Wednesday, May 22, 2019
Dumocrats constantly ask if President Trump is “above the law,” but never have anything to say about their own “investigators” being “above the law.” The Constitution says that the accused may never be questioned without their lawyer being present to advise them if they ask for it, and must be advised (correctly) of their rights BEFORE any questioning. Any “evidence” obtained from them after they ask for a lawyer is inadmissible unless a lawyer is allowed, and PROVIDED if they cannot afford it. Why then, can the FBI place somebody in a room by him/herself, WITHOUT a lawyer, with eight Trump-hating FBI agents shouting inane questions from all directions? And why can they jump on a simple lack of perfect memory and call it a lie? Something for which the “accused” can be imprisoned? All this in perfect VIOLATION of the Constitution? Why can they intimidate Trump people time after time, “questioning” them for hour after hour, with the questioners working in “shifts” (so s not to tire them out), and not allowing the “subject” any rest periods or even bathroom breaks? All this with NO “probable cause” to believe there is ANY laws broken? Why is the Congress and the FBI “above the law” in their tactics while being able to charge those “subjects” with serious crimes if they show the slightest hesitation to “cooperate?” (Just common sense)
In New York, they want to stop pro-gun folks from even having MEETINGS to discuss the useless "gun rights controversy." By so doing, they hope to cripple our defenses to their silly laws by taking away our tight to even have MEETINGS about it. Of course, to do so is a violation of the Constitution, but liberals just IGNORE that "august document" when it limits their dictatorial powers over the rest of us. Any law such as this will ultimately (hopefully) be declared unconstitutional, but not until it has been enforced for a time, and the damage has been done. New York State is the place where stupid liberals gather, and they really think they can make such laws without consequences. If the "Founders" had made the making, or even PROPOSING of such laws a punishable offense, such stupid politicians would not be able to make such stupid laws in the first place. It pains me to think there are even enough stupid liberals in existence to populate states like New York, and extend their stupidities to the Congress in the senators and representatives they send there. (Reason Magazine)
Tuesday, May 21, 2019
It really amuses me to hear liberals tell us that President Trump is merely taking credit for a boom that “started under Obama,” and continues to this day. What a LOAD of bullsh-t! Obama’s policies resulted in millions of unemployed, most of whom actually gave up on ever finding another job again in their lives. People were forced to find two or more part-time jobs (if they could) just to make ends meet. Obama confidently assured us that this is what we were going to have to get used to, that those jobs were “never coming back.” that “our best days were behind us,” and we’d better get used to it. That we would never again achieve an unemployment level below 4%. Meanwhile he sent billions of dollars to countries that hated our guts. He gave up on ever getting Kim Jong Stupid to the negotiating table. So Trump was elected, and he went to work. The unemployment is now at record level lows, and employers are having trouble finding employees to do the available jobs. Jobs are coming back from overseas. The economy is at record highs, that started in that direction after Trump’s policies took effect. Dumocrats talk about “the coming recession,” but nobody (who matters) can see any indications in that direction. Obama’s “recovery” is a MYTH Dumocrats tell so they can get back in power and fleece the nation again. (Just common sense)
This video is made by a FOOL. George Scott, Dumocrat) from somewhere, they don't say), thinks AR-15s are "weapons of war" and, as such, a citizen has no reason to own one. so he's basing his campaign for Congress on hatred for it. He, like other anti-gun fools, completely discounts the unalterable FACT that people who IGNORE laws have them, and when faced by one, only an AR-15 or a gun like it will do for defense. He ignores the fact that disarming yourself is NOT the way to self defense, like all anti-gun fools. He pushes such USELESS laws as background checks and banning assault rifles. I'm sure he's all for other useless ideas too, such as "gun-free zones" and keeping guns out of the hands of the law-abiding in schools because the law-abiding might start shooting little kids. I notice he has disabled the "comments" about his video because, like most "snowflakes," he can't stand being opposed. The ad says he's a former military man, and, as such, he should know better. But, like most Dumocrats, he has bought the anti-gun fool drivel. Personally, I think this stance ought to be good reason NOT to vote for him, ever. He calls his ad a "common sense ad," But I call it "a stupidity ad." (The Gun Feed)
Monday, May 20, 2019
