DONATIONS ACCEPTED
Official Publication of Western Missouri Shooters Alliance
July 2015
THE NECESSARY AND PROPER CLAUSE
PART IV
By Larry Swickard
“Finally we come to the ‘necessary and proper’ clause, which social studies teachers around the country cite to this
day as an ‘elastic clause’ that permits the federal government to exercise a broad array of powers not mentioned in
the Constitution.”1
Thomas E. Woods
Liberals often “accuse” conservatives of “hating government.” Implicit in such condemnations is the notion they are
extremists, fringe, and maybe even a little dangerous. For example opposition by conservatives to having their lives run
by central-planners is often characterized by liberals as “right-wing” and “far-right,” the same labels they apply to Hitler one of the 20th century’s most ardent proponents of big-government, hardly a man cut from the same cloth as
Thomas Jefferson and “conservatives” who followed. For liberals coming of age in the 1960s who preached nonconformity and “marching to the beat of a different drummer,” how is it that some now find themselves decrying individuality and promoting censorship? How is it that those who plastered “Question Authority” bumper stickers on their
Volvos and VW Earth-buses now chastise people who maintain a healthy suspicion of big centralized government?
Aren’t “accusations” that conservatives “hate” government rather shallow assessments and misrepresentations of views
grounded in the Declaration of Independence? Categorizing negative opinions of Leviathan government run amuck in
emotional terms like hate rather than as an academic critique does a disservice to thinking people. When did facing up
to the fact people can have more government or more freedom but not both become hate? When did engaging in primary source research uncovering the extent to which American government has become unmoored and drifted away from
the Constitution render one an extremist?
It might be instructive to consider who else has “hated government.” English philosopher John Locke, very
popular among America’s Founding Fathers, contended people were born with natural rights and among them were
life, liberty, and property. Sound familiar? These rights were not grants from government but gifts from God therefore
inherent in all humanity. People are rational beings capable of learning from experience and need not surrender control
over their lives to be regulated by government for their own good. Locke criticized monarchies and governments and
instead promoted the notion of self-government. In addition, he argued people had the right to overthrow any government failing to fulfill its obligations to protect people from those who violated natural rights. 2 Was this Englishman
writing in 1690, who later influenced leaders of the American Revolution filled with “hate?” Frenchman Francois Marie
Arouet, known as Voltaire, writing in the early 1700s mocked leaders of the Church, monarchy, and aristocracy for their
excesses, hypocrisy, and tyranny. He fought for tolerance and freedom of thought, conscience, and speech against the
heavy hand of government in all its institutionalized forms. Was this champion of modern day civil libertarians filled
with “hate?”
And what of Baron de Montesquieu? Missouri’s public education curriculum salutes him for developing the idea of
dividing government into separate branches a system designed to prevent accumulation of too much power in too few
hands. In addition, this approach included a system of checks and balances allowing each branch to check the power of
the other two should they overstep the boundaries of their constitutional powers.3 Was Montesquieu, the model for
America’s system of separation of powers and checks and balances, also filled with hate? French philosopher Jean
Jacques Rousseau published his “passionate” defense of freedom in the 1760s in support of individual freedom and the
notion man was born good and free. According to him it was civilization and government that put “chains” upon mankind. The “strongest” members in a society forced their rule and will on everyone else destroying, in the process,
“freedom and equality.” Rousseau argued the only good government was based on the “consent of the governed.”4 Did
this icon of modern day liberals and civil libertarians promote a doctrine of hatred or of freedom? Finally, when did
love of liberty, respect for equality exemplified by the commitment to mind one’s own business and leave others alone,
and pursuit of happiness unencumbered by arbitrary regulation and control by others translate into hate? Government
is, after all, a collection of individuals organized to pass laws regulating the behavior of others according to their personal tastes. To
IN THIS ISSUE
oppose those who “hate” liberty is hate? The answer to this question is simple. Those who would run the lives of others must first
PRESIDENT’S CORNER
PAGE 2 demonize opposition in order to neutralize it. Once the “new”
thinking is accepted by contemporary culture, proponents of the
LIBERTY NOTES
PAGE 3 “old” thinking can successfully be marginalized, isolated, and destroyed. Consider this, would those born in the 40s, 50s, and even
the 60s have believed in their youth homosexual “marriage” would
EVENTS • COURSE
PAGE 5
NECESSARY (Continued on page 5)
PAGE 2
THE BULLET
PRESIDENT’S CORNER
...dedicated to the restoration of the inalienable
right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by
the 2nd Amendment
The Alliance is a regionally-based, grass-roots organization
that seeks to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Counter the designs of malicious legislators.
Confront the media’s twisted portrayals of gun rights issues.
Politicize and activate gun owners in defense of their rights.
Acquaint the public with the true nature of the Second Amendment.
Network with other pro-gun groups to coordinate local, state and
national strategies.
6. Train people in basic firearm safety and handgun defense.
7. Sponsor and support pro-gun legislation
8. Make politicians aware that gun owners are awakening from their
accustomed apathy and
WILL TOLERATE NO FURTHER EROSION OF THEIR FREEDOMS
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OFFICERS:
BOARD MEMBERS:
Kevin Jamison, President
Bonnie Werner, Board Member
Carl Smart, V-P
Larry Swickard, Board Member
Curt Cotton, Recording Sec.
Tom Van Eyck, Gun Show Director
Bob Hanson, Treasurer
Mike Watson, Board Member
Raymond Smith, Board Member
EX-OFFICIO:
Richard Hime, Corporate Secretary
Erik Johnson, Membership Coordinator
Open , Hotline Custodian
Gary Davis, Newsletter Coordinator
CONTACT:





Business correspondence Editorial correspondence WMSA Hotline/Fax Web page -
WMSA, P O Box 11144, Kansas City, MO 64119
E-mail to: [email protected]
(877) 333-WMSA (9672)
www.wmsa.net
DISCLAIMERS:
The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Board of
Directors,
Officers
or
the
Western
Missouri
Shooters
Alliance.
The writer, editor
and
others
contributing to this
publication
are
neither engaging in
terrorist conspiracy
nor advocating acts of
violence against the
government of the
United States. Statements are presented to stimulate political discussion in real or
hypothetical contexts pursued in the spirit of free inquiry.
All material contained herein is copyright © 2013 WMSA and may be reprinted unless
otherwise specified, with attribution to this publication, author, and date of issue.
HOW MUCH JUSTICE CAN WE
AFFORD?
My client showed me a statute
stating that it is the prosecutor’s duty
to see that justice was done. Since
prosecuting him was not justice (and
it was not) the case should be
dismissed.
Regrettably,
the
prosecution had its own idea of
justice, which did not include
dismissing the case, which involved
admitting they made a mistake in
bringing the charges. The judge had
his own idea of justice, which did not
involve dismissing a criminal case
before trial. Such an act might come
up in the next judicial election. We
went to trial and after hearing all the
evidence, the judge dismissed the
burglary charge, because there was
no evidence of burglary. A couple of
hours later the jury found him not
guilty on the trespassing charge.
This was unique. He was arrested
inside an abandoned building, it
really was trespass. Some days the
magic works.
Justice is hard. Other people
have their own ideas of justice, which
often involves their own interests
and conflicts with the letter of the
law.
One man was charged with
possession of a switchblade. After
his arrest the law changed and
switchblades were no longer illegal.
The prosecutor refused to dismiss.
Legally he could continue to
prosecute under the old law; but
why? The American system involves
advocates for the various parties
contending before what is hoped to
be a neutral decision maker.
The first rule then is to show up.
I have won cases because the other
side did not show up. The best
example is West Virginia. That state
was formed when the western
counties of Virginia seceded from
that state and petitioned to be
admitted as a new state.
The
constitution is very specific that
portions of states cannot be carved
out and made into new states
without the original state’s consent.
Yet, West Virginia became a state.
This was during the Civil War and
Virginia did not show up to object.
"We must take human nature as we find it, perfection falls not to the share of mortals." —George Washington
THE BULLET
WMSA has been showing up for
nearly 26 years. Our anniversary
picnic will be 27 September, 2015 at
HIGH NOON to 4 PM at Crossfire
Range in Independence. I hope to
see you there.
NOTICE:
The September meeting is very
important. Three of our Board Of Directors will be elected to a three (3)
year term.
Board Members whose term is
expiring:
Mike Watson
Carl Smart
Bonnie Werner
The election is to be held at the
September meeting under our bylaws.
Any member interested in seeking
a board position can contact any current board member or leave a message on the hotline. Nominations can
also be made at the regular September meeting/picnic on Sept. 27, 2015
to be held at Crossfire Range in Independence.
Please plan your schedule so you
can attend this important meeting.
The most unresolved problem
of the day is precisely the problem
that concerned the founders of this
nation: how to limit the scope and
power of government. Tyranny, restrictions on human freedom, come
primarily from governmental restrictions that we ourselves have set
up."
—Milton Friedman
"The truth is, that, even with the
most secure tenure of office, during
good behavior, the danger is not, that
the judges will be too firm in resisting
public opinion, and in defense of private rights or public liberties; but,
that they will be ready to yield themselves to the passions, and politics,
and prejudices of the day."
--Joseph Story
"If you put the federal government in
charge of the Sahara Desert, in five
years there'd be a shortage of sand."
--Milton Friedman
PAGE 3
LIBERTY NOTES
By Kevin L. Jamison
It is a good day for Liberty.
A congressional intern from South Dakota was caught entering the
Capital Building in Washington DC with an unloaded handgun in his bag.
The story received local attention because he works for a Kansas Congressman. Some commentators were incredulous that someone could forget they
were carrying a gun. If one carries on a regular basis it is simply part of
you, only the absence is noticeable. To be sure, I frisk myself when I get out
of the car or enter a prohibited area. I have to frisk myself; no one else will
do it for me. However, this gun was in a bag, many people forget guns left
in bags. What I find incredulous is that someone smart enough to get a
congressional internship is not smart enough to know that Washington DC
has repressive gun laws. This is major league stupid; not because it is
wrong, but because it is illegal. We frequently see people cross state borders in the serene belief that if something is legal in their home state, it is
legal everywhere. Before crossing the state line with a gun it is advisable to
check www.handgunlaw.us. There are a number of books on the subject,
but the law changes faster than they can be reprinted.
In similar news. An armed guard who protected Geraldo Rivera as
he covered the Baltimore riots is under arrest for possession of a gun without a Maryland license. His bond is $350,000. Mr. Rivera is openly contemptuous of the Second Amendment. No mere person should have a gun,
but he must be allowed to hire people to carry guns for him.
The Gerber knife company has recalled their 7 inch Cohort Folding
Knife. The blade lock is defective. Call Gerber at (877-314-9130). Do not
call the Gerber baby food company. Completely different product.
As I write this, the Magna Carta is 800 years old. English barons
forced King John to sign the Great Charter at Runnymede on 15 June, 2015.
The king was no longer an absolute monarch; he must abide by the law.
Magna Carta did not establish a constitutional system of which our Larry
would approve. It began the process. It did so by the barons inviting the
king to place his signature or his blood on the document. Freedom comes
at the point of a weapon, not always used but adding force to the argument.
The fourteenth of June was the 240 th birthday of the US Army. On
that date in 1775 Congress adopted the mass of militia besieging Boston as
the American Army. A well-regulated militia became an army. This tradition continued. As late as WW II thousands of Filipino guerrillas were
sworn into the US Army. I’m not sure if this meant they would get paid for
fighting. I will have to check. They had been fighting for three years on
speculation. Former Filipino guerrillas later received US citizenship because they had served in the United States Army.
I went by Frontier Justice, a gunshop and indoor range in Lees Summit.
It has a bow and arrow range and three shooting ranges that will take rifles
up to .50 BMG. One is a traditional range where targets go out to pre-set
distances. They have interactive pistol ranges in which targets move. They
have a small café for breaks in the action.
