FREEDOM & LIBERTY is for EVERYONE!!!. . . . .

Folks from all over the world have accessed this site. The desire to be free of the shackles of fascism, socialism, communism and progressivism are universal. Folks just want to live their lives and be left alone... Dammit!


"People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think. Don't run. Don't walk. We're in their homes, and in their heads, and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome." River Tam referring to the government.

Not Politically Correct. . .

"Be not intimidated...
nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberties by any pretense of politeness, delicacy, or decency.
These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice."
- John Adams

Abraham Lincoln

To quote Jack Donovan’s Violence is Golden: ‘Without action, words are just words. Without violence, laws are just words. Violence isn’t the only answer, but it is the final answer.’

In a world gone mad we are the villains. We wield the truth and the light. In the end we will only be answerable to ourselves and our God. If we win then we inherit the earth, if we lose we get to Heaven.

Sunday, August 30, 2009

In Memory of Teddy. . . .

I am dumbfounded at the fawning over the Kennedys in recent days and in particular, the absoute fantasy most journalist without a set of balls have lauded on the passing of Teddy. What ever happened to the truth, for Christ's sake.

So I feel I must, in keeping with the mood, set down my own memorial.





Mary Jo




Alice Krige Ghost Story. Interesting tale.



Mary Jo



Mary Jo

Mary Jo Kopechne. By all accounts a young, innocent woman. At the beginning of her life, a life taken with callous disregard.

Teddy, A great drinker, A great swimmer, A great story teller.

Not so good a human being. Actually, the very worst in almost every respect. Makes me very unsettled about the people of Massachusetts. What in the flying f_____g hell is wrong with them.


So, at the wake, Millions of people watching, I don't know, some just can't avoid it like watching the aftermath of a train wreck and others worshiping his very person. Hmmmmm? Anyway, one of these imbeciles, actually allows that Teddy loved a good joke concerning Chappaquiddick and by association or outright comment, the death of Mary Jo. .


Now were talkin'. Late that night, a 1969 olds was involved in a single vehicle auto accident where a stupidly drunken Teddy in the drivers seat, was ferrying to her hotel room, a young, single, female Kennedy staffer named Mary Jo Kopechne.

The trail led from a party to her hotel room, or so Teddy said. He, in a drunken stupor, veered his car off the bridge leading to the beach (Hmmmmm? No hotel rooms on the beach) on Chappaquiddick Island. In fact the hotel was back the other way.

As the submerged car was filling with water, Teddy somehow swam out and left leaving Mary Jo trapped. Teddy stumbled back to the party, did not stop to call for help at any of the lighted houses alone that way, lawyered up and returned to the scene of the accident (Mary Jo may have actually been alive, we do not know.) discussed with said lawyer what to do, and then left the scene of an accident with his lawyer, all without calling the authorities.

The coroner later determined that Mary Jo died of asphyxiation, not drowning, because there was no water in her lungs. I'm no brain scientist here but that; to me, means that she found an air pocket in the car, and had lived for several hours after the accident. Yeah think on that one why don't cha!

Teddy then stumbled down to the Chappaquiddick Ferry, did not call the coppers, swam across the way to Edgartown, where the hotel room he supposedly was taking Mary Jo was located, showered and hit the sack. No calls to police till after 7:00 a.m. By then, the car had already been found and the coppers were on scene.

So the girl dies as a direct result of his callous and self serving behavior. Does anyone see any humor in this? I personally do not see the humor in it and yet according to his buddies Teddy always got a big guffaw out of Chappaquiddick and Mary Jo Jokes. Hmmmmm?

So, with these circumstances a matter of record, and his buddies assertions that he loved a good joke about a woman he killed, my personal opinion is that Teddy's character was as soiled and despicable as they come and not in any way deserving of praise or or even mourning. The people of Massachusetts accepted a corrupt government and police force as well as any district attorney and allowed a murderer to serve in a place of honor.

Mary Jo had no such luxury. So I have to wonder just what in the hell are these so called journalists thinking when they spew this garbage or actually put it in print in the face of all of this evidence of debauchery and illicit, underhanded dealings. I'm talking about the main stream and not so main stream media and for God's sake, FOX news. Come on!!!!



Want to know more? Click here and here and here and here too. Oh, and here too.

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Are concealed carry permits a violation of the Second Amendment?

I offer a resounding yes!!!



Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

infringe
verb break, violate, contravene, disobey, transgress
infringe on or upon intrude on, compromise, undermine, limit, weaken, diminish, disrupt, curb, encroach on, trespass on


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^



THE UNABRIDGED SECOND AMENDMENT
by J. Neil Schulman

If you wanted to know all about the Big Bang, you'd ring up Carl Sagan, right ? And if you wanted to know about desert warfare, the man to call would be Norman Schwarzkopf, no question about it. But who would you call if you wanted the top expert on American usage, to tell you the meaning of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution ?

That was the question I asked A.C. Brocki, editorial coordinator of the Los Angeles Unified School District and formerly senior editor at Houghton Mifflin Publishers -- who himself had been recommended to me as the foremost expert on English usage in the Los Angeles school system. Mr. Brocki told me to get in touch with Roy Copperud, a retired professor of journalism at the University of Southern California and the author of "American Usage and Style: The Consensus."

A little research lent support to Brocki's opinion of Professor Copperud's expertise.

Roy Copperud was a newspaper writer on major dailies for over three decades before embarking on a a distinguished 17-year career teaching journalism at USC. Since 1952, Copperud has been writing a column dealing with the professional aspects of journalism for "Editor and Publisher", a weekly magazine focusing on the journalism field.

He's on the usage panel of the American Heritage Dictionary, and Merriam Webster's Usage Dictionary frequently cites him as an expert. Copperud's fifth book on usage, "American Usage and Style: The Consensus," has been in continuous print from Van Nostrand Reinhold since 1981, and is the winner of the Association of American Publisher's Humanities Award.

That sounds like an expert to me.

After a brief telephone call to Professor Copperud in which I introduced myself but did not give him any indication of why I was interested, I sent the following letter:

"I am writing you to ask you for your professional opinion as an expert in English usage, to analyze the text of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, and extract the intent from the text.

"The text of the Second Amendment is, 'A well-regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'

"The debate over this amendment has been whether the first part of the sentence, 'A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State', is a restrictive clause or a subordinate clause, with respect to the independent clause containing the subject of the sentence, 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'

"I would request that your analysis of this sentence not take into consideration issues of political impact or public policy, but be restricted entirely to a linguistic analysis of its meaning and intent. Further, since your professional analysis will likely become part of litigation regarding the consequences of the Second Amendment, I ask that whatever analysis you make be a professional opinion that you would be willing to stand behind with your reputation, and even be willing to testify under oath to support, if necessary."

My letter framed several questions about the test of the Second Amendment, then concluded:

"I realize that I am asking you to take on a major responsibility and task with this letter. I am doing so because, as a citizen, I believe it is vitally important to extract the actual meaning of the Second Amendment. While I ask that your analysis not be affected by the political importance of its results, I ask that you do this because of that importance."

After several more letters and phone calls, in which we discussed terms for his doing such an analysis, but in which we never discussed either of our opinions regarding the Second Amendment, gun control, or any other political subject, Professor Copperud sent me the follow analysis (into which I have inserted my questions for the sake of clarity):

[Copperud:] "The words 'A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,' contrary to the interpretation cited in your letter of July 26, 1991, constitutes a present participle, rather than a clause. It is used as an adjective, modifying 'militia,' which is followed by the main clause of the sentence (subject 'the right', verb 'shall'). The to keep and bear arms is asserted as an essential for maintaining a militia.

"In reply to your numbered questions:

[Schulman:] "(1) Can the sentence be interpreted to grant the right to keep and bear arms solely to 'a well-regulated militia'?"

[Copperud:] "(1) The sentence does not restrict the right to keep and bear arms, nor does it state or imply possession of the right elsewhere or by others than the people; it simply makes a positive statement with respect to a right of the people."

