Bobusnr

Uncatagorized

Archive for the month “December, 2012”

Republicans Aren’t the Only Gun-Control Obstacle


 

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from National Journal’s AM & PM.

Posted byBeth Reinhard

 

AP PHOTO/JACQUELYN MARTIN/MIKE GROLL

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York have both done about-faces on gun control.

Correction: A previous version of this story misstated the state Sen. Mary Landrieu represents. It is Louisiana.

President Obama’s call for Congress to show the “courage” to consider new gun-control laws was aimed at Republicans, but he faces challenges with members of his own party who have a history of cowering from the gun debate.

The shooting deaths of 20 children and six adults at a Connecticut elementary school last week exposed how divided Democrats have been on gun control. It also demonstrated that, along with the current president, Democrats have failed to champion reforms after previous acts of mass violence. While Republicans held the line on gun control, Democrats largely ducked, ever since they ratified the assault-weapons ban in 1994 and saw their majority in Congress disappear.

Gun-control advocates face familiar challenges in keeping Democrats unified. The most vulnerable Democratic senators in 2014 hail from rural states where hunting is popular and guns are ubiquitous: Mark Begich of Alaska, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Max Baucus of Montana, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, and Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia. (Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., who was staunchly pro-gun during his 2010 and 2012 campaigns but now says he’s open to a debate, is not up for reelection for another six years. Same with Joe Donnelly of Indiana, who is also reconsidering his opposition to gun control as he transitions from congressman to senator and doesn’t face another election until 2018.)

The evolutions underscore how polarized the country is over gun control. Republicans, many of whom hail from rural, gun-owning states and districts, and the smaller number of Democrats that represent like-minded parts of the country, are responding as much to their constituents as to the powerful National Rifle Association lobby when opposing measures that come before Congress.

“There’s no question that the leadership of the party made a conscious decision years ago to walk away from the issue at all levels,” said Democratic lobbyist Steve Elmendorf, a top Capitol Hill adviser when the assault-weapons ban passed. “They figured they weren’t getting any credit for it, and they were getting hurt. I do think the situation [in Connecticut] could change that.”

The changing political calculus for some Democrats on gun control is starkly exemplified by Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who recently boasted that he “stood by [Bill] Clinton’s side” as a top adviser when he signed the 1994 assault-weapons ban.  But years later, Emanuel helped elect numerous pro-gun candidates–and bragged about their Second Amendment bona fides–as he spearheaded the Democratic takeover of Congress in 2006. He was President Obama’s chief of staff in 2010 when the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence handed the administration an “F” for expanding gun rights and failing to reinstate the assault-weapons ban. Now, in the wake of the tragedy in Newtown, as the mayor of a city plagued by gun violence, Emanuel is touting the ban once again.

Another prominent Democrat, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, underwent an even more dramatic conversion. As a member of the House representing a Republican-leaning upstate district in 2008, she voted to repeal a law that banned semiautomatic weapons in the District of Columbia and required gun owners to register their weapons and store them unloaded, with trigger locks. She earned an “A” rating from the NRA. Even as gun-control advocates complained about her January 2009 appointment to the Senate, she told a newspaper reporter that she kept two rifles under her bed. “If I want to protect my family, if I want to have a weapon in the home, that should be my right,” she said.

The makeover of the congresswoman from a conservative district to the senator of a liberal state began the next day, when staff said that the rifles were removed. Later that year, with the help of two former critics–New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y.–she sponsored legislation to crack down on illegal gun trafficking. The NRA downgraded her to an “F.” “She sounded like Annie Oakley, and now she’s somebody different,” complained her Republican challenger in 2010. Days after the shootings in Connecticut, she wrote a newspaper column pushing her gun-trafficking bill and other restrictions.  “Congress has ducked a serious national debate over commonsense gun laws for too long,” she wrote.

In the column, she describes meeting the parents of a slain 17-year-old in Brooklyn, N.Y., shortly after her Senate appointment and the near-shooting death of her friend, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., in 2011. “Her former congressional district did not experience the same issues of gun violence,” explained her spokesman, Glen Caplin. “For the last four years, as a statewide representative, Senator Gillibrand has been highly focused on solving the problems of the entire state, including gang and gun violence.”

Asked if she still owned the two rifles, Caplin said, “I’m not going to get into this.”

A shift in public opinion could offer political cover. A new Pew Research Center poll finds that, by 49 percent to 42 percent, limiting gun ownership is viewed as more important than protecting gun owners. The survey marks the first time since Obama’s election that more Americans prioritized gun control over gun rights.

“We’re getting so many calls from state capitals and Capitol Hill, it’s overwhelming,” said Brian Malte, spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “This feels like it could be a tipping point.”

It’s been nearly two decades since President Clinton pushed the assault-weapons ban, strategically attached to a sweeping anticrime bill and a 10-year expiration date. The House passed it by only two votes, and even Democrats who voted no feared it would brand their party as antigun.

“We knew it was a politically devastating vote at the moment it passed,” said Patrick Griffin, who served as Clinton’s director of legislative affairs. “They cleaned our clock in 1994. You can’t ascribe all of that to guns, but it was a factor.”

Guns were blamed again in 2000 when Democratic nominee Al Gore lost one of the closest presidential elections in history to Republican George W. Bush. As vice president, Gore backed the assault-weapons ban and cast a tie-breaking vote for a 1999 background check law. Just one more gun-friendly, Southern state–Arkansas, West Virginia, or even his home state of Tennessee–could have delivered the presidency to Gore, even without Florida.

Six years later, a handful of pro-gun candidates, including Joe Donnelly and Brad Ellsworth of Indiana, Heath Shuler of North Carolina, and Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania, helped Democrats take back the House. Once again, other factors contributed to the election results–the heated immigration debate, political scandals, and the unpopularity of the war in Iraq–but the success of pro-gun Democrats reinforced the party’s wariness of gun limits.

Anxious to protect their moderate members and the president’s reelection prospects, Democrats shied from high-stakes gun votes even after massacres at Virginia Tech and Fort Hood (although Republicans seized the House anyway in 2010), and after slayings at a meet-and-greet hosted by Rep. Giffords and in a movie theater in Aurora, Colo. “It’s never been a simple Democrat versus Republican issue. It’s much more complicated than that,” Griffin said.

A former top aide to Obama and on Capitol Hill, Jim Papa, said that Republicans beholden to the gun lobby deserve the lion’s share of the blame for inaction on gun control.

“There has always been an overwhelming amount of Democratic votes for gun control and practically zero support from the other party, and the responsibility falls on the Democrats?” he asked. “Opponents of gun control have confused the issue, confused assault weapons with hunting rifles, so there is peril for people who believe in one and not the other. The NRA successfully equated sensible, popular gun-safety legislation with taking away your shotgun.”

But even when Democrats controlled both legislative chambers during Obama’s first two years in office, they passed and he signed laws allowing visitors to carry loaded, concealed guns to national parks and permitting Amtrak passengers to stow guns in checked baggage. The assault-weapons ban was never taken up during Obama’s first term, which was consumed with trying to revive the economy, pass health care reforms, and end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“You don’t have an infinite amount of time and goodwill, and you have to pick some priorities,” said Griffin, the former Clinton aide. “Postelection, after this horrific event, maybe there’s a moment when we can come to common ground.  I’m not convinced of that, but it looks better than ever.”

