Archive for 3 Mar 2009

The “Assault” Weapons Ban garbage is back. When are you idiots going to realize that gun control doesn’t work? It never has, and it never will. Gun control empowers criminals over the law abiding citizens. So called “gun free” zones, are magnets for idiots with a vendetta. Anytime there are three, or more people killed with a gun, it is likely in one of these zones.

Holder’s “Assault Weapons” Folly

Posted by David Rittgers

Attorney General Eric Holder recently announced that the Obama administration will seek a new federal “assault weapons” ban.  This is an ill-advised policy that defies common sense.

The ban would be a revival of a law passed in the early years of the Clinton administration that expired in 2004.  The law prohibited the sale of newly-manufactured magazines holding more than ten rounds of ammunition and having two of five cosmetic features on semi-automatic rifles.  If you had a pistol grip and a detachable magazine, you couldn’t have a bayonet lug.  More recent proposals have attempted to ban “barrel shrouds,” which the rest of the world calls “handguards” – the place you put your hand (instead of on a hot barrel) to prevent burning it while firing.

The emphasis here is on the cosmetic – any rational discussion of the issue ought to note that an “assault weapon” is any object you use to assault someone with – and banning the presence of a bayonet lug on the barrel of a rifle is senseless.  Knives, tire irons, and bricks can all serve as “assault weapons.”  This is an instance where quotation marks are not just appropriate, they are required.

More

Related:

Video Lies by the Brady Bunch

Now the Brady Bunch is using videos to spread their lies.

There are two videos at the link, one of a fully automatic rifle and one of the semi-automatic version. The accompanying text says:

Some gun advocates disingenuously argue that assault weapons are only fully automatic machine guns, and that their semi-automatic versions are merely “like many hunting rifles.”

That’s false.

The only difference between an automatic and a semi-automatic assault weapon is about 3.5 seconds.

Time for yourself the difference in rate of fire between these two weapons, each loaded with a 30-round magazine.

Then decide which one you need to “hunt” with.

More

It’s about time!

Rep. Paul Broun forms task force to defend rights of gun owners

By Blake Aued| Morris News Service

ATHENS, Ga. — U.S. Rep. Paul Broun is shooting back at Attorney General Eric Holder for proposing a renewed ban on assault weapons.

Mr. Broun, a Republican whose 10th District includes parts of the Augusta area, recently formed a bipartisan Second Amendment Task Force with Rep. Dan Boren, D-Okla. He said in a news release that a ban on assault weapons is “extremely troubling since a ban clearly violates our constitutional right to bear arms.”

Mr. Broun was responding to Mr. Holder’s widely reported statement Wednesday that President Obama wants to bring back a Clinton-era ban on assault weapons.

More

On a side note; I checked around online for some pistols, and ammo in a general sense. One thing I noticed, is that the four sites I visited for guns, are all sold out.

They are also sold out on most of the popular ammo as well.

Obama and his merry band of thieves have definately sparked an economic growth in the guns and ammo industry. Way to go douche-nozzle.

Freedom of the 50 States

Posted: 3 Mar 2009 in Truth
Tags: ,

Sucks to be a New Yorker, or from New Jersey, or Rhode Island, or California…

New Hampshire, Colorado, South Dakota, or Idaho sounds just dreamy…

This study conducted on the Freedom in the 50 States (.pdf) is quite interesting.

This paper presents the first-ever comprehensive ranking of the American states on their public policies affecting individual freedoms in the economic, social, and personal spheres. We develop and justify our ratings and aggregation procedure on explicitly normative criteria, defining individual freedom as the ability to dispose of one’s own life, liberty, and justly acquired property however one sees fit, so long as one does not coercively infringe on another individual’s ability to do the same.

This study improves on prior attempts to score economic freedom for American states in three primary ways: (1) it includes measures of social and personal freedoms such as peaceable citizens’ rights to educate their own children, own and carry firearms, and be free from unreasonable search and seizure; (2) it includes far more variables, even on economic policies alone, than prior studies, and there are no missing data on any variable; and (3) it uses new, more accurate measurements of key variables, particularly state fiscal policies.

The media keep comparing Obama to Reagan, or Lincoln. This is a farce. Comparing the most liberal douche-nozzle in the history of the Presidency to two of the most conservative is beyond ludicrous.

The Anti-Reagan

By Ken Blackwell

Barack Obama allegedly intends to be a transformational president like Ronald Reagan. But now President Obama is raising taxes on businesses and retirees, socializing the largest sectors of America’s economy, and decimating state sovereignty and creativity. This is the polar opposite of what President Reagan did in the 1980s, and reveals Barack Obama as the Anti-Reagan.

There are parallels between 1981 and 2009. When Ronald Reagan was elected, the country was fatigued and weary. The outgoing president was unpopular and the economy was declining. People voted for change in 1980 by electing Ronald Reagan.

More

Related:

Obama Plus Congress Equals Economic Chaos

by Chuck Norris

Ronald Reagan was right when he said: “Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”

The next stage of out-of-control government spending started when George W. Bush bailed out Wall Street with $700 billion (new debt No. 1). But Congress didn’t learn from that failure, and apparently, neither did Barack Obama. So the newly elected president pushed for the next stimulus bill (debt No. 2), this one for $787 billion.

