Archive for June 9th, 2008

On the Second Amendment, Don’t Believe Obama!

June 9, 2008
Friday, June 06, 2008
The presidential primary season is finally over, and it is now time for gun owners to take a careful look at just where apparent nominee Barack Obama stands on issues related to the Second Amendment. During the primaries, Obama tried to hide behind vague statements of support for “sportsmen” or unfounded claims of general support for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

But his real record, based on votes taken, political associations, and long standing positions, shows that Barack Obama is a serious threat to Second Amendment liberties. Don’t listen to his campaign rhetoric! Look instead to what he has said and done during his entire political career.

~snip~

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=3991

Follow the link.

More on Obama

June 9, 2008

The “Messiah” gets some more exposure that he may not care for.

“Obama’s unique persona and talents will have to be countered with a laser focus on his leftist views and radical history. If the race comes down to speaking ability, or likeability, Obama will win. No amount of charm, however, will change the fact that Obama is the most liberal candidate for president in a generation. He is a committed leftist with historical ties to radical organizations and parties. He offers nothing but the failed big government solutions of the past dressed up with fancy words and vague symbolism… Obama’s leftist positions should come as no surprise. After all, Obama sought the support of the far left New Party when he ran for state senate in Illinois. This is a party who felt the Democrats were not liberal enough and was organized by a collection of Marxist/socialists seeking government control of the economy. Obama has a clear history of working with these leftist groups in Chicago, and steering money and power their way. The question of this election is whether the American people are going to mistake Obama’s charm and charisma for real leadership and effective solutions; if they are going to ignore his troubling past because he gives a good speech and looks good on TV; if they are going to fall for the promise of a government who can give them everything.” —Richard Collins Don’t worry, it gets better!

“The irony too bitter to swallow is that Barack Obama’s identity politics trumped Hillary Clinton’s identity politics… No real disagreement over identity goals and targets would ever emerge in a debate between Obama and Hillary, who after all was coaching first base in 1993 when her husband nominated the identity-rights theorist Lani Guinier (now a Harvard Law professor) to head the Justice department’s civil rights division. It could come up in an Obama-McCain debate. I suspect these two have profoundly different notions of how America works. John McCain by instinct, biography and upbringing is prone to see America as a common civic culture. The vocabulary of ‘unjust’ class distinctions familiar to Obama is alien to the McCain worldview. Sen. McCain should think about this and figure out a way to talk about it. If Americans are going to affirm a president making appointments on the basis of race, gender, class and sexuality, they should know it in 2008, rather than 2009-2012.” —Daniel Henninger  So? did Obama out Clinton the Clinton machine..?

And on that note:

“It is the most amazing thing that a young black man who was just a few short years ago unknown to most of his countrymen—really, unknown—could… win the presidential nomination of one of our two great political parties. It is even more amazing that this historic news could be overshadowed by the personal drama and spite of the woman who lost to him. I like it that she spent the campaign accusing America of being sexist, of treating her differently because she is a woman, and then, when she lacked the grace to congratulate the victor, she sent her stewards out to tell the press she just needs time, it’s so emotional. In other words, she needs space because she’s a woman.” —Peggy Noonan

Face it, women are just plain cruel to each other …

all the preceding, other than following comments are from The Patriot Post

Can you say, we told ya so..?

June 9, 2008

I knew ya could! At least that is how the saying goes. Once again the Patriot Post explains the un ( if you are a liberal) explainable.

“It wasn’t Bush, it wasn’t greedy corporations, or free trade, or history’s most over-predicted recession. It was not the oil companies, income inequality, or the excesses of cowboy capitalism. None of these things caused the unemployment rate to jump a half a percentage point in one month. Ask yourself a few questions: Why did unemployment surge at a time when unemployment compensation claims are historically low? More to the point, how could unemployment spike this much without a coinciding spike in corporate lay-offs? The answer to all of these questions is same: because very few people lost jobs last month. This huge jump in the size of the unemployed comes from new entrants to the economy—hundreds of thousands of them. In short, well over 600,000 people who were not job seekers in April became job seekers in May. And who starts looking for work at the end of Spring? That’s right—students. Hundreds of thousands of students are looking for work right now, and they’re not finding it. Congress is to blame. Last year Congressional Democrats (along with some Stockholm-Syndromed Republicans) passed the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, which started a phased hike of the minimum wage from $5.15 an hour to $7.25. Free market economists warned them that this would increase unemployment—that rapid increases in unemployment compensation hit teens and minorities the hardest. But the class-warriors are running the people’s house now, and they would hear none of that, so they took to the floor, let loose the dogs of demagoguery, and saddled America’s pizza parlors, municipal swimming pools, house painting businesses and lawn mowing services with a huge cost increase. Now, we see the perfectly logical outcome of wage controls—rising unemployment among the most economically vulnerable.” —Jerry Bowyer

Do we enter yet another prime example of stupid is as stupid does..?


%d bloggers like this: