Are you Politically Correct, or do you have a brain? In other words do you automatically default to PC nonsense instead of using the gray matter between your ears? The PC Quiz is here to help you find out. Answer our first question correctly and there may be some hope for you. Answer incorrectly and you'll know you're just a PC hack.
The PC Quiz Part 1
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law? - Andy McCarthy - The Corner on National Review Online
President Obama is at it again. The least American of Presidents has given Interpol the authority to operate in the United States with complete immunity from review by any American citizen, politician, or government organization. That's right, Interpol can now affect the lives of any American here or overseas without worrying about complying with the United States Constitution. All those civil rights you thought you had...Obama made sure only terrorists have them. How's that Hope and Change thing working for you?
Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law? - Andy McCarthy - The Corner on National Review Online
Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law? - Andy McCarthy - The Corner on National Review Online
Monday, December 7, 2009
It Is The Christmas Season
Do I rant a lot on this blog? No, I don't think I do. I try to be reasonable and get my point across in a fair and understandable way...but, sometimes you just have to really let people know how you feel about things and that what I tried to do with the post called: It Is The Christmas Season
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Obama Set To Win Award He Actually Deserves
How many awards has President Barack Hussein Obama won since he became President of the United States? It seems like some left-wing group is always trying to honor him for things he hasn't done. He was even awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for actions the committee thinks he might do. Well, there is at least one award that I believe President Obama should win and I'm proud I voted for him in this particular instance. Want to know which award? Read this Obama Set To Win Award He Actually Deserves
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Hamas Offers Reward For Kidnapping Israeli Soldiers
Hamas Offers Reward For Kidnapping Israeli Soldiers The idea of Hamas asking Arabs in Israel to kidnap soldiers is nothing new, but offering a reward is something new. Could the Obama administration's pledge to give $900 million to Hamas be involved?
Thursday, November 19, 2009
More Crap From Al Gore – Interior Of Earth Several Million Degrees
What can I say about Al Gore that would make an impact? Should I write about his complete hypocrisy regarding the power his very large home uses, or maybe his extensive travel via private jet? Maybe I should mention the fraud of carbon offsets. Or maybe I should just let his words speak for him...yeah, that's it...let him prove he's a dunce. Follow the link to my Happily American blog.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Is Montel Williams Right About A Second Round Of Internment Camps?
In typical liberal fashion Montel Williams suggests that anti-muslim rhetoric could get out of control and lead to internment camps for muslims in the U.S. similar to Japanese internment camps in WWII. Apparently he thinks this could happen because a muslim terrorist killed 13 soldiers and an unborn child at Ft. Hood. I haven't heard the idea of internment camps suggested by any of state-run media or conservative media but could Montel Williams be correct? Read more at Happily American
Friday, November 13, 2009
Muslim Man arrested for 'anti-Christian' mall disturbance
On November 4, 2009, the day before the muslim terrorist attack/murders at Fort Hood, a muslim man named Abdul Walid Hamid committed a terrorist act in the mall where he worked. Hamid was yelling "Allah is power" and "Islam is great" while holding a pen in a fist over his head (a potentially deadly weapon) when he tore a crucifix off of a shopper. Hamid was arraigned the following Tuesday morning at Alameda Superior Court in Pleasanton on charges of battery, grand theft, exhibition of a deadly weapon and a possible hate crime.
Danville Express : Man arrested for 'anti-Christian' mall disturbance
Danville Express : Man arrested for 'anti-Christian' mall disturbance
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Still More Armed Citizens Defending Themselves And Others
You'd never know it by watching the local or national news but law abiding citizens defend themselves and their families millions of times a year in the United States with their lawfully owned guns. Yeah, real people keep themselves from being beaten, raped, severely injured or killed using their own guns. And, even though people are saving their own lives and those of their friends, family, and neighbors the right to defend oneself with a gun is constantly under attack. We must work to keep our right to protect ourselves.
Still More Armed Citizens Defending Themselves And Others
Still More Armed Citizens Defending Themselves And Others
Monday, October 19, 2009
Is Obama Poised To Cede US Sovereignty? No Surprise!
Is President Obama ready and willing to cede the sovereignty of the United States in order to combat the hoax that is global warming? The answer is YES! Call, email, and write letters to the Whitehouse (as if) and to your Senators in opposition to this horrible treaty. Do it today.
On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton gave a presentation in St. Paul, MN on the subject of global warming. In this 4-minute excerpt from his speech, he issues a dire warning to all Americans regarding the United Nations Climate Change Treaty that is scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009. See It Here
A draft of the treaty can be read here:
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/docu...
Page 18: Section 38 of the "Share vision for long-term cooperation action plan" contains the text for forming the new government.
Page 40: Section 46 Subsection H of the "Objectives, scope, and guiding principles" contains the text for enforcement and establishment of the rule of law.
There has been considerable debate raised about Monckton's conclusion that the Copenhagen Treaty would cede US sovereignty. His comments appear to be based upon his interpretation of the The Supremacy Clause in the US Constitution (Article VI, paragraph 2). This clause establishes the Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. TREATIES as the supreme law of the land. Concerns have been raised in the past that a particularly ambitious treaty may supersede the US Constitution. In the 1950s, a constitutional amendment, known as the Bricker Amendment, was proposed in response to such fears, but it failed to pass. You can read more about the Bricker Amendment in a 1953 Time Magazine article:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/art...,9171,806676-1,00.html
Lord Monckton served as a policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher. He has repeatedly challenged Al Gore to a debate to which Gore has refused. Monckton sued to stop Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth" from being shown in British schools due to its inaccuracies. The judge found in-favor of Monckton, ordering 9 serious errors in the film to be corrected. Lord Monckton travels internationally in an attempt to educating the public about the myth of global warming.
On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton gave a presentation in St. Paul, MN on the subject of global warming. In this 4-minute excerpt from his speech, he issues a dire warning to all Americans regarding the United Nations Climate Change Treaty that is scheduled to be signed in Copenhagen in December 2009. See It Here
A draft of the treaty can be read here:
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/docu...
Page 18: Section 38 of the "Share vision for long-term cooperation action plan" contains the text for forming the new government.
Page 40: Section 46 Subsection H of the "Objectives, scope, and guiding principles" contains the text for enforcement and establishment of the rule of law.
There has been considerable debate raised about Monckton's conclusion that the Copenhagen Treaty would cede US sovereignty. His comments appear to be based upon his interpretation of the The Supremacy Clause in the US Constitution (Article VI, paragraph 2). This clause establishes the Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. TREATIES as the supreme law of the land. Concerns have been raised in the past that a particularly ambitious treaty may supersede the US Constitution. In the 1950s, a constitutional amendment, known as the Bricker Amendment, was proposed in response to such fears, but it failed to pass. You can read more about the Bricker Amendment in a 1953 Time Magazine article:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/art...,9171,806676-1,00.html
Lord Monckton served as a policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher. He has repeatedly challenged Al Gore to a debate to which Gore has refused. Monckton sued to stop Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth" from being shown in British schools due to its inaccuracies. The judge found in-favor of Monckton, ordering 9 serious errors in the film to be corrected. Lord Monckton travels internationally in an attempt to educating the public about the myth of global warming.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
US Redneck Special Forces
The Pentagon announced today that it has formed a new elite unit - US Redneck Special Forces - from East Texas. The elite warriors will be sent to Afghanistan and given ONLY this info about terrorists:
1. The season opened today.
2. There's no bag limit.
3. They taste just like chicken.
4. They hate beer, pickups, country music, & Jesus.
5. They are directly responsible for the death of Dale Earnhardt.
The Pentagon's top Generals expect the war to be over next week.
1. The season opened today.
2. There's no bag limit.
3. They taste just like chicken.
4. They hate beer, pickups, country music, & Jesus.
5. They are directly responsible for the death of Dale Earnhardt.
The Pentagon's top Generals expect the war to be over next week.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
October chill sets record, may last all week -- chicagotribune.com
Record cold expected all week in Chicago and other places. Yet some persist in fear mongering about man-made global warming in order to raise your taxes and take more control of your life. It's been getting cooler worldwide since 1998. Call your Senator and Congressmen to vote against Cap & Trade!
October chill sets record, may last all week -- chicagotribune.com
Posted using ShareThis
October chill sets record, may last all week -- chicagotribune.com
Posted using ShareThis
Sunday, October 11, 2009
More Unwarranted Awards For Obama?
Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his good intentions...and we know what road is paved with those, right? Anyway, I think he'll probably get some other awards he doesn't deserve. C'mon, just think of an award...
More Unwarranted Awards For Obama?
More Unwarranted Awards For Obama?
Monday, October 5, 2009
What About Losing Insurance Because You Are Sick?
President Obama has been using fear mongering tactics to advance his unconstitutional, unamerican, health care reform boondoggle. Obama is trying to make you fearful about health care coverage. You do NOT lose health insurance coverage due to illness. He knows it. Members of Congress know it. Now you do.
What About Losing Insurance Because You Are Sick?
What About Losing Insurance Because You Are Sick?
Saturday, October 3, 2009
16 Signs That You Live In A Tyranny
We live in interesting times with a President and Congress who seem to be ignoring the Constitution and the will of the people. Check out this list and see how many things you recognize.
16 Signs That You Live In A Tyranny
Posted using ShareThis
16 Signs That You Live In A Tyranny
Posted using ShareThis
Top 5 Reasons Obama Failed To Bring Olympics To Chicago
Obama’s Top Five Reasons Chicago Didn’t Get The Olympics as we will soon hear in the left wing media as they apologize for their guy.
Top 5 Reasons Obama Failed To Bring Olympics To Chicago
Top 5 Reasons Obama Failed To Bring Olympics To Chicago
Friday, September 25, 2009
The Continuing Tales Of Armed Citizens
Once again I’m pleased to present you with more stories of Armed Citizens. Armed Citizens defend themselves and their families about 2 Million times each year in the United States with their legally owned guns. All of the stories below are true, you might ask the talking-heads reading your local news why you hadn’t heard these stories before. After all, anytime some criminal uses a gun you do hear about it. Food for thought. Read more at:
The Continuing Tales Of Armed Citizens
The Continuing Tales Of Armed Citizens
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Happily American
I'm Happily American and Happily American is also the name of my new blog at http://www.happilyamerican.com
Why a new blog? Well, by moving to a paid host I can be sure that small-minded people don't get the blog blocked. Blogs on the Google-owned Blogger.com can be flagged by anyone that doesn't agree with what you write....and that can't happen with a Wordpress Blog on a paid host.
So please visit me at Happily American and Register to receive the posts. Pass it on.
Remember, Register on Happily American to continue to receive my posts like The Continuing Tales Of Armed Citizens
Why a new blog? Well, by moving to a paid host I can be sure that small-minded people don't get the blog blocked. Blogs on the Google-owned Blogger.com can be flagged by anyone that doesn't agree with what you write....and that can't happen with a Wordpress Blog on a paid host.
So please visit me at Happily American and Register to receive the posts. Pass it on.
Remember, Register on Happily American to continue to receive my posts like The Continuing Tales Of Armed Citizens
Friday, September 18, 2009
President tackles race questions
Since Congressman Joe Wilson's "You Lie" outburst during President Obama's speech to a joint session of Congress the liberal media has been using only one word - RACISM. After all, according to the media only racism could explain why anyone would oppose their messiah.