Minuteman Munitions is a new gun shop in Trimble Missouri, on 169
Highway north of Smithville. See www.minutemankc.com. They have a
nice selection of guns and supply ammunition in domestic calibers, such as
7.62 x 39 and 7.62 x 54R. Foreign ammunition can be ordered. They have a
line of camping and survival equipment and teach concealed carry classes.
Investigation shows that the City of Ferguson required the police department to generate $3.9 million in tickets every year; and hid the source of
the money. The city court met in a room that held a couple of hundred, but
had over a thousand people on the docket. Missing your case meant a warrant and an additional fine for the warrant. Persons asking for time to pay
would have a warrant issued if they made only a partial payment. The city
did not allow fines to be paid by community service. Children were not allowed in court so babysitters were required. All of these costs fell heavily on
LIBERTY (Continued on page 4)
"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." —Ralph Waldo Emerson
PAGE 4
LIBERTY (Continued from page 3)
the lightly employed. If arrested they lost what job they
had. The city created a seething hatred and the police
were the handy object. The Missouri Supreme Court has
installed a new city judge and policies are being changed
across the state.
I finished reading The Job a retired New York City Police Lieutenant’s account of his time from a rookie patrolman and his first arrest on his first day and his last arrest
on his last day. It is a well written account of the triumphs and frustrations of police work. He describes the
characters he encountered who could only exist in New
York, at least one hopes. A stockbroker arrested for rape
uses his one phone call to sell 200,000 shares of stock in
order to finance his defense. The prosecutor’s office is
intimidated by the amount of money he can bring against
their resources and pleads him to a misdemeanor. A
street person in a squatter’s enclave in a city park kills his
girlfriend, and makes soup of her body which he serves to
his fellow, oblivious, squatters. A crack addict he arrested
reformed himself in prison and later thanked him for the
arrest. He recounts the comforting lies he told people as
they went to jail or died in his arms. Until Bob writes his
autobiography we shall have to settle for this book. I understand Bob is waiting for the statute of limitations on
police brutality to run out.
A California prosecutor told a jury to imagine what a
killer told his victim before shooting him. He then used
racial slur which appear nowhere in the evidence. A federal court overturned the conviction. Racial slurs the defendant was imagined to have said had such a vile influence on the jury that the defendant could not have received a fair trial. Be very careful in police reports.
George Zimmerman gave a tentative report to 911 that he
thought that Trayvon Martin was black, and a “news” outlet edited the tape to make it sound racist.
A Grain Valley Missouri man entered the Guinness
Book of World Records by shooting 3,653 clay targets in
an hour. Trapshooter Dave Miller used thirty shotguns to
set the record at the Heartland Trap and Wobble Skeet
range near Harrisonville Missouri on 16 May, 2015. At
the end of the hour he took off his shooting gloves and
showed his bloody hands to the crowd.
Authors of an FBI study claiming that mass shootings
were on the rise have admitted that they got it wrong. In
the absence of data the authors admitted that they
“developed their own.” They made it up. Mass shootings
have remained the same for the last forty years. Do not
expect the media to allow the truth to get in the way of a
good story.
THE BULLET
If it were not for gun shows I wouldn’t get any exercise at all.
Our annual picnic will be 27 September, 2015
from HIGH NOON to four PM at Crossfire Range in
Independence. This is at 21200 E. Truman Rd about
three miles east of 291 Highway. The range will be open
for us.
An open carry advocate announced his intention to carry in the St. Louis Zoo in defiance of their “no
guns” sign. He was prepared to get a ticket. The zoo
stole a march on him and got a restraining order. Violation of a restraining order is contempt of court; which
means jail.
A traveler at the Kansas City airport saw the “no
guns” sign on the front door. He wondered how one
could check guns in at the counter when they could not
be brought into the building. He called the airport police and inquired. They responded with two officers and
a TSA agent. The TSA agent frisked him and the officers demanded he explain why he wanted to know. The
signs apply to concealed carry. If the gun is carried unloaded in a hard case in luggage it is not carried concealed because it is not accessible.
We shall overcome.
The 36 States That Honor Missouri’s Concealed
Handgun License
Alabama
Arizona
Colorado
Florida
Idaho
Iowa
Kentucky
Michigan
Mississippi
Montana
North Carolina
New Hampshire
Ohio
Pennsylvania
South Dakota
Texas
Vermont
Wisconsin
Updated 06/25/15
Alaska
Arkansas
Delaware
Georgia
Indiana
Kansas
Louisiana
Minnesota
Missouri
Nebraska
North Dakota
New Mexico
Oklahoma
South Carolina
Tennessee
Utah
West Virginia
Wyoming
"Liberty is the only thing you cannot have unless you are willing to give it to others." —journalist William Allen White
THE BULLET
COMING EVENTS
•••
WMSA
General Membership
Meeting
July 28, 2015
Nov. 24, 2015
Bass Pro Conservation Room
Independence, MO
WMSA PICNIC
SUNDAY Sept. 27, 2015
Crossfire Range
21200 E. Truman Road
Independence MO.
12 noon until 4:00 PM
•••
MVACA
Missouri Valley Arms
Collectors Assn.
July 24-26, 2015
KCI Expo Center
Kansas City, MO
One Day Show
Sept. 20, 2015
American Legion Hall
499 S 7 Hwy Blue Springs, MO
•••
R. K. Shows
KCI Expo Center
August 22-23, 2015
October 24-25, 2015
December 19-20, 2015
•••
WANENMACHER'S
TULSA ARMS SHOW
EXPO CENTER-EXPO SQUARE
(TULSA FAIRGROUNDS)
TULSA, OKLAHOMA
Nov. 14 & 15, 2015
April 2 & 3, 2016
Nov. 12 & 13, 2016
———
Call 877-333-WMSA
or check the web site
www.wmsa.net
PAGE 5
NECESSARY (Continued from page 1)
someday be lionized and those who stood up for Judeo-Christian morality
treated as monsters?