[Schulman:] "(2) Is 'the right of the people to keep and bear arms' granted by the words of the Second Amendment, or does the Second Amendment assume a preexisting right of the people to keep and bear arms, and merely state that such right 'shall not be infringed'?"

[Copperud:] "(2) The right is not granted by the amendment; its existence is assumed. The thrust of the sentence is that the right shall be preserved inviolate for the sake of ensuring a militia."

[Schulman:] "(3) Is the right of the people to keep and bear arms conditioned upon whether or not a well regulated militia, is, in fact necessary to the security of a free State, and if that condition is not existing, is the statement 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed' null and void?"

[Copperud:] "(3) No such condition is expressed or implied. The right to keep and bear arms is not said by the amendment to depend on the existence of a militia. No condition is stated or implied as to the relation of the right to keep and bear arms and to the necessity of a well-regulated militia as a requisite to the security of a free state. The right to keep and bear arms is deemed unconditional by the entire sentence."

[Schulman:] "(4) Does the clause 'A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,' grant a right to the government to place conditions on the 'right of the people to keep and bear arms,' or is such right deemed unconditional by the meaning of the entire sentence?"

[Copperud:] "(4) The right is assumed to exist and to be unconditional, as previously stated. It is invoked here specifically for the sake of the militia."

[Schulman:] "(5) Which of the following does the phrase 'well-regulated militia' mean: 'well-equipped', 'well-organized,' 'well-drilled,' 'well-educated,' or 'subject to regulations of a superior authority'?"

[Copperud:] "(5) The phrase means 'subject to regulations of a superior authority;' this accords with the desire of the writers for civilian control over the military."

[Schulman:] "(6) (If at all possible, I would ask you to take account the changed meanings of words, or usage, since that sentence was written 200 years ago, but not take into account historical interpretations of the intents of the authors, unless those issues can be clearly separated."

[Copperud:] "To the best of my knowledge, there has been no change in the meaning of words or in usage that would affect the meaning of the amendment. If it were written today, it might be put: "Since a well-regulated militia is necessary tot he security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged.'

[Schulman:] "As a 'scientific control' on this analysis, I would also appreciate it if you could compare your analysis of the text of the Second Amendment to the following sentence,

"A well-schooled electorate, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read Books, shall not be infringed.'

"My questions for the usage analysis of this sentence would be,

"(1) Is the grammatical structure and usage of this sentence and the way the words modify each other, identical to the Second Amendment's sentence?; and

"(2) Could this sentence be interpreted to restrict 'the right of the people to keep and read Books' _only_ to 'a well-educated electorate' -- for example, registered voters with a high-school diploma?"

[Copperud:] "(1) Your 'scientific control' sentence precisely parallels the amendment in grammatical structure.

"(2) There is nothing in your sentence that either indicates or implies the possibility of a restricted interpretation."

Professor Copperud had only one additional comment, which he placed in his cover letter: "With well-known human curiosity, I made some speculative efforts to decide how the material might be used, but was unable to reach any conclusion."

So now we have been told by one of the top experts on American usage what many knew all along: the Constitution of the United States unconditionally protects the people's right to keep and bear arms, forbidding all governments formed under the Constitution from abridging that right.

As I write this, the attempted coup against constitutional government in the Soviet Union has failed, apparently because the will of the people in that part of the world to be free from capricious tyranny is stronger than the old guard's desire to maintain a monopoly on dictatorial power.

And here in the United States, elected lawmakers, judges, and appointed officials who are pledged to defend the Constitution of the United States ignore, marginalize, or prevaricate about the Second Amendment routinely. American citizens are put in American prisons for carrying arms, owning arms of forbidden sorts, or failing to satisfy bureaucratic requirements regarding the owning and carrying of firearms -- all of which is an abridgement of the unconditional right of the people to keep and bear arms, guaranteed by the Constitution.

And even the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), staunch defender of the rest of the Bill of Rights, stands by and does nothing.

it seems it is up to those who believe in the right to keep and bear arms to preserve that right. no one else will. No one else can. Will we beg our elected representatives not to take away our rights, and continue regarding them as representing us if they do? Will we continue obeying judges who decide that the Second Amendment doesn't mean what it says it means but means whatever they say it means in their Orwellian doublespeak ?

Or will be simply keep and bear the arms of our choice, as the Constitution of the United States promises us we can, and pledge that we will defend that promise with our lives, our fortuned, and our sacred honor ?

(C) 1991 by The New Gun Week and Second Amendment Foundation. Informational reproduction of the entire article is hereby authorized provided the author, The New Gun Week and Second Amendment Foundation are credited. All other rights reserved.

About the Author

J. Neil Schulman is the award-winning author of novels endorsed by Anthony Burgess and Nobel-economist Milton Friedman, and writer of the CBS "Twilight Zone" episode in which a time-traveling historian prevents the JFK assassination. He's also the founder and president of SoftServ Publishing, the first publishing company to distribute "paperless books" via personal computers and modems.

Most recently, Schulman has founded the Committee to Enforce the Second Amendment (CESA), through which he intends to see the individual's right to keep and bear arms recognized as a constitutional protection equal to those afforded in the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth and Fourteenth amendments.

J. Neil Schulman may be reached through:

The SoftServ Paperless Bookstore, 24-hour bbs: 213-827-3160 (up to 9600 baud).

Mail address:

J. Neil Schulman
PO Box 94, Long
Beach, CA 90801-0094.

GEnie address: SOFTSERV

softserv@genie.geis.com







Firearms and the Fourteenth Amendment

Robert Greenslade
February 26, 2003

In their zeal to defend the individual right to keep and bear arms, most firearms owners limit their discussions to the Second Amendment. There is, however, another amendment that not only helps resolve the controversy surrounding the intent and wording of the Second Amendment, but also makes the prohibition enumerated in that Amendment enforceable against the States. In the author’s opinion, this is one of the reasons why opponents of the individual right to keep and bear arms, at the State level, are so opposed to this interpretation of the Second Amendment.

In order to understand the effect of the Fourteenth Amendment on the individual right to keep and bear arms, it is necessary to review some of the legislative history surrounding the Amendment. Ratified by the several States on July 9, 1868, section 1 of this Amendment states in part:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The legislative origin of this part of the Fourteenth Amendment can be traced to the Joint Committee on Reconstruction. Following the War Between the States, Congress appointed a Committee to report “by bill or otherwise” whether the Confederate States “are entitled to be represented in either House of Congress.” The Committee had a broad mission and began its work by drafting constitutional amendments that would outline the plan of reconstruction.

On January 12, 1866, a subcommittee submitted a “proposed amendment to the Constitution.” Representative Bingham delivered the report of the Committee:

"The Congress shall have the power to make all laws necessary and proper to secure to all persons in every State within this Union equal protection in their rights of life, liberty, and property."

The Committee rejected this proposal, but it formed the basis for subsequent proposals. During the following months, additional proposals were considered but were also rejected.

The proposal that became section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment was submitted by Congressman Bingham and agreed to by the Committee on April 28, 1866.

Representative Stevens, speaking for the Committee, introduced the proposed amendment in the House of Representatives on May 8, 1866:

"I can hardly believe that any person can be found who will not admit that every one of these provisions is just. They are all asserted, in some form or other, in our Declaration [of Independence] or organic law. But the Constitution limits only the action of Congress, and is not a limitation on the States. This amendment supplies the defect, and allows Congress to correct the unjust legislation of the States..."

