Why I Am Considering a 2014 US Senate Run

/80 Comments/in , , /by

Serious times call for bold measures. With the re-election of Barack Obama, our very way of self-government is in peril. The Constitution is under attack, the value of human life degraded, religious liberties are threatened, the Second Amendment is increasingly in jeopardy, and the right to protection from unlawful search and seizure is giving way to a virtual surveillance State.

In 2010, I was one of the first candidates to warn of a looming debt crisis and predict the coming downgrade of America’s credit rating. My campaign championed the prerogatives of State governments under the 10th Amendment, and pointed out the massive threat to our individual liberties coming out of Washington.

In October of 2010, I predicted that regardless of who represented Alaska in DC, “the era of earmarks is dead.” And we were ahead of the curve on entitlement reform.

Though I was labeled an “extremist” by the likes of Lisa Murkowski and Mark Begich for telling the truth, both of our sitting senators now routinely engage in such “extremist” rhetoric with respect to federal overreach, government spending, and entitlement reform. Yet they are still unwilling to tackle the tough issues.

Much of what was so shocking to the sensibilities of Alaskans who had grown accustomed to federal largesse has now been assimilated as conventional wisdom. We all know that one can only borrow against the future for so long. Yesterday’s “extremes” are today’s realities.

The choice before Alaskans in 2014 will be stark. Voters must choose between the easy lies of an insider politician and the hard truth of a reformer.

As of the writing of this article, I am unaware of another potential candidate who has demonstrated a willingness to challenge the status quo, and confront the culture of corruption that reaches to the highest levels of American government.

We need a candidate in 2014 who will join reformers like Rand Paul, Mike Lee, and Ted Cruz to confront President Obama, not one who will cut a deal to negotiate the terms of our surrender to his radical socialist agenda.

I have been a Republican for most of my adult life. But I am under no illusions about the Republican Establishment’s failure to confront the problems facing the country. The status quo is not a viable option.

Let’s be honest. The partisan frame of reference is outmoded. We now live under a duopoly which serves corporate and special interests, rather than the interests of the individual citizen. It’s the insiders versus the outsiders.

While many in my party prattle on and on about their desperate desire to “defeat Mark Begich,” that is not my singular object. Yes, Mark Begich is part of the problem in Washington. But for me, the 2014 election is not merely about beating Mark Begich. It’s about saving the country!

I have the same dreams and desires in my heart as most Alaskans have. And, we’re asking the same questions about the America we love: will our children inherit a country where life is valued, individual liberty cherished, and private property respected? Will they ever have the opportunity to engage in free enterprise and build a future for themselves and for their children? Will they be free to worship God according to the dictates of their own conscience?

The choice before us is clear: liberty or tyranny?

There are three questions that I still need to answer:

(1) Are grassroots conservatives willing to step up and join us in the fight for freedom?
(2) Can we raise the necessary funds to spread our message of liberty and successfully compete?
(3) Can our message of liberty and grassroots support propel us to electoral victory?

Thank you for your prayers and support as we launch our exploratory committee for a campaign for the United States Senate. We will continue to update you as we move forward.

Obama Screwing Up in North Korea

/10 Comments/in , , , /by

photo credit: petersnoopy

After the Obama Administration publicly blamed the U.S. Military for “amping up” North Korea’s boy-leader last week, it is continuing its deferential posture toward the reclusive country.

Today, the Pentagon announced that it is canceling a previously planned Minuteman III ballistic missile test to avoid upsetting ‘Supreme Leader’ Kim Jong Un.

Despite the arrival of B-2’s and other significant U.S. assets over the last week, sources are continuing to report that North Korea is not only prepping for another missile launch but may also be preparing for another nuclear detonation.

Additionally, the Chinese have now reported live-fire maneuvers near the border.

If Obama wishes to put an end to North Korea’s games, he’s certainly going about it the wrong way. Publicly blaming your own military and interrupting long-planned tests upon which our national security depends plays directly into the little dictator’s hands.

Kim Jong Un now has bragging rights that he forced the world’s superpower to blink, something that has likely earned his hard-line military’s respect. Obama has almost certainly guaranteed that we’ll see the same type of scenario play out, yet again, in the not-so-distant future.

