Happy New Year!

Not “Happy Holidays” as the liberals prefer. I don’t follow their “political correctness” scam to limit what we can say in any way. I say “Merry Christmas” and “happy New Year”. This is the end of 2009. Hopefully, 2010 will be the year when we foil Obama’s plans by taking away his voting base in Congress. He currently has a voting majority there, and the Republicans can’t do much more than whine and gripe, and attempt filibuster of his idiot plans. This doesn’t work very well when he has the votes to invoke cloture. So when the election comes, vote AGAINST all Democrats and every Republican who is acting like a Democrat. Get those people OUT of there and, hopefully, Obama won’t be able to complete his planned takeover and collectivizing of this government. It’s up to you. Unless you vote them out, he will continue to destroy this country a little at a time, until we can elect Sarah Palin in 2012. (Just common sense)

Merry Christmas, Gun Owners

There; that should make all liberals mad as hell, and that’s what I like to do. Mainly because every liberal idea they come up with is not only illogical, it is dangerous. Yet they think they’re the smartest people in the world, and should be allowed to run OUR lives. You know, ideas like declaring what we breathe out every time we take a breath to be a “poisonous emission” that needs to be “controlled.” How? Taxed and limited. How they’ll do that, I don’t know. They also believe that the way to self defense is to DISarm ourselves. That CRIMINALS, whose very lives are devoted to breaking the law, will OBEY one that says they can’t be armed. They actually think that they can ELIMINATE guns from the world. This is not only illogical, it’s STUPID! But they, in their “wisdom,” won’t even LISTEN to those of us who try to tell them different. They try and eliminate the word “Christmas” from the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ. They say it “offends” certain people, as if we cared. Those who are offended by Christmas can go pee up a rope, for all of me. (S. E. Cupp)

Merry Christmas!

I will not bow to the liberals’ political correctness dictate that I not mention “Christmas” in my greeting to you on Christmas day. The whole idea of eliminating the word “Christmas” from a greeting concerning the birth of Jesus Christ is stupid. But then, everything the liberals in Washington (and other government centers) do or say is stupid, so I expect it of them. Whatever your religion, using the name of Christ in a reference to His birthday is logical, and I am logical if nothing else. I respect ALL religions, even though I may not agree with all their tenets. So Merry Christmas to all, whatever your religion. I realize that may “offend” some, but that’s too bad. Trying to limit my free speech offends ME. (Just common sense)

The UN's gun Control Scheme

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has signaled that the Obama administration would “work hand-in-hand: with the UN to get the global arms treaty signed. “Disguised as legislation to help in the fight against “’terrorism,’ ‘insurgency’ and ‘international crime syndicates,’[ the UN Small Arms Treaty is nothing more than a massive, GLOBAL gun control scheme.” Like most ignorant gun-control freaks, Hillary, Obama, and the UN still think criminals, whose whole reason for being is to breaks the law, will OBEY a law that says they can’t be armed.; when are these people going to get some COMMON SENSE? I, and others, have been trying to get through to these people for years. But they aren’t listening. They think they’re smarter than anybody else. (Town Hall)

CSU Is Stupid!

Colorado State University recently voted to become a "gun-free campus." Basically telling those who want to come there and shoot people, "Come on and shoot us. There will be no unexpected guns here and you will not be shot. We're completely unprotected, except for uniformed campus police officers, most of whom have never fired their guns outside of a shooting range, and which you can identify from a long ways away. We're protecting ourselves by DISARMING ourselves. How stupid is THAT? Anti-gun freaks really think the way to self-defense is to DISARM us. The only UNsuccessful mass shooting I know of is one where there was one parishioner in a church in Colorado Springs, Colorado when a man came in shooting, and she shot him, cutting his shooting spree short after only two deaths. They CALLED her a "part-time security guard," but she was simply a worshipper who was encouraged to bring her gun to services. It is only her presence, with her gun, that stopped the shooter from creating a much bigger death toll. But this kind of thing is lost on the anti-gun freaks. (Just common sense)

Answer the Damned Question!

When you ask liberals (Democrats) an important question, such as how you can expect insurance companies, that MUST make a profit to survive, how they’re expected to compete with a government agency, which does not, they never answer. They just change the subject and get you talking about the new subject so you forget about the original question. We need to DEWMAND answers.

