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)