On May 23, 1866, Senator Howard of Michigan introduced the proposal in the Senate. In a 1994 Duke Law Journal article, William Van Alstyne and his associates wrote the following concerning Senator Howard’s remarks:

So, in reporting the Fourteenth Amendment to the Senate on behalf of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction in 1866, Senator Jacob Meritt Howard of Michigan began by detailing the ‘first section’ of that amendment, i.e., the section that ‘relates the privileges and immunities of citizens.’ He explained that the first clause of the amendment (the ‘first section’), once approved and ratified, would ‘restrain the power of the States’ even as Congress was already restrained (by the Bill of Rights) from abridging―

"...the personal rights quarantined and secured by the first eight amendments of the Constitution; such as freedom of speech and of the press; the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the Government for redress of grievances, a right appertaining to each and all the people; the right to keep and bear arms... [etc., through the Eighth Amendment]." [Emphasis added]

Senator Howard referred to the right enumerated in the Second Amendment as a personal right of the people, not a collective right of the States. He concluded his remarks by stating:

[T]here is no power given in the Constitution to enforce and to carry out any of these guarantees. They are not powers granted by the Constitution to Congress... they stand simply as a bill of rights in the Constitution, without power on the part of Congress give them full effect; while at the same time the States are not restrained from violating the principles embraced in them… The great object of this first section of this amendment is, therefore, to restrain the power of the States and compel them at all times to respect these great fundamental guarantees.

If the Second Amendment pertained to a “collective right” of the States, as opposed to an individual right of the people, then his statement that the “great object of this first section of this amendment is...to restrain the power of the States and compel them at all times to respect these great fundamental guarantees” would be an absurdity. Fundamental guarantees pertain to the natural rights of the people, not so-called “collective rights” of the States. It should also be noted that there was no descent from Senator Howard’s description of this part of the Amendment.

In 1871, a bill was before the House of Representatives that contemplated enforcement of the Fourteenth Amendment. Mr. Garfield, who had participated in the debates on the Amendment in 1866, stated these debates would be historic because they would settle the meaning of section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment:

"I ask the attention of the House to the first section of that amendment, as to its scope and meaning. I hope gentlemen will bear in mind that this debate, in which so many have taken part, will become historical, as the earliest legislative construction given to this clause of the amendment. Not only the words which we put into the law, but what shall be said here in the way of defining and interpreting the meaning of the clause, may go far to settle its interpretation and its value to the country hereafter."

A few days earlier, in a debate on the same bill, Representative Bingham, still a member of House, gave a lengthy explanation of the purpose of the Amendment as he had originally conceived it:

Mr. Speaker, the Honorable Gentlemen from Illinois [Mr. Farnsworth] did me unwittingly, great service, when he ventured to ask me why I changed the form of the first section of the fourteenth article of amendment from the form in which I reported it to the House of February, 1866, from the Committee on Reconstruction. …I had the honor to frame the amendment as reported in February, 1866, and the first section, as it now stands, letter for letter syllable for syllable, in the fourteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States, save the introductory clause defining citizens.

He continued his remarks by stating that the first eight Amendments “never were limitations upon the power of the States, until made so by the fourteenth amendment.”

It is a cardinal principle of statutory construction that the intent of the lawmaker constitutes the law. This principle also applies to constitutional law. In this case, we have a direct quote from the individual who framed the wording of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment ― “letter for letter syllable for syllable.” The intent of section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, as stated by its author, was to make the limitations enumerated in the first eight amendments of the Bill of Rights applicable to the States. Thus, from a constitutional standpoint, adoption of Fourteenth Amendment made the restraint contained in the Second Amendment, concerning the individual right to keep and bear arms, enforceable against every State in the Union.

The intent of section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment also disproves the “collective right” interpretation of the Second Amendment. The Brady Campaign contends the Second Amendment was adopted “to prevent the federal government from disarming the State militias.”

The U.S. Constitution established a permanent professional army, controlled by the federal government. With the memory of King George III’s troops fresh in their minds, many of the ‘anti-federalists’ feared a standing army as an instrument of oppression. State militias were viewed as a counterbalance to the federal army and the Second Amendment was written to prevent the federal government from disarming the state militias.

If this was an accurate statement, then Congressman Bingham could not have included a “collective right” Second Amendment in the limitations of section 1. He would have had to omit it because this provision prevents the States from infringing the rights of the people. It has nothing to do with the so-called “collective rights” of the States. Thus, section 1 could have only made 7 of the first 8 Amendments applicable to the States.

This section, as stated above, did indeed extend the limitations enumerated in the first 8 amendments to the individual State governments. If the Second Amendment was adopted “to prevent the federal government from disarming the State militias,” as the Brady Campaign asserts, then section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment extended this prohibition to the individual States. In other words, this provision would bring into play the limitations of the Second Amendment and prevent the States from disarming themselves. The absurdity of this can be seen in the following example. If a State like Nevada attempted to disarm its militia, this section would give Nevada standing to go to federal court and sue Nevada to prevent Nevada from disarming itself. Let’s see the Brady Campaign spin this one!

Copyright © Sierra Times.com
Sierra Times reprint statement:
Reprint permission granted, as long as you include the name of our site,
the author, and our URL:
http://www.sierratimes.com


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^



Making any law, or requirement for gun carry or ownership is an impediment. Period. The paperwork that must be filled out on purchase at a gun shop is an impediment. Carry in vehicle laws are an impediment. No carry in Federal buildings is an impediment. No gun zones (open season on occupants zones) are an impediment.


We freak out in this country when more than a few people get killed by gun fire, while in much of the rest of the world, it would not hardly raise an eyebrow.


I would much prefer walking into a coffee shop or what ever and standing in line for my coffee, black no sugar, standing behind three young women ordering their Cafe Moca Latte' Espresso macchiatos, each one with a Colt M4 Carbine strapped across their backs.


Take a thoughtful moment here.


At the table to my right, a new mom with a Glock at the waist and her six month old baby in the stroller, sipping her iced Caffe Mocha. As the clerk hands me my coffee, I notice a Kahr Nine on her waist and as I turn an exit the store, I see a guy at the pay phone who really never saw a movie clique he didn't like or heard of the word overkill and has two bandeleers of ammo across his chest and a nicely worn, 3rd gen Colt Single Action at his hip in a very detailed movie style old west holster. Kinda cool actually.


I didn't just make this up. This was a scene I came across as I orderd my mid day coffee in Phoenix one afternoon a few years back. I felt; oddly enough, safe and secure. No humans or animals were shot or killed in the recounting of this recollection.


Ok, Ok, Ok, the three gals with the M4s, were a fantasy. But the rest is what actually happened. I would have really liked the three girls with the M4s to have been there too but you can't have everything.


What I thought was really kinda cool was that two of the three people at that location who were carrying were women. Neat. Safe too.


When we are barred from defending ourselves, we are at the mercy of the predators out there who love un-armed people.


An impediment to my right to self-defense is anyone who owns a fire arm and accepts limitations of any kind or buys into the “It's for the common good” argument. Anyone who owns a firearm and thinks any other issue is more important. Anyone who owns a firearm and doesn't vote for the gun side of any issue. These people are; plain and simple, bloomin' idiots.


An impediment is anyone who accepts being disarmed for the officers safety or because it makes anyone feel uncomfortable. These liberal nut-jobs need a wakeup call.


Jeeeeezzzzz! This issue really gets under my skin. There are no gray areas, No other opinions. No nothing. The Second Amendment reads; A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


This one burns me. Those of you who are "O.K." with "paying" for a right or being "allowed" to exercise a right that is neither given nor issued nor controlled, need to get a bigger set of cajoles because you are playing right into their hands. What you speak, the ka ka that pours out of your pie hole is the reality you experience.

I understand that you might be grateful. . . . but for what exactly? That your master has given you a bread crumb? That you are allowed to exercise a right that you do not need permission to exercise? Get it straight, when you talk like that in a public forum, all you are doing is telling others that you'll put up with just about anything. That you will be owned. That in reality, you don't stand with the rest of us. Don't mean to poop in your cheerios but I am just amazed that people don't get it.