 

 

 

What to Watch in 2013 Politics


 

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from WND.

Posted by Beth Reinhard

Updated:

LIZ LYNCH

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie addresses the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla., on Tuesday, Aug. 28, 2012.

We had no time to catch our breath after the November election before plunging into imbroglios over Cabinet appointments and the fiscal cliff. But the chances of 2013 offering even a brief respite from politics are as unlikely as the National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre ringing in the New Year with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Pass the eggnog quick!

With the 24/7 news cycle came the 365-day-a-year campaign, and it’s only getting worse. Fundraising invitations for candidates up for re-election in 2014 were going out before the 2012 election.

Nothing compares to the drama of a presidential race or the impact of the mid-terms, but pay attention starting now because this year will set the stage for 2014 and 2016. How much longer will President Obama bask in the glow of his re-election before the inevitable sputter in the polls? Will the Republican Party get serious about improving its image and outreach to an increasingly diverse electorate? And will Mitt Romney…oh, never mind, who cares?

Those are just a few of the questions on minds cluttered with marginal tax rates and charitable deductions. Here are some of the top political events we are looking forward to in 2013:

1. Debates over immigration reform and gun control. After a first term consumed with ending wars and avoiding economic collapse, President Obama has promised to turn his attention to social concerns. The group led by Vice President Joe Biden faces a January deadline to come up with proposals to stop gun violence in the wake of the shooting deaths of 20 children and six adults at a Connecticut elementary school. Activists on both sides of the immigration debate are gearing up for what could be an epic battle over how to treat the 11 million illegal immigrants in this country.

2. Governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia. With the news that Newark Mayor Cory Booker will not challenge Republican Gov. Chris Christie, the Democratic Party is scrambling. Christie, whose popularity is soaring as he oversees the recovery from “superstorm” Sandy, has already said he’ll be “much more than ready” for a White House bid in 2016. Virginia fascinates because it’s emerged as one of the most important battleground states in the country. In 2008, President Obama turned the state blue for the first time since 1964. Gov. Bob McDonnell’s victory the following year paved the way for the Republican rout in 2010, but the GOP couldn’t overcome Obama’s well-laid groundwork in 2012. We also won’t be able to take our eyes off Virginia because of the colorful, front-running characters: Republican Ken Cuccinelli, the attorney general whose idea of a great day is shutting down an abortion clinic and stabbing a knife into the heart of Obamacare, and Democrat Terry McAuliffe, the brash former national party chairman and consummate political hack.

3. Special Senate elections in Massachusetts. Obama’s appointment of Sen. John Kerry to replace Clinton as Secretary of State is expected to clear the Senate, opening up the seat he has held since a collection of celebrities recorded “We Are the World” in 1985. Republican Sen. Scott Brown, recently ousted by Democrat Elizabeth Warren, has a good shot at getting his job back.

4. Mayor’s races in New York City and Los Angeles. Both of these cities boast larger-than-life mayors whose political careers are destined to continue after they leave city hall.  Bloomberg, the Democrat-turned-Republican-turned independent billionaire, whose dislikes include big guns and Big Gulps, is winding up his third term. Four candidates are competing to replace Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a rising star in the Democratic Party who chaired the 2012 nominating convention.

So enjoy the champagne but don’t overdo it. Twitter is no fun with a hangover.

 

The Shooting The Liberal Media Won’t Tell You About


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from WND.

Posted byFrank Camp

 

I had in mind something to write about today. I was going to write about Obama and the “rich;” about how his desired upper-income tax hike amounts to nothing more than Obama positioning himself as a Robin Hood figure in the eyes of the less fortunate, while simultaneously taxing them to death. But then a news story caught my attention. Something very important happened just two days after the disturbing shooting in Connecticut: another shooting. Why is it so important? Because the national media didn’t cover it.

On December 16th, at a movie theatre in Bexar County, Texas, a gunman opened fire in the crowded theatre. Allegedly, the shooter was a disgruntled employee of a nearby restaurant. He entered the restaurant with the intent of killing his ex-girlfriend, then proceeded to the theatre to shoot more people.

The details of the motive are unimportant. What is important is how he was stopped. When the gunman opened fire at the movie theatre, an off-duty Bexar county Sheriff’s officer, carrying a gun, shot the suspect, putting an end to the mayhem. Louis Antu, spokesman for the Sheriff’s office, said this: “She took all appropriate action to keep everyone safe in the movie theater.”

The interesting twist of this story is that the national media didn’t cover it; it was only covered by local media. The reason this was not covered was because it didn’t fit within the liberal framework of gun control. Every time a mass shooting occurs, the Left jumps on the gun control bandwagon. They simply refuse to believe that guns are not the problem.

It was an armed citizen that stopped the Texas gunman from taking lives; using her gun, she saved the lives of numerous people. Concealed carry laws help reduce crime, period. By allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons, criminals are less apt to commit a crime; and if a crime is being committed, armed citizens can stop it. More extreme gun control is not the answer.

 

According to a study conducted by Clayton Cramer and David Burnett, of the Cato Institute, concealed carry laws reduce instances of violence and crime. In addition to many defense related gun statistics that the study reveals, the authors of the study decided to use a real-world example. According to theMarquette Tribune:

“The authors also said concealed carry policies on college campuses lead to a reduction in crime, using two Colorado schools as test cases. After the state enacted its concealed carry law in 2003, Colorado State University decided to allow students to carry concealed weapons while the University of Colorado prohibited them. The report found a 60 percent decrease in crime at Colorado State since 2004, while the University of Colorado saw a 35 percent increase during the same time period.”

There have been numerous other shootings stopped in the act by armed citizens. I won’t list them, but I hope you’ll Google it. As the Colorado study showed, an armed country is a safer country. You will not, however, hear that from the Left or their accomplices in the media.

In summary:

Information is power. Obama and the Left have the power because they control the flow of information–or misinformation, as it were. With studies like the one conducted by the Cato Institute, and real stories of armed citizens stopping criminals in their tracks, we have an opportunity to change the narrative. In 2013, the Obama administration is going after the guns in America. We have the statistics; we have the anecdotal evidence; and we have the power of information to fight back.

 

The Fiscal Cliff, Debt Cliff, and Now the Milk Cliff (It’s DC Drama at it’s finest)


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from www.dailyfinance.com.

Posted byRalph Barker

 

cliffs

The sky isn’t falling, yet. But, it seems everything else is about to including your bottom line. We are about to fall into more debt, more taxes and higher prices if our leaders don’t act quickly. All of these things, if they take place, bode badly for the economy and, of course, for you and me.

Most of us who have been around a while realize that all the political gambits that are played in Washington right now are pure drama. The tension will rise, tempers will flare, and eventually something will happen, or not happen, and we will have a better idea of what life is going to be like in 2013.

Now, however, it’s just a game and the winners are those who don’t get the blame when all the dust settles. In the meantime, we are held hostage. What happens in the next two or three days may just set the stage for what will happen in the election of 2014.

The possibility of falling off of the three cliffs that now loom before us is real. It is like a fiscal perfect storm aimed right at our wallets. We are not talking peanuts here either. We are talking the farm.