This series has highlighted the fact that several clauses, necessary and
proper in this case, were crafted by the Constitution’s framers to maintain
the codified limits on the power of the federal government. Ironically, Statists have stood the meaning of these restrictive clauses on their head in
order to force them to do what they were designed to prevent thereby unlocking the limits on and allowing expansion of federal power without
check. For the most part, few if any American are taught the correct purpose and function for the general welfare phrase and the commerce, supremacy, and necessary and proper clauses. Instead, they are taught the
Constitution consists of hidden and implied powers whose existence and
nature await only to be discovered (by Statist liberals of course) and the
binding restrictive intent of the necessary and proper clause is really
“elastic.” For example, William A. McClenaghan, Professor of Political Science at Oregon State University, is author of perhaps the most widely used
textbook in America’s classrooms. He writes that; “The implied powers are
those not expressly stated in the Constitution but are reasonably implied
by those powers that are. The Constitutional basis for the implied powers
is found in one of the expressed powers, Article I, Section 8, clause 18 gives
to Congress the ‘necessary and proper power.”5
“Implied, not expressly stated, reasonably implied,” and “basis for the
implied powers?” According to Founding Father and Constitutional drafter
James Madison, the nature of Article I, Section 8 is restrictive and its immunity to expansion is through that non-flexible nature. To imply powers
not listed is to interpret what is not listed into existence. Powers that are
implied, unseen, and hidden by their very nature are unrestrictive. How
can one restrict the invisible? In Federalist #41, Madison noted that certain critics of the Constitution based opposition to ratification on Congress’s authority to lay and collect taxes, duties, and imposts as open ended and amounting “to an unlimited commission to exercise every power
which may be alleged to be necessary and proper…” Madison countered
that had no enumeration of powers [Article I, Section 8] been included as
the sole purpose for the power to tax and not connected to what was necessary and proper, then critics of the Constitution would have had a valid
point. But that was not the case because both the power to tax and to do
what was necessary and proper was tied to an enumeration of the powers
delegated to the federal government by the states.6 Moreover, Madison
added in Federalist #45; “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to
remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former
will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation,
and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the
most part, be connected.”7
Popular public high school government textbook authors like William
McClenaghan and Richard Hardy promote notions of implied powers that
are deduced, interpreted, and extrapolated from those powers which are
listed, finite and restrictive. Like a legal contract, they establish the very
boundaries of their restrictive nature and do not allow for flexible interpretation otherwise there would be no purpose in being so implicit. Assertions
by proponents of “implied powers” begs the question; who decides when
and what powers will be implied into existence, who decides what is meant
by “reasonable” as to how far a new power will be stretched, and who decides when such implications actually become interpretations that go too
far by altering the meaning of the Constitution? If these questions cannot
be answered explicitly, expressing definable boundaries, then there is no
longer limited government which is one of the bedrock pillars of America’s
founding. Pretending issues raised by such questions are nonexistent
makes perfect sense if one has for an agenda the Statist’s program to abolish the federal in favor of a national system of government. Indeed such
NECESSARY (Continued on page 6)
"We're coming up with new things to be offended by at a much quicker rate than we're retiring old things. This is not sustain able." —Frank Fleming
PAGE 6
THE BULLET
NECESSARY (Continued from page 5)
questions cannot be answered because to do so might
open the eyes of thinking Americans whose reaction
could include efforts to reestablish constitutional government. This would deny politicians opportunities to
construct electoral majorities through vote buying and
ladling out largesse. The intent of limited government
was to hem in the naturally destructive power of government to infringe on the liberties of people.
“Implied” powers are by their nature an expansion of
the power of government unshackled by the chains of
codified limits at the expense of a Constitution written
to protect people from such expansions. Conceding
contemporary reality, McClenaghan writes; “Indeed,
the necessary and proper clause is sometimes called
the elastic clause because, over time, it has been
stretched to cover so much.”8 My point exactly, although I would argue the conclusion that this stretching
happens “sometimes” understates the problem. McClenaghan provides several examples of how reading into
the necessary and proper clause has provided a
“convenient and expedient” tool to expand rather than
limit the power of the federal government; Congress’s
laws regulating “labor management relations, building
hydroelectric dams,” constructing America’s interstate
highway system, federalizing state criminal laws, regulating freedom of association through laws dictating
the use of private property relative to race and socalled “sexual orientation,” and laws regulating commercial activity across state lines.9 None of these powers was ever delegated by the States to the federal government. To have done so would have created a national in place of a federal government, an agenda debated and rejected by the delegates to the Constitutional Convention [1787] meeting in Philadelphia. The vital
clauses; general welfare, commerce, supremacy, and
necessary and proper along with the Tenth Amendment, were drafted and made part of the Constitution
in order to convince its critics that a federal government had indeed been created and could not exceed its
codified boundaries established in Article I, Section 8.
Recall that at the time the new Constitution was being
debated, its proponents had to convince Americans
that they were creating a federal system of very limited
powers that would not infringe on those of the States
creating it. Once again McClenaghan lets the cat out of
the bag observing; “Much of the vitality and adaptability of the United States Constitution can be traced di-
rectly to this provision---and even more so to the ways
both Congress and the Supreme Court have interpreted
and applied it over the years. For good reason---for it
has been stretched so far and made to cover so much
over the years.”10 McClenaghan does not deny nor hide
the fact that this restrictive clause, necessary and proper,
has instead been utilized to make legal essentially whatever Congress wants to do. The notion of limited government, then, is dead.
In 1816, Congress attempted to charter the Second
Bank of the United States going so far as to include provisions for a “national” bonus bill. Profits generated by
the Bonus-Bill were to be used for “internal improvements” (roads, bridges, canals, and such all of which had
been voted down during the constitutional debates)
which were and are unconstitutional and illegal, then
and now. In his last official act as president, James Madison vetoed the bill admonishing Congress that he was
unable to reconcile the Bonus Bill with the Constitution.
