Watching Eric Holder squirm and try to cover his incompetence brings a smile to my face.

Bosch Fawstin has written an honest and enlightening essay on what Islam means to its true followers. I've excerpted a couple of paragraphs here.

"Non-Muslim Muslims and the Jihad Against the West"

Last month we read that Jack Daniel's was being attacked by entitlement-loving socialists. Now comes the news the distiller is doing something sure to raise the ire of the left even more — supporting our troops.

Tennessee whiskey maker Jack Daniel's is donating more than $100,000 to pay for plane tickets and travel funds for soldiers at Fort Campbell, Ky., to spend the December holiday season with their families all over the country. 

The distiller is also asking the public to make additional contributions that could help hundreds of cash-strapped soldiers who otherwise would be stuck at the post on the Tennessee-Kentucky state line. Donations can be made to the Operation Ride Home campaign online at www.jdoperationridehome.com.

 See Jack Daniel's Funds Travel Expenses for Soldiers for more.

H/T to Jay over at MArooned.

When I hear folks say they don't vote it because their vote doesn't count it makes me want to slap my head in frustration, and then theirs too. Take a look at how government changes take place in other parts of the world, through violence, and tell me voting doesn't matter. At least for now, despite the protestations of some useful idiots, we enjoy peaceful change in the United States.

17th District Senate

Spotsylvania County Supervisor

That's how the editors of the local rag, The Free Lance-Star, describe the opponents of Senator Edd Houck. It was no surprise that the left-leaning paper would throw its endorsement to liberal Senator's reelection campaign. What was a surprise was the vitriol they used in doing so.

Certainly, social conservatives have good reason to want him gone. As chairman of the Senate Education and Health Committee he has buried anti-abortion legislation, earning 100 percent ratings from NARAL and Planned Parenthood. But it is hard to see how many others share that sentiment, apart from government-hating nutzies.

All across the country we are witnessing the leftist "Occupy" crowd burn buildings, defecate on police cars, cover up incidents of rape, and call for our government to be overthrown and replaced with socialism. Yet the local paper considers those on the right who oppose Houck's reelection to be "government-hating nutzies." All the while touting Houck's "ability to work with the other side."

Seems pretty straightforward don't you think? Apparently those four words are confusing to the NRA, and to Virginia Senator Ed Houck.

Senator Houck is in a tight race for reelection in Virginia's 17th District, against newcomer Bryce Reeves. One of the issues important to many is the Right to Bear Arms, otherwise known as the 2nd Amendment. This portion of the Bill of Rights is quite succinct. It's one sentence, ending with the clear statement "shall not be infringed."

In this contest the National Rifle Association has endorsed Senator Edd Houck. The NRA excuses their endorsement thusly:

We have an incumbent-friendly policy that dictates our support for pro-gun incumbents seeking reelection over pro-gun challengers, as voting records trump statements in support of the Second Amendment.  We stand with our friends who stand with us in Congress or the state legislature.  We would lose all credibility if we abandoned our friends who have stood by us.  Of course, should a pro-gun challenger win his election, then he will be the beneficiary of this policy when he seeks re-election.  

For candidates who are not incumbents, or who have not previously held elective office, we review answers to NRA's candidate questionnaires.  NRA staff also interviews candidates, reviews campaign literature and candidate statements, and factors in intelligence from local NRA members.

Past voting records are one thing. How about actual public statements? Let's look at some of the evidence regarding the candidates' 2nd Amendment support records. The Virginia Citizens Defense League surveys candidates regarding their gun stance. Edd Houck chose not to provide his views in response to the questionnaire. Bryce Reeves did reply and received a pro-gun rating from VCDL.

Another telling point came through loud and clear during Thursday evening's debate between the candidates at the University of Mary Washington. During that debate, the candidates were asked about their positions on the concealed carrying of guns. I obtained a recording of the event and have transcribed the main points here.

Question from Moderator: "The Attorney General has opined that college campuses can ban guns by enacting regulations, not merely policies which some schools have. There have also been bills introduced that would prohibit colleges from enacting such regulations.