Now should our leaders fail to act, and act now, everyone’s standard of living will suffer significantly. This is a real crisis. So, what is the response of our elected officials? Well, the President flies off to vacation in Hawaii and the Congress goes home for Christmas. Now, the President, to his credit, is cutting his vacation short as he should. The Congress is scheduled to return this weekend, just two days before the January 1st deadline, but aren’t they all cutting it a little close? Can they get anything done other than kick the football again down the road?

We’ve all heard ad nauseum about the fiscal cliff. But, what does it really mean and what’s going to happen should we suffer the worst outcome? Basically, there is a good chance that we will enter another and immediate recession. So far the stock market is taking it pretty much in stride although Friday it showed some signs of panic closing down –158.20.

On another note, consumer confidence is falling fast and hard. It dropped from 71.5 on the index in November to a 65.1 level in December during the Christmas buying season. With the future so murky and undefined this should be no surprise. It’s bad, but no surprise.

One major ramification of falling off the cliff, if things stay as they are, will be 600 billion in higher taxes and spending cuts. This means higher taxes for up to 190 million Americans and drastic cuts to our military and other programs. Some of the tax hits would be really big. For example, someone earning $1,000,000 or more would pay not a total, but an additional  $250,000 at least. That’s huge. Even people making less than $50,000 can be expected to pay thousands more.

The fiscal cliff crisis is what’s on most people’s minds, but the milk cliff, really the dairy cliff, is nothing to sneeze at. A new Farm Bill has not yet been addressed by Congress. If a new bill isn’t passed or the old one extended the law would revert to the terms of the Agricultural Act of 1949.

Under the old Act, that would become the new law, the government would be forced to buy milk at double the going price. Who do you think the farmers will give first priority if this happens? Would they sell to you and me at today’s $3.65 per gallon or to Uncle Sam at $7.30 or more? As for me, with $8.00 milk I’ll eat my Wheaties dry and put some of that plastic spread on my toast.

For more extensive detail and history related to the milk cliff you can read more here: http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/12/21/politics-gone-sour-why-the-price-of-milk-might-soon-double/

Now don’t forget that the price of milk isn’t the only downside. Everything made from milk, dairy products, would also be impacted. Here is a list of some of the major items that would likely suffer price increases or scarcity:

Cheese, butter, ice cream, pudding, custards, sour cream, yogurt, and whipped cream.

The list doesn’t stop here either. There are also many cosmetics that have milk as one of its ingredients. Milk is a major ingredient in many of our favorite desserts like cupcakes, pies, brownies, and cookies. Many salad dressings, soups, and chocolates use milk too.

If you have an infant in the house your baby formula will cost you more. It’s made from milk. If you have some time and some extra savings, you might want to pick up a cow or two this weekend.

It’s interesting that our government has dropped food prices from the inflation index so you may see no movement in the inflation index, but you will see movement, a downward movement in your checkbook if this particular cliff isn’t avoided.

Due to the emphasis on the fiscal cliff, many believe the milk cliff will take a back seat in the short run, but this could be long enough to start the surge in milk prices. It is doubtful Congress would ignore it long though. They would be getting earfuls from their constituents very quickly. For milk to double in price is something that people won’t ignore very long.

Finally, we have the debt cliff. It is really more of a mountain that keeps growing. Though our leaders may play political football with this issue they will raise the ceiling again. There is no doubt about this. They really have no choice unless they immediately lower spending to current income levels. Our nation probably wouldn’t survive that quick a solution.

The next few days will be filled with intense political drama. Let’s hope our President and Congress come to their senses and realize that this is not just another game. The consequences of falling off the three cliffs would be drastic and immediate.

We have to ask the question why, when everyone knew what was coming, that these important issues are being addressed one minute before midnight. And, we wonder why Congress has an approval rating of 18%. That’s lower than telemarketers, lobbyists and car salespeople.

Read more: http://patriotupdate.com/articles/the-fiscal-cliff-debt-cliff-and-now-the-milk-cliff-its-dc-drama-at-its-finest/#ixzz2GfGowpBF

 

Government is overpaying for prescription drugs, investigators say


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

Posted byPHILLIP SWARTS

Instead of using optional lower prices, federal agency is reimbursing drugs at expensive market prices

Why It Matters:

Ballooning healthcare costs have come under increased scrutiny from lawmakers as the government seeks anyway to cut down on spending.  But a new report from a government watchdog says that Medicare has been paying too much for prescription medication, possibly costing taxpayers millions.

The government office that oversees Medicare and Medicaid has reimbursed prescription drugs at market costs, instead of at optional lower rates that could potentially save taxpayers millions of dollars a year, a government investigation has found.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) reimburses prescription drug purchases by beneficiaries through Medicare Part B.  The cost is supposed to be no more than five percent above what it takes to manufacture the drugs.

If the price goes higher, the Secretary of Health and Human Services can disregard the average sales price (ASP), and instead reimburse drug costs at just three percent above manufacturing costs.

But CMS has instead often been paying the higher drug costs, the HHS inspector general found.  If health officials used the lower prices, it could have saved an estimated $553,000 in the fourth quarter of 2012 alone on the group of drugs that were reviewed, investigators said.

“In the long term, savings achieved through price substitution could reduce waste and conserve taxpayer funds at a time when increased focus has been placed on rising health care costs and fiscal responsibility,” the inspector general’s report said.

For 388 drugs with complete data on their manufacturing costs, investigators found that 19 were being reimbursed at rates higher than five percent.  In fact, three of the drugs were costing between 40 and 50 percent higher than their manufacturing price, investigators said.

The IG is required to notify HHS when market prices for drugs goes higher than five percent of the average manufacturing price (AMP).  However, the recommendations seem to be falling on deaf ears.

Since 2005, the inspector general has issued “27 reports comparing ASPs and AMPs.  However, CMS has yet to lower reimbursement in response to OIG‘s findings and recommendations,” investigators said.

In one of the inspector general’s previous reports, CMS expressed concerns that the payoff won’t be great, and that the pricing substitution policy “will generate minor savings for the program.”  The IG said every little bit helps.

“Although we acknowledge that the savings from any single OIG report may be modest relative to total expenditures for Part B drugs, significant savings would have accrued had CMS taken action immediately after OIG issued its first pricing comparison,” the inspector general said.

And officials lack information for how much it takes to make some drugs.  According to a CMS coding system, 67 drugs only had partial data on their manufacturing costs, and 50 had no data.  Officials are continuing to pay the market price on those drugs since they can’t base the price off of production costs.

“CMS has expressed concern that partial AMP data may not adequately reflect market trends and therefore will not apply its price substitution policy to drugs with partial AMP data,” the IG report said.

Looking at the 67 with partial data, investigators said at least 10 should have had their price reduced.

 

NYC Wants to Mandate a No-Smoking Ban in Peoples’ Homes


 

Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from WND.

Posted by Sara Noble

 

NannyBloomberg

NYC Mayor Bloomberg is behind a secret cabal of neighborhood spies who run around convincing tenants and landlords to disallow all smoking by tenants, even within their own apartments.

The community spy groups get a $10,000 bounty for their efforts. The bounty is coming out of a grant, in other words, our tax money.

This is ripe for corruption to say nothing about the whole stealth factor being unethical, sneaky, and communistic. It pits neighbor against neighbor and it demonizes people.

