No, not from some rogue militant group or terrorist organization, although some might question that. As you can see from this morning’s picture, I’ve got a fire going and have been splitting firewood preparing for the arrival of six grandkids and my son for the next three days.

With so many events and two sides to every family, Independence Day Weekend gets stretched out to several days. By the end of day there, grandpa will be completely exhausted but you’ll not hear a complaints from me. Let the good times roll.

Photo by Tom Remington

Photo by Al Remington

Photo by Al Remington

Well, aside from politicians! Probably many of you have already seen the email flying around the Internet claiming to depict a paragraph found in a San Francisco newspaper. A photo of that supposed clipping can found to the left here.

But here’s what it says, in case you can’t read it.

“To all you hunters who kill animals for food, shame on you; you ought to go to the store and buy the meat that was made there, where no animals were harmed.”

MISSOULA, Mont. – Country music star Blake Shelton hunting his first elk, baseball hall-of-famer Goose Gossage stalking a monster bull and many more adventures await viewers in 13 new episodes of Elk Chronicles beginning June 29 on Outdoor Channel.

Elk Chronicles is the official television program of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.

Presented by MidwayUSA, episodes air Tuesdays at 11:30 p.m. (EST), Sundays at 4:30 p.m. (EST) and Wednesdays at 6:00 a.m. (EST).

The new shows feature co-hosts Cameron Hanes and Brandon Bates along with a cast of hunters and conservationists in some of America’s best elk country. Legendary areas like Arizona’s White Mountains and New Mexico’s Double H Ranch, UU Bar Ranch and NRA Whittington Center are featured, as well as areas of Utah, Montana, Colorado and Wyoming. Archery, primitive firearms and conventional rifle hunts are slated.

In a very special episode, RMEF President and CEO David Allen joins legendary outdoor writer Jim Zumbo for an elk hunt with U.S. military veterans.

“Bugling bulls, spectacular landscapes, packhorses and wall tents. It’s the stuff that every hunter dreams about and we’re pleased to bring it to Outdoor Channel viewers,” said Allen. “We hope Elk Chronicles conveys both the excitement of the hunt as well as the urgent need to conserve habitat for elk, deer, other big game and all kinds of wildlife.”

To check local listings on Outdoor Channel, visit www.outdoorchannel.com.

Over the weekend, my nine-year-old grandson was fishing on Pushaw Lake just outside Bangor, Maine with family when his fishing line got tangled up in this turtle. Of course at that time he didn’t know what had happened and with a little help they were able to drag this big turtle to shore. It was reported to weigh around 45 pounds.

Photo by Steve Remington

How dare a thinker like Sowell offer sense and sensibility to the Constitutional structure of this country? I’m being sarcastic of course. Sowell puts it this way in reference to those judges who feel compelled to alter the laws of this land in order to fit their own perceptions or impressions.

If the public doesn’t like the rules, or the consequences to which the rules lead, then the public can change the rules via the ballot box. But that is very different from judges changing the rules by verbal sleight of hand, or by talking about “weighing of the constitutional right to bear arms” against other considerations, as Justice Breyer puts it. That’s not his job. Not if “we the people” are to govern ourselves, as the Constitution says.

Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once said his job was, “to see that the game is played according to the rules whether I like them or not.” That outlook is a far cry from what we all too often see from judges today. In defense of those who won’t or can’t see the actual role judges are to play in interpreting the law, it can be a difficult thing to do when sometimes we are outraged by events and demand judges make laws to prevent this from happening. Judges don’t make laws, the Legislative Branch does and that’s where we as voters have a say, or should have a say.

But when we appoint Justices to sit on the Supreme Court, it is imperative to find those highly qualified individuals who can and will maintain the attitude as repeated by Justice Holmes; whether they like it or not.

President Obama’s first nomination to the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, said the Bench is were policy is made. This is of course contradictory to the position of Justice Holmes but reflects the kind of Justice Obama seeks – not a person to see that the game is played by the rules but to change the rules in the middle of the game. This of course leads to the destruction of a nation.

And as our Congress debates the appointment of Elena Kagan, so too should they consider this very point as made by Thomas Sowell.

Tom Remington

Perhaps what we are witness to is the trouble groups such as the NRA get into when they place politics above principle, carving out exemptions for themselves in restrictive Legislative laws in what appears to be an exchange for backing off on opposition to Elena Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court. This of course is mere speculation on my part but the path the NRA has chosen to take leaves unanswered questions.

