Dr David Steinhof Issues Statement on Gun Control

Dr. David Steinhof is a
dentist in Fall River,
MA, and has worked his whole life in the private sector.  He is the
conservative choice in this year's GOP primary for the MA 4^th
Congressional District.  For more information or media availability, go to
www.davidsteinhof.com or contact Campaign Director Scott Anderson.

_________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

Press Release from the Campaign of Dr David Steinhof, Candidate for Congress from the MA 4^th Congressional District
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gun Control.

The horrific slaughter that occurred recently has brought a slew of demands from many on the left for more gun control. As is always the case, we're now discovering that the assailant was mentally unstable, and again as is always the case, the assailant's screams of intention were systematically ignored.  In practically all instances of massive gun violence (including the massacres at Virginia Tech and Columbine High School) guns were already banned on those properties. In one case, a person who had a license to carry a gun lamented that his gun was locked in his vehicle because he could not bring it on campus. In this case, as is probably the case in many instances, one gun in the hands of just one law-abiding citizen could have saved dozens of lives.

It should be noted that Chicago has already listed over 200 murders since January of this year, yet it has the strictest gun laws in the country. The assumption in much of the media is always based on the premise that anyone who owns a gun, buys a gun, stores ammunition, or wishes to carry a concealed weapon for the purposes of protection, is an extremist. I would also note, as is usually the case, that in their zeal to ostracize those whose political beliefs differ from theirs, many in the media are quick to lay blame at the feet of the Tea Party without so much as a shred of evidence.

In all cases of gun violence such as this, the person responsible is mentally ill. Lawmakers should be able to make the determination for the difference between law-abiding citizens and criminal intent. Maybe we should be abandoning political correctness for a better system in identifying and taking proper care of those who suffer with severe mental illness before they decide to finalize their intentions for murder.

Criminals are by definition those who would ignore the law.  Are we foolish enough to believe more laws would prevent the actions of those who have already chosen to ignore law?  New laws and restrictions such as gun free zones are knee jerk reactions that only put law abiding citizens at risk.  Anti-gun politicians prey on the emotions of their constituents in order to gain easy votes and support but, in reality, they are demonstrating an unwillingness to uphold our Constitution while doing nothing to treat the real problem.

For Related Posts Regarding the 4th Congressional Primary Race click on the following links:
MA 4th Congressional District Candidate David Steinhof: "The Beginning of the Season of the Conservative" 
US Congressional Candidate Dr David Steinhof Condems Sex-Selective Abortion
Bielat's Troubled Voting Record
Sean Bielat: A Pattern of Deceit

Marine Stuns a Tea Party With the Fourth Verse of Star Spangled Banner

 There are actually 4 verses and this inspiring rendition that took the crowd at a Tea Party event by surprise is the 4th verse:

 Oh! thus be it ever, when free men shall stand 
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation 
Blest with victory and peace, may the heaven-rescued land 
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation. 
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just, 
And thus be our motto: "In God is our trust" 
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave 
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave

In doing some research on all four stanzas of the national anthem, I discovered an  interesting piece by the late Isaac Asimov, that was published in 1991 in the Pure Water Gazzete, that tells the story behind the writing of the National Anthem that all who cherish freedom need to understand, seeing that history isn’t taught properly in our schools anymore, by liberal, agenda driven, union workers.

The following excerpt also  shows that if there really was a stealth like principle called “Separation of Church and State” embedded in our founding documents, the poet, Francis Scot Key,who wrote his impressions of seeing the American flag still flying at battle torn Fort McHenry that morning in 1812, certainly hadn’t heard about it.


A drawing of the 15 star flag that Key looked at from a distance is seen in the photo below.

In 1812, the United States went to war with Great Britain, primarily over freedom of the seas. We were in the right. For two years, we held off the British, even though we were still a rather weak country. Great Britain was in a life and death struggle with Napoleon. In fact, just as the United States declared war, Napoleon marched off to invade Russia. If he won, as everyone expected, he would control Europe, and Great Britain would be isolated. It was no time for her to be involved in an American war.

