Democrats Will Whine

They will cry, and they will stamp their feet as they continue their tantrum after Brett Kavanaugh was finally confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice—a lifetime appointment. They could no longer hurt him, unless he committed some foul deed, which he is not likely to do, even though they accused him (without any kind of proof) of many foul deeds in their tantrum to keep him off the Court. They will use many hankies as they blubber for a long time. They will continue their tantrum for many years. They are deathly afraid he will help reverse that faulty decision by a previous (liberal) Court that has resulted in the untimely deaths of millions of helpless, defenseless, innocent babies, before they even got a chance at life, for the “convenience” of their parents, who didn’t want the responsibility of raising them, and so had them murdered. They’re afraid he will stop their efforts to disarm all Americans by abolishing the Second Amendment. Something they sorely want for future politicians, who don’t want to meet a gun as they come to take private property. Something for which they have already started the process with their RICO laws, under which they can come and TAKE all your property without even bothering to convict you of any crime. They see him working with Trump to “tear down their house” as he “drains the swamp,” and they’re frightened. I, and all intelligent Americans, are happy. (Just common sense)

He "Feared for His Life!"

The guy who shot and killed the man who pushed him to the ground while he was giving a woman a hard time for parking in a handicap zone and then turned to walk away, said he “feared for his life.” And how is that? How can a man threaten your life by walking away? Yes, he pushed you down. But that’s not something that should demand the death penalty. Of course, what doesn’t seem to be talked about is the fact that you threatened HIS life in the past, and he didn’t get a gun and shoot you. So just how is pushing you down and walking away threatening your life? I submit that you just wanted an excuse to kill this man, and hopefully to get away with it. Well, you have now killed him, and, so far, you’ve gotten away with it, due to a gullible sheriff. There is nothing “stand your ground” about this killing. You were humiliated by this man pushing you to the ground. He didn’t even bother to use his fist on you, which made it worse, in your mind. So you killed him. And you should be in prison for it, maybe suffering your own death penalty. This is an obvious abuse of the “stand your ground” law. The prosecutor didn’t agree that this was self defense, but only charged him with manslaughter instead of the at least second degree murder it was. Considering all circumstances, it should be first degree murder. (Liberty Headlines)

Bankrupting America

Today’s politicians (on the left) want to make the government into Santa Claus all year. They want to pay for college tuition for all, using other people's money, give everybody a minimum wage whether or not they work, guaranteeing most of them will NOT work, and so will not create the new wealth the socialists require to pay for their “flights of fancy.” They hate the free market, which is the very thing that caused this country to outstrip nations that have been around for thousands of years, in about 300 years. The free market, which the left insultingly refers to as “capitalism,” is the reason America is the “destination of choice” for millions from all over the world. So much so that we have to use extraordinary methods to keep some from overrunning our borders. Everything they propose REQUIRES that there be SOME who make money for them to steal for the benefit of the “drones” of society who just want to live at the expense of others. Meanwhile, their very methods make that impossible by guaranteeing nobody will be interested in working to make any money because they get it without working. (Just common sense)

The "Circus" Ends

Maybe. We spent the best part of two weeks—and more--watching the “dog and pony show” they called an “investigation” of why Brent Kavanaugh should not be confirmed to the Supreme Court. Not whether he should or should not be confirmed. Why he should NOT. His guilt was already decided by everybody on the Dumocrat side, and their decision was irrevocable. Kavanaugh’s nomination was to be defeated, at all costs. Whatever they had to do, legal or illegal, true or lie, that’s what they would do. Dumocrats were dismayed when President Trump announced his choice, because they knew he was a strict constitutionalist who would rule, based ONLY on the Constitution, and they would be unable to get him to decide cases, based on anything else, including foreign law, or his own opinions or political biases, if any. Without a shred of proof, they accused him of the foulest deeds, and treated those accusations as if they were Gospel. They did everything they could to make any real man angry, and then they criticized him for getting angry. They found a woman who would accuse him falsely of (almost) raping her, when she couldn’t remember anything from the night in question in her foggy state, except that (in her opinion) Brett Kavanaugh did it. Of that she was certain, even if she couldn’t remember anything else. And that’s ALL she had. Her faulty memory, coupled with her absolute surety that Brett Kavanaugh did it. They failed, and Brett Kavanaugh is now an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court. They “shot their wad,” and it didn’t “stick to the wall.” They have lost the biggest fight in their history, and they will suffer for it, for many years to come. (Fox News)

