Friday, January 25, 2013

Our Stealth Government on the March

Do you want to see this become
The entire 2013 version of gun control debate has centered on the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as is proper, but the interpretations of it have been polluted by the left throughout. Our ever guileful government has seen to that, and for nefarious reasons.

The very intent of our Founders in writing the Second Amendment -- especially in light of the recent Revolution -- was for the people to protect themselves from ever needing a second revolution. It was designed specifically for we the people to guard against the future tyranny of our own government. And yet here we stand, 237 years later, struggling to retain those that were once considered to be "inalienable rights".

Just as this administration did in Benghazi, they obfuscate the true motives of the aggressor to confuse the issue on "gun control". In Benghazi the Administration insisted for days -- after the truth was already known -- that the attack on our Embassy compound was because of a YouTube video that Muslims found offensive. (The film maker is still in a U.S. prison). The offensive film was never widely viewed by the Benghazi attackers.

Now the Administration and other Democrat politicians have taken the Sandy Hook shooting for their personal cause to champion using the same obfuscation tactics. They have managed to change the narrative of the story to suggest that assault weapons and large capacity magazines were the primary methods of murder. Further, the talking heads have convinced a large portion of the population that the Second Amendment is really about hunting. Neither notion is true.

What should come as no surprise, in actuality, is that now Senator Feinstein's proposed legislation to ban certain guns and ammunition will not apply to government officials. I would point out that the scope of "government officials" is quite broad. And that broad definition has already purchased 1.6 billion rounds of hollow point bullets, some which can penetrated concrete walls. Now they want to take guns away from the citizens. Is anyone seeing a pattern here?

Our government provided millions of guns to Mexican drug cartels in Operation Fast and Furious. They are now planning to supply Egypt with F-16 fighter jets and Abrams Tanks. Rumor has it that the operation in Benghazi was a covert plan to supply rebels with guns, a plan gone horribly awry. And they want our guns.

If this article frightens anyone, I will not apologize, I will celebrate, because people should be afraid. If fear makes people sit up and pay attention to what's going on around them, I consider that mission accomplished. The only reason government officials don't come kicking in our doors already is because they never know which house is armed, nor how heavily they might be.

Without our guns, we will be at the mercy of our government as well as all the criminals who -- as demonstrated by their very nature -- have no intention of following any law that says they can't have guns. Obama and the Democrats in Congress have long ago proved their disdain for the American people by forcing through Obamacare by any means necessary, despite our objections.

If we are left completely unarmed, what chance do you think we'll have then?

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, January 24, 2013

If Hitler Had a Hitler

Typical Tactics of Tyrants
Does anyone remember the myriad comparisons of George W. Bush to Adolph Hitler? Or perhaps the signs in Wisconsin carried by leftist union thugs -- when Scott Walker had his moment in history -- showing the Governor with the trademark mustache? Now consider the reactions to those comparisons by Bush or Walker with the apoplectic outrage of the left when one of their own is similarly disparaged.

It's all a matter of projection by the left, for when one of theirs is compared to Hitler, the truth hits too close to home. And it's also about deflection, for how can one who cares for children possibly be compared to a ruthless tyrant? So the left launches the attack first in order to easily scoff at the attempt to portray them in the same light. Childish, I know, which makes the people who allegedly "lead us" frightening people indeed. I just thought the hypocrisy was worth noting

For as much as the left referred to George W. Bush as Hitler -- and Dick Cheney as Darth Vader, of all people -- it is actually the current President and Democrats in positions of power who behave more like the former Fuhrer in their collective quest to dismantle our Second Amendment rights. And while Hitler had his Minister of Propaganda in Goebbels, Obama has the entire mainstream media, a much more effective misinformation machine than Goebbels could have ever dreamed.

I won't even delve into the conspiracy theories that the Sandy Hook Elementary school shootings have spawned, but I will explore the media's malfeasance in its reporting.

The reporting on the evening of the tragedy -- and the next day -- mentioned that Adam Lanza brought four handguns into the school. It was also reported -- in case you missed it -- that Lanza had his mother's Bushmaster AR-15 rifle, but that it was left in the car. After the initial report, however, the story morphed into Lanza spraying the school with "automatic assault weapon" fire, which our Democrat politicians ran with ad nauseam.