Well, I've got news for race baiters like Maureen Dowd, former President (and failure as President) Jimmy Carter, and even Bill Cosby...It's not about race. It never was about race and President Obama agrees with me. Check out the link below where Obama "argued that the vast majority of his political opponents simply disagree with him on the merits of the issues."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27330.html#ixzz0RWdgDnW2
President tackles race questions - Eamon Javers - POLITICO.com
Shared via AddThis
Well, I've got news for race baiters like Maureen Dowd, former President (and failure as President) Jimmy Carter, and even Bill Cosby...It's not about race. It never was about race and President Obama agrees with me. Check out the link below where Obama "argued that the vast majority of his political opponents simply disagree with him on the merits of the issues."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27330.html#ixzz0RWdgDnW2
President tackles race questions - Eamon Javers - POLITICO.com
Shared via AddThis
Monday, September 14, 2009
Scrapping The Public Plan Is The Easiest Way To Get A Public Plan
I keep hearing that members of the U.S. Congress and various "experts" are saying that the "public plan" may be scrapped in order to get HR 3200 or other health care bill passed. This kind of talk is a smoke screen covering a deeper three-step plan designed to get the public to clamor FOR a public plan. The plan has only three steps and goes something like this....
First Step, Democrat members of the House of Representatives take the public plan out of HR 3200 even though most other provisions of the bill remain intact. Removal of the public plan helps bring opponents on board, and gives ammo to RINO's like Senator Olympia Snow to bring her weak-kneed associates on board in the Senate. The bill becomes "bipartisan" and passes without the public plan.
Second Step, as the law gets signed by a triumphant and gloating President Obama, it goes into effect and requires (as it does now):
a. Everyone not currently covered must buy health insurance from private insurance companies rather than face stiff tax penalties.
b. All of the health insurance plans people have to buy must be an "approved plan" which must cover everything and everyone the government says they must cover with limits set artificially high. This has the effect of making insurance premiums rise and become more unaffordable, resulting in citizens who then seek relief from their representatives.
Third Step, the President and members of the Congress publicly state that "as expected, without the public plan health care costs have spiraled out of control" and that in order to fix the problem they must create "an affordable public plan". Then "poof!" the public plan appears just in time for the 2012 election season.
First Step, Democrat members of the House of Representatives take the public plan out of HR 3200 even though most other provisions of the bill remain intact. Removal of the public plan helps bring opponents on board, and gives ammo to RINO's like Senator Olympia Snow to bring her weak-kneed associates on board in the Senate. The bill becomes "bipartisan" and passes without the public plan.
Second Step, as the law gets signed by a triumphant and gloating President Obama, it goes into effect and requires (as it does now):
a. Everyone not currently covered must buy health insurance from private insurance companies rather than face stiff tax penalties.
b. All of the health insurance plans people have to buy must be an "approved plan" which must cover everything and everyone the government says they must cover with limits set artificially high. This has the effect of making insurance premiums rise and become more unaffordable, resulting in citizens who then seek relief from their representatives.
Third Step, the President and members of the Congress publicly state that "as expected, without the public plan health care costs have spiraled out of control" and that in order to fix the problem they must create "an affordable public plan". Then "poof!" the public plan appears just in time for the 2012 election season.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Obama To Brainwash Public Grade School Kids 9/8/09
Just when you think you've heard it all it turns out you haven't. President Barack Obama, known as President Pantywaist in Britain, is all set to begin brainwashing grade school children on September 8th. Even without the particulars of the brainwashing sessions being released, people are already comparing Obama's planned address to the beginning of the Hitler Youth. Calling this the beginning of the Hitler, or Obama, Youth may be a bit strong but, I really can't think of any reason why the President of the United States would be bypassing parents to address grade school kids. Unless he's taking the advice of his friend William Ayers, the terrorist turned "educator", who promotes liberal activism in the classroom. For more info see the video below:
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Marine Corps Veteran Puts Congressman Brian Baird In His Place
People are speaking out against the health care reform plan being crammed down our collective throats by a President and Congress who care only about power. August 22nd a U.S. Marine Corps Veteran named David Hedrick spoke out at a town hall meeting with Congressman Brian Baird (D-WA). As Hedrick points out, it's not up to Congress to "allow" us to choose our health care plan. The video below shows you what happened. Way to go Marine!!!
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Why Lie About The UnInsured?
Among the reasons given for "Health Care Reform" in the United States is the number of uninsured. You've probably heard the claims. President Obama says there are 47 Million Americans who are uninsured. Sometimes the claim is that 47 Million Americans don't have access to health care. I've even been told that about 50 million people can't afford health insurance. None of those claims are true but they appear to be based on U.S. Census information from 2007 and are cited by those who want to increase government control over our lives and limit our health care choices. They are telling you lies to control your life more completely.
What did the Census say? Well, in the report "Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007" we find out that:
A person was considered uninsured if "they were not covered by any type of health insurance at any time in that year." Huh? At any time? So, if someone leaves a job where they were covered by health insurance...doesn't bother to pay the COBRA payment...loses their coverage...then gets new coverage at their new job when it kicks in 90 days later...they're still counted as uninsured? Really?
About 15% of the U.S. population was uninsured (see above) and that number has been relatively stable for at least 20 years. That also means that 85%, a very clear majority, are covered.
Instead of 47 Million, the report actually says it's just under 46 Million uninsured. So, already a lie. Does that make a difference? I think it does, but before you write to me about job losses and the effect on coverage...don't. There are no reliable statistics newer than the 2007 report so I'm gonna go with that for now. The President and Congress are telling you lies.
Roughly 10 Million of the uninsured are illegal aliens or other non-citizens...so, when President Obama says there are 47 Million Americans who are uninsured HE IS TELLING YOU A LIE. By the way, I'm not saying we should deny care to people just because they are here illegally but I don't think we should turn health care upside down based on LIES or for the benefit of non-citizens. I also don't think the American Taxpayer should be left paying the bill. Therefore, I've proposed a solution for handling health care for illegal aliens.
About 25% of the uninsured or just over 12 Million of the uninsured are currently eligible for Medicaid or S-CHIP but have not enrolled. Depending on State eligibility requirements regarding income and other factors, the number eligible but unenrolled may be as high 20 Million. Why are they unenrolled? It doesn't matter why since they will be automatically enrolled if they go to a hospital for care. Saying we need to allow government to take over our health care because these people can't afford or can't access care is just a LIE. It's there for the taking right now without any new legislation.
The remaining 16-24 Million or so? Well, some are definitely not able to afford coverage and are not currently eligible for existing programs. However, there are at least a few million who can afford coverage but choose not to have it. For example, the Census data shows there are 9.1 Million uninsured people in households making $75,000 or more.
In order to gain the support of the people, the President and Congress...not to mention their willing accomplices in the press, have intentionally lied to make you believe the problem is much larger than it really is and that the ONLY solution is more government. If the President and Congress have to lie about the uninsured what else are they fudging? How can they be trusted to handle our health care? How can they be trusted to spend TRILLIONS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS? Fight back, call your representatives. Send them letters. TELL THEM TO STOP TELLING YOU LIES.
What did the Census say? Well, in the report "Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007" we find out that:
A person was considered uninsured if "they were not covered by any type of health insurance at any time in that year." Huh? At any time? So, if someone leaves a job where they were covered by health insurance...doesn't bother to pay the COBRA payment...loses their coverage...then gets new coverage at their new job when it kicks in 90 days later...they're still counted as uninsured? Really?
About 15% of the U.S. population was uninsured (see above) and that number has been relatively stable for at least 20 years. That also means that 85%, a very clear majority, are covered.
Instead of 47 Million, the report actually says it's just under 46 Million uninsured. So, already a lie. Does that make a difference? I think it does, but before you write to me about job losses and the effect on coverage...don't. There are no reliable statistics newer than the 2007 report so I'm gonna go with that for now. The President and Congress are telling you lies.
Roughly 10 Million of the uninsured are illegal aliens or other non-citizens...so, when President Obama says there are 47 Million Americans who are uninsured HE IS TELLING YOU A LIE. By the way, I'm not saying we should deny care to people just because they are here illegally but I don't think we should turn health care upside down based on LIES or for the benefit of non-citizens. I also don't think the American Taxpayer should be left paying the bill. Therefore, I've proposed a solution for handling health care for illegal aliens.
About 25% of the uninsured or just over 12 Million of the uninsured are currently eligible for Medicaid or S-CHIP but have not enrolled. Depending on State eligibility requirements regarding income and other factors, the number eligible but unenrolled may be as high 20 Million. Why are they unenrolled? It doesn't matter why since they will be automatically enrolled if they go to a hospital for care. Saying we need to allow government to take over our health care because these people can't afford or can't access care is just a LIE. It's there for the taking right now without any new legislation.
The remaining 16-24 Million or so? Well, some are definitely not able to afford coverage and are not currently eligible for existing programs. However, there are at least a few million who can afford coverage but choose not to have it. For example, the Census data shows there are 9.1 Million uninsured people in households making $75,000 or more.
In order to gain the support of the people, the President and Congress...not to mention their willing accomplices in the press, have intentionally lied to make you believe the problem is much larger than it really is and that the ONLY solution is more government. If the President and Congress have to lie about the uninsured what else are they fudging? How can they be trusted to handle our health care? How can they be trusted to spend TRILLIONS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS? Fight back, call your representatives. Send them letters. TELL THEM TO STOP TELLING YOU LIES.
Monday, August 3, 2009
How We Can Save Billions On Health Care
The health care debate in the United States continues to spur people to action to prevent the President and the Congress from making a huge mistake and end up destroying the best health care in the world. However, the President, Democrats in Congress and even the media say that those of us against the various health care reform bills don't offer an alternative to anything they're trying to do. Well, I have a recommendation that could save the United States billions of dollars in health care spending without denying care, rationing care, or significantly raising taxpayer exposure.
My recommendation, mine since I haven't seen it anywhere else, is to save billions of dollars spent on the health care of illegal aliens. Ok, that's not the whole idea so before you start calling me a racist or murderer or something along those lines just wait a second....wait. I'm not saying we deny care to injured or ill people because they're here illegally. The American people are far to humane and charitable to deny needed care and I'm ok with that. But, I do believe that people and institutions should be paid for the care they provide and I don't think the American taxpayers should be the ones on the hook for the paying for the care of illegals. Here's the rest of my recommendation: Send the health care bill to the illegal alien's country of origin.
I know, I know...you think I'm crazy...nuts! Ok, maybe I am but is the idea so bad? I think it's pretty good but I know you think there are a number of problems with the idea. I've anticipated that. The two biggest problems include:
1. Illegal aliens believe they'll be deported if they tell hospital personnel where they're from; and,
2. Why would the country of origin pay?
The first is quite simple. Just make it known that you cannot be deported just for providing information to health care personnel about your immigration status and country of origin. As soon as the illegals see that their friends aren't being sent home by providing information to the hospitals they'll get the idea. Could they lie? Maybe, but to what end?
The second problem, payment by the country of origin, is a little more difficult but could be managed. The countries would pay because they would lose more if they didn't. What I mean is...if they don't pay the bill we could cut off all foreign aid and all Western Union transfers, and seize all their assets in this country until the bill is paid. So, do they lose a few billion in health care payments for THEIR CITIZENS or do they lose many billions in aid? A few billion for health care for THEIR CITIZENS or do they lose many billions in Western Union transfers? For example, Mexico alone receives around $46 billion a year from its citizens living here illegally. Would they really jeopardize that?
I'm still against the health care reform bills that are in Congress. I think their only purpose is a power-grab and that the quality and availability of health care in this country would suffer...but, I'm not just against the bills without offering any alternate option.
My recommendation, mine since I haven't seen it anywhere else, is to save billions of dollars spent on the health care of illegal aliens. Ok, that's not the whole idea so before you start calling me a racist or murderer or something along those lines just wait a second....wait. I'm not saying we deny care to injured or ill people because they're here illegally. The American people are far to humane and charitable to deny needed care and I'm ok with that. But, I do believe that people and institutions should be paid for the care they provide and I don't think the American taxpayers should be the ones on the hook for the paying for the care of illegals. Here's the rest of my recommendation: Send the health care bill to the illegal alien's country of origin.