It’s very funny to me to see how many Dumocrats really think they have a snowball’s chance in hell of beating President Trump. They come out daily with all their stupid proposed policies. One has proposed an “equal pay tax” on employers who have “unequal pay” for their workers, thinking the guy who has no skills at all and doesn’t even wipe down the walls well, should earn as much as the guy whose ideas have made the company $millions, maybe even $billions. Others want to establish “Medicare For All,” when there isn’t enough money to continue to pay for it just for us “old folks.” The many socialists in the Dumocrat Party want to establish all their socialist notions, such as paying the tuition for all children to go to college at someone else’s expense, and giving everybody a “minimum paycheck” whether or not they work. You name it, they want to pay for it for you. With someone else’s money. Unless, of course, you’re capable and willing to earn it yourself, and have a little left over. Then they want that “little,” and as much more as they can convince you (con you) to give up so that someone else, not so capable and willing, can live a life the equal to yours, without having to work to pay for it. All these ideas depend on YOUR MONEY, so you have to keep on working and earning new wealth, so they can seal as much of it as you will allow to finance all their giveaway programs guaranteed to buy votes to keep them in office, so they don’t have to work too hard, and get paid a lot of money for it. (Just common sense)
The anti-gun fools tell you that people NEVER use a legal gun for self defense. That's a LIE. People have used a gun for self defense approximately 2.5 MILLION times a year. That's a lot of times, especially considering how hard they make it for people to even GET a gun legally, claiming disarming people is "for self defense." It is NOT. You do NOT defend yourself by making yourself DEFENSELESS. But you can't convince these anti-gun FOOLS of this simple truth. So the Center for Disease Control (CDC) did a study that revealed this--and they BURIED it. They didn't want the public to "tumble" to that lie. What the hell is the CDC doing having a study about GUNS? Guns have nothing to do with disease. But I guess the anti-gun fools will take their stats anywhere they can. But these weren't what they wanted, so they ignored them, while the CDC just BURIED them. These findings matched earlier studies by Gary Kleck, which were labeled "controversial" by the anti-gun fools. Why were they "controversial?” Because they didn't support the LIES told by those anti-gun fools, that's why! The CDC studies were done in the 90s, but were unknown until Gary Kleck unearthed them recently to show that they proved his own "controversial" studies to be correct. Anti-gun fools are infuriated. (Reason Magazine)
Friday, May 17, 2019
Well, I told you posting would be spotty this week. Yesterday, we had a momentary power outage, due to a rain storm, that shut down our WiFi so I could not post last night. It’s back on today, although it’s “iffy.” I hope I can get through posting, today.
They say, “Women don’t lie” when they accuse a man of sexual impropriety, but they do. There are cases every day where women are PROVEN to have lied and accused a man of sexual impropriety because they didn’t get something they wanted from him. I read the other day about a woman who accused her lover of RAPE because she “forgot” that she didn’t “say no” before having consensual sex with him. In the case linked here, this woman didn’t get an “A” from this professor, so she accused him of sexual impropriety—until she got caught and had to “fess up.” The thing that really disturbs me is that, when a woman accuses a man, they don’t even let the man know who accused him, nor do they allow him to “confront his accuser,” as he is allowed to do I all other cases. They can accuse him, and he is not allowed to defend himself, nor even know who accused him. That is patently unfair, and has been widely abused by women who think it’s easy to “make a man pay” for some imagined “crime” by falsely accusing him. This has been caused by liberals, who have just decided that a woman doesn’t lie in such cases, when they do, all the time. They just can’t get caught at it in most cases because their unsupported word is accepted as “evidence” without ANY “supporting evidence.” (Brass Pills)
I've used this headline before, and I'll use it again, as long as politicians do stupid things. Like London's Muslim mayor is doing in his "flailing" efforts to reduce violent crime in his city. Anti-gun politicians all over the world think that the mere PRESENCE of a gun--and now a KNIFE in someone's pocket will cause them to commit a violent crime, so they do everything they can to take away our right to self defense, and to own or use ANYTHING that will help us in this endeavor. The very wording of the "laws" this fool has fostered reveals his ignorance. It bans ANYTHING that "could be used as a deadly weapon." I've seen such ignorance in California laws, for many years, with their law that forces you to "register" anything" that can be extended toward a person to do him harm." Which means MY HANDS should be "registered," because I can "extend them toward someone to do him harm." Such laws are so vague and all encompassing as to be unenforceable. Additionally, I could pick up ANY heavy object and hit somebody with it, does that mean any heavy object must either be "registered" or banned? Instead of working to fine REAL solutions to these problems, they seize upon an inanimate object to ban, HOPING this will work. And when it doesn't, they do the same thing, all over again. (Conservative Tribune)
Wednesday, May 15, 2019
I have to laugh every time I hear a liberal (Dumocrat) call President Trump, or anyone else who disagrees with them politically, a racist. That usually signals they have LOST whatever “argument” in which they were involved, and want to win the argument without providing anything useful, or true. It’s a “Hallmark” of liberals to resort to “name-calling” when they can’t come up with a cogent argument to back their position. Racism is just the favorite recent “name” to call their opponents, because there is rarely any proof offered that the subject IS racist—or that he/she is NOT racist. They just figure calling them racist creates a narrative that will stay with them. Another epithet they like is “white supremacist,” which is just another (code) word for racist. Meanwhile, they’re trying their best to CREATE a new racism against whites. Soon there will be drinking fountains for white and black, with the preferred one being for the black people. They’re even teaching about “white supremacy” in colleges, citing phony “facts and figures” that just don’t hold water for anybody with any degree of intelligence. How long will it be before they are teaching it in grade schools? (Just common sense)
David Hogg's sister thinks young people are more wise than older people, which only shows the arrogance of youth. There is NOBODY at age 17 who is wiser than an older person. Experience "trumps" youth and arrogance. If you've been there long enough to have seen it happen before, you're not surprised to see it happen again. Kids only THINK they're smarter than those who have been around long enough to have gained EXPERIENCE. something a boy of 17 just does not have. At age 17 I thought I knew it all, too. I did NOT. At my current age of 82, I can see all the things I wasn't able to see at 17. Kids are FOOLS to think they know more than those who have been on this Earth for a longer time. And adults who think so aren't too smart, themselves. It's that LACK of experience that makes young people THINK they know more than older people. But don't try to tell them that. They can't hear you beyond their arrogance. Hogg thinks banning guns can make kids safer. He's just buying into the MYTH that getting rid of guns will get rid of crime. A simple look back at a time when there were no guns, while crime proceeded apace, using what tools were available to the criminals, will tell the tale. (Clash Daily)
Tuesday, May 14, 2019
After more than two years of phony “investigations,” with which Trump fully cooperated in his own possible undoing because he thought it was “proper,” he has finally stopped cooperating in the efforts to unseat him, even though he is the properly elected president, and has done NOTHING to be punished for. The Mueller Report said they found NO EVIDENCE of wrongdoing on his part after two years of searching under every rock and crevice, and that should be enough. But, NO! They are starting any number of new “investigations,” going over the same facts and figures, hoping to find something the Mueller Committee missed, and which they can twist to give them a plausible excuse to impeach him. They are oh, so worried that he might not accept the results of the 2020 election, even though they have never accepted the results of the 2016 election. Now Trump has announced that he is no longer going to “cooperate” with their “dog and pony shows,” that they were simply “Beltway Conspiracies” out to “take him down” at all costs, using anything they can get. And there is no reason the “accused” should help the accuser to “take him down.” So he is now fighting it with all his means, and that is considerable. He now recognizes officially that “these are not impartial people,” they are simply the opposing party trying to reverse the 2016 election. The House “investigations” are just a massive political assault, combined with a hostile media, to destroy his presidency. And he is fed up with it. Barr has appointed a Special Prosecutor to investigate those phony “investigations.” Of course, the Dumocrats will whine and cry, accusing Trump of "blocking our investigation." (Inside Scoop Politics)
In Müenster, Germany, a fool drove his van into a crowd of people, killing several, and injuring more. WE NEED TO BAN CARS! At least, we do, if we use the same stupid thinking gun-grabbers use. They seem to think that if some fool MISUSES a gun, we need to ban all guns from the face of the Earth. Except for those in their hands and in the hands of criminals and other "bad guys" who don't bother to obey laws, of course. I'll be surprised if the gun-grabbers don't seize upon THIS occurrence to whine and cry about banning GUNS! That's the way they think. If ANYTHING happens, using ANYTHING, ban guns! They can't think of anything to REALLY solve the problem, so they seize upon the simplest thing, and attempt to demonize those who wish to retain their constitutional RIGHT to self defense, and to own and use the means to that, a gun. They flail about trying to erase guns from the face of the Earth, while the "bad guys" always find a way. And they demonize the NRA, the organization that stands up for that right, saying they are responsible for all "gun violence," while it is really the fools who misuse their guns who ARE responsible, when they are the only ones that are looking at the REAL solution, while training people in the PROPER use of guns. (DW)
Monday, May 13, 2019
Yes. Absolutely. But one CAUSED by the Dumocrats, no matter how hard they try to convince us it was caused by President Trump. The constitutional crisis was actually caused by the Dumocrats “blowing holes in the Bill of Rights” while telling us, and the world. “Look at what YOU did, Mr. Trump.” Like intelligent people can’t see that it was the holes they blew in the Bill of Rights that CAUSED the constitutional crisis. Too many people DO believe that Trump caused it, because their “captive media” continues to lie and tell them constantly that he is responsible. And people who look no further than the liberal media will never know what is really happening. Meanwhile, they tell the world that the “alternative media” is lying to them, while all the time it is the LIBERAL media that is doing the lying. If they believe the liberal media, they will never know the truth.
