Monday, January 7, 2013
Sunday, January 6, 2013
‘DICTATOR OBAMA’ NOW DETERMINED, AND MORE THAN EVER, TO TAKE YOUR GUN…
Ok folks, our ‘Dear Beloved Leader,’ Barry "Almighty" has become more determined than ever in his efforts to capitalize on recent events and to move "forward" with his desire to disarm the American public. Apparently he is now considering what’s being described as an end run around the National Rifle Association (NRA) that he must feel would give him the best chance at winning approval for what would be sweeping new gun control measures. Measures that may include such things as universal background checks for people who purchase firearms in the U.S. and tougher penalties for anyone carrying guns near schools or giving them to minors, at least according to a published report.
Citing multiple sources that are supposedly privy to ongoing White House discussions, the Washington ‘Com’Post on Saturday also reported that officials want to put into place a method of tracking the movement and sale of weapons using a national database. Right, that worked well in the case of "fast and furious." They also plan to seek tougher mental health checks on gun purchasers under various proposals being considered by a working group led ‘Creepy Joe’ Biden, whose apparently a closet letch. The ‘Creepy Joe’ group is expected to submit a package of recommendations to Barry later this month, according to the Post. Now ‘Creepy Joe’ has been an anti-gun nut for years, so it doesn’t take much imagination to come up with items that might be part of that "package."
The paper also said that administration officials may try to enlist the support of Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest retailer, and various other gun sellers in the case of measures that would ‘benefit’ their businesses. And the Post also said that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, alias ‘The Nanny,’ may emerge as a powerful surrogate with respect to gun control for Barry "Almighty." A powerful surrogate? You gotta be kidding me! This dweeb? Who the hell listens to this moron, except other morons of course? I mean, seriously folks, what kind of credibility does Bloomberg have, on any topic. Remember now, this is the same imbecile who said that police departments should go on strike until people started giving up the guns. Now there’s some rational thought.
And yet again in demonstrating his sleazy willingness to exploit the death 20 first graders, continuing to describe it as being the worst day of his presidency, Barry pledged last week to put his "full weight" behind legislation aimed at preventing gun violence. I’m sure what’s going on here is the fact that he views this as being yet another ’crisis’ that simply must not be allowed to go to waste. It simply holds to much promise in acquiring some level of stricter gun control. Especially when he has a tragedy, the death of 20 kids, that he feels he can successfully exploit while it still remains fresh in everyone’s mind. He feels has a better chance of being able to shove his attempt to restrict gun ownership down our throats by striking now, while the iron is hot.
Barry has continued to voice skepticism about the NRA’s proposal to put armed guards in schools following the Dec. 14 in Newtown, Conn. The comments were made in an interview that aired last Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press." That even though the school that his own children attend, as well as the children of the goof who interviewed him on Meet the Press, David "Kiss Ass" Gregory, has in its employ 11 armed security guards and is now looking for a 12th. Evidently, Barry fails to see the hypocrisy here that is all too obvious to many of the rest of us. And to those who say these guards are only there because the ‘president’s’ kids go there, sorry, but those guards were employed by this school long before Barry decided to send his kids there. But still, Barry doesn’t view this as being at least part of the answer.
Barry has vowed to rally the American people around an agenda to limit gun violence, adding that he still supports increased background checks and bans on assault weapons and high-capacity bullet magazines. He left no doubt it will be one of his top priorities next year. Barry said, "It is not enough for us to say, `This is too hard so we're not going to try.'" He went on to say, "I think there are a vast majority of responsible gun owners out there who recognize that we can't have a situation in which somebody with severe psychological problems is able to get the kind of high capacity weapons that this individual in Newtown obtained and gun down our kids," he added. "And, yes, it's going to be hard." Again with the kids, always using the kids.
Barry added that he's ready to meet with Republicans and Democrats, anyone with a stake in the issue. Actually, what’s he’s ready to do is to take advantage the schoolhouse shootings, coming as families prepared for the holidays, while it remains the forefront of public attention and to berate and ridicule anyone who chooses to disagree with him. And as mentioned earlier Barry has shown himself to be not the least bit shy in his efforts to do whatever he feels he can get away with. The tragedy which increased the calls for greater gun controls primarily from Liberals created what Barry now views as being his window of opportunity. But the NRA is strongly resisting those efforts, arguing instead that schools should have armed guards for protection which may not have prevented this tragedy, would, most definitely reduced the loss of life.