Flailing Around, Searching

Searching for solutions, and not finding any. But pretending you have. That’s what’s happening in the search for solutions to the problem of “gun crime.” The anti-gun fools think the basic solution is to ban guns. They can’t do that because of the Second Amendment to the Constitution, that RECOGNIZES and guarantees our RIGHT to be armed for self defense. That means guns, knives, or any other kind of self defense weapon, such as even a stun gun. They think “background checks” are the answer, but they’re not. All they do is give them a way to stop CRIMINALS from getting guns LEGALLY. They do NOTHING to keep them from getting their guns ILLEGALLY, which most of law breakers do. More guns are sold ILLEGALLY than legally. “Gun-free zones” are not the answer, either, because they only get law-abiding people KILLED since, even if they are legally allowed to carry a weapon, they make people leave them at home when they go there, making them “easy targets”: for those who IGNORE their silly laws. Now some think school counselors are the answer because they can “spot a potential shooter before he comes to kill.” Unfortunately, that would cost a LOT of money. More money than schools have. Hiring uniformed, armed guards is not, because they are easily identifiable by a potential shooter, and can be located and “taken out” early. The real solution is ALLOWING legal carriers to bring their guns so there will be guns there the shooter doesn’t know about, who can “take him out” before he can kill a bunch of students or staff. But anti-gun fools won’t hear of that, which is the main reason I call them “anti-gun FOOLS.” (Just common sense)

"He Says" He Paid

President Trump’s former attorney said he paid two women a total of $280,000.00 to “keep their mouths shut about a sexual liaison they are supposed to have had with Trump. Given Cohen’s propensity for lying, and the heavy pressure Mueller is known to use to pry any sort of testimony he can use against Trump, true, or not, I sincerely doubt it ever happened that way. He now swears Trump told him to pay them. But all he has is his unsupported word, pretty much like all the rest of the “charges” against Trump, and other Republicans. After what Bill Clinton did, one wonders why Dumocrats would be “upset over a fabled “affair by yet another president. But then, Dumocrats are known for getting upset over something a Dumocrat got away with when a Republican is supposed to have done it. If true, at least Trump paid with his own money, not like Dumocrats, who had a $17 million tax money “slush fund” to pay off such claims. (Just common sense)

"Accusation Equals Guilt!"

This country is the only one in the world (to my knowledge) in which the “rule of law” is, “innocent until proven guilty.” In just about all other countries, if the government accuses you of a crime, you are “guilty until proven innocent.” That’s wrong. The government should not be able to “criminalize” you by simply ACCUSING you of a crime, and then force you to prove your innocence, something that is often impossible. You cannot prove a negative. I have always been proud of this difference between ours, and other countries. But recently, we seem to have abandoned that, at least, when politics is involved. There has arisen a movement against men, allowing women to ACCUSE them of sexual misconduct, without proof of any kind, just their unsupported WORD, which is taken as PROOF of guilt on the part of the accused. That was used in the fight, by liberals, to prevent Judge Kavanaugh from being confirmed to the Supreme Court, by ACCUSING him of sexual impropriety, 36 years ago, using a woman who cannot remember anything about that night, except that judge Kavanaugh was (probably) the one who violated her, even though she can’t remember anything else, due to the fog she was in. (Just common sense)

She Shoulda Hadda Gun

This is a story about how USELESS are anti-gun laws. Anti-gun fools tell us confidently that the police can protect us. Then police will be the first to tell you they can NOT. The best they can do most times is arrive AFTER the violence, clean up the scene and document it, and then get rid of the body or bodies. Then maybe find the perpetrator for punishment, AFTER the crime. In this story, the murder victim was actually on the phone, talking to the cops when she was murdered. To their credit, they did capture the murderer, but they weren’t able to prevent the murder. Guns and knives are “verboten” in England, and so is murder. So this guy violated at least two laws when he killed this woman. But would he have been able to accomplish his “mission” if she had had a gun and the will to use it? Maybe. And maybe he would have been the one killed. So because of England’s laws against guns and knives, one more innocent person is dead, and a guilty one in prison. Will the anti-gun fools ever realize this, or admit it? Not a chance. They just aren’t intelligent enough. (Gun Free Zone)