I know, I know...you think I'm crazy...nuts! Ok, maybe I am but is the idea so bad? I think it's pretty good but I know you think there are a number of problems with the idea. I've anticipated that. The two biggest problems include:
1. Illegal aliens believe they'll be deported if they tell hospital personnel where they're from; and,
2. Why would the country of origin pay?
The first is quite simple. Just make it known that you cannot be deported just for providing information to health care personnel about your immigration status and country of origin. As soon as the illegals see that their friends aren't being sent home by providing information to the hospitals they'll get the idea. Could they lie? Maybe, but to what end?
The second problem, payment by the country of origin, is a little more difficult but could be managed. The countries would pay because they would lose more if they didn't. What I mean is...if they don't pay the bill we could cut off all foreign aid and all Western Union transfers, and seize all their assets in this country until the bill is paid. So, do they lose a few billion in health care payments for THEIR CITIZENS or do they lose many billions in aid? A few billion for health care for THEIR CITIZENS or do they lose many billions in Western Union transfers? For example, Mexico alone receives around $46 billion a year from its citizens living here illegally. Would they really jeopardize that?
I'm still against the health care reform bills that are in Congress. I think their only purpose is a power-grab and that the quality and availability of health care in this country would suffer...but, I'm not just against the bills without offering any alternate option.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
The Really Sad Story Of Jane Doe Who Couldn't Afford Health Insurance
This is the really sad story of Jane Doe who couldn't afford health insurance. Right now Jane is sitting in a doctor's office waiting to be seen for a painful feeling in her belly. She's afraid that the feeling is something serious and she's afraid that it will be a financial disaster because she doesn't have health insurance - she can't afford it.
Jane started getting occasional uncomfortable feelings in her abdomen a few months ago right after the presidential inauguration and the beginning of the 111th Congress...around the time she found out there was a health care crisis in the United States. It hit her like a ton of bricks that she didn't have health insurance coverage and the uncomfortable feelings became more frequent.
Jane knew she should have tried to get health insurance coverage but she couldn't afford it. She regretted that she had turned down the plan at work but felt she had to because even though the company paid the lion's share of the premiums it would still have cost her $250 per month. She just couldn't afford it even though she made decent money and didn't spend frivolously. As she kept hearing about the health care crisis she began to think about her lack of coverage more and more.
Although Jane was 39 (again) and healthy she was consumed by the idea of getting sick and losing everything. A day didn't go by that she didn't think about her lack of insurance. It made her feel ill. She thought about it every morning on the way to work while she was getting her Venti double shot mocha latte at Starbucks ($5 each work day). She thought about it more during lunch at the pasta place across from the office where she loved the Chicken Carbonara even though it wasn't on the $5 daily special ($8.50 each work day). Jane noticed she even thought about her lack of insurance while getting her hair done. It was a treat for her to get her roots done, a trim, and some highlights once a month ($50 per month). She even caught herself mentioning her plight to the nail tech while getting her nails filled ($15 twice a month).
Even at home in her comfortable apartment she would flip though the digital cable channels or surf the internet using her cable modem ($150 per month) to find out more about what Congress was doing to help people like her on her 50 inch LCD TV. She was glad to have some wine ($20 per week) to calm her while watching news that just got her more worried. Sometimes she got worried enough to go for a walk to calm her down. She should probably go to the gym instead since she was paying for it ($45 per month) but it was too much of a hassle to drive over there. She never used the gym. Oh well, the walk made her feel better and it was probably good for her health.
Jane was especially aware of her predicament when her office co-worker, a mean ol' conservative, continually took pleasure in pointing out that she could afford the company health insurance plan if she made some changes. He actually told her in front of the whole office that by eliminating her Starbucks habit and her cable tv/modem she would save enough to be able to afford health insurance. What a jerk! She couldn't believe he wanted her to live like like that. Where did he get off?!? It was all so stressful.
And that's the really sad story of Jane Doe who couldn't afford health insurance. How did you think it was going to end? Ok, ok. She had an ulcer. The doctor told her to reduce stress, maybe quit worrying so much and stop watching the news. He also said she should lay off the caffeine and wine, increase her water intake, and take the anti-biotic, antacid, and a drug to repair the ulcer he was prescribing. She paid for the office visit on her credit card and scheduled a follow up for six weeks. Then Jane went to Wal-Mart to fill her prescriptions for $10 each. She hardly even thought about the fact she had received appropriate health care without insurance. How sad.
Jane started getting occasional uncomfortable feelings in her abdomen a few months ago right after the presidential inauguration and the beginning of the 111th Congress...around the time she found out there was a health care crisis in the United States. It hit her like a ton of bricks that she didn't have health insurance coverage and the uncomfortable feelings became more frequent.
Jane knew she should have tried to get health insurance coverage but she couldn't afford it. She regretted that she had turned down the plan at work but felt she had to because even though the company paid the lion's share of the premiums it would still have cost her $250 per month. She just couldn't afford it even though she made decent money and didn't spend frivolously. As she kept hearing about the health care crisis she began to think about her lack of coverage more and more.
Although Jane was 39 (again) and healthy she was consumed by the idea of getting sick and losing everything. A day didn't go by that she didn't think about her lack of insurance. It made her feel ill. She thought about it every morning on the way to work while she was getting her Venti double shot mocha latte at Starbucks ($5 each work day). She thought about it more during lunch at the pasta place across from the office where she loved the Chicken Carbonara even though it wasn't on the $5 daily special ($8.50 each work day). Jane noticed she even thought about her lack of insurance while getting her hair done. It was a treat for her to get her roots done, a trim, and some highlights once a month ($50 per month). She even caught herself mentioning her plight to the nail tech while getting her nails filled ($15 twice a month).
Even at home in her comfortable apartment she would flip though the digital cable channels or surf the internet using her cable modem ($150 per month) to find out more about what Congress was doing to help people like her on her 50 inch LCD TV. She was glad to have some wine ($20 per week) to calm her while watching news that just got her more worried. Sometimes she got worried enough to go for a walk to calm her down. She should probably go to the gym instead since she was paying for it ($45 per month) but it was too much of a hassle to drive over there. She never used the gym. Oh well, the walk made her feel better and it was probably good for her health.
Jane was especially aware of her predicament when her office co-worker, a mean ol' conservative, continually took pleasure in pointing out that she could afford the company health insurance plan if she made some changes. He actually told her in front of the whole office that by eliminating her Starbucks habit and her cable tv/modem she would save enough to be able to afford health insurance. What a jerk! She couldn't believe he wanted her to live like like that. Where did he get off?!? It was all so stressful.
And that's the really sad story of Jane Doe who couldn't afford health insurance. How did you think it was going to end? Ok, ok. She had an ulcer. The doctor told her to reduce stress, maybe quit worrying so much and stop watching the news. He also said she should lay off the caffeine and wine, increase her water intake, and take the anti-biotic, antacid, and a drug to repair the ulcer he was prescribing. She paid for the office visit on her credit card and scheduled a follow up for six weeks. Then Jane went to Wal-Mart to fill her prescriptions for $10 each. She hardly even thought about the fact she had received appropriate health care without insurance. How sad.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Don't Cry Wolf
There's an email going around. I received the email from a trusted source that failed to check sources and verify content. This particular email is about a Senate Bill (SB-2099) that would require, according to the email, that everyone place the number of guns they have on their 2009 tax return, get fingerprinted, and pay a $50 tax per gun. The email even contains a link to a website with the bill's text. Then the email asks that you contact your elected officials to tell them to vote against it. That would be crying wolf.
Pay attention. There is no such bill currently being considered by the U.S. Senate. Do not call them about "SB-2099". There was a bill a few years ago that was numbered S. 2099 that is the bill the emailer is referring to, but it never made it through the Senate during the session it was introduced...so it died. It has not been reintroduced.
If you want to know what's going on regarding anti-gun bills in the U.S. Congress you can check with the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action. They do keep track of all State and Federal legislative actions impacting gun owners and you can subscribe to emails from the ILA. Don't cry wolf.
Pay attention. There is no such bill currently being considered by the U.S. Senate. Do not call them about "SB-2099". There was a bill a few years ago that was numbered S. 2099 that is the bill the emailer is referring to, but it never made it through the Senate during the session it was introduced...so it died. It has not been reintroduced.
If you want to know what's going on regarding anti-gun bills in the U.S. Congress you can check with the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action. They do keep track of all State and Federal legislative actions impacting gun owners and you can subscribe to emails from the ILA. Don't cry wolf.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
We Are Not The New Kid On The Block
You might think that 233 years is a long time for a country to be around. I think so. However, there are some in the world and even in our own country (liberals) who think it's next to no time at all and that's why we must tread lightly in the world and apologize for our supposed transgressions. People who believe this, including (seemingly) our current President say we are just a child as countries go. They say we need to mature before we're ready to deal with other countries. Well, I say they're full of crap and their argument falls into the category of stupidity. We are among the oldest and most experienced of countries.
When does a country become a country? Have you ever thought about it? To me a country begins its existence when it establishes and maintains a government, or institutes a new form of government...like ending a monarchy and forming a democracy. With a new government comes new ways of doing things on behalf of, or to, the people. A new government also means new ways of dealing with other world powers. New allies, new trading partners, and sometimes new enemies come with governmental change. So, a country's experience and maturity level begin with it's new form of government. This experience is completely different than the age of an area's cultural experience. With me so far?
Yesterday was July 4th, and we celebrated the birthday of the United States of America and its independence from Great Britain. Of course it would be more accurate to say that the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, June 21, 1788, is the real date of birth of our country making the country roughly 221 years old. This is the date the parameters of government were set so I'll use that date to compare this country's age and experience to other countries.
It seems the Europeans always want to tell us how young and misguided we are. Ok, which European countries are older and more experienced? How about our faithful critic and sometimes ally France? Nope. France is currently in its "Fifth Republic" established in 1958...about 51 years old. Maybe Germany? Not a chance. The Federal Republic of Germany was formed in 1949...just 60 years ago. The Italian Republic - 1946. The "Kingdom of Spain" sounds old but the actual date is 1978. Portugal - 1976...200 years after our Declaration of Independence. Care to take a guess about Serbia, Croatia, or Bosnia & Herzegovina? I have a boom box older than those countries. Even "ancient Greece" isn't so ancient - 1975. I could go on but you can see most of Europe's countries are a bunch of newborns compared to the United States. England is an exception.
What about other ancient lands? China? Isn't China one of "cradles of civilization"? Maybe, but Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier before the People's Republic of China came along in 1949. Japan's form of government came after their surrender in World War 2. The area of the world called India may have a long history but as a country it's not even eligible for Social Security in ours (1950). C'mon Ben, how about the Middle East? Isn't it ancient? Culturally yes, governmentally no. Your grandparents are older than the countries of the Middle East. And, don't even ask about Africa, they'll have new countries by tomorrow.
The Western Hemisphere must surely be full of countries older than the United States, right? Wrong. So wrong that I don't even want to write about it.
So, the United States isn't the new kid on the block. The United States is an elder state. My advice to the world...Respect your elder. Don't get uppity, and don't talk back. After all your elder feeds you. Your elder keeps you safe if you play nice. If you don't play nice your elder whips your butt or lets the local bully do it. Your elder comes to your rescue when nature rips your young butt a new one. Your elder even buys your pitiful crap to make sure you have a roof over your head. So remember, your elder does know better than you and your elder might feel bad about stepping-in or disciplining you but has absolutely no need to apologize.
When does a country become a country? Have you ever thought about it? To me a country begins its existence when it establishes and maintains a government, or institutes a new form of government...like ending a monarchy and forming a democracy. With a new government comes new ways of doing things on behalf of, or to, the people. A new government also means new ways of dealing with other world powers. New allies, new trading partners, and sometimes new enemies come with governmental change. So, a country's experience and maturity level begin with it's new form of government. This experience is completely different than the age of an area's cultural experience. With me so far?
Yesterday was July 4th, and we celebrated the birthday of the United States of America and its independence from Great Britain. Of course it would be more accurate to say that the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, June 21, 1788, is the real date of birth of our country making the country roughly 221 years old. This is the date the parameters of government were set so I'll use that date to compare this country's age and experience to other countries.