If we let this stand, It makes it that much easier for them to "infringe" further and further until, they accomplish their goals. For example, machine guns and silencers are not illegal, just taxed out of the realm of the average guy. This was accomplished by fear mongering among politicians in order to accomplish their ends. So, if machine guns are so bad, why just tax them? Why not ban them outright.

If we continue to allow the government to convince us that what they are doing is for our own good and we don't take a stand, we don't stand a chance. We get what we deserve.

We are in this situation because we allowed this to happen. Not just this year but for the last 150 years. The bad guys, Banksters, union thugs and politicians have kept us down for as long as time has existed. We don't own anything, either the bank owns it or we are paying taxes/rent to the feds. What happens if you don't pay your property tax? That was a rhetorical question. don't even bother to answer.

Unions are in the same boat. The money got to be to big and they are corrupt. Pay your dues and for what. Still got a job? Not for long. Unions are the same as government. They want you to think they are protecting you but all they are doing is taking your money and putting it in their own pockets. Look at the high life styles of the rich and deep union pockets.

We have allowed our very country to be taken from us out of fear. Ben Franklin had something to say about that.

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759


GW rammed the Patriot Act through congress and senate faster than Obysmal did his damage. The question I have is how did they come up with these acts or bills that were several hundred even thousands of pages long. Out of thin air? I don't think so. Preexisting.

These guys are working together against us. They are bigger than big business. They are the business. They are the banks, the oil, the water, the land, the buildings, etc. and now they own your children's children's children and perhaps further down the line. It is just like the cycle of abuse. Sooner or later the cycle must be broken.


Perhaps you were not impeded by these roadblocks but others have. I know it seems innocuous enough on the face of the law but to be controlled in any way impedes my right to carry. I don't care what lame brained, Orwellianly twisted logic or fear tactic they choose to use or whatever comes into play. If they really want to stop the killing in the streets, they need to ban cars and ALCOHAL. Oh yeah, they tried that one once. Seems I remember it didn't work out so well accept for Joe Kennedy and Al Capone.

Hey, here's an idea, why not ban the bad guys. Oh yeah that would be self incriminating for them that's in office.

Yup, they would know exactly which Amendment to use here, faster than you can say the Fifth and whether it was enumerated for just the militia or as an individual right.

Yup!

Making any law, or requirement for gun carry or ownership is an impediment. Period. The paperwork that must be filled out on purchase at a gun shop is an impediment. Carry in vehicle laws are an impediment. No carry in Federal buildings is an impediment. No gun zones (open season on occupants zones) are an impediment.

We freak out in this country when more than a few get killed in a hail of bullets, while in the rest of the world, it would not hardly raise an eyebrow. 40 killed in bombing in Iraq. Cars burned by Muslims in France. Bomb goes off in crowded market in Israel many dead and wounded.

I would much prefer walking into a coffee shop or what ever and standing in line for my coffee, black no sugar, behind three young women ordering their Cafe Moca Latte' Espresso macchiatos, each one with a Colt M4 Carbine strapped across their backs.

Take a thoughtful moment here.

At the table to my right, a new mom with a Glock at the waist and her six month old baby in the stroller, sipping her iced Caffe Mocha. As the clerk hands me my coffee, I notice a Kahr Nine on her waist and as I turn an exit the store, I see a guy at the pay phone who really never saw a movie clique he didn't like and never heard of the word overkill and has two bandeleers of ammo across his chest and a nicely worn, 3rd gen Colt Single Action at his hip in a very detailed movie style old west holster. Kinda cool actually.

I didn't just make this up. This was a scene I came across as I orderd my mid day coffee in Phoenix one afternoon a few years back. I felt; oddly enough, safe and secure. No humans or animals were shot or killed in the recounting of this recollection. Ok, Ok, Ok, the three gals with the M4s, were a fantasy. But the rest is what actually happened. I would have really liked the three girls with the M4s to have been there too but you can't have everything.

What I thought was really kinda cool was that two of the three people at that location who were carrying were women. Neat. Safe too.

When we are barred from defending ourselves, we are at the mercy of the predators out there who love un-armed people.

An impediment to my right to self-defense is anyone who owns a fire arm and accepts limitations of any kind or buys into the “It's for the common good” argument and if I hear the word "sensible" attached to another idiots blather about another gun law I will puke on the spot. Anyone who owns a firearm and thinks any other issue is more important. Anyone who owns a firearm and doesn't vote for the gun side of any issue. These people are; plain and simple, bloomin' idiots. A waste of good skin. They infringe.

An impediment is anyone who accepts being disarmed for the officers safety or because it makes anyone feel uncomfortable. These liberal nut-jobs need a wakeup call.

Jeeeeezzzzz! This issue really gets under my skin. There are no gray areas, No other opinions. No nothing.

The Fourteenth Amendment reads; No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The Second Amendment reads; A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Both bear repeating. . . . often.

Monday, August 24, 2009

RACIST!!!

So now the co-opted media, Obysmals lap dogs, have the audacity, the gall to refer to me as “White” in an inference that I am somehow separate or different from black or Asian or Native American or Hispanic Americans who also disagree with this bill, in a THINLY veiled attempt to call me RACIST. We are all Americans and we all hate Obamacare and the rest of the Socialist/Marxist/fascist agenda being forced down our throats.

This pisses me off. Just because I don't agree with the narcissist in chief; at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, does not make me a racist. I have never referred to Obysmal as black or mulatto or colored or . . . . well we all know where this ends up and it is impolite. To say the least. And besides, I thought he was white, nice tan.

I don't agree with anything he has proposed or enacted against the Constitution of the United States of America. I just flat out don't agree with him or his appointees from Goldman Sachs (World Bank) or any of the terrorist networks he pulled aids and appointees from. Rashid Khalidi, William Ayers etc. I say etc. because if you know these guys, then who else do you know because you know these guys. I won't even get into his underworld (dark political and other) connections.

When the media enters into collusion with Obysmal concerning race in politics, this is a lot like the pot calling the kettle black.

Clamoring to call red blooded Americans of all races, colors and creeds. . . . racist, I have to wonder if it isn't the media; in fact, that is racist. I reckon this is brought on by . . . . oh, say. . . a general revolt of the populace against an incredibly BAD, BAD, BAD, health-care bill. The media went along with the whole shebang, hook, line and sinker and in a sad attempt to marginalize you and me, the American Public, they; in fact, have marginalized themselves.

The media has become a non-entity as more and more Americans have realized the media are in cahoots with the Obysmal and now relie on bloggers and online news for the real scoop. Here is a prime example; A headline of today's MercuryNews.com boldly reads, "White Anger Fueling Health Care Debate".

Of course, who can blame them with Nancy Peloser calling You and me, Americans, Un-American because we have the Audacity to what??? Exercise our First Amendment rights of course.

They are scared, canceling town hall meetings, running and hiding. They wish we would all disappear. Well we are here and here to stay but I can not say the same for them. These law makers have elections coming up and that is what they are most afraid of.

Personally, I don't believe an election will make one bit of difference in a system that has been festering for a few hundred years. They are entrenched in the legislative, judicial, and administrative branches of government in the USA. How can we trust any of them. Or for that matter the next bunch of thieves.

You want to change things, then change things. Make a difference. Too much power, too much money, to many benefits at the tax payer's expense. It is time to step back and re-evaluate the value of the system we have and look at what it has really done too and not for us.

This is a system out of control. So far beyond that people can't even get a grasp. Anyone who still stands with Obysmal does so because they have their hand in the cookie jar. No other reason. They stand to benefit greatly or they would no sooner be a part of this then I would. Actually, there are some people who can not even wrap their heads around numbers like trillions. Those are numbers we use to use to mean a whole bunch, like gazillion or some such.

Well, no more. These are real numbers and we are really so far in debt we will never be able to dig out. So far the number tallies to about 520,000 per American household. Is this our debt now? Do you agree to pay your $520,000 dollars. . . . in a timely manner? How about it?

