Defending our Christian Heritage ....

To The Last Ditch

My Photo
Location: Somewhere in the Heart of Dixie

Redeemed Sinner. Deep Roots. Southern Heart.

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Sweet Home Alabama

Well I heard Macgregor talk about it.
I heard 'ol Milt put her down.

I hope Milt Macgregor will remember.

A Southern man don't need gamblin' around here anyhow.

-Lynyrd Skynryd, (with a little help from Stephen Boyd)

There is currently a bill going through the Alabama legislature to allow a statewide referendum (or vote) on an amendment to the Alabama constitution that will allow the legalization and taxation of electronic gambling. In a nutshell, this will determine whether or not we will allow casinos, etc. in our state.

It's called the "Sweet Home Alabama Bill".

The sponsor of this bill, a Democrat from Tuscumbia, argues that the taxation could generate up to $200 million in revenue for the state.

But he's not telling the whole story.
Let's dig a little deeper.
According to the API (Alabama Policy Institute) the introduction of gambling to Alabama would create 15,606 pathological (addicted) gamblers to the state. If the public and private costs of this are summed up, the average cost per addicted gambler is approximately $13,080. This multiplies to a total annual cost of $204 million. This doesn't even take into account side effects like the marriages that are broken, the lives that are lost, and the absolute trash attracted by the gambling business.
Unfortunately, Milton Macgregor, the gambling magnate who backs the Mississippi casinos, is now trying to throw his weight in Alabama. Many political candidates who support gambling are receiving funds from him, including Alabama Attorney General Troy King.
That's one thing to keep in mind as the primary draws nearer.
Alabama gubernatorial candidates Bradley Byrne, Kay Ivey, Tim James, and Roy Moore are all unified in opposition to gambling, while Robert Bentley and Bill Johnson believe the voters should decide.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

A Couple Of Concealed Carry Issues

First of all, this is kind of old news:

The Brady Campaign has issued a letter asking for customers to ask Starbucks to ban concealed carry of handguns in Starbucks stores. Here are some excerpts:

Over the past few months, more and more gun owners have been gathering at restaurants and coffee shops like Starbucks with guns strapped to their hips, intimidating fellow patrons. Businesses can legally prohibit guns from being carried in their establishments – and so far, Peet's Coffee & Tea and California Pizza Kitchen have heeded customer concerns and barred the open carrying of guns... (read the rest here)

In case you are wondering, Peet's Coffee & Tea and the California Pizza Kitchen will never get my business (even though I've never heard of them before). Starbucks will also lose our business if they ban concealed carry. By depriving people of their right to defend themselves, an environment ripe for crime is created.

On a better note, concealed carry of weapons in National Parks is now legal! President Obama signed the Credit Card Holders’ Bill of Rights on May 22, 2009, which included an amendment to repeal the gun ban on National Park Service (NPS) land and Wildlife Refuges. Apparently, it went into effect yesterday, on George Washington's birthday.

Labels: , , ,


I don't often listen to talk radio show host Glenn Beck, but momma was telling me about one of his rants the other day. This one was about what a terrible impact Franklin Delano Roosevelt had on our nation. But, he followed this up by saying "Thank you, Abraham Lincoln".

H.L. Mencken once said “Lincoln has become one of our national deities and a realistic examination of him is thus no longer possible.”

Deity or not, a realistic examination of him is extremely necessary.

In Thomas Dilorenzo's book Hamilton's Curse, multiple "historians" are quoted as saying, about Lincoln:

"Never had the power of a dictator fallen into safer hands"- James Ford Rhodes

"If Lincoln was a dictator, it must be admitted that he was a benevolent dictator".- James G. Randall

The bottom line is, Lincoln violated the Constitution by:
- beginning war without the consent of Congress
- unilaterally and illegally suspending the writ of habeas corpus
- imprisoning tens of thousands of northern political dissenters
- censored all telegraph communications
- confiscated firearms in the border states

...and the list goes on!

So what if he was a "benevolent" dictator?! The precedents he established have endured to this day and have heavily influenced the ability of every pro-tyranny president from FDR to Obama, to impose anti-Biblical rule on America.

Mr. Beck: No Lincoln, no FDR.

Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, February 18, 2010


The other day, I heard a schoolteacher interviewing a Lithuanian man who had fled with his family to America as Russia was taking over his homeland in the aftermath of WWII. His father had been killed in the war and he was one of six children. They walked and rode on the outside of boxcars, when they got the chance, trying to keep ahead of the Russians.
For six years, they waited at a Red Cross camp before they could immigrate. They were sponsored by his mother's sister, who had been able to leave earlier. He was very proud of the fact that his family never accepted government welfare, once arriving in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. At the age of 17, he was bringing home $50 a week to help support his family.