STIMULUS DIDN’T WORK: So they’re going to do it again, even though doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result is THE definition of insanity. Why don’t they just lower the base tax rate as Bush did, and create ANOTHER “boom” period? Why take the money in the first place, only to give it back? The answer is simple. If they get to decide who gets it, they gain more POWER.

“CLIMATE CHANGE” IS A HOAX: A hoax that has either taken in some of our leaders, or is simply being used by them to increase their power over us, while making us pay for it. The “Copenhagen Accord” is a good example of this. If it is signed, and Congress approves it, it will cause legislation that will simply fleece America for a lot more than AlGore ever dreamed of conning us out of.

GOVT. HEALTH CARE IS ANOTHER SCAM: Global warming (now called “climate change”) is a hoax designed to take more of our rights while making us pay for it. Government-paid health care is another. These are just two of the scams Obama and his “gang of thieves” are using to “take us over” and gain complete control over us.

“OLD ARGUMENT?”: The idea that we’re fighting Islamic terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan to keep them busy so we won’t have to fight them here IS an “old argument.” That’s because it is TRUE and it’s hard to “change” a true story your opponents deny. Liberals don’t have that problem because their stories are mostly lies, anyway.

I’M NOT BEING RUDE! That’s what Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee shouted rudely, after someone said she was rude for answering phone calls while people are trying to ask her questions during a “town hall” meeting. Sheila is the “poster child for representatives who just don’t care what their constituents think.
.

They Just Won't Listen

We tell them and tell them logical conclusions, but they ignore us. They won’t even answer. We ask them what makes them think a CRIMINAL, who makes his LIVING breaking the law, will OBEY a law saying he can’t be armed. We ask them what makes them think the route to self-defense is DISARMING ourselves? And the answer? Silence. And they go right on making their stupid laws, which only penalize HONEST people who DO obey laws. It just makes of them, “easy targets” for criminals, who do not. The ONLY unsuccessful mass shooting recently was stopped by ONE GUN in the hands of a woman not afraid to use it, who ended the shooting spree in a Colorado Springs church by shooting the shooter.

It’s a proven fact that in areas where guns are easy to obtain and legal to carry, violent crime figures GO DOWN. Liberals and other gun-hating fools deny this, but they can’t prove their denials. They just SAY it and hope we’ll believe it. In one case in Texas, where a licensed gun carrier was forced to leave her gun in the car by law when she and her parents went in a restaurant to eat, she had to watch as her parents were gunned down by a man with an ILLEGAL gun, right in front of her eyes. Just think about how different the story would have been if she had been allowed to carry her gun inside. (Just common sense)

New Gun Control Scam

Call every gun an “assault weapon.” There is already a law against “assault weapons,” that they successfully passed by saying, “What does an individual need with an assault weapon?” I even fell for that one. Now they have their foot in the door, they’re calling every gun they find an “assault weapon” so they can apply this law. This is how they con the world. (Learn About Guns)

Stopping Mass Shootings

Laws prohibiting guns will not do it. Those wishing to commit mass murder do not obey laws that say they “can’t come in here armed.” This article gives a long list of schools where shooters have come in armed, where guns are specifically prohibited, and killed people. These killers could be pretty sure nobody there would be armed and able to kill HIM. “Guns were specifically not allowed on the premises by official policy or by law. Some locations have specific legal prohibitions, while others rely only on ‘company policy.’ Murderers will ignore signs telling them that something is prohibited. Clearly, if the state prohibits guns on campus, the good people will obey and leave their guns at home. But quite clearly, these signs did not dissuade the killers. Think about it. The only people obeying the law and the signs were the good people...the victims.” We need to allow RESPONSIBLE PEOPLE in these schools to be able to carry a gun (if they wish) so such shooters will not know whether or not there will be someone there who is armed and able to stop him as there was in Colorado Springs, Colorado when a shooter who had already killed that day came in shooting. A female parishioner shot him (and, knowing it was ‘all over,” he killed himself) and only two people there (other than the perp) died. (Examiner)