So. . . How's that hopey, changey thing workin' out for you now

Saturday, August 22, 2009

Lockerbie bomber freed

270


270 people were murdered in cold blood in the 1988 Lockerbie airliner bombing.

There was nothing compassionate about their inglorious deaths. So what in the name of all that is Holy are they thinking. Releasing this animal to his home country to be received like royalty and hugged by Kadafi himself. Unusal physical closeness by kadafi, reserved for great heros of the realm or long lost brothers in arms.

I have a few questions.

Number one with a bullet. . . What in the Holy Hell is wrong these people in Scotland and the UK. (This includes England, Wales and Northern Ireland too)

Perhaps the most egregious slap in the face of the victims of these tragic murders (270), their relatives and the American people have received in my memory.

Number two. . . Who in the hell benefits from this.

This just gets better and better. Click here and here for The answer to that question. Public and at the governmental administration level.


These people are so arrogant and sure that the sheeple are neutered and blind to that which is now going on right in front of us.

We The People.

This is tyranny. Governments doing deals behind closed doors, not for the greater good but for dollar bills. It is no longer just rogue officials but whole governments. Governments that once had honor and pride. No more.

Now, nothing more than street thugs doing business on street corners and back alleyways.

Tyranny has always had an answer.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Barney Frank Once Again Shows Us Why He Is Irrelevant. . . .

With the spin-meisters working double time on Barney's Town Hall meet, I am calling Bull Shit. Fake Nazi lady and Barney thinks acting like a bully is good politics. Barney is looking more like an inconsiderate ass than a brave and bold politician. You work FOR these people Barney.

You may have survived coming out of the closet to let us all know you're as gay as they come, fine. Believe me, your political career will not survive the health-care bill.

This is a surprise, but even people in the People's Republic of Massachusetts are scared and/or angry about Obysmal-care.

You already have two strikes against you. Number one, you're from the dumbest state in the Union, I've checked, no other state; over the last 40 years, has elected a drunk, murdering, cowardly ass, false bravado and all, to the United States Senate and inappropriately lauded him with honors and praise as if Chappaquiddick never happened. I won't even mention Kerry, oops I did. Here's a guy who is right up there with Jane Fonda/traitor! Kerry, I don't even know how you can show your face to a veteran.

And since I mentioned this unrepentant traitor, Oh Jane, you know that little twisted voice in your head that says what you did was brave or true, well it lied to you. You are a traitor and because of your notoriety, you skated. Skating is way different than being right. Skating is a cowardly way of never owning up to the horrible things you did and said.

You're in good company though with the likes of Kennedy, Kerry and the rest.

Naughty Massachusetts.

Number two, Single Payer Health-care in Scandinavian countries; as it turns out, is flat out running out of other peoples money! Scandinavian health-care is struggling with workers/employee needs/strikes and with the avalanche of legal and illegals who have migrated to the FREE health care. The new immigrants have overwhelmed the system. Further complications of the Muslim illegal and legal immigrants are a significantly increased occurrence of rape and importation of illegal automatic weapons and RPGs and explosives. Don't even point North either. Not with the recent admissions by Canadian administrators that their health-care system is in Barney. . . . Rubble. . . . Trouble!!! Big Bad Trouble! OMG what'll we do, Trouble. You and your ilk want to impose that kind of fiscal irresponsibility on us.

(for you liberal clowns out there who are so dumb you don't know the difference between a legal semi automatic and an automatic weapon, the auto requires you to simply squeeze the trigger and hold to empty a magazine. A semi auto requires a single trigger pull for every shot. Morons!)

So all in all, your Town-hall meet was an unqualified failure. You lost points and you and the rest of your liberal cronies will be on the street in 2010. Enough is enough.




Capitol Hill (CNSNews.com)
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer


“Unfortunately for the president, history and the experience of other countries contradict his words,” Smith said. “European nations, as well as Canada, have all experienced frustrations with a single-payer system. A single-payer system has resulted in care rationing, where particularly the elderly don’t get the care they need. It has resulted in lengthy waits for necessary medical procedures, and it is not saving the money that was being claimed.”


Want to know more? Click here.

Hillary is. . . Well. . .Superfluous


Hillary, Hillary, where the heck art thou?

Well, kids, the answer to that one brings a smile to my face. NOWHERE! That's where. This is probably the most blatant, punishing slap in the face that any Secretary of State has ever received, EVER!

Cool. Nice to see that karma is alive and well and operating with smooth efficiency. No wonder she's mad as a hatter. This is the most public dressing down I have ever seen of such a high level official in the American Government. Well deserved after handing near a billion dollars over to Hamas. Lest yea all forget that slap in all American's faces.

The worst of it is that it is her "husband" , and I use that term only as a label for wont of a better term. She just has to be seething over this. Kinda makes her superfluous, excess, pointless, purposeless, redundant, senseless, surplus, wasted, unnecessary, unneeded, worthless. That last word says it all for me.


Hillary Clinton on Sidelines as Diplomacy With Rogue Nations Evolves

FOXNews - ‎29 minutes ago‎


Obysmal's Now Famous Joker Poster May Land Kid in Jail!?!

Yup, this poster right here! Printed on regular old printer paper. But I bet it pissed off the narcissist in cheat so much that he gave an under the table order.
Fry the kid!



What a crock of. . . well you know just what I mean here. This kid is being made an example of by the Omysmal's storm troopers. Get this, the kid glued the posters to a few mail boxes and so the Postal workers used scrappers and sharp objects to clean it off instead of going down to the local hardware store or Walley World and buying a $2.99 bottle of Goo Gone or even 'ole WD40 works in a pinch.

No, they scrap until the paint is gone and then the boxes have to be . . . this is good. . . sanded, primed and painted. For gosh sakes, come on now. These people have been behind the counter at the post office for way to long. Give me a break!


Felony Vandalism Charges Possible in Obama Joker ...

Buffett: Economy recovering, debt a threat

Warren Buffett's "Greenback Effect" Warning = Buy Stocks Now CNBC


This guy has been drinking way to much Kool-Aid!


This article is a doozey and

Warren Buffett: Economy Has 'Fallen Off a Cliff'

Now everything is all better and Government Sachs is a
good bet? Well sure it is. It is being propped up
by the good 'ole USA! Print mo money, spend mo money. This
guy is an astute businessman but he is a dyed in the wool
kool-aid drinker and I just want to know; what does he think
he is doing here?

By the way, the same business model that works for you and me
on a day to day basis, is what is supposed to be working
for the country as a whole and big business.

In other words, don't risk it all, don't put all your eggs
in one basket or you're asking for mucho trouble. Don't
spend more than you make. Unless of course your Epson
printer is linked to the US Mint. Oh Yeah, now that would
be nice.

So when at the beginning of the month 'ole Warren says
we're tanked (in so many words with caveats here and
there) and then at the end of the month he says it's a
grand 'ole stock market and all is rosey, I just really
want to know what he is drinking, or just what the heck
does he think he is doing here. . . .really?

Hey, Maybe it's just my skewed view of things.

Warren Buffett's Berkshire Betting $5 Billion on Goldman



Conservatives Outnumber Liberals in All 50 States

What a surprise. Really?

Check it out here and here.
Ronald Regan 1961 speech against socialized medicine

President Reagan was right about this! He is spinning in his grave at this very moment. Socialism. . . hell yeah, worked out so well for everyone else who's tried it that they gave up and incorporated good 'ole capitalism into their politics or dumped socialism altogether in favor of Capitalism.

I think I'll vote for a dead president in the next election, better by far than the alternative.

Ronald Reagan on Universal Healthcare




Glozell. . . .

This is hi-larious, I don't care who you are.

Oprah and Obama! I Oh No... Part 2.. GloZell


Tuesday, August 18, 2009

GET BEHIND GLENN BECK NOW!!!

Click the link.



The Color of Lies! Obysmals Nazi group attempts to stifle 1st Amendment with Lies, Damn lies, and fiction!!!