Restoring Liberty Passes Another Milestone: Over Two Million Views in March

/5 Comments/in , , /by

The second-most popular news site in Alaska, Restoring Liberty, passed another milestone in March, garnering well over 2,000,000 page views during that month. And its YouTube channel now has over 1.75 million views.

Since Restoring Liberty started its new format on July 4, last year, the site has seen explosive growth in pageview readership of almost 3000%.

As of the date of this article, the only Alaska online news source ranked higher in readership than Restoring Liberty is the ADN. Other major sites such as the Alaska Dispatch, Fairbanks News-Miner, Juneau Empire, and KTUU, have rankings far below this news site.

We remain Alaska’s primary conservative news outlet.

The staff of Restoring Liberty wishes to thank every one of you that has led to this extraordinary success. Your loyal readership has expanded our reach so that we are able to compete with the desperately biased media in the Alaska market. We also wish to thank our advertisers for helping to make this effort possible.

And I, Joe Miller, wish to thank our loyal, mostly-volunteer staff for their sacrifices in making this online publication a success.

If you wish to help us in our goal to hire reporters and produce more original content, please advertise with us or encourage the businesses you frequent to do so. And encourage your friends to sign up for our FREE daily news update.

Finally, please continue to send us your tips and advice. It is your help and readership that has made this success possible.

DHS Finally Responds to Senate Demand for Ammo Info but its Numbers Don't Pencil Out

/31 Comments/in , , /by

Last fall, Senator Coburn sent a letter to the Department of Homeland Security demanding an explanation by the end of November for the agency’s reported purchase of massive quantities of ammunition. Yesterday, Dr. Coburn released correspondence that he finally received from DHS purporting to explain the purchases.

First, here’s what was disclosed by DHS: As of November 2012, it had over 263 million rounds of ammunition on hand. The agency said it was purchasing an additional $37 million of ammunition in this fiscal year, but did not give the actual number of rounds. Using the prior year’s cost per round of approximately 35 cents, it appears that DHS is adding another 105 million rounds on top of the 263 million on hand, minus rounds consumed in training and operations this fiscal year.

Using this 363 million round figure, the agency’s explanation for its large purchases can be assessed. For Immigration (ICE), DHS claims that 1,000 rounds per firearm per year are necessary for training. Assuming training of 250 rounds per quarter, this estimate seems reasonable.

The Federal Protective Service or “FPS” (the agency charged with protecting federal facilities owned or leased by the General Services Administration) also uses “1000 rounds of ammunition per firearm per year for quarterly qualifications and training.” Again, another reasonable number.

Curiously, no average training rounds per firearm for any other component agency of DHS is provided. For US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), DHS gives a percentage, stating that 70% of all CBP ammo is used for training. The remaining 30% of CBP’s ammo stock is purportedly maintained for operational needs (20%) and reserves (10%). For USSS (the Secret Service), 60% of its ammo is used for training.

Another quirk in DHS’s explanation is that the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC), whose mission is to “train those who protect our homeland” by training personnel from 91 federal agencies, has another approximately 35 million training rounds (almost 19 million on hand in November 2012 plus the estimated 16.6 million purchased this fiscal year) that are supposedly in addition to training rounds maintained by the other individual DHS component agencies like ICE, CPB, and FPS.

So, really, the only way to properly assess the numbers from DHS – assuming that the agency has actually come clean on its inventories and future purchases – is to divide the ammunition stocks by the number of armed personnel.

Let’s start with FPS. According to the DHS website, FPS has approximately 900 armed agents. Supposedly, the FPS has an available stock of approximately 3.8 million rounds this year (2.5 million on hand in November plus the estimated 1.3 million purchased this fiscal year) . DHS claims its stock is explained by the 1000 rounds per firearm training requirement. No operational inventory is disclosed. Dividing the FPS stock of 3.8 million rounds by 900, provides well over 4,000 rounds per armed FPS employee, over four times the ammo necessary for annual training.

The ICE numbers give us a similar result. This agency has about 56.9 million rounds for this fiscal year (42.3 million on-hand as of November plus an estimated purchase of 14.68 million this fiscal year). ICE has about 20,000 employees of which 12,446 carry firearms. This DHS agency has also armed itself to the tune of well over 4,000 rounds per gun-toting ICE employee, well over the 1,000 rounds need for annual training and far in excess of any peace-time operational requirements.