Ignoring the Good

The Washington Post ran a story headlined.”Trump condemned China over hacking and economic espionage, escalating tensions between superpowers.” Meanwhile I couldn’t find a single mention of the fact that China “blinked” in the so-called, “tariff war” by reducing their tariff on automobiles from 40% to 15%. They might mention it later, but I guarantee they will “play it down.” They don’t want to publicize ANY trump success, anywhere. Cutting tariffs on automobiles is a major concession, which we got, in spite of the “tensions between superpowers.” Trump has had many successes in all his negotiations, with everybody. But did you hear about them? Doubtful. Outfits like the Post don’t consider them “newsworthy.” That’s how they intend to drive Trump’s approval numbers below 30%. By fooling America, so they can tell us the people who voted for him have “changed their minds” and will vote otherwise in the next election. Ain’t agonna happen! If, by some freak of fate, it does, we will be the losers, with the likes of Peelosi and Schumer in the majority, with their socialist agenda. (Washington Post)

A "Divided Country"

There are many who say we are a “divided country.” And they’re right. We are. The Founders INTENDED it to be that way. They designed this government to BE a “divisive force” where opposing ideas can be said, out loud, where such ideas are STIFLED, in other countries. They WANTED there to be “division.” There will always be opinions that differ from ours, and they wanted us to be able to express those ideas freely, without fear of government action against the dissenters. We have always been a “divided country,” and that is a GOOD THING. Healthy disagreement is good. It forces people to defend their own ideas, and that can only be a good thing. Liberals think that is a “bad thing,” because they want to be able to stifle all opposing ideas. They want to be able to CENSOR them, and they have proven that by Facebook and Twitter shutting down the accounts of people with whom they disagree, while college campuses are no longer places where “free thinking” thrives, but are now places where non-liberal voices cannot be heard, lest they be punished. (Just common sense)

Dick's Just Won't Learn

Dick’s is on its way down, but they won’t admit it. They stopped selling guns and their sales immediately went on a “downward spiral.” But they learn nothing from that, and now they’re going to stop selling anything related to hunting. Never mind that once hunting was the only way to put food on the table, since there were no “supermarkets” within miles of where you lived 100 years ago. The reduction is only a “small percentage,” but it indicates the dislike of their customers for their policy. And if they continue on that course, their sales are going to go down, even more. That “small reduction” is millions of dollars they’ve lost by their silly policy. But those myopic “executives” don’t have the ability to see that, and for that, they should be removed from any position where they can make policy that costs their company millions of dollars in sales, just to make a political point, dictated by their anti-gun fool ideas. Many large companies are making similar stupid mistakes like that. Other companies are refusing to do business with anybody who has anything to do with guns, a LEGAL product when used properly. They’re hoping to “put the squeeze” on them that way. But they’re going to learn that they need us more than we need them, by losing out business. Dick’s has signaled the closing of their subsidiary, and most recently the closure of several of their direct stores after losing millions of dollars, maybe even $billions. (Guns)

"Trump Had Temper Tantrum"

That’s what the Dumocrats who attended a meeting in the Oval Office said as they left the office. What ACTUALLY happened is that President Trump “took them to school” about border control and national security. The ideas they presented would do NOTHING to improve either border security or national security, while Trump insisted on his ideas that are PROVEN winners. That’s what they define as “having a tantrum.” They weren’t too happy that President Trump opened the meeting to television cameras because that made it harder for them to twist things in their favor. They walked in there, expecting Trump to surrender. It didn’t happen. He laid out what was going to happen, whether or not they agreed. They still think they have gained back complete control of the Congress because they eked out a slim majority in one House. It doesn’t work that way. They may be able to block SOME of Trump’s wishes, but Trump will be able to block ALL of their wishes. And after the next election, he will be in a much better position as voters give him back the House, while increasing his majority in the Senate. (Washington Post)

