How Will More Gun Laws Help?
Aug 7, 2012 Political
This nation has tens of thousands of guns laws on the books and those laws have made no difference in gun crimes. Unless, of course, those laws are ones that allow freer expression of Second Amendment rights. Places with laws allowing carry of firearms have lower crime. Places like Chicago and DC, where the gun laws are the strictest, have out of control crime.
After the Aurora CO theater shootings the liberals were screaming for more gun laws. Mind you, these well intentioned liberals only want common sense gun laws and not anything that would infringe on your rights (nod, nod, wink, wink).
Faced with the reality that the theater was a no gun zone which means that a rule was in place to keep guns out, the liberals had to think of some other reason to enact these sensible laws. The shooter did not follow the rule about taking a gun in the theater (but everyone else did much to their detriment) so banning guns won’t fly. Hmm, the guy bought thousands of rounds over the internet so maybe we need to ban that. Upchuck Schumer of New York is trying that but it must be a bad idea because it was slipped into another bill. The guy used fewer than one hundred rounds so it matters not how many he bought over the Internet, he could have bought a hundred at a Wal Mart on the way to the theater.
Wait now, the libs are pointing out that the shooter had a mental health issue and that a more extensive background check could solve the problem.
Hell, the recent shooting at the Sikh Temple involved a whack job skinhead so a better background check might have kept him in check as well.
Really? Let us see. There is a report that the psychiatrist treating the Aurora shooter reported him to campus police.
There is a report that federal law enforcement had the Sikh shooter on its radar but did not deem him a threat.
So what we have are two police agencies that were aware of the potential for disaster from two people who ended up being mass murderers and those police agencies did absolutely nothing to prevent the massacres from happening.
How in the name of all that is good would a more stringent background check have prevented any of this if the police already knew about the potential problems but did not act?
In fact, the shooter of Congresswoman Giffords had been in trouble with the law and was known to have issues but the law enforcement agency in the area swept that away because his mother worked there.
So tell me again how more government involvement will curb the killings?
It won’t. The government has been more and more involved in the effort to disarm us for a long time and in all the places where government has successfully infringed on our rights the number of gun crimes has gone up. The aforementioned Chicago and DC are prime examples. New York is another.
Guns are banned in Chicago and severely restricted in DC and New York (ironically, Chuck Schumer has a carry permit for New York) and look at the carnage. Chicago is more dangerous than Afghanistan.
We do not need more gun laws. We need the laws we have enforced and we need those entrusted to uphold the law to act when they have credible reports that someone is evil.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: ammo, aurora, chuck schumer, gun control, lies, mental health, police, sikh temple
Did Obama Go Sideways On Four Decades Of Policy?
Aug 1, 2012 Political
Robert Gibbs, the former Obama “Baghdad Bob” has declared Mitt Romney’s trip to Israel an embarrassing disaster. Gibbs, a mouthpiece for the Obama campaign, is trashing Romney’s trip claiming that he was unable to convince people he should be the Commander in Chief.
Gibbs cites Romney’s expression of concern over some aspects of the London Olympics, claims that upset the British officials, as one reason he is not ready for primetime. The Obamabots would have you believe that Romney “struck out playing tee ball.”
The problem with this is that Romney only expressed concerns that the British have been publicly declaring for months. The British newspapers and other media have been talking about the very issues Romney discussed for months. When asked, Romney cited their own concerns and was somehow the bad guy.
Let us not forget that Romney is uniquely qualified to discuss Olympic preparation given his work on the Salt Lake City Olympics. He said nothing that was not already known or that was not already a concern. Even Piers Morgan sided with Romney and Morgan is in no way a right wing supporter.
So that issue has been settled. It was no big deal and Romney caused no international incident.