Sargento can whine all they want about Their Mid-Western roots but I have a news flash for them. Leave Glenn Beck, lose my business and so far, everyone I have spoken with concerning this issue too.

I will buy generic or home grown before I buy any Sargento product again. If you are arrogant enough to believe there will not be consequences for supporting the suppression of our 1st Amendment rights, just watch the losses add up. You messed with the wrong group of people here.

These people need to hear your wrath in huge numbers. Be polite but to the point. Don't mess with my rights. Don't use the money we spent on your products to rob us, stifle us or gag us. Just say no to liars, damn liars and deceivers.

The Turncoat List:
These companies have pulled their ads in response to the
lies of extremists...

Sargento- Cheese Worst Company Nominee
GEICO- Worst Company Nominee
Progressive Insurance
State Farm
Men's Wearhouse
S.C. Johnson
Procter & Gamble
Lawyers.com

Radio Shack-
Please NOT magicJack - good people
You can buy it at Walgreens instead
Healthy Choice- (ConAgra)
Ally Bank
Plavix- (Sanofi-Aventis)
Travelocity
Broadview Security- New Turncoat


As frosting on the cake, Glenns numbers have never been higher.

For Everyone Who Thinks We're Gonna Be OK.

Read this article in it's entirety here.


Will It All Come Tumbling Down?

Let's juxtapose two stories. First, from Bloomberg:

Aug. 14 (Bloomberg) -- More than 150 publicly traded U.S. lenders own nonperforming loans that equal 5 percent or more of their holdings, a level that former regulators say can wipe out a bank’s equity and threaten its survival.

Ok. Now how about this one?

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Delinquency rates for loans and leases at U.S. banks increased to a record 6.49% in the second quarter from 5.58% in the first quarter, the Federal Reserve announced Monday.

So let me see if I get this right.

At 5% of non-performing loans a bank is at risk of being insolvent.

But the entire banking system in The United States had its non-performing loan ratio increase from 5.58% in the first quarter to 6.49% in the second, a record, and higher than the 5% level at which the survival of a bank(ing system) is threatened with collapse.Hmmmm.... So should we take from this that the entire US Banking System is about to collapse?


This much we know for certain - YOU'RE BEING SCREWED! - systematically - to cover the sins of these banksters who made loans to people who they had no reason to believe could pay:

Being in debt is about to get a lot more expensive for millions of Americans. Credit card issuers have been rushing to raise rates in advance of this Thursday, when the first provisions of the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act (CARD) will go into effect, with other protections starting in February 2010.

Right. Including those who are good credit risks.

Certainly this gentleman is a threat - to a government that would run roughshod over people and ignore The Constitution and the lawful limits to its power, to a corporatist culture that has become imbued with fraud, deceit and lies, and to the heathens in Washington DC, all of them, who have knowingly and willfully cooperated with the lawless behavior of those who not only got us into this mess but refuse to this very day to put a stop to it.

We will come to the end of this rope, and before we do we had better flush the system of these shysters and con artists or our economy will disassemble itself in a spectacle far worse than what you saw last fall and into March of this year.

Of that I am certain.

16% of our working-age population is unemployed but looking for work. Nearly 30% of people 16 to 19 years of age are out of work but desire a job.

Or will we witness America turn to something more destructive - events that I'm hearing about more and more - civil unrest?

I fear for my nation and her future.

I fear we have too few men like that gentleman in Arizona and too many muggers in Lakeview.

We live in a nation where our government's founding documents formally recognize the supremacy not of the government, but of the people. Where government exists only by the consent of the governed.

Not of, by and for the corporation, but of the individual.

Not by the rule of man, but the rule of law.

But those are just words on parchment, over 225 years old.

Does the will and the desire to bring those words to life still exist? To render them something more than dry, old, cracked ink?

233 years ago there was.

Does it still exist in America today?



This guy gets it!

NURSES REFUSE SWINE FLU SHOT!!!


Source: Daily Mail UK 
 
A third of nurses will refuse to have the swine flu jab because of concerns over its safety  

 
So,  fully 1/3 third of all nurses responding to a poll in a nursing magazine would refuse to get the vaccine citing the scary and well known aspects of the vaccine.   
 
Another third responded with maybe.    Hmmmmm? 
 
This could be a bit of a sticky wicket.    More and more people around the world are gauging their trusted governments Orwellian Double Speak on this topic and coming up with utter disbelief.   Some of the illnesses and side effects linked to this vaccine would curdle your blood.  In fact, blood curdling is one of the side effects.   Kidding,  kidding but there are serious side effects that need to be weighed before you decide to believe Obysmal and his gang.    
 
Fear mongering at it's best and of course, this is a superb wealth building technique.   Literally billions will be paid to those companies engaged in Swine Flue Vaccine production.   H1N1  is a money maker,  pure and simple for the pharmaceutical companies.    In years past,  most notably 1976,   claims in excess of $1 billion dollars had been filed by victims claiming  paralysis from the vaccine. The vaccine was also blamed for 25 deaths. 
 
Of greater concern, a couple of hundred who received the vaccine developed horribly crippling Guillain-BarrĂ© Syndrome after they were jabbed with the swine flu vaccine. Many,  even healthy teens and young adults were stricken with paralysis.    Paraplegics for the rest of their lives.    
 
So,  as I say,  think carefully, weigh the pluses and minuses.    Kinda hard to spend your settlement if they were wrong and you cannot use your arms or legs.   More risk than I am willing to take.   If AKA wants to push this issue,  it may be lighting the  fuse that brings “Real Change”.    
 
Let's all be careful out there.    

Monday, August 17, 2009

This Is a Must See!!!

WHAT IF?. . . .

I have a question, why don't we just boycott all liberals. Period. If they own a business, we'll just boycott 'em. That ought to teach 'em a good lesson. Just buy guns, ammo, and survival supplies. Be careful though, some of those survivalist's are run by liberals. Mainly from Colorado but still.

I would avoid most florists, I think barber shops are probably OK but not beauty parlors or nail shops. How bout it ladies, any conservative beauticians cosmologists out there? Sadly, I suspect all lingerie stores are right out with boutiques too.

I think most food co-ops are right off the page. Hey, maybe Slim Jims and Beef Jerky are OK. I don't think they have stand alone stores though, dang! Hardware stores are probably a good bet but not in San Francisco or Colorado.

I really think that if we start boycotting to try to shut someone up, we will have nothing left to buy. Now there's a savings for ya.

What this boycott stands for is a sitting civil servant wielding power through subterfuge and mis-direction. For instance, why is ACORN still in business and not in jail. That would be all of ya'all involved in that nasty little piece of; propoganda spewing, vote buying, under the table dealing, crapola.

That hopey changey thingy ain't workin' out to good is it? Nope, not as planned at all, is it? Something about Americans all having been issued Bull Shit Detectors. Some of us anyhoo.

We are comin' for ya'all in 2010, it's started already. That's not a light at the end of the tunnel, AKA, nope, no sirree. That thar is a locomotive bearing right down on you. A locomotive filled with the "Angry Mob", the "Un-Americans", And the "Troublemakers"! We are comin' to take our White House BACK! Yes sir! That's what I'm Talkin' 'bout!

Sounds Kinda Fishy To Me. . . .

It was. . . um. . . ah. . . the advocacy groups. Yeah, yeah, that's it. Oh, you mean the advocacy groups that have no access to the White House computers? Are those the advocacy groups you're talking about?

Please explain just who keyed in the email addresses. Is this a training issue now? Hmmmmm?

Sounds kinda fishy to me.

I think the White House thinks it can do what ever it pleases and folks will just say it's those darn troublemakers.
From RedState.com


So, the White House *was* just signing people up without their permission.


(Via Hot Air Headlines) I understand that it’s probably legally wise for the White House to assign responsibility for Axelrod’s health care spamming to all those evil, evil advocacy organizations, but really:

“We are implementing measures to make subscribing to emails clearer, including preventing advocacy organizations from signing people up to our lists without their permission when they deliver petition signatures and other messages on individual’s behalf.”