At first, our seamen proved better than the British. After we won a battle on Lake Erie in 1813, the American commander, Oliver Hazard Perry, sent the message "We have met the enemy and they are ours." However, the weight of the British navy beat down our ships eventually. New England, hard-hit by a tightening blockade, threatened secession.

Meanwhile, Napoleon was beaten in Russia and in 1814 was forced to abdicate. Great Britain now turned its attention to the United States, launching a three-pronged attack. The northern prong was to come down Lake Champlain toward New York and seize parts of New England. The southern prong was to go up the Mississippi, take New Orleans and paralyze the west. The central prong was to head for the mid-Atlantic states and then attack Baltimore, the greatest port south of New York. If Baltimore was taken, the nation, which still hugged the Atlantic  coast, could be split in two. The fate of the United States, then, rested to a large extent on the success or failure of the central prong.

The British reached the American coast, and on August 24, 1814, took Washington, D. C. Then they moved up the Chesapeake Bay toward Baltimore. On September 12, they arrived and found 1000 men in Fort McHenry, whose guns controlled the harbor. If the British wished to take Baltimore, they would have to take the fort.

On one of the British ships was an aged physician, William Beanes, who had been arrested in Maryland and brought along as a prisoner. Francis Scott Key, a lawyer and friend of the physician, had come to the ship to negotiate his release. The British captain was willing, but the two Americans would have to wait. It was now the night of September 13, and the bombardment of Fort McHenry was about to start.

As twilight deepened, Key and Beanes saw the American flag flying over Fort McHenry. Through the night, they heard bombs bursting and saw the red glare of rockets. They knew the fort was resisting and the American flag was still flying. But toward morning the bombardment ceased, and a dread silence fell. Either Fort McHenry had surrendered and the British flag flew above it, or the bombardment had failed and the American flag still flew.

As dawn began to brighten the eastern sky, Key and Beanes stared out at the fort, trying to see which flag flew over it. He and the physician must have asked each other over and over, "Can you see the flag?"

After it was all finished, Key wrote a four stanza poem telling the events of the night. Called "The Defence of Fort M'Henry," it was published in newspapers and swept the nation. Someone noted that the words fit an old English tune called "To Anacreon in Heaven" --a difficult melody with an uncomfortably large vocal range. For obvious reasons, Key's work became known as "The Star Spangled Banner," and in 1931 Congress declared it the official anthem of the United States.

Now that you know the story, here are the words. Presumably, the old doctor is speaking. This is what he asks Key 

Oh! say, can you see, by the dawn's early light,
W hat so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?

And the rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof thro' the night that our flag was still there.
Oh! say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave,
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

"Ramparts," in case you don't know, are the protective walls or other elevations that surround a fort. The first stanza asks a question. The second gives an answer

On the shore, dimly seen thro' the mist of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep.
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?

Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected, now shines on the stream
'Tis the star-spangled banner. Oh! long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

"The towering steep" is again, the ramparts. The bombardment has failed, and the British can do nothing more but sail away, their mission a failure.

In the third stanza, I feel Key allows himself to gloat over the American triumph. In the aftermath of the bombardment, Key probably was in no mood to act otherwise.During World War II, when the British were our staunchest allies, this third stanza was not sung. However, I know it, so here it is 

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footstep's pollution. 

No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

The fourth stanza, a pious hope for the future, should be sung more slowly than the other three and with even deeper feeling. 

Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation,
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the Heav'n - rescued land
Praise the Pow'r that hath made and preserved us a nation.

Then conquer we must, for our cause is just,
And this be our motto--"In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

I hope you will look at the national anthem with new eyes. Listen to it, the next time you have a chance, with new ears. 

And don't let them ever take it away.


Isaac Asimov 1991

Sources:

“All Four Stanzaz”, Isaac Asimov, the PurewaterGazette, 1991  http://www.purewatergazette.net/asimov.htm

Open Letter to Mitt Romney

Dear Governor Romney,

      If there is anything I have learned during this political season it is that no one plays political hard ball better than you, which is why I’m absolutely mortified that you have insisted on selecting a defensive strategy against Obama’s unconscionable attacks on Bain capital as a job killer and you as a "felon", after you had left the firm to run one of the most successful Olympics in US History. 

     There has never been a politician more vulnerable to attacks on criminality from his admitted cocaine use and distribution of drugs to his association with real life Chicago criminals and hate filled monsters like Bill Ayers, Rev Jeremiah Wright, Bernadette Dorn, and Tony Rezko, yet we have to sit back while you grow weak kneed at the thought of attacking the “slime ball in chief’s” well known vulnerabilities.

   As a conservative activist in MA GOP I watched from a distance as you eviscerated a sizzling array of conservative opponents during the 2012 GOP Primary campaign without barely missing a beat. One after another went down with the help of vicious campaign ads filled with lies and distortions, produced by your PACs.

  Back here in Massachusetts however, I watched much closer as you placed your hand picked surrogate, “Bribing Bob Maginn”in a position to take over the MA GOP, despite his habit of contributing large sums of money to Democrat candidates with repulsive names like Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer and Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick.

The most viol, despicable, underhanded, coldhearted action you have chosen so far, however, was when you ripped the political hearts out of 17 duly elected delegates selected at the Massachusetts Caucuses last April, by using a few MA GOP corrupt operatives to lead a move to have them decertified on absurd technicalities.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not in any way a supporter of Ron Paul like those who were decertified, despite signing affidavits to vote for your nomination at the Tampa convention, but this latest move was so corrupt and ruthless, it literally turns my stomach and makes me ashamed that you're a former governor of Massachusetts, in addition to being a Presidential candidate with a chip on his shoulder towards conservatives and strict constitutionalists like the Ron Paul people.

Knowing your record of hardball tactics this past year, however, it is very difficult to watch President Obama succeed at portraying you as a “felon”, based on your dealings in the business world, which no student of business believes is any thing less than the type of best practices approach that have helped America maintain its status as an economic superpower for generations on end. Now to watch you "wimp out" and back off from attacking the vulnerabilities of one of the most inept Presidents in our history is mind boggling to say the least.

Is it simply because he is America’s first black president, that you wont bring up his own autobiography which is filled with fodder to destroy him for ever and ever, Amen: or why you won’t bring up the names Bernadette Dorn, Bill Ayers, or the Rev Jeremiah Wright; or why you wont bring up the fact that Obama’s house was purchased by Chicago thug Tony Rezko; or why you insist on blaming his surrogates, instead of Obama himself, while he has no compunction to stop identifying you as the menace behind Bain Capitals penchant for “outsourcing”, after you had actually left the company? (By the way he doesn’t even understand what outsourcing is). I mean he doesn't know what he's talking about...Ugh!

I’m afraid that liberals have a track record of success against Republican candidates who refuse to defend themselves against personal attacks and go for the juglar on offense, as well, as John McCain learned in the 2008 campaign; and one of the most ethical, moral, principled, godly Presidents who has ever worked in the Oval Office, George W Bush learned after 6 years of vicious lies and distortions hurled at him by his opponents in the media and the Democrat party.


 “Bush Lied and People Died” is still thought to be true in the minds of mush for brains students of politics and the clueless electorate that turned on Bush before his second term was even up, leaving the door open for one of the most unqualified candidates to ever run for the office. . 

In closing I urge you to fight back, not by correcting distortions, but by going after Obama’s endless record of questionable and real acts of criminality. To start with you could just pick up his own autobiography, Dreams of My Father, and read his words, not yours to the public, as Rush Limbaugh suggested yesterday, and you’ll be on your way, once again to the White House, without question.