CBP’s is almost as bad. This agency has about 129.7 million rounds for this fiscal year (94.4 million on-hand as of November plus an estimated purchase of over 35.3 million rounds this fiscal year). According to the U.S. Department of Justice, CBP agency has about 37,000 armed employees. That equates into approximately 3,500 rounds per firearm-carrying CBP officer, well in excess of the 1,000 rounds necessary for annual training.

Looking at the entire DHS, the DOJ’s 2012 Bureau of Justice Statistics stated that the DHS had approximately 55,000 armed officers (relying on 2008 data). Although one newspaper claimed last month that DHS now has 65,000 armed personnel, DHS is claiming it has at least 100,000 armed agents. (This is an enormous increase, perhaps even more troubling than federal agencies’ ammunition purchases.)

Taking the DHS ammunition on hand in November (263.7 million rounds) plus the estimated purchases of 105 million this fiscal year, provides a rough estimate of over 3,500 rounds per armed DHS federal agent. This is well over three times the training needs for DHS personnel and over ten times what’s necessary for operational needs (using CPB’s 30% figure for operational and reserve needs).

Read more from this story HERE.

Begich and Murkowski’s Support for Obama’s Radical Anti-Gun Appellate Court Nominee Ends in Defeat

/0 Comments/in , /by

Yesterday, the Obama Administration admitted defeat in withdrawing its left-wing nominee, Caitlin Halligan, for the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals. Republicans successfully filibustered the nomination, pointing out that Halligan had argued as New York’s solicitor general that firearms manufacturers should be held liable for violent crimes committed with their guns.

The National Rifle Association vigorously opposed Halligan’s nomination. Curiously, the NRA’s darling in the senate, Lisa Murkowski, was the only Republican to support Obama’s nominee. All other Republicans joined the filibuster effort. Begich, of course, joined with the other gun control advocates in the Senate.

Halligan isn’t just known as an anti-gunner, she also is marked by her pro-gay marriage, pro-abortion, open border, radical environmental, and affirmative action views.

Of course, this isn’t the first time that Alaska’s senior senator has backed a leftist judge. Last February, Murkowski joined with other RINO’s and Begich to confirm Jesse Furman to the Federal Court of Appeals. Furman infamously blamed America’s violence on its “fascination with guns.”

The first test of how Alaskans will embrace the anti-gun votes of their elected federal officials will come in 2014 with Mark Begich’s reelection efforts. But Murkowski will face the same test just two years later. Both should be sent packing.

Message to PETA: Stay the Hell Out of Alaska

/0 Comments/in , , /by

From grieving the “enormous suffering” of dead fish to demanding that Honey Boo Boo rename Nugget, her pet chicken, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) seems to be pursuing an increasingly fringe agenda. The crazier the radical group becomes, the more it attempts to cram its animal rights agenda down throats of every American.

One of its latest campaigns is focused on Alaska’s Iditarod … again. This time, PETA complains that Iditarod volunteers and a Fairbanks musher should face criminal charges because her dog died while awaiting transport.

This unfortunate incident occurred after the musher’s dog was “dropped” at the Unalakleet checkpoint and the musher and her team continued on to Nome. A storm hit Unalakleet after the musher left. Iditarod volunteers then placed her dog, as well as a number of others that had been dropped, in an area protected from wind. Transportation for the dogs was delayed by the storm, several were buried by the snowfall, and the musher’s dog died.

Although there’s little doubt that Iditarod procedures can and should be improved to avoid this type of situation in the future, there’s absolutely no evidence of criminal intent by any Alaskan in the death of the dog.

But here’s the kicker: it was just disclosed this week that PETA, the same organization demanding criminal prosecution over the accidental death of a musher’s dog, hypocritically slaughtered 90% of the cats and dogs brought to one of its “rescue” facilities last year:

The charity, well-known for attention grabbing publicity campaigns such as the ‘I’d rather go naked’ anti-fur campaign, euthanized 1,647 cats and dogs last year and only placed 19 in new homes according to the data submitted to the Virginia Department for Agriculture and Consumer Services.

PETA’s hypocrisy reflects how morally bankrupt the group really is. Alaskans of all stripes should reject its meddling in the Last Frontier.