Kavanaugh Is Human

The liberals accused him of being a would-be rapist, of running “rape rooms,” of being a drunkard, and of everything else they could “throw up against the wall to see if it will stick,” and when he proved he was a human being and “hit back,” they criticized him for that. Like he should have been able to withstand all the “slings and arrows” and still maintain a “poker face” and not get mad. After all the inhuman things of which he has been accused (without evidence, I might add), he has a RIGHT to be angry, judge, or not. Judges are human. And when he has been accused of all the foul things the liberals have accused him of, it would be inhuman of him NOT to get angry and want to ”lash out.” And we don’t want an inhuman automaton on the Court. We want a human being who is intelligent, and able to put his personal feelings or prejudices (if any) aside, and rule ONLY on the constitutionality of an issue. That’s not what the liberals want. They want a justice who will use whatever he/she can to promote liberal issues, whatever they may be. Including references to foreign law. Kavanaugh will not do that, and so liberals “demonstrate,” professionally print signs for their “demonstrations (who pays for that?), and whine and cry like babies because they didn’t get their way. (Just common sense)

Banning Gun-Free Zones

It has always amazed me how the whole idea of “gun-free zones” has survived, over the years, when it is obvious to those with INTELLIGENCE that keeping the law-abiding from bringing their guns there, even if they have “carry permits” just gives the bad guys an assurance that most law-abiding gun owners will not bring their guns there, so they can kill as many people there with their ILLEGAL guns as they want, without opposition—until the cops FINALLY arrive, with their guns. Each and EVERY “mass shooting” has happened IN a “gun-free zone.” That is an unalterable fact, though anti-gun fools try and deny it. Criminals freely tell us they SEEK OUT “gun-free zones” in which to do their dirty work because they can be pretty sure there will be no one there who is armed, and able to oppose them. Logic says that gun-free zones are dangerous places to be, schools or otherwise, because of that. Even that musical concert that was sprayed with bullets in Las Vegas was a gun-free zone, even though the shooter only entered a DIFFERENT gun-free zone, in that hotel, from which he murdered hundreds of people. There’s a special place in hell for those who KNOW that gun-free zones are dangerous for the law-abiding and still keep creating them. The blood of all those souls who have been murdered IN a gun-free zone is on their hands. (KETV)

Mother Using A Child

There are many cases of adults using their children to promote their own political ideas, and this is one of the worst. A mother, who apparently has bought the transgender crap, insists that her 6-year-old boy “identifies” as a girl, and dresses him as a girl when at home. The father, who is separated from her, allows him to happily dress as a boy when he visits (which should tell you something), something she is working to eliminate with a custody battle, where she is trying to remove his parental rights because he doesn’t agree. The mother, who is a pediatrician, plans to cause this boy to go through the agony of “sexual reassignment” when he is eight. Nobody has asked the boy what HE wants. It seems that the only opinion that counts is the mother’s. So the boy will ultimately lose his “maleness” with, or without his permission. That mother should be removed from this boy’s life immediately, before she can cause him irreparable harm. He is too young to have made such a decision on his own, and if he actually does feel that way, he can start the procedure himself, when he reaches the age of consent, rather than have his life ruined by his MOTHER at age 6 or 8. (Legal Insurrection)

"Resistance Is Futile"

That’s what we need to tell Facebook and Twitter. Twitter has “suspended” ten more “conservative accounts” without stating a reason. But we know what the reason is: they don’t agree with the things those conservatives are saying, and they think, by muzzling them on their platform, they can stop ALL criticism of liberals. They cannot. There are too many other platforms out there they DON’T control. So the ideas they abhor WILL “get out,” in spite of their feeble attempts at censorship. In Soviet Russia, the government did the censoring. In America, they don’t need to. American citizens are doing it for them. And it will be just as futile. Soviet Russia’s communist government collapsed under the influence of what the government TRIED to censor, and what liberals are trying to censor here, today. Truth will ultimately win out here, as it did in communist Russia. And liberals will not be able to stop it. (Just common sense)

