Over the last couple of years, our politics have become more and more polarized and those in politics have become more unreasonable, seemingly day by day. One of the few voices of calm, reason, and stalwart principles that have emerged over that time is Austin Petersen.
The former Libertarian Party candidate for President who gathered a huge following during his run is now running for US Senate from Missouri, looking to gain the Republican nomination and challenging the far-Left incumbent, Claire McCaskill.
Missouri, a state that went for Donald Trump in 2016, seems like a perfect spot for the GOP to pick up a seat now held by a Democrat. I got a chance to speak with Mr. Petersen about what some of his priorities would be if the voters of Missouri are ready to be represented by someone other than a far-left ideologue.
I have to say that while I’ve met dozens of politicians, Mr. Petersen came off as one of the most authentic, a man dedicated to securing a future for Americans and who really wants government to stop invading every aspect of our lives.
BW: What issue(s) do you see as most crucial to ensuring continued American prosperity?
AP: Well one of them was tax reform which the GOP Congress passed and the President signed. That legislation has brought people in Missouri pay increases and bonuses. Senators McCaskill voted against those tax cuts for working Americans and that’s something I plan on bringing up during this campaign.
The next thing we need to do now that we’ve gotten some tax reform is spending reform at the Federal level. Federal spending is out of control and leaving us with more debt year by year. This is something I’m very intent on fixing.
BW: You’ve long been a strong and outspoken supporter of the 2nd Amendment. If elected, what would you do to strengthen the rights of gun owners?
AP: Well I think one of the biggest problems has been that we need to stop playing defense in the assault on the 2nd Amendment. We need to start playing offense. Instead of debating new restrictive regulations we need to start rolling back the regulations we already have. I would even support a repeal of the National Firearms Act.
BW: How do you feel about Attorney General Sessions crack down on states that have legalized marijuana.
AP: I think it’s a waste of DOJ resources to police cannabis at the Federal level. It’s a state matter, and I would support the bipartisan bill proposed by Senators (Cory) Booker (D-NJ) and (Rand) Paul (R-KY) that would decriminalize marijuana at the Federal level.
BW: Would you cosponsor that Bill?
AP: Yes, I would.
BW: What do you feel needs to be done about the illegal immigration in America today?
AP: Well I think there are two extremes, neither of which is right. We don’t need open borders and we don’t need the other extreme of shooting anyone who comes across.
I think the best thing we can do is reform our welfare system to make sure illegals aren’t coming here to live on the taxpayer dime. If we set up a system that prevents this, it will set up our economy to be present for those who want to come here, work hard, and build their American dream, rather than coming and expecting handouts.
BW: Since you brought it up, what kind of welfare reforms would you like to see?
AP: Well the elephant in the room (on welfare) is corporate welfare. Corporations just got their tax rate so lowered with excellent results for workers, and it’s time taxpayers stopped giving out welfare to corporations. This is something I would like to tackle head-on.
BW: What is the most important thing the voters of Missouri should know about you?
AP: I keep my promises. I’ve been offered bribes and received pressure, even threats, in order to get me to change my position on certain issues. I never have. My primary opponent has made promises he then backed off of due to political pressure. I never have and I never will.
BW: Do you think the St. Louis Cardinals have made enough moves to be competitive this season?
AP: No, I don’t. I will admit that while I like the Cardinals, I’m a Royals fan. I root for the Cardinals, as long as they aren’t playing the Royals.
*Authors note: I’m a huge Cardinals fan but you have to respect a guy who stands by his team even when asked about the OTHER Missouri team.
PragerU Video: What’s a Greater Leap of Faith: God or the Multiverse?
Image Credit: PictureQuotes.me
What’s a greater leap of faith: God or the Multiverse? What’s the multiverse? Brian Keating, Professor of Physics at the University of California, San Diego, explains in this video.
Published: Apr 23, 2018
Leftists Demanding Gun Confiscation – The short List updated to March 2018
An abbreviated list* of the times the national Socialist left talked about taking everyone’s firearms.
In order to execute the necessary steps to confiscate guns, the Left must first take control of private property with Intergalactic Background Checks [Universal, Enhanced, etc.] But they need to Lie about their ultimate goal so that the people will accept this drastic intrusion into their personal lives.
The Left needs this control over private property to get the data for their final solution to the gun problem. This is the critical step for them and the reason they obsess over ‘Background Checks’. The difficulty for the Left is that they need this stepping stone to gun confiscation while denying it’s a stepping stone to gun confiscation.
This is an abbreviated list shows they are openly lying when they deny their intentions, it also shows they have developed some clever euphemisms for the taking everyone’s firearms.
Vox: What no politician wants to admit about gun control “taking a huge number of guns away from a huge number of gun owners”
NAACP President OPINION: Gun Safety Is about Freedom [Australian style gun confiscation – making gun owners an offer they can’t refuse ]
Democrat and Chronicle: Let’s repeal the Second Amendment
New York Times -To Repeat: Repeal the Second Amendment
Toronto Star: Want to end gun violence Mr. President? Get rid of guns
Splinter news: BAN GUNS
Boston Globe: Hand over your weapons
Redhawks Online: Guns must go
New York Times: The Cancer in the Constitution [2nd amendment]
Prospect magazine: Dear America: it’s time to grow up and ban guns
Plan A Magazine: Ban Guns. Amend the Constitution.