Obama’s Unbridled Hubris: “I Go Shooting All the Time,” “Football is Too Violent,” “Gays in Military Caused No Controversy”

/23 Comments/in , /by

In an extraordinary interview just published yesterday in the New Republic, Obama makes a number of outlandish statements.

On the gun control issue, Obama apparently tries to establish some relevant personal experience, bragging that he goes “shooting all the time.”

To most, the idea of Obama with a gun is laughable. And a quick search of Google images unsurprisingly fails to produce a single picture of the President with a gun.

One would think that any activity that Obama engages in “all the time” – like golf – would result in at least one picture circulating through the public domain. And maybe, by the time you read this, one will appear. But compared to the thousands of pictures of his other “all the time” pastime of golf (or romancing his teleprompter), there’s no comparison.

But that’s not the only ridiculous statement from Obama on guns. This supposed constitutional scholar takes a page from the Slick Willie playbook that suggested Americans should only be able to own guns needed for duck hunting. Like most liberals, Obama intentionally ignores that troublesome Second Amendment, suggesting the real reason Americans are reacting angrily to his moves against gun ownership is because of their love of hunting:

…I have a profound respect for the traditions of hunting that trace back in this country for generations. And I think those who dismiss that out of hand make a big mistake.

Part of being able to move [gun control] forward is understanding the reality of guns in urban areas are very different from the realities of guns in rural areas. And if you grew up and your dad gave you a hunting rifle when you were ten, and you went out and spent the day with him and your uncles, and that became part of your family’s traditions, you can see why you’d be pretty protective of that.

For gun control advocates to move their agenda forward, Obama claims that they’ll “have to do a little more listening than they do sometimes.”

From there the interviewer takes the President to the US “culture of violence” and how it’s encouraged by football. Obama, not skipping a beat, takes the bait, suggesting that we must change football to make it less violent:

I’m a big football fan, but I have to tell you if I had a son, I’d have to think long and hard before I let him play football. And I think that those of us who love the sport are going to have to wrestle with the fact that it will probably change gradually to try to reduce some of the violence. In some cases, that may make it a little bit less exciting, but it will be a whole lot better for the players, and those of us who are fans maybe won’t have to examine our consciences quite as much.

The President continues to show his disconnect from Americans – particularly within the US Military – by stating that having practicing homosexuals in the armed forces has “caused almost no controversy. It’s been almost thoroughly embraced …”

Perhaps John Edwards was right, there really are two Americas; the corner of DC that Barack Hussein Obama occupies, and the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave where people actually have a nodding acquaintance with reality.

Video: Tiananmen Square Survivor Says 2nd Amendment is Key to Replacing Criminal Government

/13 Comments/in , , /by

Last year, Kathleen and I visited China for three weeks. We spent time in Shanghai, Nanjing, Beijing, and other Chinese cities.

One of the highlights of the trip was Tiananmen Square. The area was fenced off with a number of other security measures in place including numerous police, surveillance cameras, and checkpoints.

Despite this corridor of security, Kathleen and I were identified as westerners and almost immediately waived in. The hundreds of Chinese awaiting entrance, however, were forced to undergo intrusive security screening, similar to what one could expect from overzealous TSA agents in the US.

While there, a man told us that during the 1989 Tiananmen Square uprising, the communist government had killed literally thousands of protesters, identified virtually every surviving participant, and incarcerated most of those survivors.

One of them, however, apparently made it out and became a US citizen in 2007. According to Townhall.com, this protester then recorded the following video regarding the incredible importance of the Second Amendment:

In this Tea Party speech, the naturalized Chinese-American citizen demonstrated an exceptional understanding of the Constitution and the Second Amendment. Among other things, he noted that

•”The power of the government is derived from the consent of the governed.”

•Chinese patriots in Tiananmen were crushed by “AK-47’s” because they could “not fight back” as they “were not armed.”

•The argument “that a man with a rifle has no standing against the military technology and machine of today” is ridiculous. 20,000,000 residents of Beijing would have quickly proved that wrong had they been armed in 1989.

•”When a government turns criminal, when a government turns deranged, the body count will not be 5, 10, or even 20. It will be in hundreds like Tiananmen Square, it will be in the millions…

•”When a government has a monopoly on guns, it has absolute power.”

•”When a government has all the guns, it has all the rights.”