Who didn't hear New York Governor Andrew Cuomo shrieking, "No one needs ten bullets to kill a deer"! It was a compelling call to people who pay no attention to their rights given at the inception of our country, particularly those who live in urban areas that -- despite being riddled with crime -- have a large police presence to protect them, giving the impression that they don't need guns at all and are therefore receptive to the message of the left. (New York's Mayor Michael Bloomberg went so far as to beg the President to unilaterally scrub the Second Amendment from existence). Nor are urban dwellers generally hunters and therefore unaware that the Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting anyway.

The entire rationale used by Cuomo and his ilk was based on the false notion that an assault weapon was responsible for the Sandy Hook tragedy, while it was not. Those twenty children died by handgun wounds at the hands of a disturbed young man who was neglected by the very system the left had set into motion so many years ago; the compassionate treatment of the depraved in lieu of incarceration.

The left loves murder and mayhem because it helps promote their quest for Utopia, a world where we the people are powerless and where they get unfettered reign over us. They have lamented the Second Amendment for as long as they have been aware, and now they see the chance to eliminate it for our own good.

Hitler also professed to know what was good for Germany, and after a series of humiliating political failures, he eventually rose to the top of his party. He didn't have a potent predecessor on which to compare his enemies, though, and he still managed to rise to power and commit his mayhem. While the progressives today attempt to preemptively portray patriots like the NRA as Hitler, Hitler himself had no "Hitler" of his own with which to paint his foes as evil. He rose on his own rhetoric.

Credit Fox News Insider
Obama uses rhetoric through his teleprompter, but it stills stirs the emotions of the naive. He's also got a pen, which he uses to sign a variety of Executive Orders like the twenty three he recently signed concerning his gun control measures. If the people in America -- and more importantly our Congress -- don't wake up soon, Obama's pen could indeed prove mightier than the sword.

For those who blithely support the notion that we'd all be safer if our citizens had no guns, I caution you that if we allow that to happen, some future generations that stumble upon liberty again will have the same debate while comparing the demon not to Hitler, but to Obama.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, January 10, 2013

Why Do Politicians Hate Guns?

Dirty Little Secret
Sorry kids, the title is a trick question. The truth of the matter is that politicians love guns, so long as they're not in your hands. What our Founding Fathers knew all too well is that an armed populace was all that preserved a fragile truce between the powerful and the masses wishing nothing more than to be left alone in peace. It's a simple truth that has worked splendidly well here in the U.S. for over 200 years, much to the chagrin of the various forces who have served us in leadership. (Note the use of the word "served").

Our Founders considered the issue of gun ownership of such import that they made it the second order of the Bill of Rights, right after freedom of speech and religion. And while some on the left will argue that guns were much different in that time, I would argue that so was speech. Liberals -- or Progressives as they now wish to be called -- will say that the Founders never envisioned the weaponry we see today. If that is the basis of their argument, then why is the internet so different for speech? The Founders never imagined our wired lives, either.

Yesterday, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo gave a speech that sounded as though he was every bit as agitated as Barack Obama during a stump speech, or Adolph Hitler in the old tapes we hear to the German people. Cuomo said, "No one needs ten bullets to kill a deer"! That might be a true statement for most hunters, but it has nothing to do at all with the Second Amendment. Sadly, most people in his audience are unaware of that fact, and reacted only to his emotional rhetoric.

Self defense, our most basic right under the Constitution, sometimes requires more than ten bullets. If two people under the influence of bath salts or PCP decide to attack you, for example, five bullets each may not be enough to stop either one of them. Police can attest to the resilience of the drug-crazed.

But I'm not here to defend the right to own arms, as that right is inalienable and needs no defense. I'm here to discuss the hypocrisy and treachery of the left in their attempts at subverting our Founding document.

The Obama Administration is sending out signals that Obama is considering Executive Orders to deal with the gun issue, and while the nature of what such an order might be is anyone's guess, it must be noted that in any event, it would be unconstitutional. Of course, if no one stopped him, the matter is moot.