It seems the Europeans always want to tell us how young and misguided we are. Ok, which European countries are older and more experienced? How about our faithful critic and sometimes ally France? Nope. France is currently in its "Fifth Republic" established in 1958...about 51 years old. Maybe Germany? Not a chance. The Federal Republic of Germany was formed in 1949...just 60 years ago. The Italian Republic - 1946. The "Kingdom of Spain" sounds old but the actual date is 1978. Portugal - 1976...200 years after our Declaration of Independence. Care to take a guess about Serbia, Croatia, or Bosnia & Herzegovina? I have a boom box older than those countries. Even "ancient Greece" isn't so ancient - 1975. I could go on but you can see most of Europe's countries are a bunch of newborns compared to the United States. England is an exception.
What about other ancient lands? China? Isn't China one of "cradles of civilization"? Maybe, but Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier before the People's Republic of China came along in 1949. Japan's form of government came after their surrender in World War 2. The area of the world called India may have a long history but as a country it's not even eligible for Social Security in ours (1950). C'mon Ben, how about the Middle East? Isn't it ancient? Culturally yes, governmentally no. Your grandparents are older than the countries of the Middle East. And, don't even ask about Africa, they'll have new countries by tomorrow.
The Western Hemisphere must surely be full of countries older than the United States, right? Wrong. So wrong that I don't even want to write about it.
So, the United States isn't the new kid on the block. The United States is an elder state. My advice to the world...Respect your elder. Don't get uppity, and don't talk back. After all your elder feeds you. Your elder keeps you safe if you play nice. If you don't play nice your elder whips your butt or lets the local bully do it. Your elder comes to your rescue when nature rips your young butt a new one. Your elder even buys your pitiful crap to make sure you have a roof over your head. So remember, your elder does know better than you and your elder might feel bad about stepping-in or disciplining you but has absolutely no need to apologize.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
True Stories Of Armed Citizens Defending Themselves
Citizens of the United States of America end up defending themselves with their own legally owned guns millions of times a year. Usually it's an American defending their home and family from criminal scumbags. I know that anti-gun, anti-Constitutional Rights activists will never believe it but these true stories do sometimes find their way into the press.
At first, NRA Life member Norman McBride assumed his dogs were barking at the deer that frequent his rural property. The dogs persisted, however, so McBride investigated. Police say that as he stepped onto his front porch, he was alarmed to hear someone breaking into his shed. McBride retrieved a pistol and a flashlight, and hurried to the shed as his wife phoned police. Discovering the shed's padlock broken, McBride shone his flashlight inside and demanded that anyone within come out. Two camouflage-clad men and one juvenile advanced toward McBride, but they put their hands up and waited for police when they saw his gun. "The law officers thanked [me] several times," McBride wrote in a letter to the NRA, adding that his 2-year-old son is a fourth-generation NRA Life member. (Vandalia Leader, Vandalia, MO., 04/14/09)
Suddenly awakened by the sound of someone removing the screen from her bedroom window, a woman quietly fled to her son's room and woke him. "I got up, grabbed my gun and went to...her room," said the son, whose identity is being protected. Police say the suspect slid open the window, reached inside and pulled back the blinds. When he stuck his head inside, the son fired two shots. The intruder died nearby. (The Sun Herald, Biloxi, Miss., 04/24/09)
Police say a 26-year-old man was filling a prescription at a pharmacy's drive-through window when two women approached his car. One of the women pulled a gun and tried to pull the trigger. For some reason, the woman's gun would not fire, but the man had a gun of his own - and unlike his assailant's, it was legally possessed and fully functional. He drew his firearm and fired two shots, causing the woman to fall to the ground. The man disarmed his assailant and phoned police, who will charge the woman after her release from the hospital. (Arizona Daily Star, Tucson, Ariz., 04/24/09)
Three Eastern Washington University seniors had no idea their rental home was about to be targeted by a couple of career criminals with convictions for bank robbery, theft and other charges. Police say the armed men entered the home seeking riches. "I think these people thought there might be more valuables in the house than there actually were," said police detective John Miller. The alleged intruders did not find gold, but they did find lead. One of the college students retrieved a firearm and shot one of the men, causing both suspects to flee. Police found the wounded man in a nearby yard and arrested his accomplice two days later. (Spokesman Review, Spokane, Wash., 04/01/09)
A family was relaxing at home when their evening took a terrifying twist: a deranged man began pounding on the door and shouting obscenities. The homeowner ushered his brother, wife and children into a bedroom and locked them inside. According to police, he then loaded his double-barrel, 12-ga. shotgun and braced for the suspect's entry. The intruder smashed a sliding-glass door using a wrought iron patio chair and entered the home, but the homeowner wasn't going to let the intruder get any closer to his family. He emptied both barrels, killing the intruder. "When I heard someone tried to break in, I was just grateful he had a gun to protect his family," said a neighbor. "There's a reason the Second Amendment exists. We support gun rights and we would have done the same thing." (Roanoke Times, Roanoke, Va., 04/12/09)
Just as she was about to take a shower, a Seabrook homeowner heard "loud crashing" noises. She grabbed her pistol and came face-to-face with an intruder who had kicked in her back door. Gun in hand, the homeowner told the burglar to stay put while she called the police, but he took off running. Police later arrested the suspect at a nearby hotel. (Portsmouth Herald, Portsmouth, N.H., 04/15/09)
Linda Schultz Russo was at home when, out of nowhere, a disgruntled former employee of her pizza business breached the back door by firing a shotgun through it. Police say Russo was bleeding after the blast, but still had the presence of mind to fight back, running for her .40-cal. pistol and firing a barrage of shots at the intruder. The wounded man fled the scene. Russo was airlifted to a hospital for treatment and will fully recover. Her attacker will be arrested pending his release from the hospital. (Treasure Coast Newspapers, Fort Pierce, Fla., 04/16/09)
Don't be fooled by the anti-gun crowd which includes President Barack Obama, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and many of the people appointed to positions in Obama's administration. Disarming the law-abiding public does nothing to decrease crime. Disarming the public only increases the safety of criminals who would do you harm and increase the ability of the government to become more dictatorial.
Do your part to protect your rights. Join the NRA.
At first, NRA Life member Norman McBride assumed his dogs were barking at the deer that frequent his rural property. The dogs persisted, however, so McBride investigated. Police say that as he stepped onto his front porch, he was alarmed to hear someone breaking into his shed. McBride retrieved a pistol and a flashlight, and hurried to the shed as his wife phoned police. Discovering the shed's padlock broken, McBride shone his flashlight inside and demanded that anyone within come out. Two camouflage-clad men and one juvenile advanced toward McBride, but they put their hands up and waited for police when they saw his gun. "The law officers thanked [me] several times," McBride wrote in a letter to the NRA, adding that his 2-year-old son is a fourth-generation NRA Life member. (Vandalia Leader, Vandalia, MO., 04/14/09)
Suddenly awakened by the sound of someone removing the screen from her bedroom window, a woman quietly fled to her son's room and woke him. "I got up, grabbed my gun and went to...her room," said the son, whose identity is being protected. Police say the suspect slid open the window, reached inside and pulled back the blinds. When he stuck his head inside, the son fired two shots. The intruder died nearby. (The Sun Herald, Biloxi, Miss., 04/24/09)
Police say a 26-year-old man was filling a prescription at a pharmacy's drive-through window when two women approached his car. One of the women pulled a gun and tried to pull the trigger. For some reason, the woman's gun would not fire, but the man had a gun of his own - and unlike his assailant's, it was legally possessed and fully functional. He drew his firearm and fired two shots, causing the woman to fall to the ground. The man disarmed his assailant and phoned police, who will charge the woman after her release from the hospital. (Arizona Daily Star, Tucson, Ariz., 04/24/09)
Three Eastern Washington University seniors had no idea their rental home was about to be targeted by a couple of career criminals with convictions for bank robbery, theft and other charges. Police say the armed men entered the home seeking riches. "I think these people thought there might be more valuables in the house than there actually were," said police detective John Miller. The alleged intruders did not find gold, but they did find lead. One of the college students retrieved a firearm and shot one of the men, causing both suspects to flee. Police found the wounded man in a nearby yard and arrested his accomplice two days later. (Spokesman Review, Spokane, Wash., 04/01/09)
A family was relaxing at home when their evening took a terrifying twist: a deranged man began pounding on the door and shouting obscenities. The homeowner ushered his brother, wife and children into a bedroom and locked them inside. According to police, he then loaded his double-barrel, 12-ga. shotgun and braced for the suspect's entry. The intruder smashed a sliding-glass door using a wrought iron patio chair and entered the home, but the homeowner wasn't going to let the intruder get any closer to his family. He emptied both barrels, killing the intruder. "When I heard someone tried to break in, I was just grateful he had a gun to protect his family," said a neighbor. "There's a reason the Second Amendment exists. We support gun rights and we would have done the same thing." (Roanoke Times, Roanoke, Va., 04/12/09)
Just as she was about to take a shower, a Seabrook homeowner heard "loud crashing" noises. She grabbed her pistol and came face-to-face with an intruder who had kicked in her back door. Gun in hand, the homeowner told the burglar to stay put while she called the police, but he took off running. Police later arrested the suspect at a nearby hotel. (Portsmouth Herald, Portsmouth, N.H., 04/15/09)
Linda Schultz Russo was at home when, out of nowhere, a disgruntled former employee of her pizza business breached the back door by firing a shotgun through it. Police say Russo was bleeding after the blast, but still had the presence of mind to fight back, running for her .40-cal. pistol and firing a barrage of shots at the intruder. The wounded man fled the scene. Russo was airlifted to a hospital for treatment and will fully recover. Her attacker will be arrested pending his release from the hospital. (Treasure Coast Newspapers, Fort Pierce, Fla., 04/16/09)
Don't be fooled by the anti-gun crowd which includes President Barack Obama, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and many of the people appointed to positions in Obama's administration. Disarming the law-abiding public does nothing to decrease crime. Disarming the public only increases the safety of criminals who would do you harm and increase the ability of the government to become more dictatorial.
Do your part to protect your rights. Join the NRA.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Big Surprise - PETA Wishes PBO Hadn't Swatted That Fly
Ok, this definitely falls into the category of "I couldn't make this stuff up". On June 16th, during another of Barack Obama's seemingly endless TV appearances, he swatted and killed a fly that had been buzzing around him. It's actually one of the few times I've agreed with him but he's getting grief from everyone's favorite fringe animal group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). Yes, PETA is upset that the Apologizer In Chief killed that poor, innocent, feces-eating creature (which isn't an animal).
According to PETA spokesman Bruce Friedrich, "We support compassion even for the most curious, smallest and least sympathetic animals" and "We believe that people, where they can be compassionate, should be, for all animals." And, they must mean it too because they're sending the President the "Katcha Bug Humane Bug Catcher", a device that allows users to trap a house fly and then release it outside so it can land on more feces before landing on your food.
For his part in this matter President Obama didn't seem apologetic at all for killing the filthy creature. In fact he said "That was pretty impressive, wasn't it? I got the sucker." Yeah, he actually gloated about doing something any five year-old can do.
I'm not really even sure what else to say about this, it makes my head hurt.
According to PETA spokesman Bruce Friedrich, "We support compassion even for the most curious, smallest and least sympathetic animals" and "We believe that people, where they can be compassionate, should be, for all animals." And, they must mean it too because they're sending the President the "Katcha Bug Humane Bug Catcher", a device that allows users to trap a house fly and then release it outside so it can land on more feces before landing on your food.
For his part in this matter President Obama didn't seem apologetic at all for killing the filthy creature. In fact he said "That was pretty impressive, wasn't it? I got the sucker." Yeah, he actually gloated about doing something any five year-old can do.