Michelle Malkin declares the McDonald ruling “good news, bad news”. The good news of course being the Supreme Court ruling against the Chicago gun ban. Malkin states that with the NRA withholding a position of opposition against anti-gun Kagan, the bad news and surely it is. Why the hesitation? Kagan clearly is not a supporter of gun rights. Isn’t the NRA’s mission to promote and protect Second Amendment rights?

The NRA never opposed the nomination of now Justice Sotomayor until after members of the NRA Board and heads of state NRA affiliates signed and mailed a letter opposing Sotomayor to NRA management. As if there was some question about Sotomayor’s position on gun rights, that was clarified yesterday in her dissenting vote in McDonald v. Chicago.

Some point out that Kagan’s known work reveals an even greater support for strict gun control and yet we still see the NRA not officially opposing her nomination. Instead they have issued a public position stating they are “carefully reviewing” Kagan’s record and working with key Senators to make sure Kagan is “aggressively questioned”.

We see from what is found in the Malkin piece that the NRA management prohibited any NRA Board members from testifying or coming out publicly in opposition to Kagan. This is troubling and seems to mimic the same tactics this Obama administration uses in censoring anyone in opposition to his positions.

While Americans for the preservation of gun rights applaud any victory in court that supports the Constitution, we should not be willing to achieve those victories by compromising the very principles for which the Constitution itself was founded. When political wrangling, which is the norm in Washington, becomes a part of the NRA’s policies, it can only be expected that something will be given up in order to get.

Which brings me to wondering what the NRA gave up in order to get themselves an exemption in the DISCLOSE Act? Was it that they could have the exemption if they promised not to oppose the Kagan nomination? Who knows but the reality is that when you play these games, questions remain and speculation takes over.

Tom Remington

This is an interesting read. What adds to its intrigue, is that it was first written prior to the onset of “Climategate” and where the most of us began learning that science was no longer the search for truth but for the promotion of an agenda driven by money.

Here’s an excerpt:

Follow the money. Whilst traditional physics and chemistry departments are closing in British universities, and there is a shortage of science teachers, there is an abundance of cash being poured into departments that will serve socialist ends, and no shortage of acolytes desirous to use this as a route to power. Once there was modern science, which was hard work; now we have postmodern science, where the quest for real, absolute truth is outdated, and ‘science’ is a wax nose that can be twisted in any direction to underpin the latest lying narrative in the pursuit of power.

Tom Remington

Justice Alito announced this morning that the Fourteenth Amendment does incorporate the Second Amendment in the Heller case to keep and bear arms in self defense. Therefore McDonald v. Chicago is deemed a victory for gun rights.

Justices in dessent: Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg and Sotomayer.

It appears all of the majority Justices agree that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments but there may be some disagreement with Alito’s entire ruling.

McDonald v. Chicago ruling can be found here.

I’ve not examined the ruling yet but it appears McDonald v. Chicago is very close in resembling the Heller case. The Court remanded the case back to the Seventh District Court and what we will probably see is a similar action as to what we saw in Washington, D.C. after Heller.

It appears this is one more step in trying to make some kind of determination as to what is considered “reasonable” gun control. Incrementally we will take back what we can get of our rights to keep and bear arms but as with the Heller case, the Court does not offer any indication as to what is acceptable gun control.

I’ll offer more as I get it.

Tom Remington

This is a hoot!! A study done by Stanford University researchers, shows that those scientists who are skeptical as to man’s influence in climate change aren’t as smart as those who take the bait – line, hook and sinker.

This qualifying benchmark comes based on how many scientific papers a scientist has had published and reviewed by peers. Of course in the science community and academia, “These are standard academic metrics used when universities are making hiring or tenure decisions”. So you’re smart if you’ve written papers.

But I think what it really means is that a stupid scientist can write a paper and submit it to stupid scientists for reviews and that makes you smart. The old proverbial two wrongs making it right.

It stinks beating up on scientists this way but at least as far as climate change goes, they’ve made their bed and are now laying in it. As politics rule the day, there is nothing scientific to be considered.

So, in short, I’ve not written any scientific papers and had them reviewed by peers so don’t pay any attention to what I’ve said because I’m stupid.

Tom Remington