10) Only in America … could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.
9) Only in America … could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General and roughly 20% of the federal work force is black while only 14% of the population is black. 40+% of all federal entitlements go to black Americans – 3X the rate that go to whites, 5X the rate that go to Hispanics!
8) Only in America … could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner (the head of the Treasury Department) and Charles Rangel (who once ran the Ways and Means Committee), BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.
7) Only in America … can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.
6) Only in America … would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege, while they discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just ‘magically’ become American citizens.
5) Only in America … could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country’s Constitution be thought of as “extremists.”
4) Only in America … could you need to present a driver’s license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.
3) Only in America … could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company (Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes (Nike).
2) Only in America … could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year – for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn’t have nearly enough money.
1) Only in America … could the rich people – who pay 86% of all income taxes – be accused of not paying their “fair share” by people who don’t pay any income taxes at all.
Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category
Canadian’s Version of David Letterman’s Top 10. This is Canada’s Top Ten List of America’s Stupidity: From a Yahoo Board…
March 22, 2014Your new Facebook ‘friend’ may be the FBI
March 22, 2014More big government intrusions on freedom and liberty…
The Feds are on Facebook. And MySpace, LinkedIn and Twitter, too.
U.S. law enforcement agents are following the rest of the Internet world into popular social-networking services, going undercover with false online profiles to communicate with suspects and gather private information, according to an internal Justice Department document that offers a tantalizing glimpse of issues related to privacy and crime-fighting.
Think you know who’s behind that “friend” request? Think again. Your new “friend” just might be the FBI.
The document, obtained in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, makes clear that U.S. agents are already logging on surreptitiously to exchange messages with suspects, identify a target’s friends or relatives and browse private information such as postings, personal photographs and video clips.
Among other purposes: Investigators can check suspects’ alibis by comparing stories told to police with tweets sent at the same time about their whereabouts. Online photos from a suspicious…
View original post 169 more words
Illinois Middle School Workbook Reportedly Includes What Could Be the Most Outrageous Definition of the Second Amendment Yet
March 22, 2014Utter bullshit!
Wanting…….
March 22, 2014Not like this is news, but it rings with the truth!
Avoiding tragedy
March 4, 2014A very good read. Just because you can do something, that may well be legal, does not mean that you have too.
Ronald Westbrook, the Alzheimer’s patient, got out of his house during the night of Nov. 27. He appeared hours later at the home of Joe Hendrix, knocked repeatedly on the door and tried the bell, apparently being in a state of confusion. The homeowner, Joe Hendrix, 35, armed himself, went outside, and confronted Westbrook. Eventually, Hendrix shot Westbrook, 72, several times, which proved fatal. According to Hendrix, the elderly man was carrying an object and did not obey his commands.
Full story. (h/t Claude Werner)
By all accounts, Mr. Hendrix acted in a reasonable manner – in terms of the law. However, from outsiders looking in, they will not view what Mr. Hendrix did as reasonable. As Claude states:
While Mr. Hendrix will not face criminal charges, there is no doubt that he will still have issues to deal with for the rest of his life. Assuming he is a…
View original post 505 more words
Gun Owners Spank Bloomberg, Schumer, IRS & Governor “Moonbeam” Brown
February 24, 2014And GOA submits new brief before the U.S. Supreme Court. Click here to help.
“[New Jersey has] subordinated the People’s right to keep and bear arms to the state’s alleged interest in promoting public safety. It is not, however, within the authority of courts to override the Constitution as ratified by the People.” — Gun Owners of America’s legal brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in Drake v. Jerejian, February 12, 2014
Pro-gun victories are coming so fast and furiously (no pun intended) that it’s difficult to keep up with them.
Here is a sample of good news.
GOA CHALLENGING NJ LAW BEFORE U.S. SUPREME COURT IN WAKE OF HUGE LEGAL VICTORY
On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that California’s requirement that applicants for concealed carry permits show “good cause” were unconstitutional under the Heller decision.
“The right to bear arms includes the right to carry an operable firearm outside the home for the lawful purpose of self-defense,” said Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain.
Gun Owners of America is pursuing an almost identical challenge to New Jersey’s onerous and restrictive concealed carry law. GOA (and its foundation) filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court just one day prior to last week’s Ninth Circuit decision, challenging the New Jersey control scheme that was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
In several instances, the Ninth Circuit opinion critiques the Third Circuit’s opinion by using arguments very similar to the ones GOA presented in our amicus brief. Overall the opinion is a refreshing change from most lower federal court decisions, which have refused to engage in the textual and historical analysis required by Heller and McDonald.
As we see it, the Ninth Circuit decision should add weight in favor of the Supreme Court hearing one of these cases to resolve the circuit split. And hopefully the five justice majority from Heller will seize on these two cases because of the Ninth Circuit’s detailed and careful review of the history that supports public carry of weapons for self-defense.
Go here to read more about this case — including the GOA/GOF brief.
Go here to make a tax deductible contribution in assisting Gun Owners Foundation to continue bringing legal challenges like this.
BLOOMBERG DEFEATED IN NEW HAMPSHIRE
Former Mayor Michael Bloomberg had intended to turn New Hampshire into his most recent “victory for gun control” — joining a handful of states that enacted stricter gun control laws in the wake of the Newton school yard tragedy.
Bloomberg figured that New Hampshire would be easy pickings. After all, the “Granite State” had a Democratic House of Representatives and a Democratic anti-gun governor.
Gun Owners of America countered Bloomberg’s muscle by aiding several local gun groups in the state to rally grassroots gun owners in opposition to the bill.
Well, the final shootout occurred last Wednesday. And after the smoke cleared, Bloomberg and his “human props” were sent packing, with their tails between their legs. After a series of votes — and an hour and a half of parliamentary wrangling — the Democratic House declared that a Manchin-Toomey-type universal gun registry bill was “inexpedient to legislate.”
Having failed to buy Congress with his billions of anti-gun dollars, Bloomberg has attempted to buy the legislatures of states like New Hampshire. But, with the exception of seven states with legislatures dominated by anti-gun legislators and governors, Bloomberg has been humiliated.
And “red state Democrats” running for reelection in the Senate are running from Bloomberg even faster than they’re running from Obama.
As a result, Bloomberg has now modified his strategy to turn the country blue by legalizing millions of anti-gun voters who broke the law to get here. And to that end, Bloomberg has announced that he will use his billions to support “red state Democrats” who opposed the Manchin-Toomey amendment — language imposing universal background checks around the nation — so long as such Senators agree to support the anti-gun immigration amnesty bill.
SCHUMER REELS AFTER AMNESTY BILL IS SHELVED
Three weeks ago, it looked like an immigration amnesty bill to create 8,000,000 new anti-gun voters was on the “fast track” in the U.S. House.
That was before you burned up the telephone lines and internet accounts of House Republicans. At a Republican “retreat,” dozens of congressmen lined up to oppose the bill. And Speaker John Boehner was forced to concede that Republicans could not “trust” Obama to implement the enforcement provisions of the bill.
Now, reeling from another defeat, New York Senator Charles Schumer has threatened to file a “discharge petition” to force the House to consider the anti-gun bill, over Republican objections.
The problem is that Schumer, to be successful, would have to convince over a dozen Republicans to openly betray their colleagues, in order to garner the necessary 217 or 218 signatures (depending on the number of House vacancies). For this reason, discharge petitions almost never succeed.
THE IRS BACKS OFF FROM ANTI-GUN REGS
Fresh from a scandal in which it tried to harass conservatives applying for 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status, the IRS has spent the last several months trying to put GOA out of business.
It did this by threatening regulations which would define a broad range of policy activities (including voting guides) as political activities.
But, in its arrogance, the IRS overstepped its bounds. So many policy-related activities would be limited under the IRS rules that a broad range of both conservative and liberal 501(c)(4)’s blasted the proposals. In addition, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee introduced legislation (H.R. 3865) which would prohibit the IRS regs from being issued. Given the broad support from both ends of the political spectrum, the Camp bill would surely be passed overwhelmingly.
As a result, the IRS has now meekly testified that it will not push its proposals in 2014.
Buppert: In Defense Of Badged Barbarism
February 18, 2014Read the whole thing!
Democrats, Liberals, Progressives love dead kids.
February 18, 2014Since the other post got fouled up somehow here is a repeat.
Agenda drives the left, in all things. The more dead kids there are, the more fodder for the leftest agenda. Alinsky would be proud. The more that we learn about the mass killers the more we find out how they are drugged, and supporters of leftest ideologies. I for one am going to start referring to the entire lot of them as murderers. Because that is what they are.
When others talk of full blown revolution I will no longer speak about temperance. I’m not, after all, that kind of a Christian. More power to the people of America as envisioned by those that established this great nation!
A bunch of kid killers support the Free Fire Zones. Let us be diligent in reminding them about that at every turn!
Fast Track to Gun Control?
February 17, 2014Take a deep breath! You’re in for a wild ride.
“‘Immigration reform will add over 8,000,000 anti-gun voters to the voting rolls,’ Gun Owners of America warned its members and supporters in a January 24 alert.” — The Examiner, January 29, 2014
For months, as you know, GOA has been battling against the anti-gun immigration amnesty bill, which would add 8,000,000 anti-gun voters to the voting rolls.