Barry "Almighty," of course, remains quite unimpressed by the NRA proposal. "I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools," he said. "And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem." It may not solve the problem but it will most certainly create a safer environment for our kids, especially when nuts realize that schools are no longer "gun free" zone free for them to use as a shooting gallery. Suppose just one of those teachers in Newton would have had a gun? Can anyone disagree that the outcome would have been very much different? And if stationing someone in schools with a gun isn’t the answer, how about the school where his kids go, remove from their employment anyone on the premises who is there for the specific purpose of protecting the children? This guy is such a pathetic fraud, and is dishonest to the extreme.
Barry said he intends to press the issue with the public. "The question then becomes whether we are actually shook up enough by what happened here that it does not just become another one of these routine episodes where it gets a lot of attention for a couple of weeks and then it drifts away," Barry said. "It certainly won't feel like that to me. This is something that — you know, that was the worst day of my presidency. And it's not something that I want to see repeated." Barry continues to hope that enough people are "shook up" to the point where they convinced to take their eye off the ball just long enough, and by doing so provide to him just what he’s looking for, the opportunity to rob from us one more of our rights as a ‘free people.’
The bottom line here is that next to socialized medicine, which sadly has now become a reality in this country, the second item on the list of longstanding Democrat wet-dreams, is the complete and total disarming of the American populace. Think about it, our last line of defense again tyranny forever removed. Does anyone really see that as being a good idea? If we were to allow that to happen we would then be at the complete mercy of a cadre of blatantly dishonest and thoroughly corrupt politicians. Not only that, but we would be exposed to president who has demonstrated on any number of occasions that he views himself as being above the law and as being able to ignore the constraints placed on his office by our Constitution. We must look at the bigger picture. Yes what occurred in Newtown was a tragedy, but tragedies happen every single day.
And as much as Barry would like us to believe that had tighter gun control laws only been in place, this most recent horrible tragedy would have never happened, it just ain’t so. This nut would have come up with another way to accomplish that which was his goal. As I have mentioned before here, gun crime prosecutions are down over 40 percent since Barry assumed office. And have you ever wondered why that might be? Might it be that he sees it as a way to increase the odds, so to speak, for tragedies like Newtown to occur, so that he could then turn around and use them to further the agenda of the left, one designed to rob from us our constitutional right to ‘keep and bear’ arms? Call me a conspiracy nut if you want, but after seeing this guy in action for the last 4 years, is it really outside the realm of possibility?
Citing multiple sources that are supposedly privy to ongoing White House discussions, the Washington ‘Com’Post on Saturday also reported that officials want to put into place a method of tracking the movement and sale of weapons using a national database. Right, that worked well in the case of "fast and furious." They also plan to seek tougher mental health checks on gun purchasers under various proposals being considered by a working group led ‘Creepy Joe’ Biden, whose apparently a closet letch. The ‘Creepy Joe’ group is expected to submit a package of recommendations to Barry later this month, according to the Post. Now ‘Creepy Joe’ has been an anti-gun nut for years, so it doesn’t take much imagination to come up with items that might be part of that "package."
The paper also said that administration officials may try to enlist the support of Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest retailer, and various other gun sellers in the case of measures that would ‘benefit’ their businesses. And the Post also said that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, alias ‘The Nanny,’ may emerge as a powerful surrogate with respect to gun control for Barry "Almighty." A powerful surrogate? You gotta be kidding me! This dweeb? Who the hell listens to this moron, except other morons of course? I mean, seriously folks, what kind of credibility does Bloomberg have, on any topic. Remember now, this is the same imbecile who said that police departments should go on strike until people started giving up the guns. Now there’s some rational thought.
And yet again in demonstrating his sleazy willingness to exploit the death 20 first graders, continuing to describe it as being the worst day of his presidency, Barry pledged last week to put his "full weight" behind legislation aimed at preventing gun violence. I’m sure what’s going on here is the fact that he views this as being yet another ’crisis’ that simply must not be allowed to go to waste. It simply holds to much promise in acquiring some level of stricter gun control. Especially when he has a tragedy, the death of 20 kids, that he feels he can successfully exploit while it still remains fresh in everyone’s mind. He feels has a better chance of being able to shove his attempt to restrict gun ownership down our throats by striking now, while the iron is hot.
