Monday, May 2, 2016

They Call It "Gun Violence"

But it isn't. It's CONTROL. They also call it “common sense,” but it isn't that, either. There's no common sense in disarming honest, law-abiding people while criminals. Crazies, and Islamic terrorists have no trouble getting their guns, ILLEGALLY. Obama and his accomplices continue to make USELESS anti-gun laws and regulations, KNOWING they're useless to “curb gun violence,” but ARE useful in helping him control the population. If they don't have guns, they can't oppose his efforts to “redistribute THEIR wealth.” His “big thing” is “Smart Guns” that will only fire in the hands of their owner. It uses a computer chip to do so. He's REQUIRING everybody to have a “Smart Gun” in the future, including cops.

It uses computer technology. Have you ever seen a computer that didn't occasionally “crash?” If this computer crashes, you could be dead. Because the criminals won't be using “Smart Guns,” and they'll just shoot you. He's extending the federal background checks, which he ALSO knows doesn't save a single life. While we're importing Islamic terrorists by the hundreds of thousands at Obama's behest, and AGAINST the wishes of the American people, even paying their way with our tax money, Obama is conspiring to reduce the number of LEGAL guns we have to use in opposing them. It's as if he WANTS the Islamic terrorists to win. And I believe he does. I believe he is a “closet Muslim” who CAME HERE to help them win. (KUTV)

Why Is It, You Think?

Chicago, Baltimore, and DC have some of the tightest “gun laws” in the nation. And between them, they account for just about HALF of the murder rate increase in the country. Is that POSSIBLE? Gun laws prevent people from killing each other with guns, don't they? Don't criminals read the signs saying, “no guns allowed here” and take their guns back home before entering? Don't they unload their guns where open carry is allowed if the gun is unloaded? Do they store their guns in “gun safes” and use “trigger locks” on their guns? Not a chance! Criminals, crazies, and Islamic terrorists don't OBEY laws. They take their guns with them everywhere they go, and they're ready to use them at the “drop of a hat.” And sometimes they even drop the hat. Anti-gun fools are convinced that all they have to do is make a law against something to stop it. They're deluded that way. We need to get rid of those fools. (AIM)

IS Hillary "Inevitable?"

She's getting fewer votes than she got in 2008, when she lost to a previously unknown one-term senator. But they keep saying she'll “beat Trump OR Cruz like a drum.” I think they're just trying to keep their minds thinking they're wining—which they're NOT. What's actually going to happen is either Cruz OR Trump is going to “beat HER like a drum.” This time, her opponent will not even be an unknown. Trump is VERY well known, and so is Cruz. Cruz because he actually DID something, and Trump because they know he WILL do something when he gets in position to do something. They want us to THINK Hillary is “inevitable,” but she is, ONLY in their minds.

In reality, she's just an old grandma with a loud screech for a voice, and she uses it regularly. She thinks screeching will replace intelligence in the minds of voters. It's key to understand that in 2008, it was a 3-way race. Today it is a 2-way race between her and an ancient, wild-haired, admitted SOCIALIST who, if elected, may not even live long enough to finish his term, and she's getting fewer votes. The only way she will ever be president is to become his vice-president, and waits for him to die. And that's only of she escapes being sent to prison, which is a distinct possibility. (Breitbart)

Sunday, May 1, 2016

Does the Left Cheat?

No, unless you look closely. In the recent fight over N. Carolina's law requiring people to only enter restrooms and changing rooms related to their REAL sex, the left presented 26 large file boxes of signatures to back their objections to the law and their demand to repeal it. Great move, huh? Yea, unless you look closer, and realize that the only boxes FULL of signatures are TWO. The rest are mostly empty. And the largest number of signatures come from out of state, rendering them NO GOOD. Talk about “stuffing the box!” People say the left never is guilty of election fraud. Just ask the dead people who rise out of their graves to vote, and the people who vote many times. Of course, they enlist the Black Panthers to intimidate voters. They say it's only been happening since Kennedy. But it's been happening for long before that. Liberals say there isn't any election fraud committed by them. It's all committed by the Republicans. So there's no need for any rules to prevent it. But there is, and THEY are the ones guilty of it. So rules are NEEDED to prevent it. I'd say ALL Democrats in office now are there because of voter fraud. (Common Constitutionalist)

