The Evils of Gun Control or How The Media Murders

Hello Readers, it has been a while since my last post and quite a bit has happened since then and, I want to try to touch on most of the major issues that have popped up.  I guess the first issue that I want to touch on is gun control due to the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School.  There is not a lot that I can say about this issue that hasn’t already been said but I will give you a brief look at my personal views on the issue as well as a link to an extremely well thought out post on the issue by one of my favorite authors, Larry Correia, that I recommend everyone read.  Personally, I feel that the push to restrict and ban guns here in the US is something to be worried about.  There are millions of law abiding citizens in this country that love their guns and use them for numerous things ranging from self-defense to teaching their children responsibility.   Taking away their access to the weapons that they use for these purposes not only puts them at risk from people who wish to do them harm but it also takes a valuable tool away from parents who realize the importance of teaching children at a young age to respect firearms and what they are capable of.  I’m not even going to get into the hunting aspect of this issue. 

As for this apparent outbreak of mass shootings that seem to be happening around the country, notice that they only tend to happen in places where guns are either not allowed (such as schools) or are restricted to areas where only select people are allowed weapons and are positioned far away from the site where the shootings take place (Fort Hood) or if there is a heavy police presence, the police (as is the case with the Virginia Tech shooting) are not allowed to carry firearms.  Due to this, I believe I can safely say that and unarmed populace is little more than cannon fodder to criminals who don’t respect the law.  Also, think about what one of the first things a government does that wishes to enslave its citizens, they take away the citizens methods of protecting themselves.  That said, I believe that a well-armed populace is the safest.

Now, I believe the biggest problem when it comes to these mass shootings as well as the main contributing factor to the apparent increase in them is the sole fault of the media.  The media, in an effort to push liberal agendas on the issue of gun control has been sensationalizing these shooting and giving the shooters the lime light.  This encourages more disturbed individuals to get their 15 min of fame by trying to do an equal to larger amount of damage and the news media eats it up because it gives them more tragedy (because everyone know only bad news sells) to report on that encourages even more violence…

Or so it would seem, but the honest fact of the matter is that there hasn’t really been a large increase in these mass shooting, there has only been an increase in the reporting on them.  The media’s amount of reporting is the only differing factor; shootings aren’t really increasing like they are making it appear.  Part of this I do believe if the fault of the media, but there is another factor.  I believe that the increased accessibility to information is the other reason that the media tends to go overboard with their reporting on these issues thus bombarding us with more and more stories like this as they (the media) tries to outdo one another in an effort to report the most sensational stories they can in order to attract the almighty viewership numbers.

Hmmm, ok guess I am not going to get to any of the other issues I wanted to talk about in this post but that is ok, I can get to them in the next one.  In fact I haven’t said all I want to say with this post but since I am giving you a very long post to read on this issue as well as what you have already read to get to the point where you are now I will drop it here.  Here is the link to the post by Larry Correia - http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/. Please read this post, whether you agree with gun control or not, it is all something to think about, that is all.

The Paths That Lay Before Us

I know that I promised over twitter that I was going to post this last night, but I found that I was still so angry over SCOTUS’s that most of what I had to say would have been extremely emotionally driven and counterproductive to an intelligent conversation.

Let me start of by saying that I think SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) really dropped the ball on this one.  Not only did we have Justices that should have been required to recuse themselves (Kagan is a prime example) due to a conflict of interests, but we also had Justices that decided that in order to make the law valid, they would effectively rewrite the law to make the penalty that fell under the commerce clause a tax instead.  Of course everybody knew from the start that it was a tax but the language in the law stated that it was a penalty and that the commerce clause was what gave the authority to enact said penalty.  Well, the Chief Justice (Roberts) decided that while the current wording made the law unconstitutional, he would rule on it as if it were a tax and effectively renames it as a tax in the written statement that was presented with the Court’s decision.  Effectively, this is a declaration from Chief Justice Roberts that the Supreme Court can now use judicial activism to rewrite laws in order to fit whatever personal agenda the members of the Court have but that is not the only fall out that will come with this horrible (and in my opinion if the Justices could be held accountable, which they can’t be, illegal) decision.

The second major piece of fallout from this decision effectively gives Congress the ability to tax your actions or lack thereof.  SCOTUS basically said that by making this penalty a tax, Congress can tax you for your choice not to buy health insurance.  Taken to its logical conclusion where does this end?  Not in a good place, that’s where.  If Congress can tax you for not buying something like health insurance, what is to keep them from taxing you for not buying healthy food?  What if they want to tax you for not buying Brussels sprouts because the poor Brussels sprout farmers aren’t making enough money to cover their employees’ health insurance? (By the way, health insurance costs are going to skyrocket.) Let’s take this one step further, what if they want to tax you if you don’t vote?  What if they want to tax you if you don’t buy the exact make and model of car that they feel everyone should be forced to drive?  Do you see where I am going with this?  SCOTUS has just given Congress the power of tyrannical rule through taxes.  They have declared that Congress has the ability to tax citizens for anything that they wish as long as it is just that, a tax.

