Chris Matthews: I Forgot Obama Was Black Tonight | NewsBusters.org

Personally, I couldn't care less that President Obama is black. During his State of the Union address last night my focus was on what he was saying, but that's me...not the liberals. Despite all of their finger pointing and hysterical rants, it's the liberal left that's so focused on race in America. Whether it's the Main Stream Media (MSM) telling us how historic Barack Hussein Obama's election is/was, or Janeane Garofalo claiming all Tea Party members are just "hatin' on a black man in the Whitehouse" it's always the liberals bringing race into the national conversation. Need some proof? How about a prominent liberal member of the media who is so focused on race that he had to forget President Obama is black? Read more at: Chris Matthews: I Forgot Obama Was Black Tonight | NewsBusters.org

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.

Is Janeane Garofalo A Liar?

Ok, so we all know that liberals just make stuff up. We know that because anytime you give them a fact that they can't dispute...they just start lying or calling you names. Apparently Janeane Garofalo, noted far-left liberal and former Air America host, has been caught lying about Rush Limbaugh.

You see, she's now appearing in the TV series "24" which is a favorite of Mr. Limbaugh's. Being a well known media figure Mr. Limbaugh has, on occasion, been a visitor to the set of "24". That's where things get interesting. It's gleefully reported by Simon Vozick-Levinson on Entertainment Weekly's website, ew.com, that Ms. Garofalo snubbed both Rush Limbaugh and Lynne Cheney when they visited the set. Garofalo said, "When somebody came to me privately and said 'do you want to meet them?', I said absolutely not." To which Vozick-Levinson said, "Good for her!" Ok, I'll grant that ew.com is an entertainment site and I don't expect them to actually verify stories....but The Washington Times online did check into it.

The Washington Times' Kerry Picket reports that hearing Ms. Garofalo's statements made Radio Equalizer's blogger Brian Maloney curious. He emailed Mr. Limbaugh, who responded with a devastating fact. "The last time I visited the set of '24,' [Ms.] Garofalo had not been hired to appear in the series. She was not there, she was not a member of the cast the last time I visited." and "The last time I visited the set, Kim Raver was still in the cast and CTU was the primary 'location' of the show. This current season, seven, has been in the can since last summer or fall and I have been nowhere near the '24' set for any shoots for this season, which is this lunatic's [Ms. Garofalo's] first season".

The Washington Times story also reports that Ms. Garofalo could not be reached for comment. Too bad, I was hoping she'd try to defend herself with facts...or maybe some creative lies.

Read The Washington Times story Here

The San Antonio Tea Party

Today is April 15th, Tax Day, and also the day people around the country take part in "Tea Parties". What is a Tea Party? Well, it's a gathering of like-minded people from all walks of life and various political backgrounds...Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and Independents were in attendance and involved in the San Antonio Tea Party. What could bring all of those people together? What brought them together is a certain knowledge that the U.S. Government is far too large and unwisely spends far too much of the taxpayers money.

And, before you allow yourself to be convinced otherwise let me tell you something...I was there...the Tea Party was non-violent. It was non-partisan. It was not "right wing" (like CNN said), nor was it "left wing". It was not started by Fox News or any talk show host - it's a true grassroots effort. It wasn't a protest against President Obama nor any one person in particular. It was a declaration that this is still our country and we are unhappy with how the over sized, overbearing government is over spending OUR MONEY. It's recognition that the U.S. Government is addicted to deficit spending and growing a debt so large it will take generations to pay.

Generally, the sentiments of people attending the San Antonio Tea Party lead me to believe that all in attendance would agree with a couple of my favorite quotes from Thomas Jefferson, "My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government." and "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Maybe you agree?

The Tea Party was a great start on the path to correcting the problems in our increasingly UnConstituitonal government. The Tea Party is a statement by the people that government is responsible to us, not the other way around.

For more information about the San Antonio Tea Party Click Here

Obama Administration Lies About Arms Smuggling To Mexico

Lie, Lie, Lie. That's what the U.S. media and the Obama administration have been doing regarding drug related gun violence in Mexico. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Senator Diane Feinstein, and BATF Assistant Director William Hoover have all been blaming United States citizens for illegally providing 90 percent of the weapons used by Mexican drug gangs. Just one problem...they lie like rugs. The real number is around 17 percent.

I know you're thinking "why would they lie?" Easy, they don't believe in the U.S. Constitution, particularly the Second Amendment...and this is an effort to diminish the Second Amendment rights of U.S. citizens. It's a guilt trip designed to get the gullible to go along with new gun control measures.

Fox News reported there are a variety of sources for the weapons used by Mexican Drug Gangs:

"-- The Black Market. Mexico is a virtual arms bazaar, with fragmentation grenades from South Korea, AK-47s from China, and shoulder-fired rocket launchers from Spain, Israel and former Soviet bloc manufacturers.

-- Russian crime organizations. Interpol says Russian Mafia groups such as Poldolskaya and Moscow-based Solntsevskaya are actively trafficking drugs and arms in Mexico.

- South America. During the late 1990s, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) established a clandestine arms smuggling and drug trafficking partnership with the Tijuana cartel, according to the Federal Research Division report from the Library of Congress.

-- Asia. According to a 2006 Amnesty International Report, China has provided arms to countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Chinese assault weapons and Korean explosives have been recovered in Mexico.

-- The Mexican Army. More than 150,000 soldiers deserted in the last six years, according to Mexican Congressman Robert Badillo. Many took their weapons with them, including the standard issue M-16 assault rifle made in Belgium.

-- Guatemala. U.S. intelligence agencies say traffickers move immigrants, stolen cars, guns and drugs, including most of America's cocaine, along the porous Mexican-Guatemalan border. On March 27, La Hora, a Guatemalan newspaper, reported that police seized 500 grenades and a load of AK-47s on the border. Police say the cache was transported by a Mexican drug cartel operating out of Ixcan, a border town."

Read the whole story Here

Don't be taken in by the Obama administration's lies. Don't put up with media that aids Obama by repeating his administration's lies. Don't give up your rights.

If Bush Had Done It

Anybody who says the U.S. media isn't biased in favor of Democrats is seriously demented. Every time President George W. Bush mispronounced a single syllable or made the slightest mistake the press went into a frenzy and late night talk shows showed no mercy. Apparently the press thinks President Obama can do no wrong. Any mention of a misstep is just that...a mention; then, you won't see it mentioned again.

Do you think I'm wrong? How about an example? On March 17th, St. Patrick's Day, President Obama was having a party to celebrate the day and had invited the Irish Prime Minister. During the opening of the party President Obama began to read the Irish Prime Minister's speech from the teleprompter and went so far as to thank himself for the invitation to the party. First, who brings a teleprompter to a party? Second, how can he go that far into someone else's speech without recognizing it isn't his? Third, how come the media didn't start calling him an idiot like they would have if it had been Bush? Easy, they're biased.

Another example? Do you remember when President Obama became the first sitting U.S. President to appear on a late night talk show - The Tonight Show with Jay Leno? Do you remember how President Obama made a remark about Special Olympics? Did the media go after Obama as they would have Bush? Of course not. You know Bush would have been compared to every evil figure throughout history...Hitler, Stalin, Dr. Mengele and Fu Manchu.

How about the latest gaff by the Obama administration? The press was supposed to be on a conference call today with officials traveling with President Obama in London at the G20 meeting. When they made the call they were connected with a phone sex line. If President Bush's people had made that mistake he'd be the anti-christ.

What does all this mean? It means you can't trust the media to provide a truthful, unbiased account of anything President Obama does. And, the reasons are simple. Media members are apparently liberals, socialists, marxists, and communists who don't mind working in the propaganda department.