I'm not really even sure what else to say about this, it makes my head hurt.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Elderly Woman In Maine Chases Away Armed Intruder
Don't you just love that headline from June 16th? And the best part...it's true. A 77 year old woman in Maine was told by her daughter that an armed intruder was in their home. The 77 year old woman, apparently no shrinking violet, got her own gun and chased off the armed male intruder. How cool is that?
It's pretty cool and I bring it up for a couple of reasons. First, the anti-Constitutional Rights (anti-gun) crowd including The Brady Campaign, ABC's 20/20, and many other anti-gun types do their best to deny that people can defend themselves with guns they have the Constitutional Right to own. In this case the armed intruder, a much younger male, was already in the home - calling 911 wasn't a good option. Further, it's unlikely that the elderly woman could physically beat the intruder even if she has taken the self-defense course at the community center. A gun was her best option. Second, this instance and many others show how idiotic some politicians are when it comes to guns. For instance, in Washington, D.C. they now (since DC v Heller) allow residents to buy pistols and keep them in their home but, they must be unloaded and disassembled or be unloaded and have a trigger lock in place at all times. Legislation has been proposed in some state legislatures that would mandate similar measures. Would the elderly woman in Maine have time to assemble and load her gun with an armed intruder in her home?
Unfortunately, your God-given right to defend your life is under assault by power hungry politicians who will try to convince you that disarming you is a good thing. Don't let people who want to rule you convince you can't defend yourself with a gun. If a 77 year old woman in Maine can do it you can too. Speak up and defend your right to self-defense.
It's pretty cool and I bring it up for a couple of reasons. First, the anti-Constitutional Rights (anti-gun) crowd including The Brady Campaign, ABC's 20/20, and many other anti-gun types do their best to deny that people can defend themselves with guns they have the Constitutional Right to own. In this case the armed intruder, a much younger male, was already in the home - calling 911 wasn't a good option. Further, it's unlikely that the elderly woman could physically beat the intruder even if she has taken the self-defense course at the community center. A gun was her best option. Second, this instance and many others show how idiotic some politicians are when it comes to guns. For instance, in Washington, D.C. they now (since DC v Heller) allow residents to buy pistols and keep them in their home but, they must be unloaded and disassembled or be unloaded and have a trigger lock in place at all times. Legislation has been proposed in some state legislatures that would mandate similar measures. Would the elderly woman in Maine have time to assemble and load her gun with an armed intruder in her home?
Unfortunately, your God-given right to defend your life is under assault by power hungry politicians who will try to convince you that disarming you is a good thing. Don't let people who want to rule you convince you can't defend yourself with a gun. If a 77 year old woman in Maine can do it you can too. Speak up and defend your right to self-defense.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Even The Russians Are On To PBO
How is it that I can see it, you can see it, your tired old lap dog can see it but Obama supporters who decry the various "isms" like Marxism, Communism, and Socialism (as applied to Obama) can't see it? It's so clear that we are speeding away from the Capitalism that helped make this the greatest nation on earth that the Russian newspaper Pravda is commenting on it. For those of you with little knowledge of the Cold War Era, Pravda was pretty much the official propaganda arm of the Communist Party...they know Marxism when they see it. I've placed the article from Pravda below:
"It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.
True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.
Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.
First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a Burger King burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish.
Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.
The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama (emphasis added). His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.
These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?"
What more needs saying? They recognize their own.
"It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.
True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.
Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.
First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a Burger King burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish.
Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.
The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama (emphasis added). His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.
These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?"
What more needs saying? They recognize their own.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Criminal Mastermind Killed By Intended Victim
Today in San Antonio, Texas a criminal decided to end his life by robbing someone. Maybe he should have read my Public Service Message To Criminals and saved his own life. Oh well, if he was that smart he might have had a real job...maybe even an honest career...I hear the President needs people and he's not all that picky.
Anyway, this criminal mastermind shows up on the northside of San Antonio and walks around the parking lot of a strip mall with a bandana around his face, a cap on his head, and wearing gloves. A worker from one of the stores goes out and tells braniac to leave but he doesn't. Instead, he decides he needs some oxycontin and cash from the pharmacy. He goes in and hands a note to the pharmacist demanding the drugs and cash.
Now, instead of giving the cash and drugs to the moron in front of him the pharmacist who also owns the pharmacy points his own gun at the wanna-be Dillinger. You know what the criminal did then? He says to the pharmacist "let's get it on".
Police found him dead in the pharmacy with a cocked revolver. No charges are likely to be pressed against the pharmacist. In the words of Police Chief Bill McManus, "He has a right by state law to use deadly force in a situation like this."
Anyway, this criminal mastermind shows up on the northside of San Antonio and walks around the parking lot of a strip mall with a bandana around his face, a cap on his head, and wearing gloves. A worker from one of the stores goes out and tells braniac to leave but he doesn't. Instead, he decides he needs some oxycontin and cash from the pharmacy. He goes in and hands a note to the pharmacist demanding the drugs and cash.
Now, instead of giving the cash and drugs to the moron in front of him the pharmacist who also owns the pharmacy points his own gun at the wanna-be Dillinger. You know what the criminal did then? He says to the pharmacist "let's get it on".
Police found him dead in the pharmacy with a cocked revolver. No charges are likely to be pressed against the pharmacist. In the words of Police Chief Bill McManus, "He has a right by state law to use deadly force in a situation like this."
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Real People Really Do Defend Themselves With Guns
Day after day someone in the United States defends their home, defends those they love, and continues to live because they used their own lawfully-owned guns. It's believed to happen about 6500 or more times each day. (Source U.S. Congress) In fact, privately owned "firearms are used 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives." (Source U.S. Congress)
A suspected burglar stealthily approached a home in an area neighbors claim is suffering from increasing crime. Police say the burglar began removing a window screen, but was seen by the homeowner, NRA Life member Charles Jemeyson, who quickly got his pistol. "If I had not had my [gun] handy, he would have come into my home," Jemeyson wrote in an email to the NRA. "I fired on round...and he went down. He jumped up and jumped a six-foot fence." Police found the suspect at a hospital suffering from a gunshot wound. (KSAT 12 News, San Antonio, Texas, 03/16/09)
Sarah Nahmens and her mother often discuss personal safety and keep a .32-caliber revolver in their home. "We've always talked about defending yourself and how importand that is," Nahmens said. Police say her planning paid off when two men began forcing her door open. "It kind of kicked in and I thought, 'OK, I've got to make sure that I'm safe'...It was either going to be me or them and it couldn't be me," she explained. Nahmens fired two shots and the uninjured suspects fled. "I commend her for protecting herself," said police Capt. Patrick Whitney. Nahmens said the incident has raised awareness in her normally quiet neighborhood. Several women have expressed interest in a "girls day" at the shooting range to practice and learn more about firearms. (Clovis News Journal, Clovis, N.M., 02/06/09)
When a man armed with a gun allegedly kicked in Derrick Murray's back door and shouted that he was a police officer, Murray wasn't buying it for a second. "[The suspect and his accomplices outside] were talking in street slang," Murry explained. Police say Murray quickly retrieved a semi-automatic rifle and shot the intruder, causing him to flee. But the story doesn't stop there. The intruder ran outside, where he was run over by his own getaway car. The panicked driver then backed up, running over him a second time. The suspect will face charges pending his release from the hospital. His two accomplices are being sought. (WFIE 14 News, Evansville, Ind., 03/16/09)
John Antonetz and his wife, Lydia Pace-Antonetz, were loading groceries into their vehicle in a Wal-Mart parking lot when, police say, a man wearing a disguise announced a robbery. The couple tried to run from the robber, but he struck Pace-Antonetz, grabbed her purse and pointed a gun at the couple. That's when Antonetz, a 63-year-old dentist with a concealed-carry permit, retrieved his .357-caliber revolver from the vehicle. As the suspect continued threatening his wife, Antonetz rounded the vehical and fired several shots. The suspect, who was on parole for a burglary conviction, was arrested by the police when he sought treatment for a gunshot wound at a local hospital. (Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Lowell, Ark., 03/25/09)
Coincidentally, another act by armed citizenry took place in a Wal-Mart parking lot in March. In that incident, police say 28-year-old Joshua Eastman was loading groceries into his vehicle when a teenage thug pointed a gun at him and demanded cash. The quick-thinking Eastman opened the door to his vehicle to form a barrier between himself and the suspect. The clever act may have saved his life. The suspect fired a shot through the door's window, which narrowly missed Eastman but propelled glass shards into his face. Eastman, a concealed-carry permit holder, drew his .32-caliber handgun, dropped below the door and shot his assailant three times. The suspect fled, but police located him nearby. (The Pocono Record, Stroudsburg, Penn., 03/20/09)
Police say a robber wearing a ski mask decided to target a busy Burger King restaurant just before the dinner hour. The robber demanded money and flashed a gun wildly, endangering the lives of the many patrons and employees around him. One customer, John Landers, had seen enough. Landers told the 18-year-old robber to lower his gun and stop pointing it at people. The robber responded by shooting Landers several times. It was a mistake he'd quickly regret. Landers, a concealed-carry permit holder, drew his handgun and shot the robber, killing him. At press time, Landers was in the hospital recovering from injuries. Police say his actions may have saved a number of lives. (The Miami Herald, Miami, Fla., 03/25/09)
If you believe the national media, including heavily biased anti-gun "news magazines" like ABC's 20/20, then you'd think none of these instances could have happened. Those in the anti-gun (anti-rights) media have intentionally stacked the deck to make it appear that your gun is more of a danger to you than to the scum who come after you. Unfortunately for those in the media, all of these stories are true and the real people involved saved their own lives with guns the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees they can own.
The Second Amendment rights of Americans are constantly under attack by politicians seeking to increase their power. Take action in 3 ways. First: Call or write to your representatives in State and Federal government and tell them to keep their power hungry mitts off of your rights. Second: Join the NRA. The NRA has been defending the Second Amendment rights of Americans for a long time and they do it very well. Third: Buy a gun and get professional training on using it properly to defend yourself.
For more stories on this blog of real people defending themselves with their own guns:
Barack Obama Is Against Concealed Handgun License Holders
Armed Citizens
A Public Service Message To Criminals - Stay Away From Texas!
