Biden To Put On NRA Show
Jan 8, 2013 Political
No, not a gun show which would likely be sold out with long lines. Joe Biden was put in charge of solving the gun violence crisis and he has been meeting with groups that favor some kind of restrictive gun control on the gun owners who have done absolutely NOTHING wrong. <a href="Biden will now meet with representatives of the National Rifle Association (NRA).
Make no mistake; the die has already been cast. Biden knows exactly what he will present to Obama because he was given the mandate along with the assignment. The meetings, particularly with the NRA, are designed to give the appearance that the Obama regime considered all options and opinions. They want to push through their unconstitutional gun grab while telling everyone they talked to a lot of groups, for and against, and this is what they wanted.
Biden, who once famously said that Barack had better not come for his Beretta in an effort to give weight to then candidate Obama’s claims that he would NOT come after your guns, is now working fast and furiously to take our guns away.
For you liberals and other Obama supporters, this means they both lied. Obama assured people that he would not try to take their firearms and Biden told us we could trust the guy. Now they are doing what they said they would not and this makes it a lie.
The people from the NRA will be able to present a very detailed account of what the Constitution says and what the Founders said about individuals keeping and bearing arms. They need to do this because Obama, Biden, and the rest of the gun grabbers have no clue or are deliberately ignoring the Constitution. Regardless, this will fall on deaf ears because Biden already has his marching orders and he thinks he is the smartest man alive (he is a moron).
It matters not what Obama and Biden come up with because it is unlikely any proposed legislation would make it very far in Congress. Besides, no matter what they pass real Americans will ignore any gun grab and will find other ways to arm themselves because gun laws do not keep people from getting guns. No law stops people who have decided not to follow it.
Case in point, by law Congress must pass a budget every year. The House has passed one every year but the Senate has not. It has been more than 1300 days since a budget was passed. This is by design because the first Obama budget was bloated and provided the baseline for all continuing resolutions, should a budget not get passed. In any event, the fact that there is a law that requires a budget has not forced Harry Reid, a Senator who has sworn to uphold the law, to pass one.
No gun law will keep people from getting guns. This has been the case all along as there are over 20,000 gun laws in this nation yet criminals keep getting guns illegally and using them to commit crime. Hell, it is against the law to murder people with or without a gun.
The only thing Obama will do if he passes any kind of gun control is make a whole lot of new “criminals” whose only crime will be to have followed the Constitution.
People will not be disarmed no matter what Piers Morgan, Barack Obama, Joe Biden or any other lying statist does or says. We will not give up our God given right to keep and bear arms.
In other words, if you want them Molon labe, if you are feeling froggy that is…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[jpsub]
Tags: barack obama, constitution, gun control, joe biden, molon labe, nra
Impeach Senator Feinstein
Dec 28, 2012 Political
Senator Dianne Feinstein is a disgrace to her office and is an enemy of the United States. She took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States but she has violated that oath time and again. Feinstein’s latest violation is in legislation she intends to introduce during the next session of Congress.
That legislation is aimed at violating the Second Amendment of the Constitution by restricting what guns citizens may own with outright bans on certain types of firearms and background checks with fingerprinting of those who have firearms and are grandfathered in. She is also proposing a forced buyback program where people who own firearms that she wants banned would be required to sell them to the government.
Hell no.
Dianne, you are in violation of your oath. The Second Amendment to the Constitution is not ambiguous. It clearly states that the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed. Notice that nowhere does it state that people may keep and bear only the arms that government approves of. Notice that it places no restriction on the people whatsoever. It places restriction on the government and you, lady, are overstepping your authority and YOU are violating your oath.
Let me school you since you are obviously not well educated. The Second Amendment is not about hunting or sport shooting. The Second Amendment ensures that the people, who constitute the militia, are able to be armed to ensure the security of the free state. That security is not only from outside invaders but from intrusion BY OUR OWN GOVERNMENT. The people are to have the arms commonly associated with those the military would use so that if called to serve they would have the appropriate firearms. There is no restriction on those arms and you are not allowed to place any such restrictions.
Our Founders knew that all governments become tyrannies over time and that as governments grow they begin to impose upon the people. The right to keep and bear arms preexisted the Constitution and our founding as evidenced by the words …THE RIGHT of the people. Had our Founders been granting us a right they would have used those words but they knew that people had the God given right to be armed for their defense and for defense against a tyrannical government so they acknowledged the preexisting right in the Second Amendment. This is a right that you cannot take away.
You can’t do it by legislating what arms may be held, if any at all. You cannot do it by requiring people to be on some kind of national registry and you cannot do it by banning the things that are used in conjunction with firearms such as ammunition and magazines.
You simply do not have the power or the authority to to do this and your attempt is a violation of your oath of office.
Given that you are deliberately working to usurp the Constitution and to deny citizens of this great nation their God given and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms you are in violation of your oath. As such, you have committed a crime against the people.