The “constitutional crisis” began when the Dumocrats refused to recognize the results of the election that put Donald Trump into office. They were firmly convinced that that they had stolen enough votes to give Hillary a “shoo-in victory,” and boy, did their faces fall when they finally realized, late on election night, that they hadn’t. And they have never recovered. They still think they can nullify that election, by “hook or crook.” That’s why they spent $35 million on their two-year oddesy that resulted in the Mueller Report, which basically exonerated President Trump. But they weren’t satisfied, and they continue to spend lots of taxpayer dollars in their effort to unseat this properly elected president. And they will continue until he has served his two terms and leaves office. Then they will set to work UNDOING all his good works—which is what they do. (American Spectator)
Liberals insist that all their stupid, silly, ineffective gun laws are being made to "protect you." They are NOT. They know they don't protect a single soul who actually OBEYS them, and only make it easier for those fools who IGNORE them to victimize you. Their purpose is obvious to those of us who can THINK. They want law-abiding Americans to be DISARMED, so when they come after their property, they won't be opposed with as many guns. They have to know their laws do NOTHING to stop, or even slow down, "gun violence," because people who wish to do violence routinely IGNORE them. But that isn't important to them. They feel a "kinship" with criminals who want to TAKE what's yours, because that's their ultimate goal for themselves--and they want to face as few guns in the hands of their intended victims, as possible.
Their purpose CAN'T BE to protect you because the way to self defense is NOT to disarm yourself. That way lies DEATH. They want you to be disarmed, while they still have their guns. It's the only reason I can come up with for them insisting on passing laws ONLY the lawbreakers will ignore. They CAN'T be that stupid, even if they act like they are. They want you to be unarmed, so they can "walk all over you" in the future. There are still too many would-be dictators in this government, and they all hate Trump with a passion not seen recently, because Trump has PROMISED to "upset their applecarts." And he's doing it, unlike other politicians. (Just common sense)
Friday, May 10, 2019
Updating my blogs is going to be a little spotty this next week (May 11 to May 18) because I have to go to Indianapolis to attend my brother’s funeral. He suffered a fall, and died. I don’t know if dying was the cause of the fall, or the fall was the cause of death. But I intend to find out. I hope you’ll bear with me. I’ll try to update them when I can next week.
What is there today that makes liberals (Dumocrats) think they have the right to assault anybody who doesn’t agree with their politics? Conservatives don’t assault liberals, even if they don’t agree with them. Which is always. Mostly, I think, it is the Dumocrats who encourage their acolytes to “confront” conservatives, and they translate that into approval of ASSAULTING conservatives. And the liberal media never criticizes them for their violence. Then we have today’s KKK, also known as ANTIFA, who go around assaulting conservatives while hiding behind their masks. The media, AND liberal politicians, approve of this, saying they’re “just exercising their freedom of speech” by assaulting unsuspecting conservatives. Sometimes they’re even punished, as in that case of the guy who walked up to a conservative at Berkeley and punched him in the face. I believe he was charged with felony assault, and may even get some jail time for his trouble. Not so with this ignorant bimbo, who punched a conservative several times. She only got a misdemeanor ticket. This guy is a true gentleman in that he didn’t punch her back. I don’t hold with hitting women, but when they put themselves in a man’s place and attack me, it’s little different. Had that man been me, that bimbo would have gone home with a fat lip. If somebody hits me, they get hit back. Period. This happened in Chapel Hill, NC. A place I used to think of as a “peaceful” place. But no more, due to Dumocrat politics. (Legal Insurrection)