Target Stock Down

Surprise, surprise! Target stock “took a nose dive” after they announced their stupid policy to allow MEN in women's restrooms and changing rooms. Those rooms have always been separate for a GOOD, and logical reason: man and women are different, and BOTH (whether or not you know it) like to dress and undress without members of the opposite sex looking at them and ogling them—unless they're about to have sex—which doesn't apply here. They talk about “protecting their customers from discrimination,” but what they're doing is opening them up to sexual harassment, and sexual abuse. They're accommodating a very few while placing MANY in danger. At this writing, the boycott petition of Target Stores has received a MILLION signatures. Among them mine. This, in about a week. That should tell them something about just whom they are “protecting.” The drop represents about $2.5 BILLION. That's a lot of dough to support a STUPID action. (The Blaze)

Another Useless Law

I've written many times about the USELESS anti-gun laws they keep passing that do NOTHING to reduce gun violence. One such law is the “high-capacity magazine ban” they like to pass everywhere. Where they have been passed, they have had NO effect on gun violence. In fact, they have contributed to an INCREASE in gun violence. Other laws, such as the “empty gun” requirement in a state where “open carry” is allowed if the gun is empty, which makes the gun USELESS, are the norm, and they don't work, either. Likewise declaring a “gun-free zone” only keeps guns owned LEGALLY out, leaving things open for thugs to bring their ILLEGAL guns in and victimize people without opposition. Every idea they have seems to be totally USELESS in reducing gun violence, but they keep making them, anyway, in their stupidity. I can only describe it as stupidity, because it is OBVIOUS to intelligent people that the laws they have so far passed DO NOT WORK, and they know it, but insist on making more of the same USELESS laws, over and over. (Breitbart)

Saturday, April 30, 2016

He's Not In Trouble

Army decides: the Army sergeant who “confronted” a Muslim cop who was daily sexually assaulting a young boy and had beaten his mother for trying to save her son, will not be separated from the Army (what became of that Muslim pervert is unknown, at least, to anybody but the army). Why he was “in trouble” for what he did is amazing, to me. There are some really stupid officers in this man's military. I would have done a lot more than “confront” the pervert. The Army thought seriously about pillorying this hero because screwing little boys, beating their mothers for interfering, and chaining them to their beds for later sexual abuse was something that was a “cultural thing” to Muslims, and they thought he should not have interfered. Such activity CANNOT be “a cultural thing” in ANY normal society, MORALLY. But it is to Muslims, which is further illustration of their perverted “religion.” It's a good thing I wasn't in this sergeant's place. If I were there, this pervert would not still be alive. This is a good illustration of what WE will suffer if Muslims ever “take over” here. Theirs is a vile, perverted “religion” that was STARTED to make such activity an APPROVED activity by a man with a 9-year-old “wife!” (The Blaze)

They Call It "Common Sense"

If you want to fool a bunch of uninformed, or misinformed people about something stupid, just call what you're doing “common sense.” That's what the anti-gun fools do when they propose yet another USELESS law to keep guns out of the hands of honest, law-abiding people when violent crime rates committed by ILLEGAL gun owners rise. They insist on calling their stupidity “common sense gun laws.” but they are anything BUT “common sense.” You take guns away from law-abiding people, you leave them defenseless against the ILLEGAL guns in the hands of criminals and other “bad guys.” But they insist on doing it. Even victims of illegal guns and their survivors push for passage of more and more USELESS “common sense gun laws” after they suffer from an ILLEGAL gun that's already illegal.