Barry has continued to voice skepticism about the NRA’s proposal to put armed guards in schools following the Dec. 14 in Newtown, Conn. The comments were made in an interview that aired last Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press." That even though the school that his own children attend, as well as the children of the goof who interviewed him on Meet the Press, David "Kiss Ass" Gregory, has in its employ 11 armed security guards and is now looking for a 12th. Evidently, Barry fails to see the hypocrisy here that is all too obvious to many of the rest of us. And to those who say these guards are only there because the ‘president’s’ kids go there, sorry, but those guards were employed by this school long before Barry decided to send his kids there. But still, Barry doesn’t view this as being at least part of the answer.
Barry has vowed to rally the American people around an agenda to limit gun violence, adding that he still supports increased background checks and bans on assault weapons and high-capacity bullet magazines. He left no doubt it will be one of his top priorities next year. Barry said, "It is not enough for us to say, `This is too hard so we're not going to try.'" He went on to say, "I think there are a vast majority of responsible gun owners out there who recognize that we can't have a situation in which somebody with severe psychological problems is able to get the kind of high capacity weapons that this individual in Newtown obtained and gun down our kids," he added. "And, yes, it's going to be hard." Again with the kids, always using the kids.
Barry added that he's ready to meet with Republicans and Democrats, anyone with a stake in the issue. Actually, what’s he’s ready to do is to take advantage the schoolhouse shootings, coming as families prepared for the holidays, while it remains the forefront of public attention and to berate and ridicule anyone who chooses to disagree with him. And as mentioned earlier Barry has shown himself to be not the least bit shy in his efforts to do whatever he feels he can get away with. The tragedy which increased the calls for greater gun controls primarily from Liberals created what Barry now views as being his window of opportunity. But the NRA is strongly resisting those efforts, arguing instead that schools should have armed guards for protection which may not have prevented this tragedy, would, most definitely reduced the loss of life.
Barry "Almighty," of course, remains quite unimpressed by the NRA proposal. "I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools," he said. "And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem." It may not solve the problem but it will most certainly create a safer environment for our kids, especially when nuts realize that schools are no longer "gun free" zone free for them to use as a shooting gallery. Suppose just one of those teachers in Newton would have had a gun? Can anyone disagree that the outcome would have been very much different? And if stationing someone in schools with a gun isn’t the answer, how about the school where his kids go, remove from their employment anyone on the premises who is there for the specific purpose of protecting the children? This guy is such a pathetic fraud, and is dishonest to the extreme.
Barry said he intends to press the issue with the public. "The question then becomes whether we are actually shook up enough by what happened here that it does not just become another one of these routine episodes where it gets a lot of attention for a couple of weeks and then it drifts away," Barry said. "It certainly won't feel like that to me. This is something that — you know, that was the worst day of my presidency. And it's not something that I want to see repeated." Barry continues to hope that enough people are "shook up" to the point where they convinced to take their eye off the ball just long enough, and by doing so provide to him just what he’s looking for, the opportunity to rob from us one more of our rights as a ‘free people.’
The bottom line here is that next to socialized medicine, which sadly has now become a reality in this country, the second item on the list of longstanding Democrat wet-dreams, is the complete and total disarming of the American populace. Think about it, our last line of defense again tyranny forever removed. Does anyone really see that as being a good idea? If we were to allow that to happen we would then be at the complete mercy of a cadre of blatantly dishonest and thoroughly corrupt politicians. Not only that, but we would be exposed to president who has demonstrated on any number of occasions that he views himself as being above the law and as being able to ignore the constraints placed on his office by our Constitution. We must look at the bigger picture. Yes what occurred in Newtown was a tragedy, but tragedies happen every single day.
And as much as Barry would like us to believe that had tighter gun control laws only been in place, this most recent horrible tragedy would have never happened, it just ain’t so. This nut would have come up with another way to accomplish that which was his goal. As I have mentioned before here, gun crime prosecutions are down over 40 percent since Barry assumed office. And have you ever wondered why that might be? Might it be that he sees it as a way to increase the odds, so to speak, for tragedies like Newtown to occur, so that he could then turn around and use them to further the agenda of the left, one designed to rob from us our constitutional right to ‘keep and bear’ arms? Call me a conspiracy nut if you want, but after seeing this guy in action for the last 4 years, is it really outside the realm of possibility?
Saturday, January 5, 2013
NEWPAPER'S STUNT SHOULD ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO GO OUT AND BUY A GUN...
Might this stunt by this newsaper maybe actually backfire on it? I mean if I lived in this county and my name didn't appear on their little map, indicating to crooks that I don't have a gun, the first thing that I'm going to do is to go buy one. After all, I am not going to allow the morons who run this idiotic little newpaper to place my life, and the lives of my family, at risk just because they want to prove some point!