He wrote; “The legislative powers vested in Congress are
specific and enumerated in the eighth section of the first
article of the Constitution and it does not appear that the
power proposed to be exercised by the bill is among the
enumerated powers, or that it falls by any just interpretation within the power to make laws necessary and
proper for carrying into execution those or other powers
vested by the Constitution in the government of the
United States.”11 Madison’s veto was based on the fact
there was no Constitutional grant of authority for the
“federal” government to build roads, bridges, or canals
listed in Article 1, Section 8 or any other part of the Constitution.12 Although at times Madison promoted a national as opposed to federal government, so-called “antifederalists” [the true federalists] pointed out that a national system would nullify a limited government by
abolishing the restrictions imposed on it through the
enumerated powers [again, Article 1, Section 8]. In addition, Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts reminded Madison that a federal not national system had been agreed
upon by the delegates to the Constitution Convention
and subsequent State ratifying conventions. Madison
had to agree with Gerry.13 Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court Roger B. Taney of Maryland, wrote in response to
president Lincoln’s Conscription [draft] Act of 1863 noting the government was federal not national which
meant it was granted limited and specific powers. A national government could exercise whatever powers it
wanted but not so a federal system. Congress had the
power to make any law necessary and proper to carry out
only its enumerated powers in Article I, Section 8. In
addition, the 10th Amendment “was adopted after the
ratification process to underscore the fact that the states
remained sovereignties---that is---that they remained
the final authorities in the areas the Constitution did not
delegate to the federal government. Thus any congressional attempt to legislate beyond the known bounds of
Congress’s authority would be ‘a usurpation of state sovereignty---and consequentially, illegal.” Taney’s view
was wholly consistent with that of those called
“Federalists” during the debate over ratification in the
states.14
NECESSARY (Continued on page 7)
"Wherever the real power in a government lies, there is the danger of oppression." —James Madison
THE BULLET
NECESSARY (Continued from page 6)
The Constitution’s framers gave assurances to critics
and the States that they had created a limited government which was important considering the “repeatedly
expressed fears of unlimited government” voiced by so
many Americans. Therefore, notions of any clause being
elastic flies in the face of commons sense as well as the
facts. An elastic clause “would have defeated the purpose
the Framers had in mind in drafting a written Constitution.” The necessary and proper clause was never designed to be elastic because to do so would have been “an
invitation to tyranny that would have horrified just about
everyone. It was intended as a note of clarification only.
It meant not that the federal government was thereby
granted an array of unspecified powers, but that the government could perform simple tasks that were clearly
incidental to carrying out its enumerated powers.”15 Is
this simply the opinion of one scholar?
Examining debates at ratification conventions called
by the states reveals “assurances” that the necessary and
proper clause meant no more than an authorization to
carry out the expressed powers. Virginia delegate George
Nicholas reassured everyone that the clause did not comprise an “augmentation of power.” Madison added it did
not constitute “supplementary powers” in addition to
those enumerated (noting to be stretched, no elasticity].
North Carolina delegate Archibald Maclaine noted the
clause created “no new power” and Pennsylvania Chief
Justice Thomas McKean agreed writing the clause created “no further powers than those enumerated” [again,
not subject to “stretching” to form new unintended powers]. History reveals that the “Constitution would have
been exactly the same had this alleged elastic clause not
been included at all.” Over and over again, when examining the statements of both those who feared and supported a strong central government, it is clear there was never any elasticity imparted to the necessary and proper
clause and, had that not been true, the States would never have ratified the proposed Constitution.16
Using the NSA, FBI, and who knows what other
“federal” agency to spy on law abiding Americans, dispatching the IRS to hound and harass Christian, Conservative, and pro-Israel organizations, employing the
BATF to force law-abiding gun stores to sell firearms to
Mexican Cartels simply to “prove” foreign nationals buy
their weapons at American gun-shows (they don’t), illegal executive orders with respect to amnesty for illegal
PAGE 7
aliens and attempting to shut down American coal mining and production based on hair-brained radical environmentalist fantasy Armageddon scenarios are certainly hallmarks of the Obama administration run
amuck. But, in reality, they are the blueprint and pattern of any government run amuck, no longer hemmed
in and controlled by its own Constitution.
Thomas E. Woods, Jr., Nullification: How To Resist
Federal Tyranny In the 21st Century (Washington, D.C.,
Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2010), 29.
2 Roger B. Beck, Linda Black, et al, editors, Modern
World History: Patterns of Interaction (Evanston, Illinois, McDougal Littell, 2003), 171-172.
3 IBID. 172-173.
4 IBID. 173-174.
5 William A. McClenaghan, Magruder’s American Government (Needham, Massachusetts, Prentice Hall, Simon & Schuster, Education Group, 1988), 75.
6 Clinton Rossiter, Editor, The Federalist Papers: Federalist #41 (New York, N.Y., A Mentor Book from New
American Library, 1961), 262-263.
7 IBID. 292-293.
8 McClenaghan, 75.
9 IBID. 75
10 IBID. 271.
11 Thomas E Woods, Jr., and Kevin R.C. Gutzman, Who
Killed the Constitution? (New York, N.Y., Crown Forum, Random House, Inc., 2008), 74-75.
12 IBID. 75-76
13 IBID. 110.
14 IBID. 121-123.
15 Thomas E. Woods, Jr., Nullification: How To Resist
Federal Tyranny In the 21st Century (Washington, D.C.,
Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2010), 29.
16 IBID. 29-32.
1
"The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that
business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either
deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and
either one should scare us. Business doesn't pay taxes.... Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business. Begin
with the food and fiber raised in the farm, to the ore
drilled in a mine, to the oil and gas from out of the
ground, whatever it may be -- through the processing,
through the manufacturing, on out to the retailer's license. If the tax cannot be included in the price of the
product, no one along that line can stay in business."
--Ronald Reagan
“Washington, D.C. is a place where delusions go to
thrive. That explains why Congress and the president
are now agreed on remedies that will not work, expending money they do not have, to fix a problem that may
not exist.”