They've got people convinced that their idea of “common sense gun laws” are the only way to go, and never look elsewhere. Then there are their “gun-free zones” that gun-carrying thugs ignore, like one did recently at Wal-Mart, where he shot two cops and got himself killed—IN a Wal-Mart store. They LAUGH at signs saying, “leave your guns at home,” or “no guns allowed,” or some such. Gun locks and “unloaded” requirements for openly carried guns just make the guns USELESS in the event of an emergency caused by a criminal with his ILLEGAL gun, which they always seem to be able to get, REGARDLESS of the laws. The only answer is to let law-abiding people have guns with which to oppose them. But they never listen when we tell them that. (America's First Freedom)

Burglar Sues His Victim

Yes, this homeowner shot him. But he was in the process of robbing the man. It was dark, and the homeowner didn't know what the burglar's intentions toward him were. Yes, he was running away. But the homeowner had no way of knowing that. It was dark. Yes, he might have hurt somebody else by shooting down that alley that way. But that's not the concern of the burglar's suit. He says that, since he was running away, the man had no reason to shoot him any more. I Don't know what kind of a judgment the judge will impose, but my point here is that a criminal should have NO standing to sue a homeowner he was robbing for anything he suffered in the process. The laws in this country are way too loose if they allow a CRIMINAL to sue his victim after getting hurt in the process of committing robbing him. And they should be changed, so burglars cannot do such a thing. This is by far not the first time this has happened, but it should be the last. And it's an outrage. (The Blaze)

Friday, April 29, 2016

"Puffed Up" With Success

That describes gay activists, who have managed to instill their STUPID policies onto others by their bullying tactics. They've managed to get various businesses, and even some government institutions to accept their “gay marriages” and to call ANYBODY who objects a bigot. Now they're in the process of not only getting people to ACCEPT their male AND female bathroom together con, but to make laws REQUIRING it. They're not satisfied with PRESSURING people to accept their perversions, they now want to make laws REQUIRING it, in practice, if not in fact. People who have VALUES will never AGREE to letting men “whip it out” and pee in full view of a little girl in her bathroom or changing room, so they're now starting a campaign to FORCE them to do so, by LAW. There was a time when there were laws AGAINST male/male and female/female sex, but now that it turned completely around, and there are now laws against people not AGREEING with it. I'm not saying those old laws were right, and I'm saying the NEW laws are NOT right. It's liberal/gay BULLYING, pure and simple, making this world something we don't even recognize, any more. (Eagle Rising)

Anti-Trump Fools

The fools who are against Donald Trump have been forecasting his failure for a long time. They said his candidacy would never “take hold.” They were wrong. It took hold. Then they said, “Okay, it took hold, but it can't last.” It lasted. Then they said, every time he said something they considered outrageous, he was “going down.” He didn't. Then they said, he's still a “flash in the pan,” but he kept on winning state after state, right up to his most recent FIVE-state victory in one day, with even more victories predicted, even by his enemies. Yet, Ted Cruz still assures us, every time he gets a chance, that trump “will not be the nominee,” and if he IS the nominee, he can't beat Hillary. Are they still wrong? Are they just saying these things, HOPING against hope they're true? They haven't been right, yet. So why would we accept their assurances now? I'm not a big Trump supporter, but neither am I anti-Trump. I'm just one of those people who see reality and admit it. (The Blaze)

Boycotting Target Stores

Target Stores recently announced they would observe that STUPID liberal rule allowing MEN in women's restrooms, and even in their changing rooms, where they are sometimes completely naked. Certain liberals (such as Paypal and Bruce Springsteen) have told N. Carolina they would not do business there because they actually had the temerity to go against liberal thought and BAN men from women's restrooms and changing rooms, by law. Target Stores, also declared their stores “gun-free zones,” which, to me, makes me feel LESS SAFE there, since only HONEST people will obey their policies. Criminals will not. Which has been proven multiple times. Most lately, at Wal-Mart, which has a similar policy, and where two cops were shot and they KILLED the shooter IN a Wal-Mart store. I, for one, will violate their policy if I feel the need, and they can “stick it.” There have been several similar instances in Target Stores, as well. Some fool has started a campaign to boycott Target over the “bathroom controversy,” and I would sign it, if I though it would have ANY effect on Target's policies. But since I have yet to see ANY boycott EVER change a policy or a law, I will not. Further, as a man, I will NEVER go into a women's restroom of changing room. I'm not stupid. (Town Hall)