Political Double-Talk

This is happening in Canada, where they have no Second Amendment. But the same thing is happening here, too. Politicians tell us they don’t want to take away our right to own and use the major tool for self defense, a gun, while they go about doing just that. In Canada, Trudeau wants a complete ban on guns “while not impeding the lawful use of firearms by Canadians.” Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? Right. I’ve heard many liberal politicians saying much the same thing, except they actually refer to the Second Amendment as an “archaic” thing. Politicians always tell you they’re not doing what they’re doing, and way too many fools believe them. Mostly because those people pay no attention to politics most of the time. The fact is, it is a natural position for liberals to want the populace in their country DISARMED. So that, when they come to take our property away from us to give it, UNEARNED, to the “drones” of society, they’ll be less likely to be met by a gun in the hands of their intended victims. Just like that other kind of criminal. (The Hill)

"Suspicions Remain"

Dumocrats can’t say their “suspicions” are true, but they want the world to think that, just because they “suspect” something, there has to be something to it. They “suspect” that Trump “might” have colluded with the Russians to win the election, even though facts alone deny that would be true. The Russians would clearly prefer Hillary over Trump because she is a socialist, a system of which they approve. They would not prefer Trump because he is a dedicated free marketer (that they call a “capitalist” in an insulting manner) and is the farthest from their ideal imaginable. But in spite of logic (which liberals insist does not exist—logically) they want us to believe that a socialist country, run by socialist people, would prefer a dedicated free marketer over a dedicated socialist. They’re forced to say “In two years of searching under every rock, we could not find any evidence of that collusion, there remains a SUSPICION that the collusion exists, and so we pursue an “investigation” into it, which should, alone, be treated as prima facie evidence of his collusion. The fact that those “suspicions” are UNFOUNDED doesn’t seem to matter to liberals. They want you to treat their “suspicions” as fact. And their very “investigation” is “hanging over Trump’s head,” and that should be considered “evidence” it is true. (Just common sense)

Can He Do It?

There is a movement asking, “Can Trump fulfill ALL his campaign promises?” Which makes me ask, “Has ANY politician EVER fulfilled ALL his/her campaign promises?” And then I notice that he has fulfilled way more of his campaign promises, already, than have any other politicians, in the history of politics. CAN he fulfill ALL of his campaign promises? The answer is, “yes.” If anybody can do it, Trump can. He has proven his critics wrong, in every way possible, and he continues to do it. Getting tired of winning, America? He has done more for the American people in less than two years, than any other president has done, in his entire presidency. And the liberals hate it. They can see their dream of making this into a socialist country being dashed, little by little, and that makes them want to cry. So maybe they ought to go to one of their “safe spaces” and get out the hankies, since they can’t do much else. Maybe they can pretend it isn’t happening. (Just common sense)

"Our (Gun) Violence Is Down"

In Great Britain, they’re gloating because their “gun violence is down,” even though its level is three times higher than it should be, or ever was. What they don’t mention is that KNIFE violence is up, to an alarming level, so now they’re banning knives. In 1999, the number of violent acts per 100,000 people was at under 500. Then it rose to a level of over 1900 per 100,000 people in 2005. Now it’s down from that level to just under 1500. Which is “down,” but still way too high. Now they have stiff “knife laws” after knife violence rose tremendously in the absence of legal guns for the law-abiding. “So today, Great Britain has trapped itself in a vicious cycle of rising crime and intensifying repression.” – David B. Kopel and Vincent Harinam in Britain’s Failed Weapons-Control Laws Show Why the Second Amendment Matters. Of course, the anti-gun fools among England’s lawmakers will never realize this, or admit it. Like our ignorant politicians, they will go right on making their silly laws that don’t work any better than ours do, while many people suffer from them, being “easy targets” for those who IGNORE their silly laws. (Truth About Guns)

And We're Violent?