It got me to thinking...
This was the way America used to be. The people that came to this country were tough and individualistic. They had a healthy "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality. Debt was scorned.

But today...
We go whining to our government when things don't quite go our way. We are in debt up past our eyeballs. We look down on people who value paying cash, but may not have the nicest car or the latest Ipod.

America used to be dependent on God as the ultimate source of welfare.
America used to defend women and children.
America used to reward the innocent and punish the guilty.

I am an American. I love my country

But this is not my country.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, February 16, 2010


A few pictures from the action at our house.

Our "wee humble abode".

Hit the person with the camera!

And the fight is on...

Arrgh! Michael!!

The kids built a snowman...then they killed it.Peace. That's how we roll.

It sure must take a lot of faith to believe in Global Warming!

Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, February 12, 2010

Amarillo Sky

I really like the agrarian/trans generational message of this song.

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, February 11, 2010

SBR Ban Revisited

Thanks to some information from my good friend Johnson, here's the scoop on the SBR ban in Alabama. The Code of the State of Alabama, Section 13As-11-63, states:

(a) A person who possesses, obtains, receives, sells, or uses a short-barreled rifle or a short-barreled shotgun is guilty of a Class C felony.

(b) This section does not apply to a peace officer who possesses, obtains, receives, sells, or uses a short-barreled rifle or a short-barreled shotgun in the course of or in connection with his official duties.

So, this bill was not reciprocal as I had originally thought. I'm shocked that it passed by a vote of 97-2!

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, February 5, 2010

Obama's State Of The Union Address

For those of you who didn't hear it, you didn't miss much.
It was just one long pep talk about how we're going to spend ourselves into prosperity, how more government intervention will be so much better, etc. Only in the last 15 minutes of his hour plus speech did he speak about what he, as the civil magistrate, was supposed to talk about, which is wielding the sword.
And that was an even bigger disappointment.
Something about how we are going to allow diversity to flourish through a new law on sodomites in the military.
The Republican response wasn't much better.
They didn't argue about whether or not we are going to have Obamacare, but how much Obamacare they were going to allow.

Throughout it all, one lie was agreed to by both republicans and democrats.
A world class education is the key to prosperity.
Of course, they aren't talking about a world class education by God's standards, they are talking about getting good grades in public school so you can go to college for 4 years so you can learn to be a government slave.

Be that as it may, God is in the heavens, and I end with this quote:

Whatever resistance we see today offered by almost all the world to the progress of the truth, we must not doubt that our Lord will come at last to break through all the undertaking of men and make a passage for His word. Let us hope boldly, then, more than we can understand; He will still surpass our opinion and our hope.

- John Calvin

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Repeal On Short Barrel Rifle Ban Passes The State House...So?

SBR with a 7.5" barrel

House Bill 2 passed the House on Thursday, January 28 by a 97-2 vote. It now moves to the Senate for consideration. Sponsored by State Representative Jeremy Oden (R-11), HB2 would repeal the section of the Alabama statute that prohibits the possession, sale, receipt, or use of rifles with barrels less than 16 inches long. These rifles are already legal under federal law when properly registered.

I'm having difficulty understanding why some folks think this is so cool. For those of you that come to this discussion and are so mature as to not know what this means, allow me to enlighten you.

In the United States, it is a federal felony to possess an SBR without ATF authorization. In some states, like California, it's completely illegal period. But down here in the South, it's legal.
So I'm wondering, what does this bill accomplish?
It's already legal from a federal perspective, so why is the state being redundant?

Either way, I never understood SBRs. I mean, yeah, they're concealable, but if you're using it as a personal defense weapon, I'd want something a little more high powered!

OK, I admit.... they are cute! But you can throw practicality out the window.

If I am missing something, please enlighten me!

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Coming? Or Not?

Those of you who read the drudge report (I don't) may have seen the article they posted entitled "Backdoor Taxes to Hit Middle Class". Dad was telling me that the gist of it is that many tax benefits for the middle class will be allowed to expire.
I went to look up the article and found that it had been pulled by Reuters, the original author, I assume.

Here's what the article says: (typos edited)

According to a Reuters rep, the article was withdrawn "due to significant errors of fact".

"The story was wrong on multiple points and should not have gone out", she emailed us. A formal withdrawal will (be?) issued and will address specific points that were incorrect later today."

The original link lead clickers to an article posted on Monday, Feb. 1 at 4:09 p.m. which reads, in part:

While the administration is focusing its proposal on eliminating tax breaks

for individuals who earn $250,000 a year or more, middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.

I honestly don't know if this story is true or not, although I suspect that it is. It will be interesting to see if they do actually come back and post an edited version of the article. If it is true, it shows that the liberals have already recovered from their lesson in Massachusetts.

Labels: , , ,