The New York Times: Repeal the Second Amendment
The Week: Ban guns
Eugene Robinson: Gun control should include buyback program like Australia’s
Dan Pfeiffer: What to Bring to the Gun Fight [national gun registry, Tracking and limiting purchases of ammunition and a national gun buyback program]
Washington Post Editorial Board : “President Trump, end this ‘American carnage.’”[Australian-Style Gun Ban]
Huffington Post: We don’t need gun control. We need domestic disarmament
New Republic: It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them.
Salon: The Second Amendment must go: We ban lawn darts. It’s time to ban guns
Barack Obama: “We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours — Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it.”
The Washington Post: A gun-free society
[Also Syndicated in the Chicago Tribune, Macomb Daily, The Oregonian, Trib live, etc.]
Tallahassee Democrat: Stop the insanity: Ban guns
Barack Obama: “A couple of decades ago, Australia had a mass shooting similar to Columbine or Newtown. And Australia just said, well, that’s it — we’re not seeing that again. And basically imposed very severe, tough gun laws.”
The Daily Kos: How to Ban Guns: A step by step, long term process
Washington Post, Eugene Robinson: First, Get Rid of the Guns
*Abbreviated because a full listing would be far too long and it’s extremely difficult to track down all of these demands by the many varied euphemisms for Gun Confiscation.
Hazel doesn’t hold back against Woodall in GA7 debate
Marines are known as fearless, and this held true as Shane Hazel, the former Force Recon Marine, took on establishment incumbent Ron Woodall in the Republican debate for the Georgia 7th Congressional District Thursday night. The two traded barbs, but while Hazel’s centered around Woodall’s repeated betrayals of his conservative constituents, all Woodall could point to was Hazel’s lack of political experience and criticism for his plans to scale back the out of control leviathan that is the US federal government. Hazel in particular noted Woodall’s most recent snub of a conservative agenda when he voted in favor of the $1.3 Trillion omnibus bill that thrilled Democrats and agitated the most fiscally conservative members of Congress such as Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), and the entire House Freedom Caucus. The omnibus bill included: $500 Million for Planned Parenthood, $30 Billion for a tunnel in New York, and continued to fund Sanctuary Cities, yet included only a pittance for the proposed border wall.
Woodall implied that Hazel only wanted to say “no” to bills instead of saying “yes,” ignoring the fact that that is precisely what conservatives want Congress to do after 8 years of the Obama Administration getting pretty much whatever it wanted to grow the size and scope of government. Further, Woodall appeared disinterested throughout the debate, or at the very best, amused, as if the debate were merely a formality and that the nomination for his reelection were a foregone conclusion. Hazel, by contrast, had the intent look of a man trying to save his children’s future, and by extension, the entire country’s future as well.
Hazel detailed his plans to me in an exclusive interview a few weeks ago, and has maintained his opposition to the GOP’s lack of fiscal discipline and its unwillingness to put a stop to the legacy policies of the previous administration such as Obamacare and a lack of border enforcement. I sat down with him for a post-debate interview.
BW: How do you feel the debate went?
SH: I’ll let the crowd be the judge. The crowd was hugely supportive post debate, hugging us and telling us how much they supported us. We’ve had a huge outpouring of support since the debate and it shows that people are ready for a change and not the establishment anymore.
BW: What do you think it says that Woodall could only point to your lack of political experience and kept attacking your ideas to scale back the size of government?
SH: I think it shows how out of touch he is. I’ve supported him every time he has voted in line with the constitution. There is no secret sauce. Simply follow your oath and I’ll support you. Rob Woodall is not doing that. His last question to me on what bills I would say “yes” to shows this clearly.
BW: For many conservatives the line between Republicans and Democrats has gotten ever more blurry. Why do you think the one gentleman in the audience reacted so strongly to your suggestion that Woodall run as a Democrat? Many conservatives wonder the same about MANY Republicans in the House and Senate.
SH: The gentleman in question is named Toddy Lentz and he is not a private citizen, but rather running for the same seat as an independent. I honestly think he was a Woodall plant. He’s a big Woodall fan and basically endorsed Woodall. He actually tried to warn me before the debate began to “be nice.” He’s a constant critic of mine, and has a web page dedicated to just bashing me. Apparently I’m living rent-free in his head.
BW: Do you feel the debate accomplished the things you wanted it to? I know from speaking to Banks Wise in a previous interview this wasn’t easy to get.
SH: Absolutely worth the effort for this sitting congressman to have to sit and try to defend his record.
BW: Do you think Woodall voting in favor of this extraordinarily unpopular omnibus bill and then coming back here just days later for a debate shows a level of entitlement to renomination?
SH: Yes. This is what happens. They pass spending to make their lobbyist big donors happy and then come back to their district and try to make everything seem fine and dandy when people know it’s not. People are mad about this bill and I don’t think the plan is going to work this time. He doesn’t understand why Trump won, and that’s because people are frustrated with politics as usual.
You can view the entire debate from Hazel’s Facebook page here.