Don’t tell us that you don’t have it in you, because those of us who are part of a growing coalition of conservatives in the MA GOP know better, as do one of the most impressive array of great conservative candidates we’ve ever seen run in a national Presidential Primary learned this year before they became relegated to the historical ash heap of Presidential hopefuls, due to your superb hardball tactics. Start using them on the bad guys for a change, will ya Mitt...

Although you may may have detected correctly that I am no fan of yours, I do believe you are not a communist, nor are you  a national security risk, nor do you have an agenda to destroy the US economy, and for those reasons along with many others, I’ll be glad to vote for you, but you need to go after this guy, and go after him now. I know there will be nothing left of him when you’re finish. Best of Luck.


.Sincerly Tom Wholley
                              The Jazz Patriot


Sources:
Rush Limbaugh:Romney Must Fight The Felon Charge

In Our Hands Part II: How We Got What We Have (1950)

A video that everyone needs to see to remind us of the basics of economic freedom that made the United States the Economic success we once were, before socialism began to eat away at our culture, like the cancer that it is. It's not too late, to turn things around, but it starts with defeating Obama this November, or we are doomed, and that is a fact. This is a video that the present socialist regime in the White House will never be able to understand. It's beyond them. They despise capitalists and the creators and producers in this country, and the people who use their money to invest in the products and services that make life easier and more enjoyable for all of us, people like Mitt Romney, who should be praised for his efforts, not condemned.
It's refreshing to remember that folks were't confused fifty years ago by what were proper work ethics, and seemed to be happier and content about it. Their existence wasn't dependent on "legalized plunder", as the 19th century French Philosopher, Frederic Bastiet referred to "redistribution of wealth" and confiscation of private property in his classic literary masterpiece entitled "The Law" which you may listen to on a free audio book.
How did we go from the values expressed in the above video to the ideas expressed by Stephen King in the following poster, that I found on my facebook page this morning?

How could someone as intelligent as King, buy into this classic liberal nonsense? Doesn't upward mobility result from the liberty we have to development our own God given talents through hard work? Historically, Americans, as portrayed in the above video series I've been featuring on the Jazz Patriot, during the last few days in which the Obama administration has been disparaging those who have become wealthy through hard work, unlike the Ted Kennedy's and John Kerry's of the world who gained their wealth through inheritance or marriage, we had a government that was required under law to back off and leave us alone, resulting in the greatest economic superpower the world has ever known.?

In Our Hands Part I: How We Got What We Have (1950)

With my 91 year old mother recovering from emergency brain surgery for an intercrainal blod clot last Sunday evening, my time to work on the type of conservative issue oriented yet time consuming writing projects I love working on, has been limited, leaving me little time left for anything but hospital visitation and time alone with God. Therefore, I thought this period would be a good time to take a look at a collection of videos I was planning on posting at such a time as this, though I didn't realize that time would come so soon after receiving these just a few days before my Moms attack. Thanks goes out to David Kopacz, president of the Massachusetts Republican Assembly (MARA) for bringing this 1950's public domain video to my attention, which is very instructional in seeing how the values of hard work and ingenuity have played a part in creating the successful experiment known as the United States of America. ________________________________________________________________________________

Cartoon Predicts the Future 50 Years Ago. This Is Amazing Insight

Romney Backed MA GOP Corruption Scandal Picked UP by MSNBC

John and Abigail Adams would love Sarah Palin, despite what MoveOn.org thinks

The anti Christian bigotry and hatred in the photo above of Sarah Palin and John Adams, that was posted on my facebook page today,  is totally irrational. My guess is that this obscure quote by John Adams is being taken totally out of context by the photo's creators at Move On.org,, whose hostility towards the principles Sarah Palin defends unabashedly,  are well known.


And then the posters at Facebook went on to deride Sarah Palin with some of the most vicious hate filled names imaginable, while praising John Adams as a hero and wise man for his supposedly secular views.