I therefore call for you to be impeached. The House of Representatives must bring those charges and I have drawn this one for them to work from:
Senator Dianne Feinstein has willfully violated her oath of office and is violating the Constitution of the United States. Her efforts to ban firearms violate the Second Amendment and her attempt to disarm citizens is an affront to a free society and cannot go unpunished. Not only are her actions high crimes she is also committing treason. The militia is designed to ensure the security of the free state. Disarming THE PEOPLE makes this country weaker and vulnerable to attacks from outside sources but more importantly, to attacks from our own government. her actions are reprehensible and reflect unfavorably on the Senate, the Congress and the United States.
Dianne Feinstein is working to make millions of citizens criminals by enacting legislation that violates the Constitution and will not be adhered to by patriots of this great nation.
Her actions are also hypocritical as Dianne had her own concealed carry permit (unclear if she still has it), a rare item in California, while she works to disarm the rest of us.
It is time for this nation to rid the Congress of parasites who are bound and determined to ruin this great nation.
We can start by impeaching Dianne Feinstein for her crimes against the people.
People of America, fill out one of these forms (in the pdf located on this page) and submit it to your Representative requesting that it be acted upon. It might not go anywhere but they need to see millions of us standing up to the tyranny.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[jpsub]
Tags: constitution, dianne feinstein, free people, impeach, nra, rights, Second Amendment, treason
Michael Moore Shows His Ignorance, Again
Dec 27, 2012 Political
Filmmaker Michael Moore is stirring up the ashes of racism and saying that this is the reason we have so many guns in our society. His claim is that most guns are bought by white people who fantasize about shooting an invader and that our image of those invaders is black folks.
Moore further states that the US has never been invaded so we really do not need 300 million guns in our homes. He further states:
“I get why the Russians might be a little spooked (over 20 million of them died in World War II). But what’s our excuse?” Moore said. “Worried that the Indians from the casino may go on the warpath? Concerned that the Canadians seem to be amassing too many Tim Horton’s donut shops on both sides of the border?” CNS News
As an aside, I could not help but laugh at the donut shop comment since it looks like Moore has been a victim of excessive donut consumption for some time…
First things first. If Moore contends that we have never been invaded so we don’t need guns in our homes I will counter with, the reason we have never been invaded is BECAUSE we have guns in our homes. I think the quote attributed to Japanese Fleet Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto puts it best; “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.”
So Michael, perhaps the reason we have never been invaded is because any potential enemy knows he would have to deal with millions of armed citizens.
But the meat of this issue is Moore’s misunderstanding of the reason we own guns and the reason we have a Second Amendment. While we are armed to protect our homeland the reason behind the Second Amendment is to ensure that the people have the means to fight our own government should it become tyrannical. We used our firearms to fight England when the King became oppressive and did things to us we did not like, one of which was the attempt to take our arms.
[note]This government has done far worse things to us than those enumerated in the Declaration of Independence and we fought a revolution over those grievances.[/note]
We are armed so as to keep our government in check. We are armed so we have the means to resist a government that ignores the Constitution and tries to impose its will on us contrary to the tenets of our founding.
Michael, we have a Second Amendment to protect all the other Amendments and to protect ourselves against our own government.
That is why we need to keep and bear arms. It guarantees the security of the free state.
Our Founders felt it was necessary to acknowledge the God given right to keep and bear arms for protection (a right that predated the Constitution as evidenced by the words, “the right”) against our government. Since they were much wiser than Michael Moore will ever be I think I will go with their plan.
This has nothing to do with racism. The mass murder in Newtown involved a white guy and white students. If Moore wants racism then perhaps he should look at the inner cities where blacks are killing blacks each and every day. The racist government has enslaved them in an inner city prison and then taken their ability to defend themselves. Therefore, the innocent become victims of the criminals who don’t obey the law.
Moore admits that laws banning guns will not stop the violence but he wants to take our guns nonetheless. To him it is the right thing to do. Only a liberal idiot would espouse doing something that will not work and say it is the right thing to do. Like Obama and his idea of taxing the rich. It won’t fix anything but it makes him feel good because that is the “right thing to do.”
Obama is protected by people with guns. Moore uses an armed guard (who was arrested for illegally carrying his firearm in New York) and people like Dianne Feinstein have or had carry permits all the while working to disarm the rest of us.
We put armed people at banks to guard our money but we make our schools gun free zones and do not allow people there to be armed for the protection of our kids.
Unless, of course, your child has the last name Obama.
The government in charge of us tried to take our firearms once before. We all know how that worked out. Does this government really want to ignore the Constitution and try to disarm us? Is it ready for a backlash that it cannot possibly control?
Time will tell but my money is on the people.