Well, now the question is, what can we do about it?  The way I see it, we only have a few options, one of which is preferable, the others are not so preferable. 

The first and best option is the one I would really prefer to have happen.  It starts with electing Romney (as much as I dislike the man I will take him over the commie in the White House right now) and gaining the majority in the Senate while maintaining the majority in the House.  Romney then will need to repeal Obamacare with the help of the Senate and the House.  After that, several Constitutional Amendments need written and put up for a vote.  One of those Amendments needs to limit the taxing powers of Congress in such a way that this can never happen again.  The next needs to limit the powers of the Supreme Court to restrict the use of Judicial Activism to rewrite laws in order to make them constitutional.  The third needs to make it to where the Justices are held accountable to the will of the people. (I personally like Tom Kratman’s approach with the amendments ate the end of “State of Disobedience” where all the justices are on the ballot during every Presidential election and the one that gets the most votes is removed and the new President gets to replace him/her with a new Justice.) Forth, we need an Amendment that states that any laws that Congress pass apply equally to the members of the ruling body.  In order for get all of that done we would have to have politicians in office with the guts to pull of that kind of bold legislation… unfortunately I don’t think politicians like that exist anymore.  After those Amendments are written, then we the people need to go and vote them in.

The second option which I don’t like as much because it would be even harder to do is to forget about winning the Presidency.  Focus only on gaining a veto-proof House and Senate, and then have them enact all the steps I laid out in the first option.

The third option I like even less.  That is revolution.  I don’t like this option because of the potential for bloodshed, but it wouldn’t be the first time blood has been shed for our freedom.  To be quite honest, the prospect of a second American Revolution frightens me, but I see it as a potential future that will become necessary in order to preserve what little is left of this once great nation.  I really hate to say that but that is one of the only ways we have left.  I hope and pray that it never gets that far.

The fourth option I dislike as much as the third.  This option involves all of the conservative states that still believe in the American Ideal of freedom announcing their succession and forming their own nation independent of the liberal states.  I dislike this option because I see another Civil War happening.  Like the first Civil War, it would be about a multitude of reasons with State’s and Citizen’s rights being at the forefront. 

I know none of these options are particularly great, but the way I see it they are all we have left aside from becoming complacent in letting our freedoms slip away faster and faster.  I was going to go into how this law is going to hurt everyone that the Libs are saying it would help but I have ran out of time for now so I will have to take that up at another time. 

Thank you for reading and remember to vote this November.  Aim for Option #1 with me please.

"Old McDonald Had an Illegal Alien" (And Other Great Hits Like "Illegal Aliens Fell on Alabama")

Alabama's new illegal immigration law came under a lot of fire before it was implemented, as many lies and distortions were told about the law by liberal groups and media in order to make the Hispanic populace scared. Once the law finally got implemented the earth shattering consequences that were predicted simply did not occur, but the cries of indignation remain, fueled by half truths and lies told about the aftermath if the implementation of the law. I hope to clear some of these things up for you.

First I want to address the people who claim that this law is a racist blow to discriminate against the Hispanic population of Alabama. This is a distortion of the law. The law never singles out Hispanics, in fact it worded to prevent officers from discriminating against anyone based off of their race. How can the law be racist if it designed to protect against racism? On top of that, why do the people who state this automatically assume it is targeting Hispanics? Do they believe all Hispanics are illegal? Going with that line of thinking, do they think all non-Hispanics are legal? Don't they realize that people how are not of Hispanic decent can be here illegally too? After all, there are more countries out there besides America and Mexico. Case in point, the first person to get detained because of this law wasn't Hispanic, he was from Yemen.

That brings me to my second point. The story that the liberal news media is trying to spin on the illegal immigration law in order to make it look like an utter failure actually assures that the law is working as intended. The previously mentioned story is about three men from Yemen who were arrested on drug related charges. One of them had a drivers license, he was released after making bail, the second had a work visa, he was released after making bail, the third had no form of identification and could not state his drivers license number or social security number, he was detained until his lawyer could prove he was here legally. The liberal news media wants you to think that the police just picked this poor man (the third one) up because he looked like he wasn't a citizen. No they picked him up because he was messing with illegal substances and then was detained because he could not prove he was here legally. He was NOT Hispanic, nor, if you see any pictures of him, does he look Hispanic, that throws the theory that it is a racist law that targets Hispanics out the window.