—Steve Chapman
"Good government is the most dangerous government, because it deprives people of the need to look after themselves." —Gandhi
PAGE 8
THE BULLET
CCRKBA LAUNCHES NEW EFFORT TO
‘CULTIVATE’ GRASSROOTS
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep
and Bear Arms has launched a new national campaign
aimed at countering the multi-million dollar gun control lobbying effort of billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s
“Everytown for Gun Safety.”
“While Bloomberg is spending millions of dollars to create Astroturf,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan
M. Gottlieb, “our mission is to cultivate honest grassroots activism.”
CCRKBA has already aired a 30-second spot
on some key cable networks, and the full program will
have spots appearing on the following networks: FOX
Business, SPIKE, Velocity, American Heroes, History
and H2, TNT, Do It Yourself, AMC, Discovery and Investigation Discovery, the Outdoor Channel, the
Sportsman Channel, CMT, Trinity Broadcast Network,
Fox News, The Blaze and the Weather Channel.
“This is one of our most ambitious undertakings,”
Gottlieb explained. “We’re challenging what might
best be described as a public disinformation effort
backed by a multi-billionaire who is becoming increasingly involved in state level politics. He may spend
millions of dollars, but we’re reaching out to millions
of law-abiding citizens.
“Our country is experiencing increasing turmoil and the threat of so-called ‘lone wolf’ terrorism,”
he added. “Now is not the time to be eroding the most
basic tenet of our liberty, which is the one right that
protects all of our other rights. The system may be
broken, but surrendering our rights is not the way to
fix it.
“Wealthy demagogues think they can buy the
power to tell everyone else how to live,” Gottlieb said.
“The Bill of Rights is not up for grabs, especially not
one piece at a time. Today these elitists are after the
Second Amendment, but what about tomorrow? The
First Amendment right of free speech? Maybe the
Fourth Amendment right of privacy. Or how about the
Fifth Amendment right of due process?
“This battle isn’t about guns,” he said. “This is
about freedom, and that’s not for sale at any price.”
New Yorkers Say 'No' to SAFE Act
The New York State Police initially shot down inquiries
into how many "assault weapons" have been registered with
the state after its legislature enacted the SAFE Act in 2013,
and we now have a pretty good idea why — because compliance is abysmal. On April 30, New York Supreme Court
Judge Thomas McNamara ordered the State Police to disclose registration statistics. According to the figures, which
were made public this week, just 23,847 gun owners have
registered a total of 44,485 military-looking weapons. For
perspective, that's less than the 50,000 firearms registered
under a similar law in Connecticut. Keep in mind, Connecticut has a population of 3.6 million, according to the Census
Bureau. New York's is 19.8 million. Just a small disparity.
Keep in mind also that New Yorkers own somewhere
around 1,000,000 of these so-called assault rifles, which
would mean just 4% of eligible firearms have been registered. Leah Barrett, executive director of New Yorkers
Against Gun Violence, tried to put a positive spin on the numbers, responding, "Tens of thousands of people have complied
with the law. That's important. It shouldn't be overlooked."
What shouldn't be overlooked either is that the overwhelming
majority of New Yorkers are exercising civil disobedience by
rejecting a blatantly unconstitutional law. And they aren't afraid
to be jailed for it, either.
Obama's New 'Angry' Standard for Owning Guns
As we have already noted here and here, Barack Obama
wants you to believe that the horrific murders in Charleston last
week happened because his gun control agenda has been
thwarted. In a new interview — part of a comedian's somehow
appropriately titled podcast "WTF With Marc Maron" —
Obama blamed the NRA. "Unfortunately, the grip of the NRA
on Congress is extremely strong," he said. "I don't foresee any
legislative action being taken by this Congress." Fortunately,
the Second Amendment, which the NRA defends, still holds
sway with enough members of Congress to stop Obama's agenda. Of course, he trotted out his usual trope about how he concedes "we have to be respectful" of the traditions of "hunting
and sportsmanship around firearms," neither of which have
much to do with our rights. But his most worrisome statement
was on the standards for background checks, which the
Charleston murderer passed. Obama wants those background
checks to be even tougher to pass. How tough? Obama asked,
"The question is just, is there a way of accommodating that
legitimate set of [hunting and sporting] traditions with some
common-sense stuff that prevents a 21-year-old who's angry
about something — or confused about something, or is racist,
or is deranged — from going into a gun store, and suddenly he's
packing and can do enormous harm?" So now the standard is
whether someone is merely angry, confused or racist? Who gets
to decide that? If it's Obama, no Republican would ever be permitted to purchase a gun.
“We are so robotic in America whenever the word
‘discrimination’ is used that we shut down thought and all
genuflect in the direction of whoever is complaining. But
the proper question is not whether it is discrimination but
whether it is justified.”
—Mona Charen
"Ain't it funny how many hundreds of thousands of
soldiers we can recruit with nerve. But we just can't find
one politician in a million with backbone."
--American humorist Will Rogers
"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid." —Ronal Reagan
THE BULLET
PAGE 9
Muzzling Both Guns and Speech
By Allyne Caan
Given Barack Obama’s contempt for the Second
Amendment — after all, an armed citizenry is the last line of
defense against a tyrannical government — it’s little wonder
that a proposed rule relating to the International Traffic in
Arms Regulations (ITAR) governing the export of certain
"defense articles" is raising concerns.
The rule, published in the June 3 issue of the Federal
Register, proposes to regulate speech — including online
speech — relating to firearms and to require government approval before individuals can share certain information publicly. Penalties for violations climb as high as $1 million or
20 years in jail.
Specifically, the proposed rule rewrites key definitions in
ITAR, including “technical data,” “public domain” and
“export.” Currently under ITAR, any weapons-related information that is in the “public domain” can be shared without
penalty. However, now that the age of technology has thrown
a wrinkle into the meaning of “public domain,” the government feels the need to “clarify.” At first glance, the clarification sounds well and good, as the rule states, “Except as set
forth in paragraph (b) of this section, unclassified information
and software are in the public domain, and are thus not technical data or software subject to the ITAR, when they have
been made available to the public without restrictions upon
their further dissemination.”