From our cold dead hands…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[jpsub]
Tags: armed guards, constitution, gun control, hypocrites, idiot, lies, michael moore, Obama, racism, rights, Second Amendment
Did Obama Win The Battle Only To Lose The War?
Jun 30, 2012 Political
Last week the Supreme Court ruled that Obamacare can stand but only after the Judicial Branch majority became legislators. The Court basically rewrote the law that Congress passed and inserted the word TAX to replace the word PENALTY. This flies in the face of everything the left has been saying about the law. Obama emphatically denied that the penalty was a tax. Now that the Court has changed the law the reality is that Barack Obama broke his promise not to raise taxes on the middle class.
When all is said and done Obamacare will impose nearly a TRILLION dollars in taxes on Americans. Keep in mind, this is not an income tax it is a tax on something other than income. Some of the tax increases will pay for the massive expansion of government but the most onerous tax is the one where a person pays a tax for doing absolutely nothing. I have seen in several places an imaginary exchange that highlights how this works:
CUSTOMER: No thank you, I would NOT like a pack of gum.
CLERK: OK, the tax on that will be $2.35.
If Americans ever went to a store and declined to buy something and were forced to pay a tax for doing so they would be marching on DC with pitchforks and torches and lynching those in Congress.
But the very same thing has taken place under the health care law. If you report that you do not have health insurance (whether you can’t afford it or declined to buy it) you will have to pay a tax. This is a nightmare for Obama and I think he would have rather had the mandate ruled unconstitutional than have it upheld as a tax because now he has to defend breaking his promise. Remember, the taxes on the middle class would not be raised one dime, per Obama.
Obama and his sock puppets are already trying to rewrite the SCOTUS decision that involved rewriting the law. They are out saying that this is not a tax and is a penalty. Sorry liberals, you cannot have it both ways. If you are going to implement Obamacare because the Court ruled in your favor then you have to implement it based on the ruling.
This is not an accident. The New York Times has described this as a penalty and made the claim that the SCOTUS upheld the penalty.
WRONG. IT IS A TAX – PERIOD.
It is the largest tax increase in our history and it demonstrates that Barack Obama is a tax and spend liberal and nothing more.
While he is out saying the ruling is a win for the middle class the reality is that the middle class will get hit hard by the taxes. Wealthy people, by and large, have health insurance so they will not be affected by the tax for not having it. Those who cannot afford it will get screwed and they will pay other taxes to fund the monstrosity as well.
This is by no means a win for the left no matter what they claim because the ruling allows several things to take place. It allows states to opt out of the Medicaid expansion (which will leave a lot of poorer folks with no insurance and a tax for not having it) which is a big deal. The ruling also allows any future Republican majority in the Senate to repeal the law with a simple majority of 51 votes. Because this is now a TAX issue it will only take 51 votes to repeal it.
The ruling also had some intangible benefits. It has motivated a huge segment of society that now knows the only way to repeal Obamacare is to get rid of Obama and get a majority in the Senate (assuming the majority in the House holds). Around 66% of Americans disapprove of Obamacare and those people will be out in force on election day. They will be out to repeal Obamacare via the ballot box because the system of government that the Founders gave us failed them when an activist Court rewrote a law to make it Constitutional.
John Roberts might have felt he had to do this to preserve the integrity of the Court (though I fail to see how that happened) but he was wrong in what he did. I know, he has the law degree and he is the highest judge in the land but he is WRONG. And if he does not think it was wrong to rewrite the law then he does not belong on the bench. I am open to him demonstrating where the power he exerted is authorized in the Constitution but I doubt he can find it. The Legislative Branch WRITES the laws and the Judicial Branch interprets them to see if they are Constitutional. There is no provision that allows them to rewrite the laws.
Roberts might have done this in an effort to force Obama to defend a huge tax increase and to show he is a liar. He might have done it to make it easier to repeal it. He might have done this to keep the Court from being viewed as political (too late, the ruling was political and not Constitution based) and then again, he might just be a coward.
I don’t know. I think that if he did all these things he might just be a genius by giving Obama defeat while making him think he achieved a victory.
I don’t think this is what courts are supposed to do but the deed has been done and we have to drive on from here.
In 2010 the major issue was Obamacare. The Democrats took a beating because of that ONE issue. They will claim that the economy is what matters to everyone and while that is true does Obama really want to run on that issue?
Those who were not inclined to vote or who were not reliable voters might not have voted based on the economy but they will get out and vote based on Obamacare.
Americans can go through bad times and we know this is part of life. What we will not do is allow government to overreach and to make us slaves to them. That was the message in 2010 and it is the message in 2012.
In November we will take out the trash.
