Saturday, March 27, 2010


I have recently received several e-mails concerning new attempts by individuals in this government to control guns in America. There is also an effort by European liberals to get us to sign on to a treaty which is supposed to control the movement of arms between countries thereby arming some very dangerous people. Most conservative groups including the National Rifle Association oppose this treaty. The reason for this opposition is simple. The United States doesn't need or want any European liberal think tank or group looking over our laws or our rights. We will make our own laws based on our Constitution. Let Europe deal with their own laws and their own problems. We have bailed them out at least twice in the last century and now it is time they took care of themselves. If they have a problem with arms passing between countries in Europe, let them deal with it themselves. It is not our problem. Gun rights groups rightly believe that these are just more attempts by liberals both foreign and domestic to disarm America making us far more vulnerable to attacks on our sovereignty from the outside as well as from within our country.

My purpose in this essay is to try to ease some people's minds regarding the Second Amendment. I, like millions of other free citizens of this great country, am armed. I not only see being a gun owner as my right as an American, I see it as an obligation. I am armed in order to protect my family and my property. I am armed in order to render assistance should I be called upon for that assistance. As a free American citizen I am also a tiny part of that militia which would and could be called on at any time to defend this country. We, as a nation, were born out of revolution and we live free because we will have it no other way. With all respect, Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton are just politicians currently on the scene. Politicians appear and they disappear. They work for the citizens of this country for a period of time because we hire them. When their term is up, we will hire someone else. That has been the story since our beginning and will continue to be.

Let us say for example, that these two or any other politicians decided to try and disarm America through new laws or international treaties, etc. Do you really think for a moment that they could? Do you think that the millions of gun owners in America would just turn over their arms because some politician said they should? To coin a phrase, that ain't going to happen. There are probably more guns in America than there are people. For the most part the owners of those guns think like I do. From my cold dead hands is not just a slogan. It is reality. There is a very good reason why countries don't try to invade us. They know there is a gun behind every blade of grass aimed right at them. To be sure there is yet another reason to be armed. We also protect ourselves from our own government in the event that government was to get out of hand. We are obligated by our own Constitution to offer that protection. I take my obligation seriously and you should too.

Every time a Democrat gets elected President, gun sales skyrocket. That is great but at the same time it is a little silly. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans are ever going to disarm America. We have much more to fear from them spending us into oblivion. Both parties.

Politicians both here and abroad need to face a simple reality. American citizens are armed and will continue to be. We will never turn over our guns regardless of which politician says we should. We are not only armed but we are willing at any time to defend our rights and our homeland. Deal with it. Heck, we will even protect the liberals.

Ron Scarbro March 27, 2010

Sunday, March 21, 2010


(The following was published in the Newsleader on April 8, 2010)

Is the census senseless or sensible? Is there a consensus? Speaking of that, is the opposite of consensus procensus??? But I digress. In the late 1700s our founders felt the need to include in our Constitution the requirement that every ten years we count ourselves. That seems to be a very reasonable requirement. At that time we didn't have the technology that exists today. It was important that we knew exactly how many of us there were and to keep a running tally as we grew. Of course, as with all things government, the devil is in the details.

Our Government today is not content with just knowing how many of us are here, no they want a lot more information. For example what is our national origin? What is our race? How much money do we make? Are we married or are we living in sin? Many more details are being required as we mature and grow from our humble beginnings. It is for you to decide how much information you are willing to give to the government.

Ostensibly they tell us that this is the way they decide how to divvy up the money that we send them each year. It is also how they decide how many Congressional Districts each state has which of course decides how many Representatives each state will have in the Congress. So far so good. Now, however, this is where it starts to get a little sticky.

According to today's interpretation of the Constitutional requirement of a census, everyone who lives in the United States must be counted. That includes prisoners in our jails. That includes homeless people who live on the streets or in homeless shelters. It also, according to the census officials, includes illegal aliens. In other words, people who don't even belong here must be counted along with legitimate citizens. Aside from just being ridiculous, it also has far more serious ramifications. I read a recent report that stated that just in the state of California, if illegals were not included in the census count, California would lose thirty Congressional Districts. What that means, dear friends, is that laws are being passed in our Congress with the help of at least thirty more Californians than should be the case. That means that states like, for example, Minnesota, are being controlled by Californians. Pretty scary, huh? It is not just Minnesota, it is all states. I believe if illegal residents want representation, let them return to their legitimate home for that representation.

I don't know about you but I for one don't like the fact that legislation concerning the entire country is affected in such a big way by Representatives who shouldn't even be in Congress. When one looks at the condition of California, it doesn't take much imagination to conclude what their Representatives are doing to the rest of the country. Among others California has inflicted people like Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi on us. Is it necessary to go any further?

I am, however, pro census. I understand the need that we be counted. At the same time, though, I am not in favor of counting illegals. They are not Americans. When I say that we should be counted, I mean Americans. Illegal aliens are not a part of we.

Today I am mailing back my census form. My government has already spent untold millions of dollars advertising this requirement and has already far exceeded their budget. This is just the beginning of enforcement of the rules. Who knows how much this is going to cost in the end. Wouldn't it be great if we could just trust the people we elect? Wouldn't it be great if we could just trust the system? Alas, such is not the case and is not likely to be any time soon.