Dumocrats like to talk about the “violent rhetoric” put out by Republicans. But some of the most vitriolic rhetoric ever comes out of the mouths of Dumocrats. Like Dumocrat Rep. Stephanie Kifowit, in Illinois; she wants to brew up some deadly poison and feed it to her opposition and their families, including the kids. All because they disagree with her on some legislation. She has no cogent arguments to offer, so she just wants to KILL her opposition. And this is the kind of person Dumocrats regularly elect to office. And they accuse US of “violent rhetoric!” If this person had made such a suggestion outside of the legislature, she would now be in irons, charged with “terrorist threats.” But as a member of the “ruling class,” she is able to make such threats with impunity. We should probably change her name from Kifowit to Nitwit, for that’s what she is. This is the kind of person who would be right in the forefront of a dictatorial government, if she would like to KILL those who oppose her ideas. (Clash Daily)

No Pro Kavanaugh Demonstrators

I recently listened to a news reporter on a “friendly” cable news station (Which shall remain nameless. “Foxy,” huh?) where the reporter was impressed by the fact that there wasn’t a single “pro-Kavanaugh” demonstrator there. Obviously, she didn’t consider the fact that the anti-Kavanaugh demonstrators are all liberals, who tend to be violent—and they don’t want to get “beat up.” There’s another reason why pro-Kavanaugh demonstrators are not there—non-liberals don’t usually demonstrate much, and we have won, so far. So they don’t NEED to demonstrate for anything. So it doesn’t really mean anything that there are no “pro Kavanaugh” demonstrators there. But Kavanaugh was confirmed, so they don’t need to be there. Of course, their demonstration would be futile, because if Kavanaugh had not been confirmed, we would be LOST. We would not get a clear conservative on the Court, to balance against the four LIBERAL justices already there, and then it would be easier for the liberals to “stack” the Court, in their favor, so they can continue to use the courts to gain where they could not, legislatively. (Just common sense)

Anti-Gun Law Failure

(Again) The killer at the Jacksonville, Florida gamer gathering bought his guns LEGALLY, in spite of the fact that he had had previous “mental health issues.” He had been hospitalized TWICE because of his “mental issues.” He was on (or should have been on) anti-psychotic and anti-depressant medications, according to the Associated Press. The killer bought his guns from a licensed dealer a month before the killings. Which means he PASSED a background check, in spite of his KNOWN mental issues. In his defense, his parents blame that on their “nasty divorce,” although killing people after losing in a tournament brings that into question. But the salient fact here is that he should NOT have passed that background check with that on his record. Not if we are expected to believe the anti-gun fool laws are effective. Cops say they “have yet to determine a motive,” although the motive is self-evident. He LOST, was mad, was a “mental case” with a gun, and he killed some people. That is evident to INTELLIGENT people, but not to the cops, apparently. Of course, the anti-gun fools blame the guns, rather than personal responsibility for his actions. Even though their laws didn’t stop him. (Fox News)

How Brazen Can They Get?

The FBI, under a Clinton goon as an assistant director, raided a “protected” government “whistleblower” and “confiscated” information he had already intended to GIVE to the government, as if he was some kind of a criminal, to be raided and “evidence” taken from him. He is the one who had information about HILLARY’S “Russian Connection, which is probably what got him raided, and treated like a criminal. Just more evidence that “the fix is in” to keep Hillary and Bill out of trouble, no matter how many crimes they commit. His attorney said this was a “brazen and outrageous disregard of whistleblower protections.” And, since it was done to protect a Dumocrat, it will probably go unpunished, while the whistleblower may well be the only one punished in this scenario. Which proves to us that you cannot trust the government—at least, the Dumocrat side, to conform to the law. Does anybody think anything will come from their “confiscation” of that “evidence” against Hillary and Bill? Not a chance, unless Hell freezes over. It will never be seen again, and will probably be “lost.” (Flag and Cross)

Actions & Consequences

Liberals criticized Brett Kavanaugh for getting mad, after they had “raked him over the coals” for something that probably never happened when he was a teenager. Actions have consequences. You can’t do that to a man without pissing him off. I think his reaction to the committee was quite reasoned. Most human beings would have “gone off” a lot more than that. I certainly would have. I’d have been jumping up and down on their desks, leaving my footprints on their papers. You just can’t libel a man without making him mad. And a judge is still a man, and this is not a court proceeding, requiring a “completely reasoned response.” It is his personal and professional life that is being libeled. Not someone else’s. If he hadn’t been confirmed, it would be, as now Justice Thomas put it, the biggest “virtual lynching” in the history of lynching. He had every right to be angry, judge or not. I think he has held up very well under the onslaught of lies and innuendo, with no kind of proof of ANY wrongdoing. He has proven himself to be exactly what we need on the Court. And fortunately, the libel didn't work, any better than it did with now Justice Thomas. (Just common sense)