So on to the next issue. Gibbs cites Romney’s statement that Jerusalem is the Capital of Israel as a major gaffe and shows Romney is not ready for the White House. Here is what Gibbs said about Romney and his comment:
And he criticized the Republican’s declaration that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and should therefore be home to the U.S. embassy. He said that “went sideways” on four decades of American policy, under both Republican and Democratic administrations, that holds the status of Jerusalem, which both Israelis and Palestinians claim as their capital, should be worked out in negotiations. WSJ
So, according to Gibbs the Romney declaration went sideways on four decades of American policy. How dare he declare that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel? He is a foreign policy disaster. Barack Obama is so talented and in tune that he would never make such a silly gaffe.
Except candidate Obama said the very same thing in 2008. Yes ladies and gentlemen, Barack Obama went sideways on four decades of American policy by declaring that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel. Here is what the anointed one said in 2008:
Any negotiated agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, he said, “must preserve Israel’s identity as a Jewish state with secure, recognized, defensible borders. And Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided.” CNS News
The Obama campaign backtracked later on but it is important to note that Obama said Jerusalem must REMAIN (remain means that it is currently so and must stay that way) the capital of Israel. He further stated that it must not be divided. He was speaking to a Jewish group and backtracked later when confronted by others. There is a video of him saying it so you Obamabots out there can’t claim he never said it. And just to be sure, NO, you all can’t play games and claim he was taken out of context. He was in context with his remarks about business and he was completely in context with his Jerusalem remarks.
I know that Obama and his people like to say something and then tell everyone that it was never said or taken out of context but the truth is they all lie and try to twist words. Another truth is that many of Obama’s followers are too stupid to actually see it.
In any event, candidate Obama said the EXACT same thing candidate Romney is now saying. Obama was the wonderful messiah and Romney has gone sideways on four decades of American policy.
This is what Baghdad Bob Gibbs would have you believe. The reality is that Romney’s trip was not an embarrassing disaster and the Obama campaign knows it. The campaign is doing everything it can to lie in order to gain traction.
Say Romney insulted the Brits while ignoring the insult Obama levied on them when he took office. He returned a Bust of Churchill thus insulting our ally and then his peeps lied about it. Even the apology is steeped in falsehood.
The reality is that Romney went to other countries and met with people who respect him. He did not bow to other leaders and he did not run around apologizing for America. He demonstrated what a real leader looks like and the Obama folks know this.
They are scared. It shows in their response to Romney’s actions and it shows in their fundraising emails. They are afraid and they are worried that the ruse is up and they will lose.
Even the black community is fracturing with regard to Obama.
I wonder if they are racists for opposing the anointed one…
Stick around and pop the popcorn because the show is going to get interesting.
Also:
The Blaze
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Obama’s Catch And Release Is Deadly
Jul 31, 2012 Immigration, Political
It is no secret that Obama panders to the illegal community. He has enacted his version of the DREAM Act via Executive Order, he has ignored their presence in the country and he has sued a sovereign state to keep that state from enacting and enforcing immigration laws that are EXACTLY LIKE THE FEDERAL LAWS.
Obama does not look at illegals as being here in violation of the law. He looks at them as Democrat voters. They are no problem to him and his party because they are viewed as people who deserve a chance and, well, if they happen to vote Democrat that is all the better.
Right.
Obama has no issue with illegals being here because he can feel a kinship with them in that none of them have their papers.
Obama tells us not to worry and that these folks are no problem. According to a report from the House Judiciary Committee:
Those who could have been deported but were released later went on to commit the 19 murders, 3 attempted murders and 142 sex crimes, the Judiciary Committee said
Those crimes could have been prevented (like the murder of our Border Patrol Agent and hundreds of Mexicans by Fast and Furious could have been prevented) but Obama chose to ignore the law. Democrats are perfectly happy with the catch and release program and keeping illegals here. In fact, they are upset at programs that would deport those here illegally:
Many Democrats say it [Secure Communities program] casts its net too wide, which means illegal immigrants who have committed relatively minor offenses could be deported.
If they are here illegally then they committed a crime that is not relatively minor and they should be deported.
While Americans are subject to violent crimes committed by people Obama allows to stay here illegally he is protected from the violence by a large number of armed guards.
Typical liberal.
Source:
Washington Times
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: arizona, crimes, illegal aliens, Immigration, lies, Obama
Can’t Find A Doctor, Blame Obama
Jul 30, 2012 Political
But I bet Obama blames Bush.