But it’s what comes in paragraph (b) that has folks
concerned. It turns out that, this “clarification” notwithstanding, “public domain” really means only what the government
says it means. The rule continues, “Technical data or software, whether or not developed with government funding, is
not in the public domain if it has been made available to the
public without authorization from: (1) The Directorate of
Defense Trade Controls; (2) The Department of Defense’s
Office of Security Review; (3) The relevant U.S. government
contracting entity with authority to allow the technical data or
software to be made available to the public; or (4) Another
U.S. government official with authority to allow the technical
data or software to be made available to the public.”
According to the National Rifle Association, the outcome of such a rule is troublesome: “Gunsmiths, manufacturers, reloaders, and do-it-yourselfers could all find themselves
muzzled under the rule and unable to distribute or obtain the
information they rely on to conduct these activities.” One
minute you’re posting a description of a new firearm design,
and the next you’re accused of exporting technical data to a
foreign government.
Particularly noteworthy, too, is the timing of the proposed rule, as it comes on the heels of Defense Distributed's
lawsuit against the federal government. Defense Distributed
is a pro-Second Amendment organization targeted by the
State Department in 2013 for allegedly exporting technical
data illegally. Two years ago, it published online plans to 3D
print a pistol after it developed a single-shot .22 pistol named
The Liberator.
As The Federalist’s Sean Davis reports, Defense Distributed’s supposed crime was little more than “mak[ing] its
data, compiled entirely from publicly available information,
available for free on the internet.” In response, the government demanded the group submit its speech to Uncle Sam for
approval before dissemination. When Defense Distributed
attempted to comply, the government delayed by doing nothing. So Defense Distributed filed suit in May, and, voila, on
June 3 we have the newly proposed rule.
While it’s certainly important that the government protect
against the public sharing of confidential weapons information, the wording of the proposed rule — particularly given the nature of this administration — is hardly comforting.
Indeed, as National Review’s Charles C. W. Cooke notes,
“[I]t is difficult to imagine how any firearms website would
be able to survive the regulators’ caprice.” And while it’s
possible such an outcome was not the administration’s intent,
it’s also possible it was.
The good news is that the administration is accepting public
comment until August 3 on the proposed rule, and it certainly
wouldn’t be a bad idea to push for clarification. After all,
trusting the good intentions of any government has never
proven an effective defense of Liberty.
SCOTUS Passes on Chance to Set 2A Ruling Right
Not exactly profiles in courage, but the Supreme Court
declined to review two lower court rulings upholding San
Francisco's draconian gun control laws. The Associated Press
reports, "The court on Monday let stand court rulings in favor
of a city measure that requires handgun owners to secure
weapons in their homes by storing them in a locker, keeping
them on their bodies or applying trigger locks. A second ordinance bans the sale of ammunition that expands on impact,
has 'no sporting purpose' and is commonly referred to as hollow-point bullets." Of course, in DC v. Heller, the Supreme
Court struck down a requirement about locking down a firearm in the home, saying the Second Amendment protects the
right of the people to keep a "lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense." So by declining to hear this case, the justices are allowing a patchwork
of wrong interpretations of its ruling to stand. As Justice
Clarence Thomas wrote, "Despite the clarity with which we
described the Second Amendment’s core protection for the
right of self-defense, lower courts, including the ones here,
have failed to protect it." Furthermore, they're passing on an
opportunity to clarify the most important point of all: The
Second Amendment is not "for sporting purposes." The ban
on hollow-point ammunition is beyond asinine, but the justices can't be bothered to fire anything but blanks.
"In America, our origins matter less than our destination, and that is what democracy is all about." —Ronald Reagan
PAGE 10
THE BULLET
We’re having a raffle!
It’s time for another fundraiser. Last year we raffled off a Ruger 10/22 configured to
look like a Thompson SMG. This year we’re raffling off an AR-15.
The rules for this year’s raffle are a bit different than from previous raffles. First,
we’ve limited the number of raffle tickets to only 500. Second, unlike some pr evious
raffles, we will not mail tickets to members to sell. Tickets will be available at all General
meetings and at events where WMSA has a table. Third, in addition to building our treasury
for the coming year, this year’s raffle is aimed towards gaining more WMSA members.
The tickets are $10 each. Only 500 are being printed. If you buy one ticket, you have
one chance in five hundred of winning. If you buy two tickets, your chances rise to two
chances in five hundred. As an added incentive, bring in a new member and get a free raffle
ticket. Any current member who brings in a new WMSA member gets a free raffle ticket for
each new member added to our rolls.
Bring your prospective new member to a General membership meeting and when the
new member completes the membership application and pays their dues, you are handed a
ticket, no charge! No WMSA funds were used to acquire the rifle nor the accessories.
The drawing for the rifle will be at the January 2016 general meeting…or earlier if all
the raffle tickets are sold. Don’t want to wait until January? Go recruit new members, get a
free ticket for every member and exhaust our limited number of tickets. The quicker they are
all gone, the sooner we’ll have the drawing.
Tickets can also be obtained via mail by sending a check to the WMSA, P.O. Box
11144, Kansas City, MO 64119.
If you win, what will you get? You get more than just the rifle. The rifle itself is a flat-top
M4 clone.
DPMS Sportical M-4 Clone (Photo of the actual rife.)
DPMS Sportical Carbine AR-15 rifle / 5.56 NATO 16” barrel
4 Magpul 30 round magazines & one factory 30 round metal magazine.
Soft side tactical rifle case with 6 Pockets.
Miculek DPMS Muzzle Brake — installed.
Hogue overmolded pistol grip — installed.
NcStar 3X9 power dual illuminated reticle tactical rifle scope — installed.
1 case (500 rds.) Federal XM193, 5.56mm 55g, FMJ Ammunition.
Here’s your chance for an AR, or another if you already have one. Come to our next General
meeting and buy your tickets!
"The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it." -- H. L. Mencken
THE BULLET
PAGE 11
MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION
WESTERN MISSOURI SHOOTERS ALLIANCE
The Alliance is a regionally-based, grass-roots organization that seeks to;
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
Counter the designs of malicious legislators.