Although it is difficult to understand the full context in which Adams made this statement, I do know that many of the writings of John Adams that I have seen, concerned his fear of offending the other founding fathers, who were men of deep faith and undying devotion to their respective denominations.

It is quite understandable how people in today's secular culture would misinterpret the observations made by Adams in the following letter to his wife Abigail, after the very first session of the Continental Congress on September 7, 1774, as religious indifference, which was completely opposite of their true feelings.

You must remember in early America, they were still living on the coat-tails of the Protestant Reformation, and differences in denominational practices were life and death issues during the period in which they or their ancestors fled England, for the most part, not just because of religious persecution, but denominational persecution.

The freedom to worship in the denomination of their choice was paramount in their minds  during this great religious revival called "the Great Awakening",  that preceded the American revolution. If you miss that,  you miss the whole point of placing the establishment clause at the very top of all the protections against an over abusive government that were added to the Constitution, in the Bill of Rights, just to make sure the right to worship in the Christian denomination of their choice would be preserved, down through the ages.

Also, and this is very important to understand, when the word "religion", was used they weren't talking about Christianity. The fact that everyone was expected to at least respect Christian values and practices, whether they practiced holy living or not, and we know, many of them did not, was a given. The word "religion" referred to their Christian denomination and theology that governed their individual sects and guided them as a member of "the Body of Christ", which was the true church revealed to the apostle Paul and only the apostle Paul by Jesus himself in the New Testatament..

The writings of the founding fathers which should be examined in a book entitled America's God and Country  by William J Federer,  indicate that they never imagined a future Supreme Court in the 1950's would manufacture the principle of Separation of Church and State, as an opening salvo for implementing an agenda of stripping all vestiges of God from official government currency, buildings, and in the classrooms and public squares of the future United States of America, as you can see in what John Adams wrote his wife.      

When the Congress met. Mr Cushing made a motion that it should be opened with Prayer. It was opposed by Mr Jay of New York, and Mr Rutledge of  South Carolina because we were so divided to religious sentiments, some Episcopalians, some Quakers, some Anabaptists, some Presbyterians, and come Congregationalists, that we could not join in the same act of worship.

Mr Samuel Adams arose and said that he was no bigot and could hear a Prayer from any gentleman of Piety and virtue, who was at the same time a friend of his Country.

They reached an agreement and allowed an Episcopal clergyman named Mr Duche, to read Prayers to Congress the next morning. I imagine this was difficult for many of these individuals, who were used to a less formal form and style of worship and praying heard in other Protestant denominations of the day. That would still be true today for some, but not,  I'm sure,  for the vast majority in todays secular culture, that don't have the foggiest idea what I'm talking about, thinking  that they are the musings of some kind of a religious fanatic. No, I'm just telling you the truth, which you'll never hear in the secular media.. 

BTW, many members  of Baptist churches down South, even today, would not be comfortable attending a convention of some type where the opening prayer was lead by  an Episcopal, Roman Catholic, or even a Northern Presbyterian or Methodist,  and it certainly wouldn’t be because they were less religious. If asked, someone who starts each day alone with God in prayer, might even go so far as to opt for eliminating the opening prayer from the program, under those circumstances.  

If you don’t believe that John Adams felt strongly about his faith, read what he wrote to his wife, Abigail, next after the agreement  had been made and the prayers delivered.

I never saw a greater effect upon an audience. It seemed as if heaven had ordained that Psalm to be read on that morning. After this, Mr Duche, unexpectedly, to everybody, struck out into an extemporary prayer, which filled the bosom of every man present. I must confess, I never heard a better prayer, or one so well pronounced.

Does that sound like a man who felt the Christian faith had no influence over the founding of the Country, and it's day to day affairs.. What about this one, which John Adams wrote in his notes for a Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, February of 1765:

I always consider the settlement of America with reverence and wonder, as the opening  of a grand scene and design in Providence for the illumination of the Ignorant, and the emancipation of the slavish part of mankind  all over the earth. (He’s not talking about slavery on plantations; he’s talking about slavery to sin) 

Now lets consider what John Adams might have felt about Sarah Palin's statement concerning the Bible and the Ten Commandment’s influence on our laws:

Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited!  Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity toward his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward almighty God. What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be.