What the "Anti-Gun Freaks" Won't Tell You

“According to the FBI, states with ‘shall-issue’ right-to-carry laws have a 26 percent lower total violent crime rate, a 20 percent lower homicide rate, a 39 percent lower robbery rate and a 22 percent lower aggravated assault rate than those states that do not allow their citizens to legally carry guns.” Do they REALLY think the way to self-defense is to DISarm yourself? How STUPID is that? They tell you that when a lot of innocent citizens are armed, we will have a “wild west atmosphere” where people solve all their problems with guns. That’s a patent insult that assumes the average person has NO CONTROL over their actions and access to guns will cause more deaths and violence. That’s a LOAD. In Florida, where they DO have “must issue” laws for concealed carry permits, violent crime of ALL kinds has PREDICTABLY gone down significantly; while violence where gun laws are tight, it has gone UP significantly. This is not spoken of in the liberal media because they don’t want you to know it. (Just common sense)

"Taser Death"

Twice in recent days people have been shocked and have died. The “quick” judgment is that the shock killed him. That is impossible. Stun guns cannot kill. There isn’t enough AMPERAGE to do so. I’d bet that when the autopsy results are in, it will be discovered that both these people had underlying medical problems that killed them, not the stun gun. Of course, family members will not accept this, as the stun gun is a “convenient target.” They’ll say the medical examiner is “part of the system” and ruled to “save” the cop who stunned him. MEs don’t operate that way. They find what’s there and report it. Maybe that has happened in the past, but it’s not “common.” Medical Examiners are THERE as an “oversight” to the cops, and anybody else who might kill someone, accidentally or on purpose. In one case, the man fell to his death AFTER being stunned, but the press STILL called his death as CAUSED by being “tazed.”

I’ll wait until I find out just what killed this man before I blame the stun gun the cop used. (Update: now it has come to light [thanks to Fox News] that he was on a ledge, high above the street when he was shocked, and FELL to his death. He died of “head trauma” caused by his fall. A police lieutenant and the cop who shocked him at a very bad time have been relieved of duty. It was NOT the stun gun that killed him, news reports notwithstanding). Nonetheless, news reports still say this “has brought renewed focus to the use of Tasers by police.” Maybe they ought to teach them not to use them on people precariously perched on ledges, way above the street. One thing is sure: shooting him would not have been better. (Fox News)

Going Off Half-Cocked

At Princeton University recently, they shut down the campus, sent out e-mail mass messages, and wasted hours of the cop’s time conducting a search, all because somebody saw someone with a toy plastic gun. I expect soon to hear that “authorities” are demanding even tighter anti-gun laws in response to this. I guess they will figure if a TOY gun can trigger such a response, they ought to ban it, too. This is how the “anti-gun freaks” “gin up” reasons to make new laws against gun ownership and concealed carry. They figure if ANYBODY has a gun in his possession, he’s going to kill somebody. They don’t know ANYTHING about personal responsibility and self-control because they don’t have it. Turns out it was a couple of kids (They made sure everyone knew were from "off-campus" and had no connection to the university) playing "cops and robbers." (Just common sense)

"Gun Control" IS A Crime!

It gets people killed. If just ONE person in the path of the “Alabama Killer” had been armed and had the will and training to use his/her gun, Michael McClendon would not have been able to kill as many people in his rampage before he was shot to death. It makes no difference whatever whether or not the gun or guns he was using were legally obtained and legally carried, or were bought out of the trunk of an illegal gun seller in an alley somewhere. Someone bent on killing others doesn’t worry about the “legality” of the guns he has. What makes ANYBODY think a law against carrying or owning a gun will stop, or even slow down a criminal whose life is spent breaking the law, is beyond me. All such laws do is give such people a ready supply of “easy targets.” Even people who are directly threatened have trouble getting guns. I remember two stories of women who, threatened by their spouses, went in two different directions; one applied for a gun permit and was told to wait fifteen days to get it. She was shot to death by her boyfriend the next day. The other woman wasn’t so stupid. She bought an illegal gun and, when her ex-husband tried to kill her, she shot him to death. They tried to charge her with carrying a gun illegally, but the jury wasn’t stupid, either. There was no question about self-defense. In Israel, EVERYBODY carries a gun and my favorite “mind-picture” is of an old Jewish lady standing over a Palestinian terrorist, pumping bullets into his dead body. We need such gun laws” here so more of us can stay alive when crazies start shooting up the landscape. (Yahoo News/AP)

It's Patently Illogical!