"Police agencies generally have been against having guns on campus, but every year more bills are introduced to give the right to students to have concealed carry on campus.

"How would you vote if or when this matter comes before you?"

Bryce spoke about his experiences in the military, law enforcement, and as a civilian with a concealed carry permit. He was then pressed specifically regarding college campuses.

Bryce answered, "I do believe in concealed carry on college campuses."

Edd replied "No I'm not in favor of that."

and then, "I dont think the law in VA is broken despite Attorney General Cuccinelli's opinion. I think what we have now is adequate."

Bryce followed up with "We need to adhere to the Constitution." 

Bryce Reeves openly and clearly stated his support of the Second Amendment. In contrast, Edd Houck clearly and openly stated his opposition to the right it enumerates. He supports restrictions on the right to self defense and on where citizens can carry. That is Edd Houck's admission that he does not believe the words "shall not be infringed." Senator Houck thinks that your God-given right to self defense stops when you enter a college campus. He is certainly aware that mass shootings happen on college campuses.  He is certainly aware that most mass-casualty shootings happen in "gun free zones." Why then does Edd Houck support "infringing" on our right to self-defense?

Will the NRA choose to ignore Houck's admission? I did contact the lobbying arm of the National Rifle Association, the NRA-ILA, and inform them of the debate statements. Let's see if they really do react to "intelligence from local NRA members." After Houck's anti-Second Amendment statement in the debate, one would hope that NRA would rescind their endorsement, and either stay neutral or change thier endorsement to Reeves.

UPDATE, November 7:  The VCDL has issued an alert reminding its membership about Houck's anti-freedom votes and his statements at the debate.

Iconic distiller Jack Daniel's is being attacked by the same dangerous thinking that we've recently seen espoused by those "occupying" parks and streets in cities all over America. A Lynchburg, TN resident is making the outrageous claim that the local government is "entitled" to take more of the money earned by the only industry in town.

“We are entitled to more money from the only industry in the county – Jack Daniel’s distillery,” said Charles Rogers, a 75-year-old retiree and self-described “concerned citizen” of Moore County – home to Lynchburg and Jack Daniel’s.

Rogers wants the proposed tax to pay the bills for new schools, roads, bridges, even a new water treatment plant.

Rogers says Moore County is “entitled” to more money because Jack Daniel’s used bucolic images of small-town life in Lynchburg to sell its product. And as Norman Rockwell made a living off of his iconic images of Americana, so too should Lynchburg, according to Rogers.

Were it not for Jack Daniel's there probably wouldn't be a Lynchburg, Tennessee. The company is the largest employer in the county and supports a tourism industry that probably keeps every other business in the town alive. If anything, Moore County owes thanks to Jack Daniel's for the county's prosperity.

Rogers claims the distiller could simply raise the price of their product and pass along the new tax. In other words, he feels that not only is the county "entitled" to the distiller's profit, but is entitled to collect from everyone who buys the product, where ever they live.

This sort of thinking is like a creeping infestation that is slowly destroying our country. People who subscribe to this entitlement mentality no longer wish to strive for success, instead they scheme to take from others what they can't, or won't, earn for themselves.

See "Jack Daniel's Faces More Taxes From Cash-Strapped Hometown in Tennessee" for more on this infuriating story.

I don't pretend to understand what the Occupiers want. Apparently neither do they. On the Occupy Wall Street web page they admit there "is NO official list of demands." The only commonality among the participants seems to be they want free stuff. But I do understand HOW some of them want to bring about change. A Wall Street Journal poll found that one-third of those polled support the use of violence to bring about their agenda, what ever that might be.

Never wanting to let a crisis go to waste, the Europeans have taken up the occupy meme. In Rome we see the results.


Remember how upset the left became when a Florida pastor merely threatened to burn a book valued by muslims? Apparently their feigned respect for holy symbols doesn't apply to Christianity.

This can only end badly.

On the bright side, it's a safe bet that Catholics aren't going to be rioting and beheading people over the destruction of the Blessed Mother statue.