But that wasn’t enough, either, so the recent $410 billion omnibus spending bill (with 9,000 earmarks — 60 percent originating with Democrats and 40 percent with Republicans) is being railroaded through Congress to keep government moving until September (debt No. 3).

More

Obama lied, people will die, well maybe not yet. America may die. Socialism doesn’t work. Ask Britain what they think of their socialist state. Their freedoms have been so eroded, that most of the younger generation don’t even understand the concept of true freedom. Government intervention is always an encroachment on freedom, no matter how good the intention.

It’s pitchfork time.

By Patrick J. Buchanan

In his campaign and inaugural address, Barack Obama cast himself as a moderate man seeking common ground with conservatives.

Yet, his budget calls for the radical restructuring of the U.S. economy, a sweeping redistribution of power and wealth to government and Democratic constituencies. It is a declaration of war on the right.

The real Obama has stood up, and lived up to his ranking as the most leftwing member of the United States Senate.

Barack has no mandate for this. He was even behind McCain when the decisive event that gave him the presidency occurred – the September collapse of Lehman Brothers and the market crash.

More

Prove It.

Posted: 3 Mar 2009 in Comarade Obama
Tags:

I’ve been ignoring this one, but thought maybe it should be looked at.

Military officers are now asking for proof of Obama’s citizenship. I would like that one cleared up as well. Obama could have avoided this altogether from the start. Just show your birth certificate. I had to do it to join the Army; you should have to do it to lead the Army and the other services.

This could be settled in a matter of minutes by Obama. Show the birth certificate. Why jeopardize the office any further than you already have?

More military officers demand eligibility proof

Plaintiff: ‘In the worst case … it’s going to be revolution in the streets’

By Bob Unruh

Military officers from the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines are working with California attorney Orly Taitz and her Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, citing a legal right established in British common law nearly 800 years ago and recognized by the U.S. Founding Fathers to demand documentation that may prove – or disprove – Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president.

Taitz told WND today she has mailed to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder a request that he “relate Quo Warranto on Barack Hussein Obama II to test his title to president before the Supreme Court.”

The lengthy legal phrase essentially means an explanation is being demanded for what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto “affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents.”

Requesting the action are Maj. Gen. Carroll Childers; Lt. Col. Dr. David Earl-Graef; police officer Clinton Grimes, formerly of the U.S. Navy; Lt. Scott Easterling, now serving on active duty in Iraq; New Hampshire state Rep. Timothy Comerford; Tennessee state Rep. Frank Nicely and others.

More

Rush puts on a beat down on the RNC Chairman. I think he needed a good ass whooping to kick off his tenure.

Here’s a couple of quotes:

A Few Words for Michael Steele

“I’m not in charge of the Republican Party, and I don’t want to be. I would be embarrassed to say that I’m in charge of the Republican Party in the sad-sack state that it’s in. If I were chairman of the Republican Party, given the state that it’s in, I would quit. I might get out the hari-kari knife because I would have presided over a failure that is embarrassing to the Republicans and conservatives who have supported it and invested in it all these years.”

If we don’t want Obama and Reid and Pelosi to fail, then why does the RNC exist, Mr. Steele? Why are you even raising money? What do you want from us? If I want Obama and Democrats to succeed, I suppose we should be sending the RNC donations? You know, these people, it’s a bizarre discussion to have because there’s a news story on this, on this feud now between me and Michael Steele. And listen to this. This is a quote from RNC spokesman, Alex Conant, I’m not sure how he pronounces his last name. “The feud between radio host Rush and Rahm makes great political theater, but it is a sideshow to the important work going on in Washington. RNC Chairman Michael Steele and elected Republicans are focused on fighting for reform and winning elections. The Democrats’ problem is that the American people are growing skeptical of the massive government spending being pushed by congressional leaders like [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi.”

Go read the whole transcript.

Related:

Since When is Promoting Conservatism ‘Ugly?’

Posted by Bobby Eberle
March 3, 2009 at 7:58 am

The grassroots base around the country has been ignited by a brief, but powerful comment.  The comment, made by Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele was directed at conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh.  It turns out that Steele felt it was necessary to denounce Limbaugh and establish his own manhood in front of a CNN audience.

The comment made on the D. L. Hughley show reveals much about what is hurting the Republican Party.  Rather than trying to distinguish itself from the Democrats, it seems as if the strategy is to keep quiet, wish the Dems well, act like they do, and still hope that the country will see the “difference” and vote Republican. I get it!  It’s Obama’s “hope and change” strategy… except in this case, we are “hoping for change” without actually doing anything about it.

More

Related:

Limbaugh Message Trumps Obama Style

by Harry R. Jackson, Jr.

Like most Americans, I have been challenged recently to make sense of a great number of speeches given by politicians, political appointees, and media pundits. We are in an era in which many of our community leaders desire to rewrite or redefine history, while selling us philosophies and theories instead of proven solutions to our pressing problems. As an English major and a student of public speaking, I have been shocked by how poorly our greatest leaders have used the opportunities they have had to speak to the nation.

More