In a letter dated November 4, 1816, John Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson:

 The Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount contain my religion.

I’d also like to suggest that the tired old liberal argument of “Separation of Church and State, a term that is nowhere to be found in the US Constitution, might be more accurately described as a bedrock principle of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto. Thomas Jefferson was correct in writing that their is a wall of separation, however,  that prevented the government from interfering with the religious affairs of it's citizens, although this is usually taken out of context by those who believe the principle of Separation of Chuirch and State is consistent with the US Constitution, which it is not.

In  fact, the true meaning of Jefferson's wall of separation is I can say anything I want about my religious beliefs anywhere and anytime I wish,  including in a prayer or Bible Study in a public school or during a graduation cermony from the same school, whether in the capacity of a school official of not, and there is nothing anybody can do to stop me. The choice of religious style of prayer or religious display in the lobby of a government or private sector building or on it's grounds, would
be expected to represent the dominating religious practices, traditions, and beliefs of the community the elected government represents in a democracy. 

I can't help it,  if atheistic supreme court judges have foolishly and ignorantly ruled otherwise, for decades now. But it is never too late to "right a wrong"

In conclusion, I think that considering both people shared a love for God and Country, as well as an avid inclination towards government service, I would think that John Adams, as well as his very religious and patriotic wife, Abigail, would love Sarah Palin. So this post by supporters of "the America hating MoveOn.org on my Facebook page, is way off base.


Sources:

America's God and Country by William J Federer

Stop Agenda 21

Stop Agenda 21 from John Tweedell on Vimeo.
For more info on Agenda 21 go to:


MA South Coast Residents Learn About "Agenda 21", "Smart Growth", and "Sustainable Development"


Beware: SouthCoast Rail Project Is Nothing Less Than UN "Agenda 21 "TakeOver Scheme"

Executive Order 525 and State Investment In The S outh Coast Region and Implementation Of  The Corridor Plan: A Retrospective Analysis 

Agenda 21 in One Easy Lesson


Waking Up To The Threat Imposed By The UN


The Rapoza Report(May 2012)

ObamaCare Was Upheld Because the Chief Justice Changed His Mind: So much for being a strict constitutionalist

Enjoy the 4th of July listening to a free audio book of Bastiat's "The Law"

In the wake of Chief Justice John Robert’s extremely disappointing decision to stand the US Constitution on it’s ear,  by upholding the ObamaCare legislation on unconstitutional taxation grounds, just so  Robert’s wouldn’t be blacklisted at DC social events hosted by Democrat and media elites, it is altogether appropriate to acquaint ourselves with the writings of the French Philosopher, Frederic Bastiat, (1801 -1850)

Bastiat wrote ideas that inspired liberty in early America, while his own country, France, was being destroyed by socialism,  and thus could see the evils and folly of a flawed utopian construct, up close.

This book. that was prominently placed in the libraries of early American statesmen and patriots, extolled the virtues of life, liberty, and property, that were emanating from the vibrant new nation of the United States, while the confiscation of privately owned wealth, he termed legalized plunder or legalized theft, was taking place in his own beloved homeland. This legalized plunder, then of course, according to those who drank the coolaid. of the much different French Revolution,  needed to be redistributed to the vassals in the name of social equity and fairness (sound familiar?)

The following link leads to a free audio book on Bastiat’s “TheLaw”, included with an equally inspiring introduction by conservative economics professor, Walter E Williams, who makes me regret having never attended one of his classes at George Mason University in person, though I do enjoy listening to him when he serves as a substitute host on the Rush Limbaugh Radio Program. Happy 4^th of July everyone!.   

 http://www.freeaudio.org/fbastiat/thelaw.html