The law is designed to protect Alabama citizens from criminals, plain and simple. I, for one, have no problem with criminals having it a little tougher. As for those of you who think that illegal aliens (or as the Obama regime wants to call them, undocumented workers) are not criminals, put the crack pipe down and listen up. Illegal aliens come to the USA through ILLEGAL means, meaning, THEY ARE BREAKING THE LAW. I know some of you bleeding hearts out there take offense to that, but it is true. “Well, they're just coming here because they want to work to provide for their families in Mexico,” is what some of you are saying right now. Yes, that is the reason some of them come over here, but you know what? That doesn't make it any less illegal, they are still breaking the law. The USA has plenty of guest worker programs that the Mexican citizens can take advantage of in order to come here LEGALLY and work. As for you who are asking “Well, what about the ones here seeking asylum? Hmm? What about them?” Once again, there are legal ways for people seeking asylum, to come here for protection that don't involve breaking the law.

Now to my third point, and this is the one I find myself getting the angriest about. Alabama farmers have stated that this law has dried up the workforce that they relied on for harvesting their crops. They claim that they can't get any non illegals to come work for them, stating that Alabamians refuse to do that kind of physical labor. I don't know about you, but if I was hurting for work (and Alabamians are at the moment with ten percent unemployment) I believe I would jump at the chance to earn some money. If Alabamians are truly refusing to do this kind of work to earn an honest days wage, then that right there says something about the unemployment system not doing it's job right, (but that is a discussion for another time) and we really need to reform it so people stop wanting to settle for unemployment. In fact, some of the local radio stations that have been interviewing these farmers have offered to let them advertise, free of charge, that they need work and where the people who want it need to go and who they need to call. The farmers every time have refused to give out that information so that Alabamians who want to work have no way to contact them for work. Am I the only one that sees the problem there? That, though, isn't that part that makes me mad.

What makes me mad about the claims of these farmers is some of the thing they are saying when talking about how this law has screwed them. I'm not saying all of them have said this but a fair number of times I have heard this said (yes this is a quote), “Them brown skinned folks is the only ones that will come out here and do this kinda work. Colored folks and white folks won't stoop to doing this kinda back breaking work. After all, them brown skinned folks is built for it, they are made to work out in the heat and the sun.” Not all the farmers have said exactly that (but the nature of what is said is the same) but that it the latest I have heard with my own ears, which is why I quoted it. Am I the only one this kind of speech ticks off? How dare they refer to these people like they are live stock! Both Illegal and legal Hispanics are not live stock! This kind of speech churns my stomach, it is disgusting, reprehensible, hateful, and extremely offensive. The last time speech like this was said about a people based off their skin color was back when plantation owners were told they could no longer use slave labor. Is that what we have come to think of these people who come here looking for work as? Slave labor? NO, if they come here illegally they may be criminals, but they are NOT slaves!

The plantation owners had to change their business model when they could no longer use slave labor, the ones that didn't throw up their hands in defeat survived and were able to continue earning a profit thru legal means. The farmers here in Alabama need to do the same, adjust their business models and they will see their business survive. Those who refuse to change will see their business crumble and fall, that is the simple truth to it. They can succeed by hiring legal citizens who want and need the work, they just have to try.

Anonymous, Fighters for Freedom? Nay, Fighters for Fear

I have to thank the liberals that use the comments section of news stories on Fox News web site for inspiring this post.  After an hour of trying to explain the simple concept of what qualifies as terrorism, I had to wash my hands of the willfully ignorant people (Yes I am talking about you "thinkanonymous") that populate those dredges.

The story was about the hacker group "Anonymous" and their recent attack against the city of Orlando, Florida by taking down their tourism website with the promise of more to come if their demands are not met.  What are their demands you ask?  They want the leader of the group "Food not Bombs" released from jail after he broke the law by passing out food to the homeless in one of the city's many parks without a permit.  I know, it sounds like the city just arrested a person for having some compassion on those less fortunate, but lets get some facts out in the open. 

1.  The group "Food not Bombs" was purposely feeding people in the park in defiance of the law stating that a permit was required.  These people knew that they were breaking the law and are lucky only their leader was arrested.  If you knowingly break the law then you have to expect to have to pay the consequences.

2.  The city had it's reasons for putting this law into place.  They wanted to discourage the homeless from harassing the citizens and tourists of Orlando.  This would also help cut down on crimes against the homeless that took place in these places.  Also, it protects the people who get a license from lawsuit if they feed a homeless person who then chokes on the food or has an allergic reaction to the food.

3.  The city isn't preventing people from feeding the homeless.  If anyone wants to set up a soup kitchen for the homeless of Orlando in any of the parks, then all the have to do is obtain a permit for it.  There are plenty of organizations and people out there that wish to help those in need and this gives those people and organizations a safe and legal way to do so.

Now on to my point...

Anonymous, by attacking Orlando's websites, have committed criminal actions in an attempt to create fear of retaliation if the city doesn't meet their demands.  This by definition, is an act of terrorism, plain and simple.  It doesn't matter about the method of attack, cyber or otherwise.  Below is the definition of terrorism courtesy of Dictionary.com.

ter·ror·ism

–noun

1.

the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

2.

the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.

3.

a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

If Anonymous's actions don't fall under that definition then I don't know what does.  Anonymous over the last few years has attacked multiple businesses and even government organizations to try to intimidate the victims into bending to their will.  This is just the latest in a long line of crimes these terrorists have committed. 

Also, to respond to some of the stuff "thinkanonymous" said arguing (his/her only defence was that what Anonymous did isn't deserving of death despite I kept trying to point out that not all terrorism crimes are sentencable by death) with me after I gave him/her the hand to talk to, he/she tried to make the case that Anonymous isn't terrorist...

"you think that taking down a site is worthy of execution. it's is not, by definition, terrorism."-thinkanonymous

Actually, yes it is, it falls under the definition of terrorism. It is all in the intent behind the action. Look back up to the definition above.  Got it?  Good. Moving on.  You (thinkanonymous) kept insisting that I was calling for the members of Anonymous to be put to death, but if your tiny little smooth liberal brain would have read, I kept stating "Not all crimes that are acts of terrorism are punishable by death.  Committing crimes in order to make people comply to demands out of fear of the ramifications of the consequences, is by definition, terrorism."  Not that hard to understand, is it? 

Anonymous is a without a doubt, a terrorist organization and it's members that are involved in these various attacks over the years should be tracked down and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for the crimes they have committed. 

Obama Lied, The Economy Died

I was planning on using this post to use this post to detail how the Republicans lost the 2011 budget battle instead of winning it like you will hear from the news media, instead, due to recent events I must change my focus.

While it is true that the Republicans caved on their budget promise to the people of this great nation, I have now reached the conclusion that it is of no fault of their own that they could not complete this promise. It is hard to uphold your promises when you are so stupid that you will believe anything that is told to you by your political opponents, instead of fulfilling the promises you made. You have now set the stage for your defeat in 2012.

After all, we started out with a promise to cut 100 billion from the 2011 budget, but after much name calling, you caved. So then it was 61 billion, and you swore that you would stand firm on that, yet once again, the mud slinging caused you to slip and fall further. Wanting to prove that you didn't want women and children to die or old people to eat dog food, you dropped the cuts to 31 billion. Someone in the Republican party must have realized that a mistake had been made though, so you then worked it back to 38.6 billion.

You smiled and patted yourselves on the back after that, never mind that we the people were demanding that you ignore the vilification and keep your promise. The news media touted about how this was such a great victory for the Republican party and the Dems hung their heads in defeat, screaming bloody murder about how draconian these cuts were! But little did you know, that the Dems were actually laughing and praising themselves for being so clever. The Dems played up their defeat while the CBO got to work on the that actual numbers.

Within a few days the CBO report came out revealing the vile treachery of the Democrat party was thrown into the light. The 38.6 billion in budget cuts only came out to little more then 300 million, and on top of that it added 3 billion to the over all budget instead of actually cutting it.

To make matters worse it comes out that Obama had promised to cut 4 key czar positions then in a written statement said He would not hold up his end of the bargain. The czars that he was supposed to cut were, the Health Care, Climate Change, Auto Industry and Urban affair czars in case you were wondering. Obama lied, waited till all was said and done, then in written word confirmed too all that would listen.... he lied. In a bold move he openly admitted he lied, no sugar coating it, he lied.

Republicans, please explain how it is you trusted this war criminal to up hold his end of any bargain? He has already stated that he will do anything he has to to see his vision for this country come to pass, so how could you believe he would up hold anything? Are you really that stupid?

Think about it, the man that has passed illegal laws and shoved them down the American peoples throats, telling them they will thank him for it! This is the man that illegally went to war without the approval of congress! This is the man who talks down to anyone who disagrees with him because he knows better! This is the man who said he would cut the budget and then at every turn has tried to increase it instead! This man that has passes executive orders that fall outside his given power! This is the man who can't tell the truth about anything, because the truth one day may change for him the next! What the hell makes you think he would do anything he promised to do?!?!?!?

Now because of your caving on the 2011 budget, you have proven you can't be trusted as much as our future dictator can't be trusted.

Obama on the other hand is setting himself up to be the dictator the liberals claimed Bush was and there is no one in Washington that we the people can trust to stop him. The man has grown bold, knowing there is no one to oppose him, after all the Dems think he is the messiah and the Republicans are fools, easily lead astray.

Obama should be impeached for all the crimes he has committed, yet who will stand against him? Not the Dems, Not the Republicans!