But don’t worry, it is for the common good.

I’ve never smoked in my life and I don’t like being around cigarettes, but what right does anyone have to tell someone what they can do in their own home? Did our Bill of Rights disappear? Can’t Mayor Bloomberg look up our inherent rights on the Internet?

Did anyone doubt the government would enter our homes? Seriously, did you doubt it?

In mid-November, the New York Times reported that more landlords are demanding that new renters promise not to smoke in their homes. Most are grandfathering in present tenants.

Kenbar Management’s new project at 1510 Lexington Avenue which opened this month bans smoking in all 298 units, in addition to private and shared terraces. You can’t even smoke outside, not even on the sidewalk around the building. You would think smokers were spreading sarin gas. Actually the leftist PR is great and they make smoking sound as dangerous.

The NYC Health Department produced a study that indicates 57% of new tenants might possibly have been exposed to secondhand smoke. That’s a study you can hang your hat on.

Kenbar is a private company and can do what they want but the government doing it is something altogether different. They want to intrude on our personal lives, especially now that they have put themselves in charge of our healthcare.

Public housing throughout the country is being encouraged to ban smoking and they are doing it.

Laws are being passed against smoking. For example, all apartments and condos in Richmond, California must ban smoking by law.

San Francisco has banned smoking but won’t extend the ban to pot.

Marijuana has been legalized in two states and is ignored in others while smoking is verboten. The fact that marijuana is a gateway drug is meaningless to the leftists.

Disney banned smoking in film which is rich since no one is talking about banning vulgar and violent movies and video games.

The Pentagon has been considering a ban on smoking by soldiers.

The left bans what they don’t like and the rest of us have no say in the matter. Is this really what people want? What will they ban next? The fact that many on the far left hate Conservatives, Republicans, Christians, religion, morality, salt, sugar, McDonald’s, baby formula, fuel oil and gas, et al should send shivers down your spine.

I don’t like being in the position of supporting smoking and I certainly don’t want to promote it but telling people what they can do in their own home is just wrong.

Read about Mayor Bloomberg’s sneaky takeover of peoples’ smoking rights at the NY Post

 

Obama Seizing Sole Authority for US Defense


He has to be stopped he needs to be brought up on charges of Treason and IMPEACHED NOW!

U.S. Constitutional Free Press

In an attempt to seize total control over national security and bypass congress, a frightening new step by the Obama Administration is coming into play. As noted in Friday’s Wall Street Journal in an op-ed by John Bolton and John Woo, a State Department advisory group that is run by former Secretary of Defense William Perry is advising that the U.S. and Russia both reduce nuclear weapons without a treaty, as a treaty would require ratification by Congress. This would allow Obama and his executive branch to unilaterally cut our nuclear weaponry and ignore the treaty clause of the Constitution.

As Bolton and Woo point out, the US has a greater global responsibility than Russia; Iran and North Korea, neither of which is far from Russian interests, can only be countered by U.S. military strength. In addition, they note that Russia is not a trustworthy partner in weapons reduction; it…

View original post 139 more words

WHY GOOD PEOPLE NEED SEMIAUTOMATIC FIREARMS AND “HIGH CAPACITY” MAGAZINES … Part I


To be armed as well as the troops they might send to end our God given liberties!

BLOGGIN' BAD w/ Gunny G! ~ HEY! NO MORE PC, REMEMBER? ~AMERICA CANNOT BE GREAT AGAIN UNTIL THE STAIN, STIGMA, STENCH AND SHAME OF "THE PRINCE OF FOOLS" IS OFFICIALLY AND FINALLY UNDENIED, AINOs (AMERICANS IN NAME ONLY) RECOGNIZED, AND THE SWAMP FLUSHED! -POTUS TRUMP!.....-IF WE CAN KEEP HIM?

If you’re reading this, you’ve probably had a conversation with someone in the last few days who asked, “Why do ordinary law-abiding people need those semiautomatic firearms with magazines that can hold more than ten cartridges?” There are lots of sound answers.

 

 

 

 

For one thing, defensive firearms are meant to be “equalizers,” force multipliers that can allow one good person to defend against multiple evil people. To allow one good person to defend against a single evil person so much stronger and/or bigger and/or more violent than he or she, that the attacker’s potentially lethal assault can be stopped. History shows that it often takes many gunshots to stop even a single determined aggressor. Most police officers have seen the famous autopsy photo in the cops-only text book “Street Survival” of the armed robber who soaked up 33 police 9mm bullets before he stopped…

View original post 343 more words

Agenda Prevails Over Truth


Compare the troops between President Bush and obama they are smiling more with Bush than they do with the little dictator !

Flyover-Press.com

The right sets up a police state. The left wants to disarm the people. Where does that leave us mere mundanes? Pressed ham in the sandwitch. I may slap the next SOB that tries to tell me that “our boys” are fighting for “our freedom.” — jtl, 419

by Paul Craig Roberts via LewRockwell.com via PaulCraigRoberts.org. Recently by Paul Craig Roberts at LRC: The Greatest Gift for All

In the Western world truth no longer has any meaning. In its place stands agenda.

Agenda is all important, because it is the way Washington achieves hegemony over the world and the American people. 9/11 was the “new Pearl Harbor” that the neoconservatives declared to be necessary for their planned wars against Muslim countries. For the neoconservatives to go forward with their agenda, it was necessary for Americans to be connected to the agenda.

President George W. Bush’s first Treasury Secretary, Paul…

View original post 2,164 more words

And Way More Popular Than Congress


YouViewed/Editorial

GALLUP: NRA MORE POPULAR THAN MEDIA

 

 

 

 

” Gallup released a poll this month stating that the NRA stands at 54 percent approval.

Fifty-four percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of the National Rifle Association, while 38% have an unfavorable opinion. The public’s ratings of the NRA have fluctuated since first measured by Gallup in 1993 — from a low of 42% favorable in 1995 to a high of 60% in 2005.

On the other hand, the same polling firm shows that the media is distrusted by 60 percent of the population: approval rates for the media are below 30 percent.

And Congress? Their approval rate was last measured by Gallup at 21 percent. ”

 

 

Related :

 

Congressional Performance

5% Think Congress Is Doing A Good or Excellent Job
Congress Approval

View original post 26 more words

A Marine’s letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein – Tea Party Nation


Gds44's Blog

A Marine’s letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein – Tea Party Nation.

Jack E. Kemp

From Armed Forces Tea Party:

QUESTION OF THE DAY - Do You agree with this Marine? (Whether you agree or not please keep the language of your post respectful.) Senator Dianne Feinstein, I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one. I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America. I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man. I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public. We, the people, deserve better than you. Respectfully Submitted, Joshua Boston Cpl, United States Marine Corps 2004-2012 (Post and picture shared from : Uncle Sams Misguided Children)

QUESTION OF THE DAY – Do You agree with this Marine?
(Whether you agree or not please keep the language of your post respectful.)

Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one…

View original post 186 more words

New Years Eve Facebook….


Freedom Is Just Another Word...

We have a pResident, Buck Ofama whom completely disregards everything the Constitution and America stands for. The Senate and House are filled with the same.

He is after our Freedoms and wishes to dictate our lives. He is after our Rights and wants our guns to make sure we cannot stand up to him and his thugs. I have seen anger in people I would have never expected it from.

