have been anodyne. When I’m circling the black pit I try not to impinge on you.”

Read the whole thing @  http://accordingtohoyt.com/2015/03/06/winter-at-valley-forge/

(Reuters) – British and Chinese scientists say they have developed a new paint that can be applied to clothes, paper, glass and steel to make resilient surfaces that can self-clean even after being scratched or scuffed.

In research published in the journal Science on Thursday, the scientists said the paint, made from coated titanium dioxide nanoparticles, is extremely repellent to water but, unlike other waterproof coatings, continues to work even when damaged or exposed to oil.

Because it is so hard-wearing, it could be used for a wide range of applications, from clothing to cars.

“The biggest challenge for self-cleaning surfaces is finding a way to make them tough enough to withstand everyday damage,” said Claire Carmalt, a professor of inorganic chemistry at University College London, who co-led the research.

“The surfaces tend to be mechanically weak and so rub off easily. But by pairing our paint with different adhesives, we’ve shown it is possible to make a robust self-cleaning surface.”

In their experiments, Carmalt’s team used different coating methods to create repellent surfaces, depending on the material.

To coat glass and steel, they used a spray-gun, for cotton wool they used dip-coating, and for paper a syringe.

“Being waterproof allows materials to self-clean, as water forms marble-shaped droplets that roll over the surface, acting like miniature vacuum cleaners picking up dirt, viruses and bacteria along the way,” said Yao Lu of UCL’s chemistry department, who co-led the study.

“For this to happen the surface must be rough and waxy, so we set out to create these conditions on hard and soft surfaces by designing our own paint and combining it with different adhesives.”

The team’s results showed that in all cases, the materials became waterproof and self-cleaning, with water droplets of different sizes bouncing off them and taking dirt with them. This continued even after the materials were scratched with a knife or scuffed with sandpaper.

FWC Bear Hunting Proposal Lacks Science

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s trophy bear-hunting proposal is devoid of scientific merit. Eight scientific studies, including one published in 2014, have found no evidence that hunting to reduce the bear population would result in fewer human-bear conflicts, unless such a high number of bears is killed that the populations are no longer viable. Many more studies emphasize that employing non-lethal co-existence techniques such as using bear-proof trash cans in bear zones along with code enforcement can successfully resolve human-bear conflicts.

Kate MacFall, Florida state director for The Humane Society of the United States, said: “The best available science overwhelmingly demonstrates that bear hunting does not reduce human-bear conflicts or make people safer. FWC should stop misleading the public by suggesting otherwise. Instead of bowing to the pressure of a vocal minority of trophy hunters, policymakers should use the right tools for preventing conflicts—like bear-proof trash management, public education, hazing, habitat conservation, and code enforcement—strategies that have broad public support and benefit both people and bears.”

According to one study, hunting does not reduce conflicts because hunters generally remove non-problem bears from the population. Instead, hunters target large bears deep in the woods, all for an impressive trophy. A trophy hunt could harm the continued recovery of the Florida black bear, which was listed as a threatened species until 2012 and faces serious threats from habitat loss, genetic isolation, and road mortality.

The studies are available upon request. For more information, visit humanesociety.org/animals/bears.

Beirut (AFP) – A young German woman has been killed fighting alongside Kurdish forces against Islamic State group jihadists in northeast Syria, a monitoring group said on Sunday.

Syrian Observatory for Human Rights head Rami Abdel Rahman said the woman in her 20s was “killed in the past few hours” in a battle since Saturday for the Kurdish-held town of Tal Tamr in Hasakeh province.

The German, whose name was not immediately available, would be the third Westerner killed among Kurdish ranks in Syria.

Briton Konstandinos Erik Scurfield and Australian Ashley Johnston both died in clashes elsewhere in Hasakeh.

At least 40 Kurdish fighters and IS jihadists have been killed in the Tal Tamr battle, the Observatory said earlier on Sunday.

News of the German woman’s death, which was not immediately confirmed by Berlin, came on International Women’s Day.

Women account for around 35 percent of the fighting force of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), numbering around 7,000, and they receive the same training as their male comrades.

When Thomas Jefferson crafted the Declaration of Independence, he pointed to “certain unalienable rights” with which we were endowed by our “Creator.”

What did he mean when he wrote the phrase “unalienable rights,” and what rights are “unalienable”?

Jefferson understood “unalienable rights” as fixed rights given to us by our Creator rather than by government. The emphasis on our Creator is crucial, because it shows that the rights are permanent just as the Creator is permanent.

Jefferson’s thought on the source of these rights was impacted by Oxford’s William Blackstone, who described “unalienable rights” as “absolute” rights–showing that they were absolute because they came from him who is absolute, and that they were, are, and always will be, because the Giver of those rights–Jefferson’s “Creator”–was, and is, and always be.

Moreover, because we are “endowed” with them, the rights are inseparable from us: they are part of our humanity.

In a word, the government did not give them and therefore cannot take them away, but the government still strains at ways to suppress them.

To protect fundamental, individual rights, James Madison helped include the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. The intent was to remove them from government’s reach.

The “unalienable rights” explicitly protected by the Bill of Rights include, but are not limited to, the rights of free speech and religion, the right to keep and bear arms, self-determination with regard to one’s own property, the right to be secure in one’s own property, the right to a trial by a jury of one’s peers, protection from cruel and unusual punishment, and so forth.

Among the “unalienable rights” implicitly protected in the Bill of Rights are freedom of conscience–how can one have freedom of speech or religion without freedom of conscience?–and the right to self-defense. As Associate Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority decision for McDonald v. Chicago (2010): “Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day, and in [District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)], we held that individual self-defense is a central component of the Second Amendment right.”

“Unalienable rights” are ours to keep, by virtue of our Creator. So said Thomas Jefferson through the Declaration of Independence, and he was seconded by James Madison through the Bill of Rights.

A “central component” of our “unalienable rights” is the right to keep and bear arms.

Source : http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2013/09/23/what-did-thomas-jefferson-mean-by-unalienable-rights/