If the petitions were only presented in hardcopy form, somebody had to enter those email addresses into the system. If the organizations in question had provided a digital list of email addresses, somebody had to add them to the White House’s distribution list. If the organizations in question had signed up those email addresses one at a time, somebody on the White House Staff needs to explain why he or she didn’t even set up a please-click-to-confirm-your-registration system.

Somebody with a name.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to Moe Lane.




I sure hope Ole' Dave Axelrod, the White House Pretend Oops, I mean Press Secretary, Looks into this because at the very least it points to a serious security leak in the machine, right? Or clumsiness, or stuuuuuuuuuuupid behavior on the part of trusted employees, Right?

Really, why not just man up and admit that you are a lying, cheating, illegal alien with ties to the most corrupt and evil political system in the country, AKA. Why the good people of Chicago haven't run the Daley's and Blagojevich's out of town on a rail is beyond me and you're tied to them at the hip.

While I'm there, What's the juice on this "I only met David Blagojevich once crap? With all these pics of you and he practically dating, you'd think you'd remember. Maybe he was using an alias too!

That they actually elected another Daley to office in Chicago is beyond belief. Following in the footsteps of his dad and Al Capone and the like. Kinda reminds me of the State of Massachusetts and their propensity to elect drunkards and murderers to office. For 47 years. Jesus Christ!

If there is a failing of the Democratic process, This is it. Hell, we've got the Long Legged Mack Daddy in the White House, more commonly known as AKA or Barry.

People, people, people, figure it out, Bill Gates is not going to pay for all this crap, it is you. All you mindless zombies who said "Yes We Can" voted for someone who said "With Their Money".

Oldest trick in the book. Redistributing the wealth worked so well for the Russians that Stalin killed millions of them and redistributed the wealth you know where; "Change" is not a pretty or an easy thing and it is costly.

Fascism is never a good thing and to hand over the reigns of this grand country to a narcissist is tantamount to getting what you deserve. Oh and just why is it that in every dictatorship, fascist, communist, socialist regime I have ever heard of, the grand and almighty leaders live like kings while their people starve, Anybody got a neat answer for that little tidbit?

Whining, sniveling little crybabies.

Want to know more? Click here.

Sunday, August 16, 2009

The Upside. . . .

The upside to this boycott is that conservatives (actually a redneck truth be told) can now avail themselves of Whole Foods without running into those smelly hippy types that are by now way past that cool look. This guy said his peace and people want to coerce him to change his tune or scare the bejesus out of the rest of the Liberal business world.

Maybe He should look into a lawsuit against the Obysmal group that started all this. Maybe the RICO Statutes could be used. Strong arming is strong arming no matter who you are. This action in particular is especially insidious because it is lauded by both media and politicos as a way to shut him and others up and to give it to em. Maybe even a civil rights violation here. I suspect it is illegal to attempt, conspire to prevent someone from using the first amendment.

I don't know, wishful thinking I guess. As it turns out, John's company released an apology to any and all who would listen or who's delicate sensibilities were some how injured by trying to say that John was just speaking his own mind and not that of corporate or in fact, the employees.

Whoa Nelly! John is; after all, in favor of heath care reform, just not Obysmal's Health Care Reform. Well, Well, Well. The all mighty dollar has spoken. It really was a grand moment to see that not all Libs drank the Kool-Aid. Cool. . . . .

Saturday, August 15, 2009

Obama’s “Brownshirts” Boycott Whole Foods This Time

This is good stuff

Read the full story here: Alamo City Pundit



JohnMackeyA major controversy is brewing on the cultural left. John Mackey, Founder & CEO of Whole Foods Grocery Store chain, a darling of cultural liberals from Vermont to Seattle to the Bay Area, has come out strongly against Obama Care. In an editorial today in the Wall Street Journal Mackey wrote, in “The Whole Foods Alternative to Obama Care”:

With a projected $1.8 trillion deficit for 2009, several trillions more in deficits projected over the next decade, and with both Medicare and Social Security entitlement spending about to ratchet up several notches over the next 15 years as Baby Boomers become eligible for both, we are rapidly running out of other people’s money. These deficits are simply not sustainable. They are either going to result in unprecedented new taxes and inflation, or they will bankrupt us.

Mackey even had the audacity to quote one of the most hated figures among liberals:

“The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” — Lady Margaret Thatcher

ABC News reports that Mackey’s pro-free market comments have sparked a boycott.



Babalu Blog adds what has to be the definitive commentary to the subject:

I am looking forward to this boycott and I sincerely hope it begins soon and lasts for a very long time. If I never have to stand in line behind another scruffily dressed, dread-locked, protein deficient skinny hippie chick with hairy armpits and a distinctive odor, it would be too soon.

For much more, click here.

Long Legged Mack Daddy


click the pic.

First time I've heard this fellow. Hmmmmm?






mack daddy: pimp, player, mack, playa, hustler, mac daddy mac, macker, loser, don juan, baller, stud, makker, game, daddy, casanova, boss, bitches, balla, whore, thug, sugar daddy, sluts, slut, sexy, pimping, pimps, mack, truck, macking, mackdaddy, hustla, hot, hoes, ho, gigalo, gangster, gangsta, don dada, bling, asshole.

The Kings New Clothes . . . .

This is for all those who think the kings clothes are just fine and getting better all the time.


Excerpt from: Econospeak,
The Chinese have been "bailing out the dollar" since sometime way back in the 1990s. What else is new? And actually their growth is now accelerating, not declining, as is India's and Brazil's. That is part of the more optimistic story.

"Real unemployment" has always been higher than official. In case you did not notice, the official rate just dropped this past month, although I am fully aware that this was due to discouraged workers and it will probably rise some more. I expect it to go above 10% before it is all over, but it might not actually break the 10.8% at the worst point in 1982.




I don't know where you get your info or what research you've done but i can't see how these conclusions square with reality.

The falling dollar, the Chinese bailing out of the dollar and buying every bit of gold and silver as well as any other bullion they can get their hands on and of course speaking of China, they are looking at unemployment in the double digits too because of world wide recession and the depression here. And another thing, their GDP would look like a ski slope if not for very creative accounting practices.

The coming avalanche of mortgage defaults in 2010 (millions of loans.) That should be fun to watch. How do you think that will affect spending by the general public.

The outright lies concerning the unemployment situation. Real unemployment at 17% and about to take another big jump. Some prognosticators say it won't stop till it hits 30-40% . Just how do you think that will set with the GDP.

The retail shocker, cash for clunkers in exchange for any other spending by the public. Oops! People bought cars and stopped buying anything else. Why? Cause they are broke! Belly up! The rapidly decreasing consumer spending and utter and complete lack of confidence in this government should make for some interesting reading in the near future.

This could put a frown on your face to. . . .

$516 Trillion dollars in derivatives? The infamous "Ticking Time Bomb"? If I ignore my debts long enough, do they just go away?


This could go on and on but I think you get the picture and it ain't purddy!!!


The Chinese have been loving the dollar for many years but no more. They are the largest stockholder in US debt. Period. Just passed Japan. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 800 billion. The deal with India and Brazil looks like diversification but is actually transfer of funds out of US bonds and into hard assets.

China has it's own problems with severe unemployment and social unrest due in whole to the crashing world economy and their number one consumer going off the map. These are tumultuous times we live in.

They are scared. It is not business as usual. They are dumping dollars as fast as they can into hard assets and gold. Since 2002 the dollar as lost over 30% and it looks grim for anyone holding them. Maybe if they just print some more and spend more it will be OK.

China is looking hard at other markets for it's goods. The US has been a literal gold mine for China's industrial boom but that is about to go bust unless we get a handle on the debt we are now saddled with.

The worst of it is that the US is tied at the waist to China. We have never been so intertwined with one country. this is dangerous..