He wants our guns, yet people are buying them in droves, The lying, lame assed media supports him and one wonders about the agenda here. Does Buck Ofama really think all those out buying guns, ammo and accessories will really just ‘hand them over’.  All the dollars spent and just here ya go Mr Federal Asshole??

Will be an interesting 2013..

Enjoy…

“[T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.”…

View original post 18 more words

“Murder every NRA member” from those peace lovers on the left!


These folks disgust me to no end. They only want civility when it comes to folks talking about the left! Screw them!

Conservative Libertarian Outpost

Seems that all those peaceniks on the left really are not so peaceful after all. Not to mention that Feinstein,Schumer, and Lautenberg are hard at work as usual committing treason to their oaths to protect and defend the Constitution. I do believe in the death penalty, and treason is indeed a capital offense.

I am so sick of these better than thou’s inflicting their perceived utopia that I could personally come up with a hot barrel of tar and a feather bed! These are the very same people that came up with ex post facto law, the permanent taking of rights for less than felonious behavior, as well as the taking of private property rights.


Remember, in 1994 it only took one day for Congress and President Clinton to “legally” remove guns from the hands and homes of law-abiding Americans!


Remember, in 1984 it only…

View original post 59 more words

Obama: ‘I Cut Spending by Over a Trillion Dollars in 2011’


What a lying sack of scat!

How Gun Grabber Feinstein Stole $100s Of Billions In Gold | Video Rebel’s Blog


This person needs to be retired from the Senate now!

BLOGGIN' BAD w/ Gunny G! ~ HEY! NO MORE PC, REMEMBER? ~AMERICA CANNOT BE GREAT AGAIN UNTIL THE STAIN, STIGMA, STENCH AND SHAME OF "THE PRINCE OF FOOLS" IS OFFICIALLY AND FINALLY UNDENIED, AINOs (AMERICANS IN NAME ONLY) RECOGNIZED, AND THE SWAMP FLUSHED! -POTUS TRUMP!.....-IF WE CAN KEEP HIM?

Diane Feinstein is Gun Grabber in Chief in the US Senate. We need to go on the offensive against her for her many acts of corruption. The alternative is unthinkable: We could go unarmed off that Fiscal Cliff into the Greatest Depression in 500 years with nationwide riots and martial law.

 

Senator Diane Feinstein: “The Modern Jesse James

 

 

 

 

Congress should be convening a criminal investigation. On October 8, 1994, the biggest gold heist in history occurred, but this theft lacked the melodrama of a Jesse James’ holdup or the excitement of a Brink’s truck robbery. Nary a word was reported by the media even though this thievery was committed in the light of day. The citizens that were being robbed tried to cry out for help but the lawmen wouldn’t listen because unbeknownst to them, they were helping the bandits gain their booty.

 

View original post 856 more words

2012 in review


The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.

Thank each and every one that helped reach these stats!

Here’s an excerpt:

600 people reached the top of Mt. Everest in 2012. This blog got about 6,600 views in 2012. If every person who reached the top of Mt. Everest viewed this blog, it would have taken 11 years to get that many views.

Click here to see the complete report.

 

Watch a Mash-Up of Celebrities Demanding Gun Control (in Real Life) Gratuitously Using Guns (Onscreen)


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

 

Posted by Eliot Glazer

Last week, we pointed you to a PSA from Mayor Bloomberg‘s gun-control group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, in which the rich, famous, and pretty decried the need for stricter gun control (or something not quite specified). Some, like YouTube user Mike Hunt (ahem!), blame those very same people for perpetuating a culture of violence in the first place. In his own biting video response, he peppers in hyper-violent, trigger-happy footage against video of each celebrity wearing black and speaking in a hushed tone, respectively.

Actors against guns

Deport me? If America won’t change its crazy gun laws… I may deport myself says PIERS MORGAN


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

This is a Reblogged from www.dailymail.co.uk.

Posted byPIERS MORGAN

I have fired guns only once in my life, on a stag party to the Czech capital Prague a few years ago when part of the itinerary included a trip to an indoor shooting range. For three hours, our group were let loose on everything from Magnum 45 handguns and Glock pistols, to high-powered  ‘sniper’ rifles and pump-action shotguns.

It was controlled, legal, safe and undeniably exciting. But it also showed me, quite demonstrably, that guns are killing machines.

Rarely has the hideous effect of a gun been more acutely laid bare than at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, two weeks ago – when a deranged young man called Adam Lanza murdered 20 schoolchildren aged six and seven, as well as six adults, in a sickening rampage.

Speaking out: Piers Morgan angered 90,000 gun-lovers in the US when he spoke out about gun control

Speaking out: Piers Morgan angered 90,000 gun-lovers in the US when he spoke out about gun control

The Sandy Hook massacre brought back such horribly vivid memories for me of Dunblane, the worst mass shooting in Britain in my lifetime.

I was editor of the Daily Mirror on that day back in 1996 and will never forget the appalling TV footage of those poor Scottish mothers sprinting to the small primary school, many already howling with anguish at the thought of what might have happened to their five-year-old children.

It was a slaughter so senseless, so unspeakable, that it reduced even hard-bitten news reporters, including me, to tears.

And as I watched the parents at Sandy Hook racing to try to find their children, I saw the same images, the same terror, that engulfed Dunblane. And I felt the same tears welling up.

Then, 16 five-year-old children were slain in their classroom. Now, 20  six- and seven-year-olds. Beautiful young lives snuffed out before they had a chance to fulfill any of their potential. It made me so gut-wrenchingly angry.

I have four children. And I still remember the blind terror I felt when I lost my son Stanley, then aged two, for half an hour at a cricket match on a field surrounded by a small running creek. I was sure he’d drowned. But I was lucky: he finally emerged from where he’d been hiding – big, cheeky grin intact.

Every parent has a similar story. To even try to conceive of how you would feel if your child was shot multiple times in the head by a Rambo madman at school is just impossible. I honestly don’t know how you would ever carry on with life.

But my anger turned to blind rage when I saw the reaction to this hideous massacre in America.r

Deal with it don’t use your position as a media personality to  have a bully pulpit!

dEager to buy: After the Sandy Hook massacre, sales of the specific weapon used, an AR-15 assault rifle (pictured) rocketed

Eager to buy: After the Sandy Hook massacre, sales of the specific weapon used, an AR-15 assault rifle (pictured) rocketed

Gun frenzy: People crowd the RK Gun Show in the Smokies in Knoxville, Tennessee on Friday, December 28, 2012. Sales of high-capacity bullet magazines have also risen

Gun frenzy: People crowd the RK Gun Show in the Smokies in Knoxville, Tennessee on Friday, December 28, 2012. Sales of high-capacity bullet magazines have also risen

Sales of the specific weapon used, an AR-15 military-style assault rifle, rocketed at gun stores all over America in the days following the Sandy Hook shooting.

And the country’s biggest gun supplier, Brownells, said it sold more high-capacity bullet magazines in three days than it normally did in three-and-a-half years.

What is behind this apparently insane behaviour? The answer is, mainly, fear.

The well-organised, richly funded, vociferous pro-gun lobby were straight out, on my CNN show and many other media outlets, declaring that the only way those schoolchildren would have survived is if their teachers had been armed. It’s been their answer to every mass shooting.