Disarming yourself as a means to self defense is NOT LOGICAL. But that’s the policy the “anti-gun freaks” have (at least, until they get shot). Carry that into foreign policy, and you have this: “The outgoing director of the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog warns major powers such as the U.S. to unilaterally disarm or be blamed for the doubling of nuclear weapons states in a few years.” Does he really think the irrational leaders of such currently nuclear-armed countries will just “back off” if we disarm ourselves? What the hell is he THINKING? They will attack us IMMEDIATELY, as soon as they know for sure we have no defenses. How can people who pretend to be so smart be so STUPID? (IBD Editorials)

"Irrational?"

"Sens. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), Jack Reed (D-RI) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) have joined Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and victims and family members of the Virginia Tech tragedy, to introduce legislation to eliminate the private transfers of firearms and close the nation's ‘gun show loophole.’ ‘There is no rational reason to oppose closing the loophole. The reason it's still not closed is simple: the continuing power of the special interest gun lobby in Washington’ Sen. Lautenberg said, ignoring the Constitution.” What’s irrational about logic? Logically, what makes them think criminals, whose very life is dedicated to breaking the law (and crazy mass murderers) will OBEY a law that says they can’t be armed? No; we’re not “irrational,” these congresspeople are irrational to think that ANY law will stop people with evil intentions from getting their guns out of someone’s trunk in an alley somewhere. Experience has shown that where the gun laws are the tightest, illicit guns are the most easy to obtain. (Just common sense and logic)

Another "Victory" for Gun Control!

Twelve or more people are dead in New York City at an immigration center. There was NOBODY there with a gun and the will to use it to stop him. That’s because New York has some of the most restrictive anti-gun laws in the country. Did that stop this guy? Not for a second. When a criminal wants to use a gun to commit a crime, NO amount of laws that say he can’t do it while armed are going to stop him. Only the presence of someone in the crowd who can kill him early in his “shooting spree” and reduce the death toll. Only his not knowing if there was someone there who is armed so he can’t target the only armed person he knows is there, first, as the Columbine killers did. Only laws that allow honest people to be armed and able to defend themselves from such people will help. But ignorant politicians will never allow that. Even if this killer’s gun or guns were licensed, it makes no difference. If they were not, it’s the same. Anti-gun laws, as we know them, are STUPID and have KILLED many people. As long as honest people are not allowed to be armed for self-defense, we will continue to hear about such shooting sprees, and they will be successful. This is the second such shooting spree I’ve heard about in as many days. The other one was in a “REST HOME,” fergawd’sake! How many people have to die before the “anti-gun freaks” wake up? (Yahoo News/AP)

It's NOT An "Iraq War!

Iraq is just ONE THEATER in an overall “war against terrorists.” It doesn’t matter what we do in Iraq, that war will go on and on until we’ve killed or crippled enough Islamic terrorists to make it impossible for them to continue to attack us. Afghanistan will be the next “theater” in that war, and I’m sure Iran will come soon after. If the “doves” in our society continue to gripe every time we make a move to win this war and this government LISTENS, we will LOSE that overall war and the Islamic terrorists will be bombing indiscriminately in the U. S., which they have not been able to do up to now because Bush kept them busy in Iraq and Afghanistan. What is it about “self defense” these “doves” don’t understand? These are the same people, no doubt, who think the way to personal self defense is to DISARM yourself while CRIMINALS, who have no problem violating a law that says they can’t be armed, see us as “easy targets.” I’m getting sick and tired of these “doves” running things while making it more dangerous for us to live. If I arm myself to avoid becoming the victim of one of these illegal guns, then I become a criminal who will go to jail if the cops find me armed. That’s a load of bull droppings. (Just common sense)

Zapping Coyotes

Coyotes are becoming a major problem in Colorado lately, coming into settled areas and attacking people and animals. Now they have come out with (“new”) device (which has actually been around for a while, designed to stop human predators) they mistakenly call a “Taser.” “Taser” is a registered trade name for one of the first of its breed, the stun gun. Just the sound scares off some animals (though maybe not human animals). But the “shocker” is that it carries a 150,000 volt bang that will put down the biggest animal, human or coyote. Works on dogs, too, and is a lot better than shooting them, according to the cops. (Just common sense)