The political left has attacked Gun Owners of America for rallying gun owners to oppose the anti-gun amnesty legislation. One liberal website even (mockingly) characterized our view as saying that “immigrants must suffer because of their supposed political views.”
Of course, that’s not what we’re saying, but then again, we wouldn’t expect anti-gun liberals to understand.
There were even some conservatives who had misgivings. For example, one pro-gun author confessed that he initially “harbored some doubts” about GOA’s position and even argued that immigration overhaul could actually help gun ownership in the U.S.
But after reading our alerts, he admitted that such a rosy scenario was “probably very wishful thinking” on his part, especially considering the 2013 “Pew poll indicating an electoral bonanza for Democrats — and therefore for ‘gun control’ — should illegal aliens gain the right to vote.”
GOA is very thankful for thoughtful journalists like the one above who took the time to really research the issue — and grateful for many gun owners like yourself who have taken action on our alerts.
The result has been an intense outpouring of “political heat” on politicians in Washington (especially Republicans).
A couple of weeks ago, GOA asked you to contact your Republican Congressman, prior to their retreat, to let them know that their grassroots base (that is, gun owners) do not support anything that resembles amnesty. Other groups have joined the chorus as well.
Since then, media reports indicated that the phones rang off the hook on Capitol Hill — especially in Speaker Boehner’s office.
All of this culminated in newspaper headlines around the country reporting, on Friday, that the anti-gun amnesty bill was dead and we had won:
* “Hope dims for immigration bill,” trumpeted USA Today.
* “Boehner Doubts Immigration Bill Will Pass in 2014,” said the New York Times.
* “Immigration Overhaul Stalls,” said the front-page headline of the Wall Street Journal.
For us to have reached this point was an enormous victory for your activism. And GOA is grateful for all you who made calls and helped tie up the phone lines on Capitol Hill opposing this bill.
But the battle is clearly not over, for buried deep in the articles was a more nuanced story. The Journal said that a pro-immigration leader “was told by congressional aides to ‘take a deep breath’ and that ‘the wheels continue to turn.'”
Thus, there is still some degree of danger that Speaker John Boehner could push the anti-gun bill after primary filing season had closed — perhaps in May, June or July.
This would not be the first time that we have seen defeat snatched from the jaws of victory. In fact, you might remember our most recent alert over the weekend which explained how a Senate committee ambushed pro-gun Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) in an attempt to defeat his language repealing the Post Office gun ban.
[GOA has posted an update here which further explains how players behind the scenes — like Senator Mark Begich (D-AK) — worked overtime to ambush Rand Paul and sack his pro-gun agenda.]
So one might wonder: Is this battle over anti-gun amnesty just another political ambush, similar to the one gun owners saw play out in the battle to repeal the post office gun ban?
Well, consider the multiple levels of perfidy that are at play.
Fast Track to Gun Control?
Many of the same business interests that support immigration — for short-term “balance sheet” motives — also support a bill to allow Barack Obama to write virtually any multilateral trade treaties he wants — with little or no ability to stop them when we “find out what’s in them.”
The bill is called “fast track.” The way it would work is that Obama could negotiate treaties, and, once they were negotiated, they would have to be considered under the Senate rules … they could not be filibustered … they would be approved by a simple majority … and they would be unamendable.
Obviously, if the Obama treaties contained provisions limiting the import and export of guns, we would not have the votes to do anything about it, if “fast track” were in place.
Why is this relevant?
MSNBC and the New York Times have floated a “deal” to pass the anti-gun immigration bill. Obama would “give” Republicans “fast track” — because many in the GOP business interests support “fast track” and many Democrats oppose it. In exchange, Republicans would “give” Obama immigration amnesty.
Obviously, some Washington-centered business interests would view this as a win-win.
For gun owners, it would be a lose-lose. There would be 8,000,000 new anti-gun voters, and California-style gun control would be inevitable. On the other hand, newly drafted Obama anti-gun treaties, which could resemble the UN Arms Trade Treaty, would be almost impossible to stop.
Think Obama is so honorable that he would not use treaties to ban guns? Does anyone think that?
ACTION: For now, let’s receive our apparent victory graciously — knowing that we’re going to have to be continually vigilant to make sure the amnesty bill doesn’t raise its ugly head again. So urge your Representatives to remain firm in opposing anti-gun amnesty for the rest of this congressional session. So Take Action and urge your Representatives to remain firm in opposing anti-gun amnesty for the rest of this congressional session.