A suspected burglar stealthily approached a home in an area neighbors claim is suffering from increasing crime. Police say the burglar began removing a window screen, but was seen by the homeowner, NRA Life member Charles Jemeyson, who quickly got his pistol. "If I had not had my [gun] handy, he would have come into my home," Jemeyson wrote in an email to the NRA. "I fired on round...and he went down. He jumped up and jumped a six-foot fence." Police found the suspect at a hospital suffering from a gunshot wound. (KSAT 12 News, San Antonio, Texas, 03/16/09)
Sarah Nahmens and her mother often discuss personal safety and keep a .32-caliber revolver in their home. "We've always talked about defending yourself and how importand that is," Nahmens said. Police say her planning paid off when two men began forcing her door open. "It kind of kicked in and I thought, 'OK, I've got to make sure that I'm safe'...It was either going to be me or them and it couldn't be me," she explained. Nahmens fired two shots and the uninjured suspects fled. "I commend her for protecting herself," said police Capt. Patrick Whitney. Nahmens said the incident has raised awareness in her normally quiet neighborhood. Several women have expressed interest in a "girls day" at the shooting range to practice and learn more about firearms. (Clovis News Journal, Clovis, N.M., 02/06/09)
When a man armed with a gun allegedly kicked in Derrick Murray's back door and shouted that he was a police officer, Murray wasn't buying it for a second. "[The suspect and his accomplices outside] were talking in street slang," Murry explained. Police say Murray quickly retrieved a semi-automatic rifle and shot the intruder, causing him to flee. But the story doesn't stop there. The intruder ran outside, where he was run over by his own getaway car. The panicked driver then backed up, running over him a second time. The suspect will face charges pending his release from the hospital. His two accomplices are being sought. (WFIE 14 News, Evansville, Ind., 03/16/09)
John Antonetz and his wife, Lydia Pace-Antonetz, were loading groceries into their vehicle in a Wal-Mart parking lot when, police say, a man wearing a disguise announced a robbery. The couple tried to run from the robber, but he struck Pace-Antonetz, grabbed her purse and pointed a gun at the couple. That's when Antonetz, a 63-year-old dentist with a concealed-carry permit, retrieved his .357-caliber revolver from the vehicle. As the suspect continued threatening his wife, Antonetz rounded the vehical and fired several shots. The suspect, who was on parole for a burglary conviction, was arrested by the police when he sought treatment for a gunshot wound at a local hospital. (Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Lowell, Ark., 03/25/09)
Coincidentally, another act by armed citizenry took place in a Wal-Mart parking lot in March. In that incident, police say 28-year-old Joshua Eastman was loading groceries into his vehicle when a teenage thug pointed a gun at him and demanded cash. The quick-thinking Eastman opened the door to his vehicle to form a barrier between himself and the suspect. The clever act may have saved his life. The suspect fired a shot through the door's window, which narrowly missed Eastman but propelled glass shards into his face. Eastman, a concealed-carry permit holder, drew his .32-caliber handgun, dropped below the door and shot his assailant three times. The suspect fled, but police located him nearby. (The Pocono Record, Stroudsburg, Penn., 03/20/09)
Police say a robber wearing a ski mask decided to target a busy Burger King restaurant just before the dinner hour. The robber demanded money and flashed a gun wildly, endangering the lives of the many patrons and employees around him. One customer, John Landers, had seen enough. Landers told the 18-year-old robber to lower his gun and stop pointing it at people. The robber responded by shooting Landers several times. It was a mistake he'd quickly regret. Landers, a concealed-carry permit holder, drew his handgun and shot the robber, killing him. At press time, Landers was in the hospital recovering from injuries. Police say his actions may have saved a number of lives. (The Miami Herald, Miami, Fla., 03/25/09)
If you believe the national media, including heavily biased anti-gun "news magazines" like ABC's 20/20, then you'd think none of these instances could have happened. Those in the anti-gun (anti-rights) media have intentionally stacked the deck to make it appear that your gun is more of a danger to you than to the scum who come after you. Unfortunately for those in the media, all of these stories are true and the real people involved saved their own lives with guns the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees they can own.
The Second Amendment rights of Americans are constantly under attack by politicians seeking to increase their power. Take action in 3 ways. First: Call or write to your representatives in State and Federal government and tell them to keep their power hungry mitts off of your rights. Second: Join the NRA. The NRA has been defending the Second Amendment rights of Americans for a long time and they do it very well. Third: Buy a gun and get professional training on using it properly to defend yourself.
For more stories on this blog of real people defending themselves with their own guns:
Barack Obama Is Against Concealed Handgun License Holders
Armed Citizens
A Public Service Message To Criminals - Stay Away From Texas!
Friday, May 22, 2009
President Obama's Teleprompter Speech Template
It's hard to escape hearing or seeing President Obama. He really seems to love hearing himself so he talks and talks and talks while saying pretty much nothing at all. It turns out there's a template used for his speeches that gets plugged into his many teleprompters. It goes something like:
I'd like to welcome blah, blah, blah, I'm blah, blah, blah, I know blah, blah, blah, I feel blah, blah, blah, I won blah, blah, blah, I will blah, blah, blah, Previous Administration blah, blah, blah, and Everyone Agrees blah, blah, blah, Therefore I Have Instructed blah, blah, blah, Michelle Says blah, blah, blah, The World Hates Us blah, blah, blah, I, I, I, Me, Me, Me.
There, now you don't have to wonder what the President is going to say. You don't have to rush to the nearest television bought with the Stimulus Package to find out anything. You've now officially heard/read every single speech he's made or will make.
I'd like to welcome blah, blah, blah, I'm blah, blah, blah, I know blah, blah, blah, I feel blah, blah, blah, I won blah, blah, blah, I will blah, blah, blah, Previous Administration blah, blah, blah, and Everyone Agrees blah, blah, blah, Therefore I Have Instructed blah, blah, blah, Michelle Says blah, blah, blah, The World Hates Us blah, blah, blah, I, I, I, Me, Me, Me.
There, now you don't have to wonder what the President is going to say. You don't have to rush to the nearest television bought with the Stimulus Package to find out anything. You've now officially heard/read every single speech he's made or will make.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Why I Voted Democrat
Don't be scared. I didn't vote Democrat, it's just the name of the email that I received today. The content of the email I received is a remarkable insight to Democrat voters. I'm hoping this was written as a joke but I'm not entirely sure since I've actually met people who would agree with some of these statements.
I voted Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I've decided to marry my horse.
I voted Democrat because I believe that oil company profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but government taxes of 15% on the same gallon are not.
I voted Democrat because I believe that the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
I voted Democrat because I believe that freedom of speech should be strongly supported...as long as nobody is offended by it.
I voted Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they're doing because they now think we're good people.
I voted Democrat because I'm way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.
I voted Democrat because I believe that people who can't tell us if if will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius.
I voted Democrat because I'm not concerned with the slaughter of millions of babies so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.
I voted Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They should break even and give the rest away to government to redistribute as government sees fit.
I voted Democrat because I believe that liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.
If you did vote Democrat, especially a straight ticket, you really need to re-read this entry and figure out if this really is you. If it is please seek treatment (at your own damn expense).
I voted Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I've decided to marry my horse.
I voted Democrat because I believe that oil company profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but government taxes of 15% on the same gallon are not.
I voted Democrat because I believe that the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
I voted Democrat because I believe that freedom of speech should be strongly supported...as long as nobody is offended by it.
I voted Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they're doing because they now think we're good people.
I voted Democrat because I'm way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.
I voted Democrat because I believe that people who can't tell us if if will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius.
I voted Democrat because I'm not concerned with the slaughter of millions of babies so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.
I voted Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They should break even and give the rest away to government to redistribute as government sees fit.
I voted Democrat because I believe that liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.
If you did vote Democrat, especially a straight ticket, you really need to re-read this entry and figure out if this really is you. If it is please seek treatment (at your own damn expense).
Thursday, May 14, 2009
President Obama's Body of Work Not Enough for Honorary Degree
Finally, a liberal has told the truth about President Barack Obama. Strangely, Obama has agreed with them. What truth? The truth, according to ASU's Sharon Keeler, is "His body of work is yet to come. That's why we're not recognizing him with a degree at the beginning of his presidency." Even though it's traditional among universities like ASU to present commencement speakers with an honorary degree President Obama won't get the honorary degree.....because of the truth. Obama himself said "I come here not to dispute the suggestion that I haven't yet achieved enough in my life," Obama said in a commencement speech Wednesday. With a smile he added: "First of all, Michelle (Obama) concurs with that assessment. She has a long list of things that I have not yet done waiting for me when I get home." I really expected this narcissist to submit his curriculum vitae in response.
Yeah, he tried to laugh it off but if a liberal university says he hasn't done enough to earn an honorary degree what does that say about his qualifications to be President of the United States? That was one of the things I've always said about him...he doesn't have the background or qualifications to run the free (for now) world. Of course most of the Marxists in history had little experience running anything other than their mouths, why should Obama be different?
Oh well, he's President now but let me leave you with this: ASU has previously honored Erma Bombeck, Hugh Downs, Howard Pyle, Jerry Colangelo, Art Buchwald, and Steve Allen with honorary degrees. Get it?
Yeah, he tried to laugh it off but if a liberal university says he hasn't done enough to earn an honorary degree what does that say about his qualifications to be President of the United States? That was one of the things I've always said about him...he doesn't have the background or qualifications to run the free (for now) world. Of course most of the Marxists in history had little experience running anything other than their mouths, why should Obama be different?
Oh well, he's President now but let me leave you with this: ASU has previously honored Erma Bombeck, Hugh Downs, Howard Pyle, Jerry Colangelo, Art Buchwald, and Steve Allen with honorary degrees. Get it?
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Three Women Went To Mexico
Three women went to Mexico one night to celebrate their college graduation...they get drunk, and wake up in jail, only to find that they are to be executed in the morning, though none of them can remember what they did the night before.
The first one, a redhead, is strapped in the electric chair and is asked if she has any last words. She says, "I just graduated from Trinity Bible College and believe in the almighty power of God to intervene on the behalf of the innocent." They throw the switch and nothing happens. They all immediately fall to the floor on their knees, beg for forgiveness, and they release her.
The second one, a brunette, is strapped in and gives her last words. "I just graduated from the Harvard School of Law and I believe in the power of justice to intervene on the part of the innocent." They throw the switch and again, nothing happens. Again they all immediately fall to their knees, beg for forgiveness and release her.
The last one (you know it), a blonde, is strapped in and says, "Well, I'm from the Louisiana State University and just graduated with a degree in Electrical Engineering, and I'll tell ya'll right now, ya'll ain't gonna electrocute nobody if you don't plug this thing in!"
Author Unknown
The first one, a redhead, is strapped in the electric chair and is asked if she has any last words. She says, "I just graduated from Trinity Bible College and believe in the almighty power of God to intervene on the behalf of the innocent." They throw the switch and nothing happens. They all immediately fall to the floor on their knees, beg for forgiveness, and they release her.
The second one, a brunette, is strapped in and gives her last words. "I just graduated from the Harvard School of Law and I believe in the power of justice to intervene on the part of the innocent." They throw the switch and again, nothing happens. Again they all immediately fall to their knees, beg for forgiveness and release her.
The last one (you know it), a blonde, is strapped in and says, "Well, I'm from the Louisiana State University and just graduated with a degree in Electrical Engineering, and I'll tell ya'll right now, ya'll ain't gonna electrocute nobody if you don't plug this thing in!"
Author Unknown
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Washington DC City Government Denies Handgun Registration Based On Gun Color
It's amazing how far liberal city officials will go to prevent the exercise of Constitutional Rights in the nation's capital. They persist in violating civil rights despite being told last summer by the Supreme Court (in DC v Heller) that the Second Amendment protects a pre-existing, private, individually-held right, to keep arms and to bear arms, without regard to a person’s relationship to a militia. More simply, DC residents including Heller could keep a fully assembled and loaded gun in his home for self-defense.
Despite the Heller decision the DC city government, in an effort to side-step the U.S. Constitution, has done all it can do to prevent U.S. citizens from exercising their rights by instituting a ridiculous gun registration scheme which includes a roster of "approved" guns based on a State of California list. All citizens attempting to register a handgun for their own defense in their own homes can only do so if their gun is on the list. Simple? Well, not really and that's why the city of Washington DC is being sued yet again.
The lawsuit was filed against Washington DC because when Tracy Ambeau Hanson tried to register her Springfield XD-45, which is on the approved list, she was denied registration because her gun was the wrong color. Oh yeah, you read that correctly. Her gun was not an approved black, green, or brown color...it was bi-tone. Because of that bi-tone color her gun was considered "unsafe" and her registration was denied and rights violated.
The lesson here is that anti-gun, anti-rights governments will make it up as they go in order to accomplish their goals. Exercise your rights or be ready to lose them. You can take a step in the right direction by supporting the National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation.
Despite the Heller decision the DC city government, in an effort to side-step the U.S. Constitution, has done all it can do to prevent U.S. citizens from exercising their rights by instituting a ridiculous gun registration scheme which includes a roster of "approved" guns based on a State of California list. All citizens attempting to register a handgun for their own defense in their own homes can only do so if their gun is on the list. Simple? Well, not really and that's why the city of Washington DC is being sued yet again.
The lawsuit was filed against Washington DC because when Tracy Ambeau Hanson tried to register her Springfield XD-45, which is on the approved list, she was denied registration because her gun was the wrong color. Oh yeah, you read that correctly. Her gun was not an approved black, green, or brown color...it was bi-tone. Because of that bi-tone color her gun was considered "unsafe" and her registration was denied and rights violated.