DEMOCRATS AND RADICAL ISLAMISTS…A COMMON AGENDA…
Is it just me or does there seem to have been, and for quite some time now, an alliance of sorts between those who identify themselves as being Democrats and the radical Islamists who are so determined to destroy our country? Why is it that the progressive left or the Democrats in our society, almost always side with Muslims against American ideas and laws and, in particular, against Christian beliefs and practices? It is a curiosity, to say the least. You would think that Islamists and Democrats would have nothing in common and would actually be diametrically opposed to one another. But the two belief systems actually have much more in common than you might think. Democrats and Muslims both despise most of what patriotic, religious Americans cherish and revere. This makes them common enemies of the American enterprise: comrades in arms, so to speak.
Where there is conflict between the Islamic and the Democrat’s leftist ideologies, the Muslims always prevail. Democrats will never confront the Islamists, out of fear that to do so would weaken their ally, or that it could produce a backlash so violent and devastating that the beneficial alliance would be destroyed forever. Still, it is rather amazing to watch as Democrats continue to defend and even support their Muslim allies in light of the latter's historical and continuing offenses against the most hallowed tenets of liberalism: hanging homosexuals; stoning adulterers; maiming criminals; abusing and raping women and children; beheading and crucifying non-believers; killing, dismembering, and having sex with the corpses of women; invading embassies and torturing and killing Americans and raping the body of the ambassador.
But instead of getting tough with the Islamists for the horrors the commit on a regular basis and in the name of their supposed God, Barry "Almighty" and his fellow Democrats provide all manner of protective cover for them. The horrific crimes and depredations committed by radical Islamists are endless, yet Democrats manage to "tolerate" them, even make excuses for their absolutely disgusting behavior. You would think that those who constantly profess to be the sole proprietors of any moral mantle, would not be able to tolerate such a level of pure evil. But such is the mentality of those who proudly called themselves Democrats. Democrats cope with these contradictions by denying that they exist or by convincing themselves that Islamic practices are justified and the result of cultural differences, poverty, Zionism, or something that either George Bush or the United States must have done to cause their uncivilized acts of violence.
And the more you take the time to actually compare the beliefs of these radical Islamists and the American Democrat Party, the more similarities you will find. In fact what you will find is a frightening number of similarities between these two groups. Enough to cause you to wonder just who it is, exactly, that we should now be in fear of the most. Because I would argue at this point it would be difficult to determine who represents the bigger threat to our country. Below is a compilation of statements. Your job will be to see if you are able to distinguish which of them more closely resembles something that describes what it means to be a Muslim or to be a Democrat. Now it may sound easy, but it just might be more difficult than it sounds. There’s no grade given afterward, just consider it as being an eye-opening experience.
You decide:
- You have many ideas and beliefs, and you insist that other people conform to them.
- You believe that lying to obtain your objectives is completely acceptable.
- You enjoy mass demonstrations, chanting, and rioting.
- You get a particular kick out of burning the American flag.
- You have a belief system filled with contradictions, and you regard that as normal.
- You hate Ronald Reagan.
- You discriminate against everyone who does not believe as you do.
- You think it is obligatory to be offensive toward those who disagree with you.
- You believe that you have the right to take from others.
- You enjoy destroying the religious symbols of others.
- Your meeting places are actually enemy outposts from which you plan the overthrow of the free world.
- You believe you should be able to have sex with anyone you can physically subdue.
- You absolutely do not believe in freedom of speech.
- You believe that violence is integral to the pursuit of your worthy goals.
- You view freedom as an unacceptable proposition.
- Your prophets have long been shown to be false.
- You believe in using government police or military force to impose your beliefs on others.
- You hate all religions except your own.
- You believe that pedophilia is proper and moral.
- You believe that morality is defined by the rules of the cult you follow.
- You often engage in mob violence.
- You think that books and publications you don't approve of should not be available to others.
- You believe that freedom of the press is a terrible idea.
- You hate Christianity and Judaism.
- You engage in blasphemy on a daily basis.
- Your ultimate goal is that everyone else in the world submit to what you believe.
- You believe that bullying is an acceptable tactic.
- You do not believe in religious freedom.
- You are a racist.
- You believe that women are sex objects.
- You believe that men are sex objects.
- You believe that incest is relative.
- You abuse Western ideals of religious freedom and tolerance and use them as wedge opportunities to overthrow the society you live in.
- You have your own set of laws.
- You believe that the enemy of your enemy is your friend.
- You believe that Christianity must be destroyed at all costs.
- You believe that America is the Great Satan.
- You believe that people who don't believe as you do should be killed or subjugated.
- You believe that the USA has too much power and must be brought down.
- You do not recognize the divinity of Jesus Christ.
- You do not believe in the Founding Fathers, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, freedom and liberty, or anything American.
- You believe that the ends justifies the means.
- You believe that you must win at any cost.
So, how did you do? Were you able to decide, Islamist or Democrat? In the end, was there really that much of a difference in any of what these two totalitarian ideologies espouse or in what they want to achieve? Don't both of them pose what any rational person would see as being a clear and present danger to us, and to America? Why do Democrats think they are any better than Islamists? Whatever they believe, it is up to those of us who love freedom and liberty to be the ones to deal with them, both of them. We must be able to recognize Democrats for what they are, those working on the inside in concert with their Islamist allies who are very busy working on the outside. The are members of the same anti-America team, both are determined in their effort to destroy the country that many of us still love. And they think that by working together they can succeed.
Friday, January 4, 2013
IT WOULD SEEM THAT MASSACHUSETTS HAS DONE IT AGAIN...
The state has the uncanny knack of being able to send to Congress the least capable and most incompetent people it can find. I can only assume that the gene pool must be extremely shallow if this moron, and now newest Senator from the state, was really the best they could find.
YUP, WE'RE SURE MOVING "FORWARD" ALL RIGHT!
NANCY PELOSI…DUMB AS DIRT OR STUCK ON STUPID...
Good old Nancy Pelosi, the rather demented leader of the House Democrats. You know, they say even a broken clock is right twice a day and that even a blind squirrel will find an acorn every now again, such is also the case, apparently, with Ms. Pelosi. And the only reason I say that is because in a recent interview, one that took place on Thursday with National Public Radio, Nancy said that many Republicans do not "believe in government." And I could not agree with her more. But while that assessment of hers is correct up to a point, a more accurate statement would have been for her to say that what we do not believe in is government that's grown too big, too intrusive and way too expensive. But she's not going to say that!
MATT DAMON, A LIAR? OH NO, SAY IT AIN'T SO!!!
Fracking fans have a new target, that mental midget, and well-known moron, none other that Matt Damon. "Promised Land," the new Gus Van Sant film about the controversial technique that acquires natural gas through drilling and pressurized fluid, stars, and was written by, this dweeb, Damon, and costar John Krasinski. This idiotic work of pure unadulterated fiction opens nationally today. Enter, Phelim McAleer. Mr. McAleer is launching what is essentially a one-man campaign to call Damon out about the film. McAleer directed the documentary FrackNation, along with his wife Ann McElhinney, and the film paints a more sympathetic portrayal of fracking and aims to dispel some of the misinformation that McAleer and McElhinney believe have dominated the debate over the procedure’s environmental and health impact.
DEMOCRATS IGNORE THE FACTS BECAUSE IT'S ALL ABOUT THE AGENDA...
So remaining completely oblivious to the mountains of evidence that proves beyond the shadow of a doubt the fact that stricter gun laws simply don't work, those brilliant Illinois Senate Democrats have now recently decided to advance legislation the purpose of which, we are told, is to restrict semiautomatic weapons and high-capacity magazines, pressing forward with new gun control measures in the waning days of the session over the objections of firearms groups. A Senate committee approved two bills, one dealing with the weapons and the other with magazines but it's being reported by some sources that Democrat supporters could face a tough sell in the full Senate.
***FLASH*** MORE PEOPLE MURDERED EVERY YEAR WITH HAMMERS AND CLUBS THAT WITH RIFLES...
 |
MORE DANGEROUS THAN AN ASSAULT RIFLE?
|
Now who would have thunk it that with all of this craziness coming from Democrats, that the real problem we might need to concern ourselves with is the restricting hammers and clubs. And so, having said that, might it not t least appear that the zeal of Sens. like Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) might be more than a bit misdirected. For in looking at the FBI numbers from 2005 to 2011, the number of murders by hammers and clubs consistently exceeds the number of murders committed with a rifle.
Think about it: In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. And in 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle actually decreased to 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs climbed to 618. And so the list goes, with the actual numbers changing somewhat from year to year, yet the fact that more people are killed with blunt objects each year remains constant.
For example, in 2011, there were 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs. The FBI makes is clear that some of the "murder by rifle" numbers could be adjusted up slightly, but still, when you take into account murders with non-categorized types of guns, it doesn't change the fact that their annual reports consistently show more lives are taken each year with these blunt objects than are taken with Feinstein's dreaded rifle, assault or otherwise.
Oh, and here's another rather interesting little fact: According to the FBI, nearly twice as many people are killed by hands and fists each year than are killed by murderers who use rifles. And I can't help but wonder if there are any numbers that might tell us just how many times a rifle might have been used as a club? Look, all this goes to prove that this supposed outrage over the need for more gun restrictions we see coming from Democrats is more about politics than it is out of any concern for loss of life.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
LATEST POSTER BOY FOR THE CRIMINALLY IGNORANT, DONALD KAUL…
Well, it’s finally happening, the lunatics are now literally flowing out of the woodwork. And the prefect example of that comes to us in the form of what has been laughingly described as being an opinion column in the Des Moines Register which was actually published on Dec. 29. The author, some flaming anti-gun zealot by the name of Donald Kaul, must have thought that by writing this little piece, and in such a rather uncensored manner, demonstrating his outright disdain for the Second Amendment and anyone who values their right to keep and bear arms, he might be able to convince others to come around to his rather bizarre way of thinking. And in what was nothing more that a full-blown psychotic rant disguised as a newspaper column, this very obviously deranged individual calls for a full repeal of the Second Amendment, advocates for extreme violence to be used against Republican leaders "until they see the light on gun control" and even goes so far as to declare the National Rifle Association a terrorist organization. Wow, and how do you spell deranged? Ah, that would be - D-O-N-A-L-D K-A-U-L.
I guess what we are intended to assume here as being what it might have been that finally drove him over the edge, and to the point where he felt compelled to write this diatribe entitled "Kaul: Nation needs a new agenda on guns," was, at least in part, the tragic shooting in Newtown, Conn. where shooter Adam Lanza opened fire at Sandy Hook Elementary School, killing 20 children and six adults. And I also guess we’re to believe that it was this tragedy that spurred this obviously demented psychopath into action and causing him to write, "I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control." Why a Chevy, I wonder? Anyway, he went on to say, "And if that didn’t work, I’d adopt radical measures." And another point that makes very clear this nut's questionable mental state is the fact that he would also like to make it illegal to even be a member of the NRA, similar to the way it was illegal to join the Communist party in the past. Yup, I think we can safely say this guy has gone round the bend!
He went on to say: "Here, then, is my ‘madder-than-hell-and-I’m-not-going-to-take-it-anymore’ program for ending gun violence in America:
Repeal the Second Amendment, the part about guns anyway. It’s badly written, confusing and more trouble than it’s worth. It offers an absolute right to gun ownership, but it puts it in the context of the need for a "well-regulated militia." We don’t make our militia bring their own guns to battles. And surely the Founders couldn’t have envisioned weapons like those used in the Newtown shooting when they guaranteed gun rights. Owning a gun should be a privilege, not a right.
Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. Hey! We did it to the Communist Party, and the NRA has led to the deaths of more of us than American Commies ever did. (I would also raze the organization’s headquarters, clear the rubble and salt the earth, but that’s optional.) Make ownership of unlicensed assault rifles a felony. If some people refused to give up their guns, that ‘prying the guns from their cold, dead hands’ thing works for me."
For a guy who seems to possess a rather high opinion of himself, like most liberals that you run into, the irony here, which is obvious to everyone reading in his imbecilic tirade, is apparently completely lost on him. Because while at the same time he is seemingly promoting a more peaceful and enlightened society, he also seems to advocating the tying of Republican leaders, and other who may not agree with his rather skewed way of looking at thing, to the back of pick-up trucks and dragging them around until they may finally come around and agree with his point of view. Kaul berates gun owners while also saying it’s alright to pry "the guns from their cold, dead hands." Now in response to Mr. Kaul's column, Tim Graham, director of media analysis at the Media Research Center, wrote: "Publishing death threats is bad enough, but doing so in the name of promoting a more peaceful, compassionate society is beyond sick." I think it safe to say that that's putting it rather mildly. It should be obvious to just about anybody that this Kaul character should be residing in a rubber room somewhere!
HANNITY GUEST DEMONSTRATES TYPICAL LIBERlAL DEBATE STYLE...
I was kinda waiting for this moron to start stomping his feet and and to start yelling that if Hannity didn't stop talking he'd hold his breath until he turned blue. Man just how infantile can a grown black man act?
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
WILL BOEHNER CONTINUE AS SPEAKER? CAN HE CONTINUE AS SPEAKER?
So the question on the lips of many the morning after the night before when the Republican wilted before Barry "almighty," and once again did nothing more than what they were told to do. And according to American Majority Action (AMA) spokesman Ron Meyer, enough House Republicans have now banded together in an effort to unseat House Speaker John Boehner from his position--they just need a leader to take up the mantle. At least that's what he reportedly told Breitbart News late Tuesday night. I gotta tell you, that would be something that, personally, I would be very much in favor of! There has got to be somebody out there that can do a better job.
"At least 20 House Republican members have gotten together, discussed this and want to unseat Speaker Boehner--and are willing to do what it takes to do it," Meyer said. "That’s more than enough to get the job done, but the one problem these guys face is they need a leader to coalesce behind." Meyer said the conservatives have considered House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) to take the helm after Boehner is knocked out. His opposition from the right to the Senate fiscal cliff deal that Vice President Joe Biden cut with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is a sign Cantor may try for the job. I'm not sure about Cantor, personally I'd like someone with closer ties to the Tea Party.
AMA is hardly the only conservative entity aware of the rekindled effort currently afoot to unseat Boehner. Another conservative with inside knowledge of the effort also told Breitbart News that the movement has "new focus and juice," and if enough members go to Boehner telling him they won’t support his re-election, that Americans should "watch for him to resign gracefully." And to that I would gladly say good riddance! This guy has done nothing but cave time after time, and look where it has gotten us. You'd think that for the good of the country he'd just go ahead and just bow out now while he could so under his own terms. Hey, he's had a good run for himself, now it's time for him to go.
I've never really been a big fan of Boehner's, but then I don't really care all that much for McConnell, our supposed 'leader' over in the Senate, either. Both guys have been around way too long and have always struck me as being much more concerned with their political careers than with doing what needed to be done regarding the survival of the country. Just once I wish we'd have some congressional leadership that would be comprised of folks who actually possess a spine and who were actually more interested in the economic wellbeing of our country than in their next election. But perhaps it is just not to be. Maybe a politician is a politician is a politician regardless of party affiliation.
Look, it's pretty much common knowledge that Democrats have always hated this country, demonstrated repeated by the fact that they have spent their every waking moment trying to come up ever more efficient ways of destroying it. Maybe I've been a bit naïve all my life, but I've always liked to think that those who call themselves Republicans cared just a bit more about what it is that this country has always stood for. Maybe this most recent debacle, which was said to be the best we could hope for as a way of dealing with the "fiscal cliff," was just what I needed to snap myself out of, what has been, a life long stupor. What we need today is another Reagan, but unfortunately for the country, we seem to be fresh out!
OBAMA AND CONGRESS TELL US ALL TO, "BEND OVER AND SPREAD 'EM"...
Despite all of the hoopla about us being able to avoid the so-called 'fiscal cliff', don't think for a second that you're taxes won't be going UP this year! And by a lot! Even if you're below that magic threshold of $400,000, you'll see less in your paycheck in the coming months. Because even though we may not have taken that big plunge over 'fiscal cliff', for now, the only thing that was accomplished is the delaying of the inevitable. And for those of you naïve enough to think that just because the debate is subsiding and may now be asking if that means higher taxes for middle class Americans are a thing of the past, the answer to that is — not exactly. Because while the tax package that Congress passed New Year’s Day will protect 99 percent of Americans from an 'income tax' increase, most will still end up paying more in federal taxes in 2013 and beyond.
But how can that be, you ask? Well, it's pretty simply really. Because, you see, the legislation did absolutely nothing to prevent what was the 'temporary' reduction in the Social Security payroll tax from expiring. Remember how, way back in 2012, that 2-percentage-point cut in the payroll tax was worth about $1,000 to a worker making $50,000 a year? Well that now no longer is in effect. And now the Tax Policy Center, an outfit described as being a nonpartisan Washington research group, estimates that 77 percent of all American households will now face higher federal taxes in 2013 under the little agreement that was negotiated between Barry and Senate Republicans. And I hate to be the bearer of bad news here, but while high-income families will feel the biggest tax increases, many middle- and low-income families will end up paying higher taxes too.
And we keep hearing about how things could have been oh so much worse, that the tax increases could be a lot higher. A huge package of tax cuts first enacted under President George W. Bush was scheduled to expire Tuesday as part of the "fiscal cliff." The Bush-era tax cuts lowered taxes for families at every income level, reduced investment taxes and the estate tax, and enhanced a number of tax credits, including a $1,000-per-child credit. The package passed Tuesday by the Senate and House extends most the Bush-era tax cuts for individuals making less than $400,000 and married couples making less than $450,000. Barry continued to make the idiotic claim that the deal "protects 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small business owners from a middle-class tax hike. While neither Democrats nor Republicans got everything they wanted, this agreement is the right thing to do for our country."
While the income threshold covers more than 99 percent of all households, exceeding Barry’s claim, according to the Tax Policy Center, the increase in payroll taxes will hit nearly every single wage earner. Social Security is financed by a 12.4 percent tax on wages up to $113,700, with employers paying half and workers stuck paying the other half. Barry and Congress reduced the share that was to be paid by workers from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent for 2011 and 2012, saving a typical family about $1,000 a year, but that is no longer in effect. And while Barry pushed hard to enact the payroll tax cut for 2011 and then to extend it through 2012, it was never fully embraced by either party, and this time around, there was general a general consensus to simply let it expire. So expect to see a little less in your paycheck every week.
The new tax package would increase the income tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent on income above $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for married couples. Investment taxes would increase for people who fall in the new top tax bracket. High-income families will also pay higher taxes this year as part of Obama’s 2010 health care law. As part of that law, a new 3.8 percent tax is being imposed on investment income for individuals making more than $200,000 a year and couples making more than $250,000. Together, the new tax package and Barry’s health care law will produce significant tax increases for many high-income families. For 2013, households making between $500,000 and $1 million would get an average tax increase of $14,812, according to the Tax Policy Center analysis. Households making more than $1 million would get an average tax increase of $170,341
But look, this is only the tip of a much bigger 'tax' iceberg. Rumor has it that Barry fully intends to mount another assault come the spring, in the form of yet another request for higher income taxes. The general feeling among most Democrats is that Americans, all Americans are severely under taxed. Now I'm not sure if Democrats view those who are currently paying no income tax as being in that category, but most definitely those of us that are currently paying taxes, do. So if you're one of those who are now pretty satisfied that those evil rich are finally being made to pay what is a little closer to their fair share, I wouldn't be too happy about that fact. Because it's gonna be sooner rather than later that you too are going to be forking over more cash to the government. It won't be long before Barry's gonna be telling you to bend over and spread 'em, and to take it like a man. And that it'll only hurt a little bit.
AH YES, TIS GOOD TO BE KING!
So while those of us considered to be the unwashed masses will now be forced to cough up a little more of our hard earned money this coming year, to the tune of an average of an additional $1,600, we can take comfort in the fact that Barry will be able to continue his holiday vacation. Because in a move that only Barry could conceive, after agreeing Tuesday night to sign an emergency deficit reduction bill that does absolutely nothing to rein in spending, promptly jets off to Hawaii to resume his much needed vacation which result in an additional cost of more than $3 million to we the taxpayers. By the way, that price tag is in addition to more than $4 million that's already being spent on the Barry "Almighty’ & family holiday vacation in Hawaii, bringing the total cost of the little family excursion to well over $7 million. Yup, it's good to be king.
The added cost of Barry's rather self-indulgent, and one could argue an abuse of resources, was incurred simply because by the time that Barry "Almighty" and the clan returns from Hawaii – whenever the hell that is – our "Dear Beloved Leader" and he who has been described to us as being our "Lord and Savior," Barack Hussein Obama, will have used Air Force One to travel to Honolulu and back twice. Barry decided to return from Hawaii just after Christmas in order for him to complete 'negotiations,' the purpose of which were to avoid that much talked about "fiscal cliff," talks that result in nothing more that a 'f*#k job' for taxpayers that was passed by Congress just last night. Barry stonewalled the making of any significant spending cuts throughout these supposed 'negotiations', and therefore the final legislation relies almost solely on new taxes to 'reduce' the deficit.
Air Force One costs about $180,000 per hour to operate. Based on an estimated 18 hours roundtrip flying time between Washington and Honolulu, the travel cost alone for Barry’s decision to return to Hawaii amounts to roughly $3.24 million. And that doesn’t include the price tag for the massive security operation required or the cost of the cargo plane that follows Air Force One around. Now Barry could have saved taxpayers millions by returning from Hawaii with the family after Christmas and resuming their vacation at any one of the many ritzy resorts, that wold both satisfy his rather expensive tastes and are located just outside of Washington. If the beach is a must, even a trip to Florida would have been far less expensive. Or they could have simply stayed at the White House or Camp David, each a luxurious government-run installation, billing taxpayers a relative pittance. But why on earth would he, or the queen, want to do that?
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)