What's interesting is the reaction of our lapdog media, who have rushed to Obama's defense over the prospect of unilaterally banning guns. While the talking heads pooh-pooh the language Vice President has recently used, Rush Limbaugh today made an excellent point.

On his show today, Limbaugh asked this hypothetical question: "Imagine that George W. Bush, VP Dick Cheney and AG Alberto Gonzalez were floating the notion of banning abortions by executive fiat? What do you think the media reaction would be"? Very good question, indeed. For while the left uses murdered children as props for their anti-gun agenda, they stand behind Roe v. Wade as a method to murder them before they are born. The hypocrisy is too rich even for me.

But the truly scary part is that most people -- reacting in stunned horror to tragedies like the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre -- are instantly eager to facilitate the same on an even grander scale to make themselves feel better in the present. If the media did it's proper job, people would see the nightmare they willing participate in inflicting upon themselves. But the media is largely made up of public school and university products, most of which are comprised of the whims of Progressives' twisted ideals.

Perhaps these folks -- both media types and their gullible consumers -- need to read a bit of Pravda, the Russian publication. Stanislav Mishin has recently published an article titled Americans Never Give Up Your Guns, and it spells out the dangers the former Soviet Union faced when disarmed. Both Josef Stalin and Adolph Hitler fooled their people by promising to care enough for their safety to seize their weapons "for their own good", and we all remember how that worked out for the people.

While our own U.S. government is busy buying billions of rounds of hollow point bullets for a variety of agencies -- including the weather bureau and Social Security -- its front men tell the rest of us of the evils of firearms. If anyone reading this believes that your lives will be safer when only the government has enough ammunition to pump five hollow point bullets into each and every person in the country, while none of us have a method to defend ourselves, I pray for you, for you might as well be dead already.

It's time for the American people to wake from this deadly dream and think what will happen if we are all disarmed. The nuts who perpetrate crimes like the Sandy Hook massacre will still find ways to kill a bunch of people, but it would be nearly impossible for a large segment of the population to arm up fast enough to respond to a tyrannical takeover, which is precisely what the Founders meant by the Second Amendment.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, January 1, 2013

The Enigma That is Barack Obama

The Most Mysterious President
There's something about Barry, something that defies logic and mesmerizes multitudes. Once upon a time we had a press corps that was aptly compared to a pack of hunting dogs, or watch dogs and most recently, pit bulls. Today, they can best be summarized by the descriptive term "lap dogs".

Never before have we been witness to reporting so devoid of curiosity, so unaware of glaring realities, or so blind to truth. So eager were the people who make up our contemporary media -- relatively youthful products of our Universities -- to see a Black man ascend to the Oval Office that journalistic integrity was cast to the wind and a genuine quest for facts discarded.

Domestically, we have already paid a heavy price for not kicking the tires, instead settling on the prettiest model on the lot. Internationally, we could be speeding toward a genuine disaster. And still no one will dig for the truth and if they do, no one else will bother to hear. Our people have become so programmed to listen to the nightly news as background noise that they barely consider what they say when they either agree or disagree with a viewpoint uttered by the anchor, usually dribbling spinach down their chins.

Barack Obama has been an experiment gone horribly wrong and yet our media "watchdogs" will not let the viewers or readers know it. Once our beloved anchor declares that "there's nothing to see here, folks", any attempt by our alternative media to counter with a rebuttal is null and void, automatically deemed the ravings of lunacy. And we had such great hope for truth at the outset of the digital age.

How else could one possibly explain the miraculous second-termer that is Barack Obama? His chances for a first term were slim at best, and he somehow won, but given his dismal record in that first term, there should have been no chance this side of Shangri-La for success. And yet, here we stand today, a mere nineteen days away from his second inauguration. What have we become, America?

Since the election, I have been silent, stunned by our own collective masochism. I can't stay sequestered forever, however, and I plan on reviving this space this year. So I just want to wish you all a very Happy New Year, despite our self-inflicted wounds, and pray with you that we have indeed hit rock bottom with no place to go but up.

Sphere: Related Content