Here we have a situation where another country, an old nemesis actually, owns the lions share of the US. Japan is second in line.

That is power of a sort. But really, it is perhaps an even larger problem for the Chinese who are not happy with their leaders for sinking so much of Chinese capital into one pot. Billions have been lost and I know the leadership is looking long term but there is infighting on the home front as to the wisdom of having all of your eggs in one basket.

That is why there is both gnashing of teeth and rattling of sabers in China today. There are factions in China that understand the precarious position their leadership has put them in. Just as there are those who see this as a house of cards in this country.

Having a Happy face is all well and good but really, you can smile and live in the real world too.

As for unemployment going above ten percent, Ha! You were right. It's way beyond that now and more and more folks who live in the real world and not Alice's know it. The curve for this depression is still heading straight down and will probably not come back up for air till 2013. Perhaps by 2014 it will rise to an equivalent level of a year ago.

Housing needs people who are making money, saving money and spending money! Oh, they better have perfect credit too, to start climbing out of this morass. The housing market will not have them for many years. They are on unemployment and it will soon be gone.


With Colonials death this week and the fire sale merger with BB&T, perhaps 150 other banks teetering or already totered we have still more rosy news from the financial industry. Sure there was a merger but a loan will be 10 times harder to get now. Still more to come and as long as the banking industry as a whole continues to lie, cheat and steal by fraud, there will be more bank closures.


You can't keep hiding loses to stay open without some severe consequences. In the past, folks went to jail for this kind of fraud. We call it cooking the books.


The reason I present this view is that I believe it is irresponsible for anyone to paint a rosy picture on a rotten apple. This deluded view of recovery is just a mask on "Same old, same old" and may lead others astray who actually still trust their banks or government with their much needed and hard earned cash. Happy smiley faces are great on a greeting card but not when you're arrogantly leading others to the slaughter.

Folks really need to prepare for a bit of a hard time ahead. I think that is really the only prudent and responsible advice.


For those of you who think the Kings clothes are bright and beautiful, keep smiling.

Friday, August 14, 2009

Obama Official Linked to Racially Charged Boycott of Glenn Beck

Human Events and RedState excerpts



This just in:

UPDATED: Obama Official Linked
to Racially Charged
Boycott of Glenn Beck

A racially charged activist group called “Color of Change” founded by Van Jones, a special advisor to the Obama Administration, is trying to silence popular radio and Fox News personality Glenn Beck by calling for a boycott of Beck’s TV advertisers.

On July 28th, Beck made a comment on the Fox & Friends morning show about Obama’s reaction to the arrest of Dr. Henry Louis Gates Jr. During the discussion of “Professor-Gate,” Beck connected the President’s past association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright to Obama’s comment that Cambridge police officer, Sgt. James Crowley, acted stupidly. Though Beck acknowledged most of the Obama administration is in fact white, he concluded that the President’s world experience made him a “racist.”

Now “Color of Change” has bullied at least five of Beck’s big advertisers -- SC Johnson, Progressive Insurance, Geico, Procter & Gamble and Nexus Lexis -- to pull their ads from Beck’s national cable program. Jones, the founder of “Color of Change,” was named Special Advisor for Green Jobs at the White House Council on Environmental Quality -- a key administrative post -- this past March.

Reports also claim that addition companies; Mens Wearhouse, Sargento, and State Farm Insurance will be excluding their ads from any rotation during Becks time slot. HUMAN EVENTS contacted Mens Wearhouse, Sargento, and State Farm to confirm these reports, our calls have not yet been returned.


SC Johnson:
Fisk Johnson Chairman & CEO
Phone: (262)260-2000

Petrell Ozbay
Senior Global Public Affairs Manager
Phone: (262) 260-2114
pmozbay@scj.com

Progressive Insurance:
Glenn Renwick, President & CEO- (440)461-5000

Linda Harris, Advertising & Sponsorships
Linda_J._Harris@progressive.com

Geico:
Tony Nicely
Chairman, President & CEO, Insurance Operations
E-mail: tnicely@geico.com
(301) 986-2462

Chris Tasher, GEICO Media Relations
301-986-3271
ctasher@geico.com




Want to know more? Click here and here.

My take:

If Glen Beck was lying, no one would give a good garsh darn. He would be a non-Issue.

I have posted these companies and I am calling for a boycott. Do what you want, me, I am spending my money where it will do the most good. Period.

By the way, any of you whiners out there crying about how hard it is to avoid these commie, socialist, fascist companies, you have a com-pute-r. Use it! Research your shopping list. Not hard at all.

My wife has used Tide for ever and after I told her about this she said she would wash the clothes on a rock at the river before she bought another bottle of Tide. I told her I'll get the camera, she pinched me, hard. Ouch! Darn mouth.

I will wrap my wounds with toilet paper before I buy another Band-Aid from SC Johnson. Edit: SC Johnson claims it has been erroneously listed and targeted. We'll see.

SC Johnson, Progressive Insurance, Geico, Procter & Gamble and Nexus Lexis

These Major extremist leftist players are so rich, they only want what they want.

Warren Buffett, Owner Of GEICO, Fruit of the Loom, Benjamin Moore, Dairy Queen & More
Peter Lewis, Owner of Progressive Insurance.

It appears that these companies are using their power ($$$$$$$$$$$$$$$) at the behest of an Obysmal drone ( Obama’s Green Jobs Czar, the convicted felon and self-declared communist Van Jones ) to push us around to promote their agenda. This is a literal assault on you and the first amendment. And please don't be fooled, in the case of Geico and Progressive, it isn't the company. It is the owner.

George Soros would be in here too if he had any advertising on Beck.

We haven't purchased a Sara Lee or any associated product for over ten years. There are many others. If you continue to purchase from companies that stick a knife in your back, you are an idiot. (That was a rhetorical comment mainly and not meant to insult anyone but rather to point out the idiots. So if your feelings are hurt, well. . . .)

This is the same thing as the billboard companies not allowing a simple questioning of Obysmal to be placed on their boards. OK, their right but it is my right to advertise elsewhere forever.

If enough of the 80 million gun owners and several million others with like minds, i.e. Conservatives, would get off their posteriors and do more than just offer lip service, we might actually see some "CHANGE" for a change.

Make your voice heard. Dang it!

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Nail in the Coffin. . . .


House Democrats Put Nail in Health Care's Coffin

Dana Perino

- FOXNews.com

- August 11, 2009

I figured that maybe the headline writer had gotten ahead of himself, "over-wrote" the story, as we in media relations complain about sometimes. But no -- it was a direct quote -- and, with that one adjective, the House Democrats probably have sealed the bill's fate: failure.

Yesterday morning the first thing I heard was that Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressman Steny Hoyer had written in USA Today that the protesters of health care reform don't want the facts and that the protests are un-American.

I had one thought:

Oh no they didn't!

I figured that maybe the headline writer had gotten ahead of himself, "over-wrote" the story, as we in media relations complain about sometimes. But no -- it was a direct quote. And, with that one adjective, the House Democrats probably have sealed the bill's fate: failure.


We can only hope this is true! The real Un-American here is Nancy Peloser and the rest of her gang. Not only did she probably seal the fate of this bill but also the possibility of being re-elected. Ever.


Want to know more? click here and here.

US Banks Rape Americans for $38.5 Billion!

How's this for a kick in the teeth.
U.S. banks will gather a record of $38.5 billion in overdraft fees.



As the recession plummets upon us, we would hope that the government and financial services, such as banks, would do all that they can to help ease the clamor and chaos.

In 2000, 19.9 billion was collected in overdraft fees, but 9 years later such colossal numbers have nearly doubled in spite of the recession. “Overdrafts are the mother lode of all service-related charges, and they’re often the only source of capital,” said Mike Moebs, chief executive of research company Moebs Services.



And Banksters wonder why they're held in such high regard. Right up there with car saleman and Lawyers.

Want to know more? Click here.