After the shootings at a cinema in Aurora, Colorado, in July – where 70 people were hit, the worst victim-count in such an incident in US history, and 12 people died – sales of guns in the state rose by a staggering 41 per cent in the following month as people bought into the theory that if everyone in the theatre had been armed too, they’d have stopped the shooter. Can you imagine the scene as 200 people pulled out guns and started blazing away in a dark theatre?

The gun-lobby logic dictates that the only way to defend against gun criminals is for everyone else to have a  gun, too. Teachers, nurses, clergymen, shop assistants, cinema usherettes – everyone must be armed.

To me, this is a warped, twisted logic that bears no statistical analysis and makes no sense. Do you fight drug addiction with more cocaine? Alcoholism with more Jack Daniel’s? Of course not.

But woe betide anyone who dares suggest this. In the days following Sandy Hook, I interviewed a number of gun-rights representatives and grew increasingly furious as they  trotted out these hackneyed old  disingenuous lines.

Get over it!

Outspoken: Morgan called gun advocate Larry Pratt 'an unbelievably stupid man' on his show last week

Outspoken: Morgan called gun advocate Larry Pratt ‘an unbelievably stupid man’ on his show last week

Finally, I erupted at one of them, a man with the unfortunate name of Larry Pratt, who runs the Gun Owners of America lobbying group.

‘You,’ I eventually declared, ‘are an unbelievably stupid man.’

And that was the catalyst for the full wrath of the gun lobby to crash down on my British head.

A petition was created on an official White House website demanding my deportation for ‘attacking the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution’. This, of course, is the one that alludes to an American’s ‘right to bear arms’.

The concerted effort to get me thrown out of the country – which has so far gathered more than 90,000 signatures – struck me as rather ironic, given that by expressing my opinion I was merely exercising my rights, as a legal US resident, under the 1st Amendment, which protects free speech.

But no matter.

This gun debate is an ongoing war of verbal attrition in America – and I’m just the latest target, the advantage to the gun lobbyists being that I’m British, a breed of human being who burned down the White House in 1814 and had to be forcefully deported en masse, as no American will ever be allowed to forget – Special Relationship notwithstanding.

It’s no exaggeration to say that America’s unique fondness for guns pretty much got cemented by hatred of us Brits and the War of Independence. But the main reason the more fervent gun-rights activists give is a fear of their own US federal government using its army to impinge on their freedom. The problem is that America’s historical love of guns means the country is now awash with them – and with gun death.

Outrage: A petition on an official White House website demanding Piers Morgan's deportation had garnered more than 40,000 signatures by Monday afternoon

Outrage: A petition on an official White House website demanding Piers Morgan’s deportation had garnered more than 40,000 signatures by Monday afternoon

The bare statistics say it all. There are 311 million people in the United States and an estimated 300 million guns in circulation. (Between four million and seven million new firearms are manufactured in the US every year.)

Take out children from the population figure, and that’s comfortably more than one gun per person.

Each year, on average, 100,000 Americans are shot with a gun. Of these, over 31,000 are fatalities, 11,000 of them murders and 18,000 suicides. More than a million people have been killed with guns in America since 1968 when Dr Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy were assassinated.

The US firearm murder rate is 19.5 times higher than the 22 next most populous, high-income countries in the world. And a staggering 80 per cent of firearm deaths in the combined 23 countries occur in America.

My campaign against America’s gun laws didn’t begin two weeks ago when Adam Lanza committed his carnage. It began a week before I went on air for CNN, in January 2011. A US Congresswoman called Gabby Giffords was shot in the head by another deranged young man at an outdoor event in Tucson, Arizona, and miraculously survived. Six others, including a nine-year-old girl, were murdered.

It was the person not the gun that killed these folks so again Get Over your self!

Piers Morgan

Hitting back: Morgan has responded to the growing petition with a series of tweets

Hitting back: Morgan has responded to the growing petition with a series of tweets

It was a horrifying incident but, to my astonishment, nothing happened as a result. A week or so of debate and furrowed brows, and everyone went on with life.

Since then, I’ve watched in despair as the volume of gun-related massacres has escalated. (Six of America’s 12 worst-ever mass shootings have occurred since 2007, when I first came to America to work as a judge on America’s Got Talent.) And I’ve been shocked at how America’s politicians have been cowed into a woeful, shameful virtual silence by the gun lobbyists and the all-powerful National Rifle Association in particular.

The NRA targets pro-gun-control politicians on every rung of the political system and spends a fortune ensuring they either don’t get elected or get unelected. It’s been a concerted, ruthless and highly successful campaign. And to those, like me, who stand up to them, they sneer: ‘You don’t know anything about guns. Keep quiet.’

Well, I do know a bit about guns, actually. My brother’s a lieutenant colonel in the British Army and has served tours of duty in Northern Ireland, the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan. My sister married a colonel who trained Princes William and Harry at Sandhurst. My uncle was a major in the Green Howards.

Killer: Adam Lanza opened fire at Sandy Hook elementary school and killed 20 schoolchildren and six adults

Killer: Adam Lanza opened fire at Sandy Hook elementary school and killed 20 schoolchildren and six adults

My argument with guns is not based on some universal, pathological hatred of them. I’m not a pacifist. Guns win necessary wars and defeat tyrannical regimes like the Nazis.

Nor do I have a problem with those who use guns for hunting or for sport. I also understand, and respect, how there is an inherent national belief in America, based on their understanding of the 2nd Amendment, that everyone should be allowed to have a gun at home for the purposes of self-defence.

But where I have a big problem is when the unfortunately ambiguous wording of the 2nd Amendment is twisted to mean that anyone in America can have any firearm they want, however powerful, and in whatever quantity they want.

Again Get Over it Piers!

This has led to the absurd scenario where I can’t legally buy six packets of Sudafed in an American supermarket, or a chocolate Kinder egg, or various French cheeses, because they are all deemed a health risk.

Yet I can saunter into Walmart – America’s version of Tesco – and help myself to an armful of AR-15 assault rifles and magazines that can carry up to 100 bullets at a time.

Tragic: Traumatized students were seen being led out of the school crying and holding hands after the massacre

Tragic: Traumatized students were seen being led out of the school crying and holding hands after the massacre

The families of victims grieve near Sandy Hook Elementary School. Piers Morgan felt deeply affected by the tragedy The families of victims grieve near Sandy Hook Elementary School. Piers Morgan felt deeply affected by the tragedy

That weapon has now been used in the last four mass shootings in America – at the Aurora cinema, a shopping mall in Oregon, Sandy Hook school, and the most recent, a dreadful attack on firemen in New York.

The AR-15 looks and behaves like a military weapon and should be confined to the military and police force. No member of the public has any need for a death machine that can fire up to six rounds a second when modified and can clear a 100-bullet magazine (as used in Aurora) within a minute.

The only apparent reason anyone seems to offer up is that useing such weapons is ‘fun’. One gun-rights guy I interviewed last week even said admiringly that the AR-15 was ‘the Ferrari of guns’.

Well, I’m sorry, but ‘fun’ is just not a good enough excuse any more. Not when children are being killed by gunfire all over America.