Obamacare, the terrible law opposed by most people, is set to fully implement in the later years of this decade and when it is fully in place there will be an even larger shortage of doctors. This comes as no surprise to those who noted that you can’t add 30 million people to the eligibility rolls and expect to have access to health care with the same number of doctors.
The New York Times discusses the future shortage under Obamacare as if this is some new revelation.
Amazingly, after supporting this terrible law the NYT finally comes to the game to discuss a major problem associated with it. If the NYT had been diligent in doing its job then perhaps it could have made these arguments during the debate over Obamacare.
Instead, it cheered Obama and the Democrats for their blatant act that enslaved people to government.
The situation will be even worse than this article reports because many doctors will stop practicing medicine when they see how Obamacare will affect their bottom line.
Of course, if the Communist in the White House gets a second term he might just use his Dear Leader powers to force doctors to keep working.
He could just impose a tax for not practicing medicine and call it a penalty.
John Roberts already told him it was OK to do that.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: communism, doctor shortage, lies, Obama, obamacare, socialism
Pro Choice Liberals Not So Much So
Jul 30, 2012 Political
Everyone knows that liberals are intolerant. If people do not believe what they believe then they attack and ban. They don’t like meat, you can’t eat it. They don’t like guns, you can’t have one. Don’t agree with their messiah, well you sir, are a raaaaacist……
Nanny Bloomberg in New York is a typical liberal. I know he changed from the Republican Party to an Independent but he has always been liberal. He is very happy to ban tobacco use, trans-fatty foods, salt and large drinks because he knows better than you how to live your life. And God knows he wants to ban guns…
I thought liberals claimed they were all for choice. If a woman wants to have an abortion then liberals believe she should be able to do so. Women should have that choice. Hell, they believe it so much so that they will not limit abortions. Women, according to liberals, should be able to get an abortion at any time, at any age, and at taxpayer expense. They even believe that a woman should be able to have an abortion just seconds before a baby is born and if by chance that child actually survives the attempt on its life, liberals think the woman should be able to choose to leave her baby on a table somewhere to die.
This is the kind of choice that women can make no questions asked and without any interference whatsoever.
Let the rest of us choose to consume tobacco, salt, fatty foods, or large sugary drinks and Bloomberg is right there to stop us from doing harm because he knows oh so much.
Ironically, the same Michael Bloomberg who thinks that reproductive choice is a fundamental human right (as opposed to the fundamental human right not to be murdered) does not think women should have free choice in how they feed their newborn babies (should they decide to choose life).
Yep, you can choose to abort your baby and that is a fundamental human right BUT if you want to feed your baby formula rather than breastfeeding, Nanny has something for you. Bloomberg is working to have hospitals lock up formula to force women to breastfeed and he wants a record kept with a medical reason for issuing a bottle and formula.
How about the idea of choice? How about if the woman wants to use formula?
Personally, I think breastfeeding is best for the baby. However, that is a choice that the mother (and in a perfect world the father) will take. This choice, unlike the choice of abortion, does not murder the child. Formula is just fine for babies but it is just not as good as breast milk (not to mention the bonding that takes place).
No matter, it is up to women to decide how to feed their children.
The left is not about choice, it is about control. It wants to control what you consume and how you live your life. It wants your guns because they can control you if you have no means to resist. It wants abortion because that controls certain demographics and ensures the feminist vote. It wants to control how you feed your child because it knows better than you how to raise your kid.
To them it takes a village (and the political elite) to raise a child.
No matter what, they are only pro choice when it comes to abortion. Choose to own a gun, consume tobacco, fats, salt or sugary drinks and they are out in full force to prevent you from making your own choice.
Liberal elitists like Bloomberg are dangerous and need to be stopped. We must ensure we remove these kinds of people from office and take away their ability to control us.
That is right. They can let us have our liberty or we can come take it.
The choice is theirs.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: abortion, breastfeeding, control, liberals, lies, michael bloomberg, nanny state