Guns on Campus A Comforting Thought

At least to those who have been killed by insane idiots who have had no trouble getting their guns, OR bringing them on campus. What the hell makes politicians think “BANNING” guns from campuses will make them safer? What makes them think such people will OBEY a law that says they can’t be armed? People bent on killing people will NEVER have trouble getting guns, no matter how many “anti-gun” laws are passed; and they don’t give a second thought to anti-gun laws. So honest people, especially people on school campuses, are “fair game” for those weenies. If the principle of Columbine High School in Colorado had had a gun in his pocket and the will to use it when he “looked around a corner and watched one of the shooters firing into a room,” he could have “put a couple into the shooter’s head” and maybe reduced the death toll. An armed part-time security guard at a church in Colorado Springs, Colorado DID end a shooter’s rampage in her church when she shot him before he could kill more than two people there. How many times must it be proved that having more guns in the hands of responsible, honest people can reduce such shootings because the criminals won’t know for sure their intended victims won’t be armed and able to shoot back? The “anti-gun fanatics” seem to think the very presence of guns is dangerous. In actuality, the presence of guns those shooters don’t know about can stop them cold (or maybe cold and dead). For my part, if someone shoots me, I want it to be the last thing he does in HIS life. (Indianapolis Star)

Kills Intruder With His Own Gun

I'd like to hear more of this kind of story. This woman, when faced by a man with a shotgun who wanted to rob them, took it away from him and gave it to her husband, who shot and killed one of the two bumbling attackers. The cops say since they were defending themselves, they "probably" won't be charged. "Probably?" The Constitution still allows deadly force in defense of your life or family. The woman says she isn't glad someone is dead. I am. More of this kind of person should be killed. Maybe others would get the idea that people aren't going to be "easy targets" any more. (Fox News)

"Anti-Gun Fanatics" Refuted Again

"Another bogus argument of gun control extremists--that sensible concealed carry laws create an increased threat to police officers--has been refuted by statistics from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund and published by USA Today. The number of officer fatalities due to gunfire is the lowest in 50 years, noted Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. A report out Monday said that this year, 41 officers have died from gunshot wounds, down 40 percent from the 68 who died by gunfire in 2007. Yet the number of concealed carry permits issued by the states has risen, dramatically in some areas, in the past 12 months. 'Better training and equipment have contributed to this decline,' Gottlieb stated, 'but it must be noted for the record that growing numbers of legally-armed citizens have not resulted in more police slayings. That has been one of the many lame arguments offered by gun control fanatics over the past few years when they fought against expanded concealed carry rights.’ " We refute them again and again, but they keep insisting on their flawed reasoning and their flawed assumptions. When we do it, they call us names. That’s when we know we won the argument. (CCRKBA)

"Gun Control" Doesn't Work

It didn’t work in Mumbai (formerly Bombay), India where TEN people killed HUNDREDS in a country with tight gun laws. It doesn’t work in Australia, which suffered a 300% INCREASE in gun violence after effectively BANNING guns. In America, we have periodical massacres, sometimes in schools, other times in churches and colleges. Some have been done with ILLEGAL guns; others with LICENSED guns. Nothing the anti-gun freaks have tried has worked. If someone wants to go on a shooting spree, he/she always seems able to get guns, legal or not. Whatever makes politicians think that the way to self-defense is to DISARM ourselves; or that criminals, who don’t obey laws, will obey one that says they can’t be armed, I don’t know. Stupidity, maybe? If the Columbine school principal (during their massacre) had had a gun and the will to use it when he peeked around a corner and watched one of the shooters firing into a room and could have “put a couple in him,” maybe the death toll wouldn’t have been so high. In Colorado Springs at a church, it was different. There was a female parishioner there who had been asked to bring her gun to services and act as a “part-time security agent.” She shot the shooter after only two deaths. So he killed himself, knowing it was “all over.” The point is, no amount of “gun control” has EVER been able to “control” guns. So why not allow innocent people to carry guns for self-defense? Maybe violent criminals will find something else to do if they can’t be sure their intended victims aren’t armed and ready to shoot THEM. What good are “gun laws” if they can’t get rid of guns? Only violent criminals meeting guns in the hands of their intended victims will lower gun violence. That’s an absolute. (Just common sense)