Well Piers that is the way it goes. It is a God given right that folks have the right to be well armed to protect our country against folks like obama and any other tyrant that comes along.

President Obama seems to agree it’s time for action. After four years of doing precisely nothing about  gun control in America, he finally snapped after Sandy Hook and said he’s keen to pursue a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. And he wants a closure of the absurd loopholes that mean 40 per cent of all gun sales in America currently have no background checks whatsoever – meaning any crackpot or criminal can get their hands on whatever they want.

These measures, which will be resisted every step of the way, won’t stop all gun crime. Nor all mass shootings. There are too many guns out there, and too many criminals and mentally deranged people keen to use them. But the measures will at least make a start. And they will signal an intent to tackle this deadly scourge on American life.

After the shootings at a cinema in Aurora (pictured) , sales of guns rose by 41 per cent

After the shootings at a cinema in Aurora (pictured) , sales of guns rose by 41 per cent

Obama should follow up by launching a Government buy-back for all existing assault weapons in circulation (as worked successfully in Los Angeles last week). I would go further, confiscating the rest and enforcing tough prison sentences on those who still insist on keeping one.

Either you ban these assault weapons completely, and really mean it, or you don’t.

He should also significantly increase federal funding for mental health treatment for all Americans who need it. It’s the lethal cocktail of mental instability and ready gun availability that is the key component in almost every American mass shooting.

Nor do I think Hollywood or makers of violent video games should avoid any responsibility – their graphic images can surely only twist an already twisted mind.

I will not stop in my own efforts to keep the gun-control debate firmly in people’s minds, however much abuse I’m subjected to.

And let me say that for every American who has attacked me on Twitter, Facebook or Fox News this past week, I’ve had many more thank me and encourage me to continue speaking out – including one lady who came up to me in Manhattan just before Christmas, grabbed my arm, and said firmly: ‘I’m with you. A lot of us are with you.’

I genuinely think Sandy Hook will act as a tipping point. A Gallup poll released on Thursday showed that  58 per cent of Americans now support new gun-control laws, up from 43 per cent in 2011. That’s a big jump.

President Obama wept as he spoke of the mindless shooting. He seems to agree it's time for action over gun control

President Obama wept as he spoke of the mindless shooting. He seems to agree it’s time for action over gun control 

Nice for a photo op isn’t it. I would not trust this Jack wad individual,  on any level his whole 1st term was a LIE and he keeps lying so why would you trust this commie  Why??

The ‘more guns, less crime’ argument is utter nonsense. Britain, after Dunblane, introduced some of the toughest gun laws in Europe, and we average just 35 gun murders a  year.  

Well bad news for you Piers look at Kenasaw Ga. since every house hold owns at least 1 gun, rifle or shotgun they have had 1 just 1 murder by a gun.

Japan, which has the toughest gun control in the world, had just TWO in 2006 and averages fewer than 20 a year. In Australia, they’ve not had a mass shooting since stringent new laws were brought in after 35 people were murdered in the country’s worst-ever mass shooting in Tasmania in 1996. Fewer guns equals less gun murder. This is not a ‘pinko liberal’ hypothesis. It’s a simple fact.

In conclusion, I can spare those Americans who want me deported a lot of effort by saying this: If you don’t change your gun laws to at least try to stop this relentless tidal wave of murderous carnage, then you don’t have to worry about deporting me.

Although I love the country as a second home and one that has treated me incredibly well, I would, as a concerned parent first – and latterly, of a one-year-old daughter who may attend an American elementary school like Sandy Hook in three years’ time – seriously consider deporting myself.

BYE BYE

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2254758/Piers-Morgan-Deport-If-America-wont-change-crazy-gun-laws-I-deport-myself.html#ixzz2Ga27pisb
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

Sen. Reid To GOP: "At This Stage We’re Not Able To Make A Counteroffer"


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

 

 

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KENTUCKY): My office submitted our latest offer to the Majority Leader last night at 7:10 p.m. and offered to work through the night to find common ground. The Majority Leader’s staff informed us they would be getting back to us this morning at 10:00 a.m., despite the obvious time crunch we all have. It’s now 2:00 p.m., and we have yet to receive a response to our good-faith offer.
Now, I’m concerned about the lack of urgency here. I think we all know we’re running out of time. This is far too much at stake for political gamesmanship. We need to protect the American families and businesses from this looming tax hike. Everyone agrees that that action is necessary. In order to get things moving, I have just spoken with the Majority Leader. I also placed a call to the vice president to see if he could help jump-start the negotiations on his side.
The vice president and I have worked together on solutions before, and I believe we can again. I want my colleagues to know that we’ll keep everyone updated. The consequences of this are too high for the American people to be engaged in a political messaging campaign. I’m interested in getting a result here.
I was here all day yesterday. As I indicated, we submitted our latest proposal at 7:00 p.m. last night. We’re willing to work with whoever, whoever can help. There is no single issue that remains an impossible sticking point. The sticking point appears to be a willingness, an interest, or frankly the courage to close the deal. I want everyone to know I’m willing to get this done, but I need a dance partner.
###
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NEVADA): We have been negotiating now for 36 hours or thereabouts. We did have conversations last night that ended late in the evening between staffs. This morning, we have been trying to come up with some counteroffer to my friend’s proposal. We have been unable to do that.
I have had a number of conversations with the president, and at this stage we’re not able to make a counteroffer. The Republican leader has told me that — and he’s just said here — that he’s working with the vice president, and he and the vice president, I wish them well.
In the meantime, I will continue to try to come up with something. But at this stage, I don’t have a counteroffer to make. Perhaps as the day wears on, I will be able to. I will say this, I think that the Republican leader has shown absolutely good faith. It’s just that we are apart on some pretty big issues.

 

Regulating the Militia


Welcome and thank you for stopping by. Please be aware and advised, this is a CONSERVATIVE BLOG. Here is some information and my rules:

1) I do not like Liberal Ideology;

2) Conservatives have the voice of reason on my blog;

3) I will delete any comments that are abusive, non-related to the “blog theme” and not debated in a civil manner;

4) I welcome input from all walks of life. However, this is my blog and I will make the “ultimate” decision on any/all comments.

I encourage “civil” discussion. We may not agree on “ideology”. However, we can agree on “respect” and at least listening to different perspectives. Thank you for visiting!