•”To me, a rifle is not for sporting or hunting. It is an instrument of freedom. It guarantees that I cannot be coerced, that I have free will, that I am a free man.”

The Tiananmen survivor also weighed in on firearm magazine restrictions, like those proposed by a number of bills pending before the US Congress: “Now suppose the 20 million Beijing citizens had had a few million rifles, how many rounds should they have been ALLOWED to load into their magazines? Ten rounds? [crowd: No!] Seven rounds? [crowd: No!] How about three rounds? [crowd: No!]”

The naturalized US citizen continued,

Do not give up the fight, my friends. It may be a small step that you give up your rifle, or a 30 round magazine.

But it will be a giant leap toward the destruction of this republic.

Now, in closing, I will quote the words of Captain John Parker: ‘Stand your ground. Do not fire until fired upon. But if they want a war, let it start here!

Video: Ruling Class on Track to Destroy Middle America in 2013

/12 Comments/in , , /by

It’s time for us in the middle class to get smart – the debt is going to destroy us. And both parties are making sure of this.

I met with Senator Tom Coburn two weeks ago. He suggests that the American experiment could collapse within the next two years. Why? Because the debt bomb is going to explode and destroy every dollar you and I own.

Who suffers? The middle class. We will be destroyed and along with us, the Republic.

Will our millionaire federal masters get real in 2013? Probably not.

Call to Arms: Sandy Hook May Foreshadow Unimaginable Horrors for the US

/19 Comments/in , /by

The horrific Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre almost immediately led to calls across the nation for stricter gun control, from President Obama to CNN’s Piers Morgan. Protests against the NRA and disparaging remarks against other pro-Second Amendment groups seemed to dominate the mainstream and social media. Some newspapers are actually pushing online petitions to ban assault rifles.

But the reactions aren’t limited to these petitions and public statements; anti-gun laws are being planned, too. In fact, Democratic leaders have announced that they will introduce comprehensive gun control legislation in the 113th Congress. They, as well as Obama, believe the only answer to gun violence is to take away guns.

The GOP House may prove incapable of stopping this effort. As the Reagan coalition continues to implode due to spineless leadership in Congress, many believe that RINO’s will partner with Democrats and enact more restrictive gun control.

In my opinion, this could be a catastrophic mistake. In fact, I’ll go a step further: instead of making our schools safer, banning guns may actually lead to more Sandy Hooks.

First, no law is going to stop a madman from a massacre. Before he started his evil rampage, Lanza was already in violation of all sorts of laws including the prohibition on his possession of handguns (he was under 21 years of age) and the possession of guns on school property.

But more importantly, the whole world now knows that a single lunatic, with apparently little firearms training, can pretty much break into any school and massacre children at will until law enforcement arrives. There’s little risk of anyone interfering, as the vast majority of U.S. schools have no armed guards.

What are our enemies thinking? The radical Islamists, who have perpetuated mass suicide attacks in the US and abroad, are likely salivating over the possibilities in the U.S., opportunities that are certain to expand with even more gun restrictions.

They’ve already tried it in schools abroad. Remember the horrific Beslan School massacre in Russia eight years ago? 334 were slaughtered – over half, children – in an attack by Islamists from Chechnya.

Could you imagine if just 100 of these fundamentalists, split into two-man teams, decided to attack fifty elementary schools across our nation? If a scrawny lunatic 20 year old can single-handedly murder dozens, think what trained terrorists could do. And think about the impact of such a coordinated attack.

These fanatics are likely already operating in the U.S., as they did immediately prior to 9-11. Close to home, we know Iran is exporting terror to Mexico and to drug cartels operating in Latin America. Additionally, increasing numbers of illegal aliens from the Middle East are crossing our southern border.

Coordinated Beslan-like attacks in the United States would be absolutely devastating. Due to misguided gun-free zones, the United States would be looking at a slaughter on an unimaginable scale.

So how is additional gun control legislation going to help protect against that? Rather than enhancing safety, further restricting guns from private ownership in the U.S. will only serve to embolden such aggressors, ensuring that their murderous plans are not impeded.

As Larry Pratt noted in his skewering of Piers Morgan on CNN last week, the only reasonable answer to prevent aggression is to arm potential victims, not disarm them. Schools across the nation should recognize that they are targets and prepare accordingly.