Thursday, April 28, 2016

Fighting Back

I wrote the other day about a bakery fighting back against gay activists “searching them out” because they KNEW they would refuse to bake a cake for their “gay wedding,” then suing them for big bucks, by counter-suing the activists, proving that BOTH SIDES could sue. Now a new gun store in Arlington, Virginia, is fighting back against a “conspiracy” to keep them from opening the ONLY gun store with a storefront in Arlington, by making scurrilous claims in letters to their landlord in an effort to get their lease canceled, They're SUING the 64 people involved in the conspiracy, which included members of the legislature, the leader of which is a Democrat, of course. It's about time somebody fought back against the “bullying tactics” of the left. We can sue, too, and force them to spend their money to fight OUR suits. (Patriot OutdoorNews)

Counting Her Chickens

Before they're even conceived! HIllary's having a helluva time staying ahead of Bernie, but she's making a list of potential VP choices (So's Teddy). What unmitigated arrogance! Either she's “whistling past the graveyard,” or she knows something we don't—like the FBI will not file any charges against her until AFTER the election—on Obama's orders, even though they have a multiplicity of evidence that amply proves her criminal acts. If charges are filed AFTER the election, she hopes to win, in spite of ample evidence that her winning is not the “inevitable” thing the Democrat Party is promoting, it's going to be very hard to win an election that is not controlled completely by her party.. Anybody who has to use scurrilous, underhanded means like having the party give her more delegates than the SOCIALIST winner of many primary elections, has no chance of winning on her own. Yes, she is offering many of the same giveaways as is Bernie. And she doesn't admit to being a socialist, as he has. But both appeal to the LEECHES who want to live at the expense of others. (Inquisitr)

Changing History

Obama is “going to work” on our currency to reflect his “changing of history.” The 7 women he proposes to replace the “heroes of history” with on our currency probably deserve honoring. But are their accomplishments worth more than the FOUNDERS of this great republic? It's his last year in office, so he's still ignoring the IMPORTANT things that concern us, like the economy and Islamic terrorism, spending his time on UNIMPORTANT things like changing the face of our currency and allowing MEN to pee in the same room with your young daughter if they “think” they're female. And that's not surprising. He CAUSED most of the problems we face, today. So it would not be unusual for him to ignore them and concentrate on frivolous things. I just hope we can get rid of him before he completes the job of destroying this nation. He's already most of the way there. (American Thinker)

Wednesday, April 27, 2016

Violating the Constitution

What do you do when a presidential candidate PLEDGES to violate the Constitution on her first day ion office (IF she ever makes it to the Oval Office, that is)? The answer is obvious. You vote against her and, if she wins anyway, and carries out her pledge, you IMPEACH he for high crimes and misdemeanors. Hillary is like a lot of politicians, mostly Democrats, who think they have a lot more power than they do, and think they can just VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION, at will: Hillary is like a lot of politicians, mostly Democrats, who think they have a lot more power than they do, and think they can just IGNORE the document that CREATED this free nation. Make laws or "regulations" that negate the Constitution, the BASIS for ALL laws. The Founders added the Second Amendment for a good reason: there will always be a demigod like Hillary who thinks running things AGAINST the will of the people is their right. the Second amendment was added to stop such people.They're wrong. Which is why Obama has FAILED miserably to do what she PROMISES to do during his two terms. Americans are a free people, despite what Democrats think. It is our RIGHT to be armed in self-defense, whether of not Democrats think so. We (not me) have elected far too many fools like Hillary in the past, and we need to ELIMINATE all candidates who threaten to go against that right. (Breitbart)

It's An Absurdity

Many people, including members of his own party, say confidently that Trump can't win. So why are they working so hard to sabotage him? If they think he can't win, why don't they just shut up and pick a replacement to put forward at convention? The truth is, Trump not only CAN win, he can win handily, in SPITE of all efforts by people who are supposed to be in his corner to stop him. Trump is the strongest Republican candidate since Reagan. He is not like the wimps they have put up in recent years, who guaranteed a Democrat victory. They don't like him, not only because he is NOT the choice of the party bigwigs, but also that he will, if elected, upset many little applecarts and destroy their fiefdoms. And they can't have that, so they'd rather have HILLARY win than that. They keep saying he can't beat Hillary. But an ADMITTED socialist is running neck-in-neck with her in her own party, even though nobody with brains wants anything to do with Bernie. They've been saying he can't win all along, and have been WRONG all along. (Mark Davis)

A Violent Crime?

Bill O'Reilly did a segment on the “drug epidemic” in this country. In it, he said selling drugs was a “violent crime,” but one of his gals (Kirsten Powers) disagreed, saying that selling drugs was not a violent crime. She's wrong. She used a simile about somebody selling a gun to a guy who went out and killed a bunch of children, but that's wrong, too. She said selling that gun is a violent crime, but selling drugs is not. Under her logic NEITHER is a “violent crime,” and she's wrong in both cases. Both lead to violence. Thus both ARE violent crimes. In his segment he said everybody probably knew a family that was affected by drugs. I do. MINE. I lost TWO children to drugs. One son died of an overdose. One daughter died because of drugs. Her “drug of choice” was booze. But she abused cocaine, and other drugs, too. Both died at about 35 years of age. My son's body was discovered by his 12-year-old son. My daughter died IN the doctor's office, while waiting for some medication. (Just common sense)

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

They Want "Free Stuff"

But when you ask them how we should pay for giving them “free stuff,” they have no idea, except vaguely to “tax the rich.” which is merely parroting” the liberal brainwashing. Recently, Jesse Watters went out and asked a number of random college students (in the North East) what they thought about “free stuff,” and got some very interesting answers. Seems like everything he mentioned, including free dope, got an affirmative answer. But, to a man (or woman), they couldn't come up with a way to pay for it except to steal money from “the rich.” They don't care how to pay for it, as long as somebody else is paying. This is why I'm not really surprised why Bernie Sanders is giving Hillary so much grief in her effort to be “the anointed one” and our next president. Both Bernie and Hillary are promising many “freebies,” but Bernie goes much further than she does. Ergo: he's not “going away” any time soon. America today, is much different from what it was when I grew up in the forties and fifties. Then, self-reliance and doing for yourself was prized, and “moochers” were scorned. Now they outnumber us, and are able to influence events. (The Blaze)

They Act Like We Can't See It

“The anti-Second Amendment crowd and the mainstream media cheerleaders who act as gun control first-responders to mass murder by sociopaths have convinced far too many that criminals will stop acting criminally if only more and more laws can be enacted.” That’s not us, that’s THEM. We know LAWS will not stop criminals from getting their guns. They don’t OBEY laws. So they won’t “stop acting like criminals” if we make enough laws. They ARE criminals. It’s not an act. And if they need a gun to do their “dirty deeds,” they will get one, no matter WHAT the law says; believe it! But their goal is NOT to reduce gun violence; it is to DISARM all Americans to make their jobs easier when their “jack-booted thugs” come to take what’s ours. Believe it! Otherwise they wouldn’t insist on making USELESS LAWS in spite of SURE evidence they do not work to reduce gun violence. Criminals want more and more gun laws to make THEIR jobs easier. It's a proven fact that the tighter the gun laws, the easier it is to get ILLEGAL guns. (Joe for America)

Twisting the Law

That's what the “child protectors” do. They PRETEND to have “the best interests of the child” at heart, but they'll use ANY EXCUSE to steal people's children from them. They'll twist the law until it screams so they can kidnap children for the “fees” the feds pay them at every juncture while they “hold them hostage.” And if they're able to keep them permanently, and adopt them out, they get yet another “fee” of $4,500 to $6,000 EACH. The $6,000 figure is for “special needs” children. But what child will NOT be “special needs” after being put through their wringer? In the case linked here, they used a “non-government approved FILTER as their excuse. They typically exercise “Gestapo-like control” over families. Their REAL reason for taking these children from their loving family is that they are home-schooled. But since they can't use that as an excuse, due to some recent court decisions, they cite use of a non-government approved filter, which is about as silly an excuse as I've heard, and I've heard some silly ones. How transparent can they BE? But they don't care. They have their own court systems, with their own judges. And the judges' word is LAW. They flout the Constitution, saying that since their abuses are “civil matters,” the Constitution does not apply. (Preserve Freedom)