Posted byKevin D. Williamson

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 29, 2012

 

The Second Amendment is about protecting ourselves from the state.
By Kevin D. Williamson, NRO: My friend Brett Joshpe has published anuncharacteristically soft-headed piece in the San Francisco Chronicle arguing that in the wake of the massacre at Sandy Hook, conservatives and Republicans should support what he calls “sensible” gun-control laws. It begins with a subtext of self-congratulation (“As a conservative and a Republican, I can no longer remain silent. Some will consider it heresy,” etc.), casts aspersions of intellectual dishonesty (arguments for preserving our traditional rights are “disingenuous”), advances intoex homine (noting he has family in Sandy Hook, as though that confers special status on his preferences), fundamentally misunderstands the argument for the right to keep and bear arms, deputizes the electorate, and cites the presence of teddy bears as evidence for his case.Brett, like practically every other person seeking to diminish our constitutional rights, either does not understand the purpose of the Second Amendment or refuses to address it, writing, “Gun advocates will be hard-pressed to explain why the average American citizen needs an assault weapon with a high-capacity magazine other than for recreational purposes.” The answer to this question is straightforward: The purpose of having citizens armed with paramilitary weapons is to allow them to engage in paramilitary actions. The Second Amendment is not about Bambi and burglars — whatever a well-regulated militia is, it is not a hunting party or a sport-clays club. It is remarkable to me that any educated person — let alone a Harvard Law graduate — believes that the second item on the Bill of Rights is a constitutional guarantee of enjoying a recreational activity.There is no legitimate exception to the Second Amendment for military-style weapons, because military-style weapons are precisely what the Second Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear. The purpose of the Second Amendment is to secure our ability to oppose enemies foreign and domestic, a guarantee against disorder and tyranny. Consider the words of Supreme Court justice Joseph Story — who was, it bears noting, appointed to the Court by the guy who wrote the Constitution: The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.“Usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers” — not Bambi, not burglars. While your granddad’s .30-06 is a good deal more powerful than the .223 rifles that give blue-state types the howling fantods, that is not what we have a constitutional provision to protect. Liberals are forever asking: “Why would anybody need a gun like that?” And the answer is: because we are not serfs. We are a free people living under a republic of our own construction. We may consent to be governed, but we will not be ruled.
The right to keep and bear arms is a civil right. If you doubt that, consider the history of arms control in England, where members of the Catholic minority (and non-Protestants generally) were prohibited from bearing arms as part of the campaign of general political oppression against them. The Act of Disenfranchisement was still in effect when our Constitution was being written, a fact that surely was on the mind of such Founding Fathers as Daniel Carroll, to say nothing of his brother, Archbishop John Carroll.
The Second Amendment speaks to the nature of the relationship between citizen and state. Brett may think that such a notion is an antiquated relic of the 18th century, but then he should be arguing for wholesale repeal of the Second Amendment rather than presenting — what’s the word? — disingenuous arguments about what it means and the purpose behind it.
If we want to reduce the level of criminal violence in our society, we should start by demanding that the police and criminal-justice bureaucracies do their job. Massacres such as Sandy Hook catch our attention because they are so unusual. But a great deal of the commonplace violence in our society is preventable. Brett here might look to his hometown: There were 1,662 murders in New York City from 2003 to 2005, and a New York Times analysis of the data found that in 90 percent of the cases, the killer had a prior criminal record. (About half the victims did, too.) Events such as Sandy Hook may come out of nowhere, but the great majority of murders do not. The police function in essence as a janitorial service, cleaning up the mess created in part by our dysfunctional criminal-justice system.
We probably would get more out of our criminal-justice system if it were not so heavily populated by criminals. As I note in my upcoming book, The End Is Near and It’s Going to Be Awesome, it can be hard to tell the good guys from the bad guys: For more than twenty years, NYPD detectives worked as enforcers and assassins for the Gambino crime family; in 2006 two detectives were convicted not only of murder and conspiracy to commit murder but also on charges related to such traditional mob activity as labor racketeering, running illegal gambling rings, extortion, narcotics trafficking, obstruction of justice, and the like. This was hardly an isolated incident; only a few years prior to the NYPD convictions more than 70 LAPD officers associated with the city’s anti-gang unit were found to have been deeply involved in gang-affiliated criminal enterprises connected to the Bloods street gang. Their crimes ranged from the familiar police transgressions of falsifying evidence, obstructing justice, and selling drugs seized in arrests to such traditional outlaw fare as bank robbery — they were cops and robbers. More than 100 criminal convictions were overturned because of evidence planted or falsified by officers of the LAPD. One scholarly account of the scandal concluded that such activity is not atypical but rather systemic — and largely immune to attempts at reform: “The current institution of law enforcement in America does appear to reproduce itself according [to] counter-legal norms . . . attempts to counteract this reproduction via the training one receives in police academies, the imposition of citizen review boards, departments of Internal Affairs, etc. do not appear to mitigate against this structural continuity between law enforcement and crime.”
The Department of Homeland Security has existed for only a few years but it already has been partly transformed into an organized-crime syndicate. According to a federal report, in 2011 alone more than 300 DHS employees and contractors were charged with crimes ranging from smuggling drugs and child pornography to selling sensitive intelligence to drug cartels. That’s not a few bad apples — that’s an arrest every weekday and many weekends. Given the usual low ratio of arrests to crimes committed, it is probable that DHS employees are responsible for not hundreds but thousands of crimes. And these are not minor infractions: Agents in the department’s immigration division were caught selling forged immigrant documents, and DHS vehicles have been used to transport hundreds (and possibly thousands) of pounds of illegal drugs. A “standover” crew — that is, a criminal enterprise that specializes in robbing other criminals — was found being run by a DHS agent in Arizona, who was apprehended while hijacking a truckload of cocaine.Power corrupts. Madison knew that, and the other Founders did, too, which is why we have a Second Amendment.
————–
Kevin D. Williamson is a deputy managing editor of National Review and also writes for National Review Online. He is the author of the 2011 book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism. ARRA News Service editor’s comment: This article has been shared in whole because Williams’ summation of the situation which can not be summarized any furher and is  shared for “educational purposes” under theFair Use Doctrine.

 

Post Navigation

Brittius

Honor America

China Daily Mail

News and Opinions From Inside China

sentinelblog

GOLD is the money of the KINGS, SILVER is the money of the GENTLEMEN, BARTER is the money of the PEASANTS, but DEBT is the money of the SLAVES!!!

Politically Short

The American Reality Outside The Beltway

My Opinion My Vote

America needs saving

America: Going Full Retard...

Word: They are acting. They are creating. They are framing their reality around you. And we … we bark at the end of our leashes. Our ambition for freedumb is at the end of our leash.

hillbillysurvival

The greatest WordPress.com site in all the land!

I am removing this blog and I have opened a new one at:

http://texasteapartypatriots.wordpress.com/

Reclaim Our Republic

Knowledge Is Power

Lissa's Humane Life | In Honor of George & All Targeted Individuals — END TIMES HARBINGER OF TRUTH ~ STANDING FIRM IN THE LAST HUMAN AGE OF A GENOCIDAL DARKNESS —

— Corporate whistle blower and workers’ comp claimant, now TARGETED INDIVIDUAL, whose claims exposed Misdeeds after the murder of my husband on their jobsite by the U.S. NWO Military Industrial Complex-JFK Warned Us—

Linux Power Wordpress.com

Just another WordPress.com weblog

redpillreport.wordpress.com/

The ‘red pill’ and its opposite, ‘blue pill,‘ are pop culture terms that have become symbolic of the choice between blissful ignorance (blue) and embracing the sometimes-painful truth of reality (red). It’s time for America to take the red pill and wake up from the fog of apathy.

The Mad Jewess

Mirror Site For Reflection

Freedom Is Just Another Word...

Rules?? What Are rules? I don't need no stinking rules!!!

sharia unveiled

illuminating minds

JUSTICE FOR RAYMOND

Sudden, unexplained, unattended death and a families search for answers

THE GOVERNMENT RAG BLOG

TGR Intelligence Briefing

Flyover-Press.com

Dedicated to freedom in our lifetimes

News You May Have Missed

News you need to know to stay informed

Automattic

Making the web a better place

%d bloggers like this: