Archive for the ‘Democrats’ Category

…we impart this lovely image just for them.

men

…it’s that time of year! I’ve been remiss, so here’s my stab at pissing on off Femanazis.

First up, all the Feminazi’s favorite president.

Clinton

Next we have this lovely Asian with big boobies to ogle. Ogle away boys.

1-1-1

And then there’s nostalgia.

And finally, for today, we have this nugget.

That is all.

You too can have fun at the expense of Feminazis.

Please do.

 

…and why the morons in Congress should shut the fuck up about it.

…it’s not going to after it’s passed, just like the last amnesty boondoggle that was passed in 1986. The ONLY thing it does is give at least 11 million people who broke our laws amnesty for the privilege of doing so, for no other reason than to give the Democrats another permanent voting block that could change the way this country goes forward, or in the liberal case, assbackwards. 

I fear that this country will lose any pretense of freedom under Democrats, and the sheeple will just fall in line and let it happen.

This farce of a bill must be stopped dead in its tracks. If the border is not enforced first and foremost, then this sham of “immigration reform” will just open the floodgates for more people and will be rife with fraud from the word go. It’s a failure before it even starts. And don’t tell me it’s for the children. That fucking line of bullshit doesn’t fly with me.

Morning Bell: Immigration Bill Doesn’t Secure the Border

Must Washington fix our broken southern border? You bet.

Will the comprehensive immigration reform bill help? You bet it won’t.

The number one flaw of the bill is it starts by giving amnesty to the unlawfully present population in the United States. As soon as the bill passes, those in the country contrary to U.S. immigration law are granted status to stay.

Amnesty immediately creates an incentive for illegal border crossings and overstays. Thus, the bill’s strategy would drive up the cost of securing the border. To make matters worse, the draft law states that anyone who was present in the U.S. before 2012 qualifies—creating massive opportunity for fraud, since there is no proof required that applicants have been here for several years.

While supporters of the bill trumpet its “border security” features, in reality, the law delivers nothing new—other than the promise of spending a lot more money and running up our debt.

via Immigration Bill Doesn’t Secure the Border.

…most people that know the issues well will say that the shit sandwich Obama tried to shove down everyone’s throat was just that. A turd shoved between two slices of bread.

Gun control isn’t the issue that should be debated. It’s the fact that there are “gun free” zones that turn into a violent asshole’s dream killing ground.

If children are our most precious commodity, then why do we guard banks better than the kids?

Just curious.

Still Waiting for That Pro-Gun-Control Groundswell

Jacob Sullum

After the Senate gun control bill died last week, The New York Times said “Democratic leadership aides promised that the effort could be revived if a public groundswell demanded it.” Claiming support from nine out of 10 Americans, President Obama and former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) angrily urged the public to rise up in righteous fury and demand action. The results of a new poll by the Pew Research Center can be summed up as a three-word reply to such hopes: not gonna happen.

According to the survey, the share of Americans who reacted negatively to the Senate vote fell short of a majority, with 15 percent describing themselves as “angry” and 32 percent saying they were “disappointed.” Not exactly a groundswell in favor of gun control. On the other side, 20 percent said they were “very happy” about the vote and 19 percent described themselves as “relieved.” In short, even immediately after supporters of new gun controls bombarded the public with images of dead children and grieving parents, insisting that anyone who disapproves of mass murder has no choice but to vote for the president’s policy proposals, there is only an eight-point difference between supporters and opponents of the legislation, and opponents seem to feel more strongly about the issue. Pew also found, in addition to a predictable partisan divide, that opposition to the bill was especially strong among those who said they were following the issue “very closely,” 31 percent of whom said they were very happy the bill failed, compared to 22 percent who were angry.

via Still Waiting for That Pro-Gun-Control Groundswell – Hit & Run : Reason.com.

Good article over at the American Spectator. What are you waiting for? Go read it! :D

Jihad Blows Up the Liberal Utopia

Jihad has blown up The Liberal Utopia.

The visionary liberal land of political and social perfection.

President Obama is not happy — and he isn’t alone.

You know the place.

• The Liberal Utopia is a land where gun background checks prevent mass murder.

• The Liberal Utopia is a land where Islamic fundamentalists have changed their perception of America because the President travels to Muslim nations to give lovely speeches, believes that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere is a wonderful sign of an Arab Spring, and refuses to use the word “terrorist” whether his administration is investigating Ft. Hood, Boston, or Benghazi.

• The Liberal Utopia is a land where a 2009 presidential video proclaiming a “new beginning” in American relations with Iran will halt the effort to build a nuclear bomb.

• The Liberal Utopia is a land where the good intentions of Social Security will never bankrupt the Social Security Trust Fund.

• The Liberal Utopia is a land where the good intentions of Medicare could not possibility result in trillions of unfunded liability.

via The American Spectator : Jihad Blows Up the Liberal Utopia.

As I watched the Boston fiasco unfold, I was appalled at the very thought that people would submit to a government shutdown of an entire city.

That, and the fact that only 1 in 10 within that state have a firearm of any type, most likely none of them an “assault” style weapon. I hate the term assault rifle, because those are not available to the common citizen. Not without an exorbitant and prohibitive tax just to own one, but I digress.

This is a major failure in and of itself. Freedom is too precious just to hand it over to government just because they said so.

With all that happened, any asshole politician that says I don’t need a high cap magazine, or “assault” rifle to defend myself, well, just look at the Boston PD, FBI and a multitude of other agencies and the number of rounds that they used in this whole deal and tell me that again. They’re supposedly trained in their use too. Pathetic.

The Boston Bombings and the 2nd Amendment

By Jonathan F. Keiler

As terrible as the Boston marathon bombing was, it was the subsequent searches and shootouts that might have the greater long-term implications for supporters of the 2nd Amendment, as well as those uncomfortable with the increasing militarization of local and national police forces. Four related issues bear consideration in the wake of these events.

Boston’s Disarming — Since 1998 Massachusetts has suffered under one of the nation’s most restrictive and extensive gun control regimes. Predictably, this did not increase public safety but rather produced soaring crime rates. However, it did result in the third lowest rate of gun ownership in the country 12.6% behind only New Jersey and Hawaii.

So when Dzhokhar Tsarnaev fled into Watertown, he had little to fear from the local residents, barely one in ten of whom likely had firearms available, and presumably none an “assault weapon” or high-capacity pistol. How those residents felt as an armed and murderous terrorist roamed the streets while they were effectively disarmed, unable to protect themselves and their loved ones, is still a matter of speculation. A spike in Massachusetts gun purchases restrictions and all is a good bet.

Maryland my own state with a gun ownership rate only modestly higher than Massachusetts 21% — ranked 42 nationally will likely be in a similar situation in a few years, thanks to draconian new restrictions on firearms here. One hopes that at least some Maryland politicians are questioning their recent votes banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines.

In any event, in the wake of the events in Boston, it should be harder for gun-control advocates to parrot their standard line that firearms for home defense are a danger to individuals and to the community at large, rather than useful tools.

via Articles: The Boston Bombings and the 2nd Amendment.

…to make a liberal angry, tell him the truth.

HT:Conservative Videos

…and anyone with a brain can figure this out. I guess that leaves out liberal idiots. Here’s a report that comes from the Congressional Research Service basically stating the obvious. At least to those of us who can use our brain housing group for something other than a hat rack.

It’s a failure before they even vote on it.

New Gun Laws Won’t Prevent Another Sandy Hook

There’s no guarantee new regulations will prevent another tragedy.

That’s the logical, if grim, conclusion to be drawn from a new Congressional Research Service Report on “Public Mass Shootings in the United States.” CRS strives to be studiously neutral, so they’re not going to put it quite like that.

Instead, the report’s authors say things like “the utility of widely employed preventive measures in these areas [law enforcement and public health] to fight public mass shootings is far from clear.”

As the Daily Beast’s Megan McCardle observed in December, “it is beyond horrible to suggest that even a small number of attacks are largely unavoidable. I don’t like saying it. Unfortunately, I think it’s true.” The tragic fact is, there’s not a great deal that public policy can do to avert spree shootings.

Still, it’s worth asking, as CRS does, “what are the parameters of this threat?” The report defines “public mass shootings” as incidents involving four or more deaths and “gunmen who select victims somewhat indiscriminately,” excluding drug trafficking, gang activity and terrorism.

via New Gun Laws Won’t Prevent Another Sandy Hook – Reason.com.

…which isn’t saying anything new.

Fair warning, my crude ass is on display in the following.

He continues to use the 40% of all gun purchases take place without a background check. That bogus statistic was taken from decades ago prior to the background check being mandatory and it’s not even a survey that can be considered scientific.

Yet, time and time again, this tyrannical asshole keeps spouting lies to further his agenda. I am tired of this lying piece of shit. I can’t believe that Americans are so fucking stupid as to elect this asshole twice, when all he does is blame shit on other people, lie, take vacations, golf. He continues to be a colossal failure and has yet to do his fucking job.

If you voted for this twinkle toed cock sucker, then I blame your dumb ass for screwing over the greatest country on earth and turning it into a shit hole.

Obama Hectors, Lies on Gun Control Statistics (Again)

President Obama still has not submitted a budget, but between his vacations he is now back out campaigning for his gun control ideas. During remarks he delivered moments ago, the president took a harsh, lecturing tone as he once again claimed that 40% of all gun purchases in America take place without any background check.

Everyone who purchases a firearm in a retail or licensed resale setting must undergo a background check. This is true whether the purchase is made in a brick and mortar store, at a gun show, or via a licensed online gun retailer.

The president’s claim that 40% of all gun sales fall outside the national background check system is based on a single survey of 251 people done two decades ago. The federal background check system did not even become mandatory until 1994.

John Fund shot down the 40% statistic back in January.

If that alone didn’t make the number invalid, the federal survey simply asked buyers if they thought they were buying from a licensed firearms dealer. While all Federal Firearm Licensees do background checks, only those perceived as being FFLs were counted. Yet, there is much evidence that survey respondents who went to the smallest FFLs, especially the “kitchen table” types, had no idea that the dealer was actually “licensed.” Many buyers seemed to think that only “brick and mortar” stores were licensed dealers, and so the survey underestimating the number of sales covered by the checks.

Another reason for the high number is that it includes guns transferred as inheritances or as gifts from family members. Even President Obama’s background proposal excludes almost all of those transfers.

via The PJ Tatler » Obama Hectors, Lies on Gun Control Statistics (Again).