Anti-Gun Fools Ignorant

They do stupid things, and demand stupid things. Anti-gun fool teen David Hogg is demanding that Smith & Wesson donate $5 million bucks to anti-gun fools, “or be destroyed.” How that’s going to happen he has no idea. That they should donate a lot of money to a movement that is out to destroy them, anyway. Stupid. Something a teenager, who knows nothing, would come up with. And, of course, the London Daily Mail freaked out because the killer in Jacksonville had a laser sight on his gun—as if the absence of that laser sight would have made any difference. And now one anti-gun fool Dumocrat wants to drop the voting age to 16 because “young people like gun control.” (They’re too ignorant not to) So, just because they haven’t been alive long enough to know how FUTILE current anti-gun laws are, we should let them vote so they can help enact those stupid laws? Of course, Parkland School students are blaming Rubio for their shooting. I wish I had a list of all the foolish blame that has been spread around for all the school shootings, EXCEPT the thing that SHOULD be blamed—the law requiring that law-abiding citizens be DISARMED in order to defend themselves. What we ought to do is ban “gun-free zones.” As with EVERY mass shooting, the mall where the Jacksonville killings happened, WAS a “gun-free zone.”Wannabe mass shooters SEEK OUT “gun-free zones” because they can be pretty sure the law-abiding there will not be armed, and able to stop them from killing more people. (Just common sense)

Mueller's Guilty PLeas

They aren’t worth the paper they’re written on, because he uses a “sledge hammer” on his “victims” to get them to admit to things they never even considered doing. In the end, he hopes to con one of them into making a statement that will “bring Trump down.” The cartoon linked here displays graphically his methods. His only reason for living these days is to “bring Trump down,” and he’s using taxpayer money (unlimited) to do it. His funding should be cut off immediately. Not by Trump, but by Congress. (A. F. Branco Cartoons)

Why Is This Allowed?

Why is the Dumocrat Party allowed to have a “special prosecutor” to be appointed (at $20 million dollars of government expense, so far) whose ONE JOB is to “take down” a sitting president? Why does that sitting president not stop funding this scheme to remove him from office for anything they can find, or manufacture? This would never be allowed in any country run by a dictator, which liberals claim Trump has become. When Mueller was appointed, he was appointed against the rules, which say a CRIME must be there to be investigated. Collusion with the Russians is NOT a crime, even if it were true. Next, Mueller hired 13 (or more) “investigators” for his staff, all of whom are KNOWN Trump haters, and they get paid handsome salaries to find, or manufacture, anything they can to cast aspersions on this sitting president. Mueller has ruined the lives and reputations of several people in his quest, for things done way BEFORE their association with Trump, and his “investigation” has gone far afield from the original mandate to “prove” Trump’s collusion with the Russians to get elected, something they’ve worked hard on for almost 2 years, while finding NO EVIDENCE of any “collusion, with the Russians, or anybody else. Meanwhile, there is CREDIBLE EVIDENCE, being ignored, that Hillary Clinton DID “collude with the Russians, in her unsuccessful effort to get elected. (Just common sense)

More Stupid Gun Laws

Billionaire anti-gun fool Michael Bloomberg has spent $MILLIONS to take away our right to be armed, so we can DEFEND against such people like the fool who shot up a “gamer’s gathering” in Jacksonville, Florida. Within MINUTES of the news of the shooting, Shannon Watts, boss of the Blooberg-paid-for anti-gun fool organization, “MOMS Demand Action” on gun control, LEAPED into action, demanding more of those USELESS gun laws that do NOTHING to stop, or even slow down “gun crime.” As this is written, it is STILL not known whether or not the shooter got his gun legally, or illegally. She was campaigning at the same time the cops were searching the building for survivors. She says “Lobbyists pay politicians for their inaction,” completely ignoring the unarguable fact that NONE of the laws she has caused to be passed in the past have done ANYTHING except make it easier for the holders of ILLEGAL GUNS to victimize those of us who OBEY her stupid, silly laws. When we ask about the INEFFECTIVENESS of her laws, she never answers, she just starts calling us names, as do most liberals, so she won’t have to try to actually answer our questions factually, because she HAS no answers. (Breitbart)

Mallard Fillmore

One thing I’ve always liked about Bruce Tinsley is his ability to come up with a comic that put everybody in their place. That’s why I was instrumental in getting his comic returned to the Denver Post after they canceled it because it was “too political.” Actually, if it had been political on the liberal side, it wouldn’t have been a problem for them. But that aside, they did return it to the newspaper, though it was then placed on the editorial pages. Today’s strip puts the “racism” thing in its place by saying, “President Trump giving Elvis the Medal of Freedom is being called racist, leaving armadillos and Port-Wine Cheese Balls as the only things left that haven’t been called racist.” Even that may not last long, as liberals everywhere search for things to be called racist. (Mallard Fillmore)

Fake Accusation

The woman who accused Brett Kavanaugh if nearly raping her when they were both teenagers is a fake. It’s obvious from several perspectives. First, her “accusation” is just that: an accusation, devoid of proof of anything. Then there’s the fact that the Dumocrats tried the same thing on Clarence Thomas with their “pubic hair on a Coke can” accusation. Their accusation is even more outlandish this time, with the woman actually claiming (almost) a rape. Another factor: she says told her husband years ago that she was “afraid this man would get on the Supreme Court,” yet she said not a thing as he was vetted six times as he rose through the ranks of the judiciary. The there’s the fact that she is a KNOWN Dumocrat operative, and even wore one of those silly “vagina hats” at a recent event. She’s “very hazy” on the events of something that normally would be “burnt into her brain,” saying there were one, maybe two—maybe three assailants (she isn’t sure), including Kavanaugh, yet she still managed to escape. There have been no other women coming forward to “accuse” Kavanaugh in his long career in the judiciary, where he worked with many women, all of whom say he was always a perfect gentleman, and that they adore him. And years ago, she suffered a defeat in court, with the judge in the case being Kavanaugh’s MOTHER. Then there’s the question of why Sen. Feinstein, who knew of this back in JULY, waited until late enough in the process that this phony accusation could be used to delay his affirmation, maybe forever, if they manage to win back the Dumocrat majority in Congress. Nope—I don’t believe a word of it. It is just a repeat of a KNOWN Dumocrat ploy, one they have tried, mostly unsuccessfully, in many cases. And fortunately it failed this time, too. (Just common sense)

"Might" Shoot Students

Every argument of the anti-gun fools depends on a “MIGHT.” “Teachers MIGHT shoot students” if allowed to be armed. Or ANYBODY who is allowed to carry a gun “MIGHT” shoot somebody over a parking spot or a fender bender. Never mind people are doing that, now. In spite of their highly-touted gun laws that don’t work. They’re afraid of something that “MIGHT” never happen, but it sounds good to their ears. They have nothing else, so they push their IMAGINARY scenarios. Never mind there are already MILLIONS of illegal guns, already out there, in the hands of people who just want to victimize us, and they are the biggest supporters of gun control there are, because they know that reduces the chances of their intended victims being armed, and able to defend themselves. The anti-gun fools re very afraid LEGAL gun owners “might” go crazy and shoot up the landscape, while they are IGNORING all the ILLEGAL guns out there already. They really believe that if they can “get rid of all the legal guns,” that will stop all “gun crime. They are DELUDED. The only thing that WILL do something about gun crime is to allow the LAW-ABIDING to be armed, so they can defend themselves, and “thin the ranks” of ILLEGAL gun holders who try and victimize them. As they KILL those illegal gun holders who try to victimize them, there will naturally be fewer “gun crimes,” since there will be fewer criminals with illegal guns. That will work. What they propose will NOT. (Daily Wire)