Confront the media’s twisted portrayals of gun rights issues.
Politicize and activate gun owners in defense of their rights.
Acquaint the public with the true nature of the Second Amendment.
Network with other pro-gun groups to coordinate local, state and national strategies.
Train people in basic firearm safety and handgun defense.
Sponsor and support pro-gun legislation.
Make politicians aware that gun owners are awakening from their accustomed apathy and
WILL TOLERATE NO FURTHER EROSION OF THEIR FREEDOMS!
Date: _____/_____/_____
Name: ______________________________
Address:_____________________________
City:________________________________
Mail to:
Western Missouri Shooters Alliance
P.O. Box 11144
Kansas City, MO 64119
Hotline (877) 333-WMSA
www.wmsa.net
County: ___________________
State:________ Zip:___________
Occupation: __________________________
Home Phone: (____) ____-_________
E-Mail _________________________
Cell Phone: (____) ____-________
NRA member? ____
Registered Voter? ____
Check membership type:
___ Annual
$25 (voting rights)
___ Sponsor
$100 (4 business card
ads per year.)
___ Senior
$15 (65+)
__ Sponsor
$250 (12 business card
ads per year.)
___ Associate
$10 (spouse, no newsletter)
__ Sponsor
$500 (4 half- page ads
per year.)
__ Sponsor
$1000 (12 half- page ads
per year.)
Dedicated to the restoration of the inalienable right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment
PAGE 12
THE BULLET
Western Missouri Shooters Alliance
P O Box 11144
Kansas City, MO 64119
PRESORT STD
AUTO
U.S. POSTAGE PAID
OAK GROVE, MO
PERMIT NO. 60
...dedicated to the restoration of the inalienable right to
keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment
*REMINDER* Next General Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 7:00 PM
Meeting located at Bass Pro Conservation Room, Independence, MO
CONTACT INFORMATION - Let them know what you think!
Missouri State Senate
Jason Holsman—D -Dist 7
201 W Capitol Ave., Rm. 421
Jefferson City, Misouri 65101
(573)751-6607
Will Kraus—R -Dist 8
201 W Capitol Ave., Rm. 418
Jefferson City, Misouri 65101
(573) 751-1464
S. Kiki Curls—D -Dist 9
201 W Capitol Ave., Rm. 434
Jefferson City, Misouri 65101
(573) 751-3158
Paul LeVota—D—Dist 11
201 W Capitol Ave., Rm. 330
Jefferson City, Misouri 65101
(573) 751-3074
Dan Hegeman—R -Dist 12
201 W Capitol Ave., Rm. 332
Jefferson City, Misouri 65101
(573) 751– 1415
Ryan Silvey—R - Dist 17
201 W Capitol Ave., Rm. 331A
Jefferson City, Misouri 65101
(573) 751-5282
David Pearce -R—Dist 21
201 W Capitol Ave., Rm. 227
Jefferson City, Misouri 65101
(573) 751-7381
Pat Conway—D—Dist 10
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 109B
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-9755
Noell J Shull - R Dist 16
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 201B
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-9458
Donna Pfautsch - R Dist 33
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 236B
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-9766
Nathan Beard— R - Dist 52
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 409A
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-9774
Ed Emery—R—Dist 31
201 W Capitol Ave., Rm. 426
Jefferson City, Misouri 65101
(573) 751-2108
Galen Higdon—R -Dist. 11
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 412A
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-3643
Nick King - R Dist 17
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 201-CA
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-1218
Rebecca Roeber - R Dist 34
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 116-3
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-1456
Glen Kolkmeyer - R Dist 53
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 400CA
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-1462
Rob Schaaf—R—Dist 34
201 W Capitol Ave., Rm. 423
Jefferson City, Misouri 65101
(573) 751-2183
Kenneth Wilson—R _Dist 12
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 206A
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-9760
Lauren Arthur - D Dist 18
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 109H
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-2199
Gary L. Cross - R Dist 35
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 112
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-1459
Denny Hoskins - R - Dist 54
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 301
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-4302
Missouri House
Nick Marshall—R— Dist 13
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 134
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-6593
Mike Cierpiot—R Dist 30
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 302B
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-0907
T. J. Berry - R Dist 38
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 205
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-2238
Rick Brattin— R - Dist 55
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 114C
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-3783
Kevin Corlew—R Dist 14
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 201A
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-3618
Sheila Solon - R - Dist 31
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 305B
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-8636
Joe Don McGaugh - R -Dist 39
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 236A
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-1468
Jack Bondon - R - Dist 56
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 201F
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-2175
Jon Carpenter— D - Dist 15
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 101-I
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-4787
Jeanie Lauer— R Dist 32
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 413B
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-1487
Dean Dohrman - R Dist 51
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 115G
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-2204
Wanda Brown - R - Dist 57
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 412C
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-3971
Jim Neely—R—Dist 8
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 110A
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-0246
Delus Johnson—R—Dist. 9
201 West Capitol Ave Rm. 302-1
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-3666
WEB ADDRESSES - Get educated!
Gun Owners of America
www.gunowners.org
703-321-8585
Gateway Civil Liberties Alliance
http://www.gclastl.org/
866 385-GUNS (4867)
Women Against Gun Control
www.wagc.com
801-328-9660
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
www.JPFO.org
262- 673-9745
Missouri Sport Shooting Association
www.missourisportshooting.org/
NewsMax.com
www.newsmax.com
The National Rifle Association
www.nra.org
800-672-3888
Western Missouri Shooters Alliance
www.wmsa.net
The Paul Revere Network
www.paulrevere.org
312- 482-9910
Second Amendment Sisters, Inc.
www.2asisters.org
877- 271-6216
The Second Amendment Foundation
www.saf.org
425- 454-7012
Arming Women Against Rape and Endangerment
www.aware.org
877-672-9273
The Washington Times
www.washtimes.com
The London Telegraph
www.telegraph.co.uk
The Drudge Report
www.drudgereport.com