Ron Scarbro March 21, 2010

Monday, March 15, 2010


Be reasonable, see it my way. That seems to be the theme of the latest attempt at bipartisanship coming out of Washington. We have been treated to a seven hour argument between our employees, (our elected representatives) which accomplished nothing. The meeting was called in a feeble attempt by one party to convince the other party to get on board with their program for so-called health care reform. The whole deal turned out to be a gigantic waste of time and money. It was billed as an opportunity for the two parties to get together for the good of the American people. As it turns out the politicians of both parties care much more about themselves and their political parties than they care about the American people. Is that a surprise to you?

President Obama said at this meeting, and has said on other occasions, that elections matter. Okay, the Democrats have the majority. Pass what legislation you wish. You have the numbers. You have more than enough to pass any bill you deem fit. My question is why haven't you just rammed your legislation through? What are you afraid of? Could it be that recent elections have sent a message? Could it be that you have also read the polls and know that this particular piece of legislation is not popular with a majority of the American people?

The reason Democrats think a certain way is that is the way Democrats think. The same is true for Republicans. They believe the way they do because that is the way Republicans think. I can tell you that in years past and in my lifetime most politicians put the country ahead of their particular prejudices and beliefs. Republicans and Democrats came together many times in the past to accomplish for America. There have been many times when, for the good of the country, party was shelved for America's sake. What is so different about today? Why are some very questionable members of Congress being shielded and protected by the leadership? In the private sector some of them would be at least fired and at best prosecuted. Is it because of party loyalty? Is anybody surprised that Congress has a favorability rating of under ten per cent by the electorate?

Well, elections do matter and guess what? Another election is just around the corner. At this point most experts believe that there will be a wholesale change in the Congress at the next election. Long serving politicians who have had their way for years will be looking for work after November. I think this is going to affect both parties. The reason to me is clear. We the people, the employer of these politicians, are fed up. We are fed up with the bickering and the childish behavior. We are fed up with the bribes and the shady deals. We are fed up with the inability of grown adults to accomplish their jobs. 

This one thing is true above all else. We have the opportunity every two years to change the Congress. Senators are elected for a term of six years and many of them face re-evaluation every two years as well. You will notice I said re-evaluation not re-election. That describes the difference between what they want and what we should do. If, like me, you are unhappy with the direction this country is heading, join me at the polls and let's change this mess. As I have said so many times before, the only special interest politicians need to concern themselves with is the American people. Those who cannot, need to find new employment.

Ron Scarbro February 26, 2010

Sunday, March 7, 2010


Some events have occurred recently that have caused me to write this politically incorrect essay concerning Haiti. The first event was a commercial featuring Pres. G. W. Bush and Pres. Clinton asking for money for Haiti because of their devastating earthquake. Clinton, in this ad said we need to give money to Haiti not for them to return to their former status, but instead for them to build a new Haiti that would be better than the one they are replacing. Haiti could become what they want it to be rather than what it was. Apparently the former Haiti was not good enough for the Haitians and they need money so they can have a new country.

The second event was an item I read in today's paper. The article said that Haiti needs latrines because soon the rains will come and disease will overtake the Haitian people and they will die by the thousands. Now for you who don't have the benefit of a military background, a latrine is a toilet. It is usually just a ditch dug to be used as a toilet and then covered up with yet another ditch dug to replace it. When I was in the military latrines were commonly used when our unit went to the field for maneuvers. Digging latrines required nothing more than a few men with shovels and a little bit of labor. They didn't cost anything but labor.

Okay Ron, so what is your problem? What is wrong with a little charity? What is wrong with giving money to these devastated people to rebuild? My answer is, nothing is wrong. I believe in charity. I believe in helping people out. But I have a few questions. Let's say for example that we and the rest of the world give Haiti billions of dollars. Who is going to get the money? Will it be divided up among the Haitians? Haiti has never had any infra-structure and they certainly don't now. Will the money go to contractors who will rebuild the cities and hospitals and homes? Who will supervise the distribution of that money? Where will the money be deposited while waiting for its distribution? How are we going to keep greedy government officials away from it?

I know I sound like a skeptic, but I believe when the smoke clears, regardless of how much money is sent to Haiti, it will still just be a poor country controlled by greedy government types and criminals. The state of living for the Haitian people will be the same or worse in ten years than it is today. You see, it isn't about the money. It's about the people. What Haiti needs and what all these third world countries need is self determination and initiative. They need to take control of their own lives and their futures and build a country that will survive. They need to establish law and order. They need to round up the thugs and criminals and put them in cages. They need to deal with their drug problems. The last thing they need is to be the dependent of any other country or people.

Let's face it. Haiti is a beautiful Caribbean Island with great natural attraction and resources. They could be another Aruba or Dominican Republic. They could prosper with tourist dollars. They are close enough to wealthy countries to be a vacation destination extraordinaire. But they have to get busy and take charge of their own destiny. If they are willing to be wards of the US or any other wealthy nation, they will never be anything but what they have been. We might just as well add them to the role of statehood. Then they could be just another welfare recipient. I know this isn't very politically correct but then I never have been known as such. Haiti, this is your last chance to be anything. Take advantage of it and dig your own latrines.

Ron Scarbro March 7, 2010