As a last thought, it has always been a joke that if the government could figure a way to tax you for breathing it would. Since we now have to pay a tax for being an American who does not participate in a certain activity it would appear as if government figured out how to tax us just for breathing.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: constitution, john roberts, lies, november, obamacare, scotus
Obama Did Not Ask For An Argument
Jun 16, 2012 Political
No, he picked a fight…
Barack Hussein Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm) gave a Royal Proclamation yesterday in announcing that his monarchy would no longer follow the law and instead would do what it wanted. He proclaimed that illegal children who were brought here by their parents would not be deported but would instead be given a legal status, be allowed to attend college, and be given a work permit. It must be a Royal Proclamation because he has now done what he once said he did not have the power to do, thus he has become a dictator…
[note]My friend Kender MacGowan points out Legal status=legal residence=legal driver’s license=motor voter registration=illegals voting in elections…[/note]
Obama violated the US Constitution with his decree because Article II Section 3 clearly states:
“…he [president] shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed…”
The law says if an illegal is captured he is to be processed and deported. Obama changed that with his Royal Proclamation and that is a violation of the Constitution, period…
The big uproar happened when a reporter interrupted Obama to ask a question. Obama got testy, wagged his finger and acted like a petulant child. I would agree that it was rude to interrupt with the question but the reporter later explained that he thought Obama had finished or was wrapping up and wanted to get his question in before he turned and went back into the White House. As it turns out, Obama addressed the question as he wrapped up but did not take any other questions.
No matter what the cause or who was wrong the typical liberal morons were out in full force decrying the interruption and they all blamed it on one thing, wait for it, yup, racism. Obama was interrupted and a question yelled at him while he was speaking because he is black and the right is full of racists.
The left is playing a game with this one. The liberal media are saying that the leaders of the right have not denounced the reporter and therefore are saying it was OK. This is nothing more than them trying to get one of the leaders to capitulate like McCain would and say it was wrong. By doing so they can continue to press their narrative and take the light away from Obama’s unconstitutional move. They can also push their narrative that it is based on race.
Tucker Carlson pointed out that Sam Donaldson was not admonished for his “heckling” Ronald Reagan. Yes, heckling is the word that the left has given to describe a reporter asking a question so Carlson had to describe it that way. Donaldson took issue with the description and pushed the narrative that it was because Obama is black.
Once again, I do not know if what took place was proper but I know the guy who did it said he mistimed his question thinking Obama was wrapping up (similar to what Donaldson said he used to do), so I will reserve judgement other than to say if he did it on purpose it was rude and if not he made a mistake so move on.
My purpose is twofold. One it is to point out that Obama is usurping the Constitution with his illegal amnesty (and face it, that is what it is).
The second is to point out that the left can’t help but play the race card whenever anything happens to poor little Barry Obama. It never occurred to them to look into the unconstitutional act that Obama is engaging in because they are too blinded by race to do their jobs objectively.
Let me help them. Obama’s race has nothing to do with the fact that he sucks.
He sucks because he is a Socialist who is pandering for votes and he refuses to follow the Constitution while he leads the country down the path to destruction.
But the narrative has been set and the left will continue to drivel on as to how this never happened to any other president. But, since Sam Donaldson was mentioned, this exchange took place between him and George W. Bush:
On August 2, 2006, during the last White House Press conference in the briefing room before undergoing major renovations, Donaldson shouted, “Mr. President, should Mel Gibson be forgiven?”, referencing reports of the actor/producer’s alleged anti-Semitic remarks. President Bush laughed and looked up to see who had asked the question. Bush joked, “Is that Sam Donaldson? Forget it…you’re a ‘has-been’! We don’t have to answer has-beens’ questions.” Donaldson replied, “Better to have been a has-been than a never was.” Wikipedia
Was Sam Donaldson a hater because of this? Did he treat Bush this way because he is white? That same behavior toward Obama would have Donaldson labeled a racist…
We also know that a foreign reporter threw two shoes at George Bush (which Bush successfully dodged) and the left did not condemn those acts. I know they have no control over how foreign reporters act but couldn’t they at least condemn the act? Some blamed Bush and said he failed to see why it happened.
Did anyone blame Obama for the ill timed question shouted by Neil Munro of the Daily Caller? Did anyone claim that Obama was out of touch and that he did not understand the frustration of the majority that opposes what he did with illegals in this country? Did anyone blame Obama for anything?
No, because he is not Bush and because he is a liberal.
And because he is a “black”* man.
Yes, it is the left that is racist here because the left always looks at things through the prism of color. The left blames Obama’s failures on the alleged racists who can’t come to grips with his color. The left is obsessed with making race an issue where it should not be.
The right does not care what color he is. The right is concerned with his polices, policies that are destroying our country.
And his blanket amnesty that usurps the Constitution is one such policy in a long line of them.
*Barack Obama is half black and half white but to the race baiters his white half never figures in the equation. In fact, give his Communist background I think it is fair to say that Obama is black and white and red all over….
Will this act by Obama lead to a Constitutional crisis?
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: constitution, illegals, Immigration, lies, Obama, racism, usurer