The lesson here is that anti-gun, anti-rights governments will make it up as they go in order to accomplish their goals. Exercise your rights or be ready to lose them. You can take a step in the right direction by supporting the National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
President Obama To Name Supporter's Daughter To FCC
What can I say? This is purely a payback move by the President who said his administration would be the most ethical and open administration in history. Apparently this week nepotism is ethical and is being done somewhat openly. President Obama announced that Mignon Clyburn would be nominated to a seat at the Federal Communications Commission. Mignon Clyburn is the daughter of Democrat Congressman (and majority whip) Jim Clyburn of South Carolina.
As I said, this is just a payback move. Congressman Clyburn, the highest ranking African-American in Congress, was key to passing the massive $787 billion "economic-stimulus" plan quickly through the House in February. He also played a part in securing Obama's nomination during the Democrat Presidential Primaries by swaying other "super delagates" toward Obama. Since then, Clyburn and Obama have become somewhat close.
Now, for you liberals out there screaming at your computer screen right now, I know other Presidents have done this kind of thing. But, how many of those Presidents made their whole campaign about "Change" from the way things were done before? No, not promising change because they all do that....how many made it their whole campaign like Obama? How many promised the "most transparent" administration in history? Just Obama. The most ethical? You might see my point. This nomination is not ethical, it's not change, and it's barely transparent.
As I said, this is just a payback move. Congressman Clyburn, the highest ranking African-American in Congress, was key to passing the massive $787 billion "economic-stimulus" plan quickly through the House in February. He also played a part in securing Obama's nomination during the Democrat Presidential Primaries by swaying other "super delagates" toward Obama. Since then, Clyburn and Obama have become somewhat close.
Now, for you liberals out there screaming at your computer screen right now, I know other Presidents have done this kind of thing. But, how many of those Presidents made their whole campaign about "Change" from the way things were done before? No, not promising change because they all do that....how many made it their whole campaign like Obama? How many promised the "most transparent" administration in history? Just Obama. The most ethical? You might see my point. This nomination is not ethical, it's not change, and it's barely transparent.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Gun Control Advice Given To Obama By Eliot Spitzer The Whore Monger
The following is reproduced from the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action website dated May 1, 2009:
The assault on our Second Amendment rights is continuing. Don't let yourself believe that your rights can't be taken away just because they're in the U.S. Constitution. Legislation can be passed that technically doesn't take away your rights but makes it so difficult to exercise your rights that you give up on them.
What can you do? First, join the NRA. You can join online at the NRA Membership website and can even give a gift membership to a friend or loved one. Second, demand that your Congressmen and Senators keep their power hungry mitts off of your rights. Do it soon...like today.
You know you are doing something right when two prominent politicians driven from public office come out in favor of gun control in the same week.
After resigning from the governorship of New York in shame and spending months out of the public eye, Eliot Spitzer (D) has decided to launch a campaign to rehabilitate himself by giving unsolicited gun control advice to President Barack Obama. Yes, this is the same Eliot Spitzer who, after railing against the "unregulated" firearm industry as New York's Attorney General, was driven from public office when caught spending $4,300 on a member of the oldest and most unregulated of professions.
On Wednesday, Spitzer wrote in Slate magazine that President Obama should not worry about Congress and the public, but should impose gun control on his own. Spitzer's article resurrects a scheme from former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Andrew Cuomo. Cuomo's idea was that the federal government would buy guns for the military and federal law enforcement agencies only from manufacturers who agree not to sell "certain types of weapons" (unspecified, but presumably including "assault weapons" and many types of handguns) to the general public; not to sell guns without trigger locks, hidden serial numbers, or a magazine disconnect—features that have no particular benefit and some of which decrease the firearm's usefulness for self-defense; not to sell guns to dealers who are not "authorized;" and not to sell guns to dealers to which guns recovered from criminals have been traced.
Just think, if Spitzer had spent $4,300.00 on guns, he'd still be Governor. But given his views on the issue, it's just as well he was driven from public office.The assault on our Second Amendment rights is continuing. Don't let yourself believe that your rights can't be taken away just because they're in the U.S. Constitution. Legislation can be passed that technically doesn't take away your rights but makes it so difficult to exercise your rights that you give up on them.
What can you do? First, join the NRA. You can join online at the NRA Membership website and can even give a gift membership to a friend or loved one. Second, demand that your Congressmen and Senators keep their power hungry mitts off of your rights. Do it soon...like today.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Senators Want To Tell Your Kids What To Eat At School
It never ends when you start taking "federal" money. Never mind that there's no such thing as "government money" or "federal money", it's really just your money sent to Washington, D.C., bundled up, and sent back to you with strings attached. If you are stupid enough to accept it then you have to live with ever increasing government intrusion forever and ever. Now, because $11 billion of taxpayer money is spent on school food programs, Senator Tom Harkin (Dem-Iowa) and Senator Lisa Murkowski (RINO-Alaska) have submitted legislation to allow the U.S. Department of Agriculture to establish "common-sense nutrition standards" for food, beverages, and snacks sold in vending machines, school stores, or other outlets. That's politician speak for getting rid of junk food.
Yeah, nobody wants kids to eat more junk food but who in hell do they think they are? I don't know about schools in your area but I can't find a single school in San Antonio (other than on military bases) built on federal land. I can't find one school designed or built by the federal government. Never saw a school bond issue by the federal government...they've all been local. The teachers, administrators, secretaries, and janitors are not federal government employees. The students are not subjects of an almighty federal king. So, where do they get off telling local school districts what they can and can't do, and telling you what will and will not be available at your kid's school? It's the money you send them that they send back to you that lets them in.
In the U.S. Constitution the federal government is not given any authority over education. Check it out if you think I'm wrong, but you'll find I'm right. The senators proposing this legislation know they have no constitutional authority but they still want to ram this down everyone's throats. Why? Because it increases their power by expanding government. How do they get away with it? We let them. I propose we don't let them anymore. Schools are local not federal. Call Senator Harkin and Senator Murkowski to tell them to keep their noses out of your local business.
Yeah, nobody wants kids to eat more junk food but who in hell do they think they are? I don't know about schools in your area but I can't find a single school in San Antonio (other than on military bases) built on federal land. I can't find one school designed or built by the federal government. Never saw a school bond issue by the federal government...they've all been local. The teachers, administrators, secretaries, and janitors are not federal government employees. The students are not subjects of an almighty federal king. So, where do they get off telling local school districts what they can and can't do, and telling you what will and will not be available at your kid's school? It's the money you send them that they send back to you that lets them in.
In the U.S. Constitution the federal government is not given any authority over education. Check it out if you think I'm wrong, but you'll find I'm right. The senators proposing this legislation know they have no constitutional authority but they still want to ram this down everyone's throats. Why? Because it increases their power by expanding government. How do they get away with it? We let them. I propose we don't let them anymore. Schools are local not federal. Call Senator Harkin and Senator Murkowski to tell them to keep their noses out of your local business.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Blog Entry About Torture
There's been a lot of news media coverage of memos released by President Barack Obama regarding Enhanced Interrogation Techniques used by the U.S. or what the clearly biased media calls torture. Unfortunately the average person has absolutely idea what torture actually is in the real world. The United Nations defines torture as:
"any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions."
While that definition is as clear as mud to most people, others would like to know what actions actually constitute torture. So, as I so often do, I'm going to make it easy for people. I'll do this by listing a number of activities that are and are not torture:
Panties On Head = Not Torture (done in College hazing)
Red Hot Poker in Eye or Orifice = Torture
Caterpillar In Room = Not Torture (they don't bite)
Staked to Ant Hill Covered in Honey = Torture
Sensory Deprivation = Not Torture (people pay for this)
Flaying/Skinning= Torture
Stress Positions/Long Standing = Not Torture (did this in Little League)
Flagellation/Whipping = Torture
Belly Slap = Not Torture (drinking game)
Impalement = Torture
Waterboarding = Not Torture
Knee Capping = Torture
Shirt Grabbing = Not Torture
Public Stoning by Taliban for Playing Music = Torture
Sleep Deprivation = Not Torture (most Americans are sleep deprived)
Being Next In Line After Jihadists Behead Your Friend = Torture
Forced Isolation = Not Torture (even in Liberal courts)
Tried, Convicted, Stoned/Whipped for BEING RAPED by your Uncle Achmed = Torture
Listening to Eminem's "Slim Shady" or Britney Spears = Not Torture (unpleasant I'll admit)
Listening to Self-Righteous Know-It-All Liberals Blather On and ON and ON= Torture
I hope this partial list has been helpful for you. God Bless America.
"any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions."
While that definition is as clear as mud to most people, others would like to know what actions actually constitute torture. So, as I so often do, I'm going to make it easy for people. I'll do this by listing a number of activities that are and are not torture:
Panties On Head = Not Torture (done in College hazing)
Red Hot Poker in Eye or Orifice = Torture
Caterpillar In Room = Not Torture (they don't bite)
Staked to Ant Hill Covered in Honey = Torture
Sensory Deprivation = Not Torture (people pay for this)
Flaying/Skinning= Torture
Stress Positions/Long Standing = Not Torture (did this in Little League)
Flagellation/Whipping = Torture
Belly Slap = Not Torture (drinking game)
Impalement = Torture
Waterboarding = Not Torture
Knee Capping = Torture
Shirt Grabbing = Not Torture
Public Stoning by Taliban for Playing Music = Torture
Sleep Deprivation = Not Torture (most Americans are sleep deprived)
Being Next In Line After Jihadists Behead Your Friend = Torture
Forced Isolation = Not Torture (even in Liberal courts)
Tried, Convicted, Stoned/Whipped for BEING RAPED by your Uncle Achmed = Torture
Listening to Eminem's "Slim Shady" or Britney Spears = Not Torture (unpleasant I'll admit)
Listening to Self-Righteous Know-It-All Liberals Blather On and ON and ON= Torture
I hope this partial list has been helpful for you. God Bless America.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Diane Sawyer and 20/20 Anti-Gun Bias
When I was growing up I was told that journalists were people that reported the news in an objective, unbiased manner. I wasn't told that by my parents or even my teachers. I was told that by journalists on TV and in newspapers. It turns out that they lied to me. Did you know that news organizations like ABC's "20/20" and their star "journalist" Diane Sawyer don't worry about being biased? They have no problem providing only the information that helps their cause. Don't believe it? If you want proof all you have to do is see 20/20's special called "If I Only Had A Gun", a blatant anti-gun hit piece.
I didn't watch the show the Friday night that it aired but due to the miracle of modern technology I got to watch it on ABC's website (thanks to Al Gore or Ira Einhorn). I got to see it, rewind it, and see it again. I have a headache.
The major portion of the show was devoted to convincing the public that there's no way to defend themselves with a gun. They did this by conducting an "experiment" that was rigged right from the beginning. The producers of the show recruited university students and gave them a couple of hours of training with a handgun. The object? The students were to sit in a classroom attending a lecture while carrying a concealed pistol they're supposed to use to defend themselves. In the experiment an attacker armed with a handgun bursts into the university classroom, fires two shots at the teacher in the front of the class and then turns his gun directly on the very student with the concealed gun. The attacker doesn't really try to gun down any of the unarmed students and succeeds in "killing" the armed student each time. Well isn't that all very convenient.
I have a few problems with the experiment. First, the "attacker" is a highly trained Police Firearms Instructor, not some untrained or poorly trained whack job wanting to commit mass murder. Second, the students with the concealed handgun are made to sit front row center in each run of the experiment and the attacker apparently knows this. Third, "for safety" the students are wearing helmets and thick padded gloves which hinder them from drawing their handgun. In the real world outside the bias of ABC and Diane Sawyer the attackers are seldom (maybe never) an experienced police firearms instructor, the person with the concealed handgun wouldn't likely always be front row center with a helmet and padded gloves hindering the draw of the weapon. The students were set up to fail. Lastly, they didn't try that BS with someone that has good training and experience...any idea why?
At no time did Diane Sawyer or anyone else mention that in the U.S. people do successfully defend themselves, their property, and their loved ones 2.4 million times a year with their own guns (Source: U.S. Congress). In fact I've made a couple of entries containing reports of people that successfully defended themselves at: entry 1, entry 2, or entry 3. You can find even more examples of people using guns to defend themselves on John Lott's Blog, Clayton Cramer's Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog, or the Armed Citizen section of the NRA's website.
Another segment of this anti-gun show was about how horrible the "gun show loophole" was and how it was a way for criminals to get guns. How? Well, the story goes that there is a loophole in the law that allows criminals to buy guns at a gun show without a background check. A lie by omission. All gun dealers are required to perform background checks at gun shows just as they do in their stores. Only private individuals selling their privately owned guns are exempt from the background check requirement. However, they tried to prove their point by getting the brother of a woman killed in the Virginia Tech killings to go to a gun show and buy guns without showing an ID. Of course he succeeded in buying quite a few guns without a background check because he bought them from private individuals, not gun dealers. Imagine that, people selling their personal property to someone. No crime was committed.
What the show failed to mention is that a U.S. Justice Department survey of 18,000 state prison inmates showed that less than one percent (0.7%) had obtained their gun from a gun show. Some loophole.
There was more anti-gun bias exhibited but like I said earlier...it gave me a headache. The show aired to coincide with the anniversary of the Columbine High School and Virginia Tech shootings, but I think there's more to their anti-rights bias. Sure there was an anniversary but there's also an anti-gun President in office they worked very hard to get elected. So, to support their guy they have to get people to believe a few things that aren't true including:
Lie 1. Guns kill people all by themselves without human intervention;
Lie 2. Guns are mysterious machines that you can't possibly understand well enough to use in your own defense;
Lie 3. The bad guy is always going to be a better shot;
Lie 4. There's an evil loophole in the law that helps criminals buy lots of guns and we need to curtail your rights to fix it;
Lie 5. Criminals will be defeated by the next new gun law even though they don't follow the thousands already on the books.
If enough people believe the lies it will be easier to take away their rights. Don't believe the lies.
I didn't watch the show the Friday night that it aired but due to the miracle of modern technology I got to watch it on ABC's website (thanks to Al Gore or Ira Einhorn). I got to see it, rewind it, and see it again. I have a headache.
The major portion of the show was devoted to convincing the public that there's no way to defend themselves with a gun. They did this by conducting an "experiment" that was rigged right from the beginning. The producers of the show recruited university students and gave them a couple of hours of training with a handgun. The object? The students were to sit in a classroom attending a lecture while carrying a concealed pistol they're supposed to use to defend themselves. In the experiment an attacker armed with a handgun bursts into the university classroom, fires two shots at the teacher in the front of the class and then turns his gun directly on the very student with the concealed gun. The attacker doesn't really try to gun down any of the unarmed students and succeeds in "killing" the armed student each time. Well isn't that all very convenient.
I have a few problems with the experiment. First, the "attacker" is a highly trained Police Firearms Instructor, not some untrained or poorly trained whack job wanting to commit mass murder. Second, the students with the concealed handgun are made to sit front row center in each run of the experiment and the attacker apparently knows this. Third, "for safety" the students are wearing helmets and thick padded gloves which hinder them from drawing their handgun. In the real world outside the bias of ABC and Diane Sawyer the attackers are seldom (maybe never) an experienced police firearms instructor, the person with the concealed handgun wouldn't likely always be front row center with a helmet and padded gloves hindering the draw of the weapon. The students were set up to fail. Lastly, they didn't try that BS with someone that has good training and experience...any idea why?
At no time did Diane Sawyer or anyone else mention that in the U.S. people do successfully defend themselves, their property, and their loved ones 2.4 million times a year with their own guns (Source: U.S. Congress). In fact I've made a couple of entries containing reports of people that successfully defended themselves at: entry 1, entry 2, or entry 3. You can find even more examples of people using guns to defend themselves on John Lott's Blog, Clayton Cramer's Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog, or the Armed Citizen section of the NRA's website.
Another segment of this anti-gun show was about how horrible the "gun show loophole" was and how it was a way for criminals to get guns. How? Well, the story goes that there is a loophole in the law that allows criminals to buy guns at a gun show without a background check. A lie by omission. All gun dealers are required to perform background checks at gun shows just as they do in their stores. Only private individuals selling their privately owned guns are exempt from the background check requirement. However, they tried to prove their point by getting the brother of a woman killed in the Virginia Tech killings to go to a gun show and buy guns without showing an ID. Of course he succeeded in buying quite a few guns without a background check because he bought them from private individuals, not gun dealers. Imagine that, people selling their personal property to someone. No crime was committed.
What the show failed to mention is that a U.S. Justice Department survey of 18,000 state prison inmates showed that less than one percent (0.7%) had obtained their gun from a gun show. Some loophole.
There was more anti-gun bias exhibited but like I said earlier...it gave me a headache. The show aired to coincide with the anniversary of the Columbine High School and Virginia Tech shootings, but I think there's more to their anti-rights bias. Sure there was an anniversary but there's also an anti-gun President in office they worked very hard to get elected. So, to support their guy they have to get people to believe a few things that aren't true including:
Lie 1. Guns kill people all by themselves without human intervention;
Lie 2. Guns are mysterious machines that you can't possibly understand well enough to use in your own defense;
Lie 3. The bad guy is always going to be a better shot;
Lie 4. There's an evil loophole in the law that helps criminals buy lots of guns and we need to curtail your rights to fix it;
Lie 5. Criminals will be defeated by the next new gun law even though they don't follow the thousands already on the books.
If enough people believe the lies it will be easier to take away their rights. Don't believe the lies.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
National Home Foreclosures
In an online article CNNmoney.com staff writer Catherine Clifford broke down a RealtyTrac report regarding home foreclosures. The last paragraph said, "The national report also found that the worst of the foreclosures were centralized in a handful of worst-hit states. California, Florida, Arizona, Nevada and Illinois accounted for nearly 60% of the total foreclosure activity in the first quarter, with 479,516 properties received foreclosure filings in those states."
Hmm, all of those states, excluding Arizona, were "Blue States" in the last Presidential Election. Also interesting is that the "National Leadership" is from three of those states. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is from California, Senate leader Harry Reid is from Nevada, and President Obama is from Illinois. Sure, John McCain is from Arizona but he might as well be a Democrat. I'm not saying it's because of Democrat leadership but it's interesting that the people saying they have the answers are from the areas hardest hit. They didn't do much for their home states did they?
Hmm, all of those states, excluding Arizona, were "Blue States" in the last Presidential Election. Also interesting is that the "National Leadership" is from three of those states. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is from California, Senate leader Harry Reid is from Nevada, and President Obama is from Illinois. Sure, John McCain is from Arizona but he might as well be a Democrat. I'm not saying it's because of Democrat leadership but it's interesting that the people saying they have the answers are from the areas hardest hit. They didn't do much for their home states did they?
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Happy Earth Day - Please Don't Murder Anyone
Today is April 22nd....Happy Earth Day! Earth Day is a pseudo-holiday co-created by a murderer to honor the planet and to raise the consciousness of man’s effect on the environment. Yes, you read correctly. Earth Day was reportedly born from the mind of left wing environmental whack-job Ira Einhorn, aka the Unicorn Killer. Einhorn murdered his girlfriend and stored her dead body in a trunk in his apartment. You'd think he would have buried her in the Earth to fertilize it...Happy Earth Day.
What does that have to do with anything? Well, a couple of things. First, if Adolf Hitler had founded Earth Day would you celebrate it? No? But it's ok if a woman beating murderer started it? Also, it just seems weird that so many left wing environmental, animal rights, anti-war weirdos care so little for humans. It's also strange how so many of them make the same grandiose claims....Like Nobel Prize Winner Al Gore, Einhorn also claimed to have invented the internet. Happy Earth Day.
In the interest of disclosure I have to say that the other co-founders of Earth Day did write a letter claiming that Ira Einhorn had nothing to do with Earth Day. They wrote this letter despite his 30 minute appearance on the stage during the first Earth Day. They did this in 1998, 28 years after the first Earth Day and not very long after the fugitive Einhorn was found living in France. Sounds like CYA to me. Happy Earth Day.
Anyway, I just thought you should know about this stuff and I'm gonna leave you with a thought.....two "environmentalists" claim to have invented the internet and the internet uses more electricity generated by coal and oil than just about any other electrically powered system ever devised. Happy Earth Day, Please Don't Murder Anyone.
What does that have to do with anything? Well, a couple of things. First, if Adolf Hitler had founded Earth Day would you celebrate it? No? But it's ok if a woman beating murderer started it? Also, it just seems weird that so many left wing environmental, animal rights, anti-war weirdos care so little for humans. It's also strange how so many of them make the same grandiose claims....Like Nobel Prize Winner Al Gore, Einhorn also claimed to have invented the internet. Happy Earth Day.
In the interest of disclosure I have to say that the other co-founders of Earth Day did write a letter claiming that Ira Einhorn had nothing to do with Earth Day. They wrote this letter despite his 30 minute appearance on the stage during the first Earth Day. They did this in 1998, 28 years after the first Earth Day and not very long after the fugitive Einhorn was found living in France. Sounds like CYA to me. Happy Earth Day.
Anyway, I just thought you should know about this stuff and I'm gonna leave you with a thought.....two "environmentalists" claim to have invented the internet and the internet uses more electricity generated by coal and oil than just about any other electrically powered system ever devised. Happy Earth Day, Please Don't Murder Anyone.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Someone In Congress Is Realistic
Want to see something interesting? The following is taken from Section 2 of HR 17 which is known as the Citizens’ Self-Defense Act of 2009:
The Congress finds the following:
Isn't that interesting? If you read the whole bill you'll see it's pretty much like the "Castle Doctrine" we have here in Texas. Let your Members of Congress know you want this to pass.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) Police cannot protect, and are not legally liable for failing to protect, individual citizens, as evidenced by the following:
- (A) The courts have consistently ruled that the police do not have an obligation to protect individuals, only the public in general. For example, in Warren v. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App. 1981), the court stated: ‘[C]ourts have without exception concluded that when a municipality or other governmental entity undertakes to furnish police services, it assumes a duty only to the public at large and not to individual members of the community.’.
(B) Former Florida Attorney General Jim Smith told Florida legislators that police responded to only 200,000 of 700,000 calls for help to Dade County authorities.
(C) The United States Department of Justice found that, in 1989, there were 168,881 crimes of violence for which police had not responded within 1 hour.(2) Citizens frequently must use firearms to defend themselves, as evidenced by the following:
(A) Every year, more than 2,400,000 people in the United States use a gun to defend themselves against criminals--or more than 6,500 people a day. This means that, each year, firearms are used 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.
(B) Of the 2,400,000 self-defense cases, more than 192,000 are by women defending themselves against sexual abuse.
(C) Of the 2,400,000 times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, 92 percent merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8 percent of the time, does a citizen kill or wound his or her attacker.Isn't that interesting? If you read the whole bill you'll see it's pretty much like the "Castle Doctrine" we have here in Texas. Let your Members of Congress know you want this to pass.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Filtered Comment [show]
Findings are totally superfluous. Who gives a crap about all this? I know it's a practical argument, but any firearms regulation is immoral and unconstitutional.
Filtered Comment [show]
I agree with you, but...
Having worked in a legislature before, it is almost imperative that you convince your fellow legislators to vote for something. Often times you must make practical arguments as well as principled ones. This is also because in a bill (as opposed to the other method of passing a law, a Joint Resolution) has no preamble laying out the purpose of the bill.
Add A Comment