Fast and Furious: With 'Gunrunner' Obama Moves Forward on Gun Control

When I first heard about this I asked myself what was the goal of "Fast and Furious?"  Having worked international law enforcement for over a decade I knew that without the other country being "on-board" and cooperating you were just pissing into the wind and were likely to get wet.  It is clear now that the goal was not to arrest the drug lords--Mexico had no idea what was going on and only they can arrest people in Mexico--but to ensure that there were statistics available to fan the outrage in the media as a way of smoothing the path for more onerous gun control laws.  Laws that we know affect only lawful owners and which criminals will ignore just as they ignore the plethora of gun laws on the books today. 

Now we have an announcement that the UN will be meeting this week on the gun control treaty that they plan to use to disarm all but the ruling elite in all countries.  (See: http://bit.ly/jUf6so)  This is the same treaty that Hillary Clinton and Obama have already said that they will support and sign and is clearly part of the "under the radar" moves that Obama let slip during a meeting with gun-control advocates a few weeks ago.  

Late last week Obama's spokesman told us that we can expect an announcement soon on "reasonable measures" to ensure gun safety which in all likelihood will have less to do with gun safety than to impinge on legitimate gun ownership.  It would appear that Obama, et al., are using two-pronged approach to get America looking one way at one hand while they stab us in the back with the other hand.  We must keep our eyes and ears open and ensure that we contact our Senators and Representatives and tell them "No!" when it comes to the UN treaty and Obama's anticipated Executive Order.  

Obama Eyeing Internet ID for Americans

"I know who you are now and what you wrote.  Now I'm gonna show you how we take care of the enemy in Chicago."  

American's have long objected to a Federal Government-controlled centralized data base for firearms because of concerns that an overreaching politician in the not-necessarily-so-far-distant future would use it to confiscate the arms of private citizens in violation of the 2nd Amendment.  Now we have an overreaching politician who is moving to seize control of the internet through innocuous sounding programs like "Net Neutrality" and now "Internet ID."  It's all being proposed by his "Czars" of course and we can count on him to blandly assure us that he won't allow anyone to interfere with our right to communicate our political ideas via the internet.  He may even issue a nice sounding Executive Order forbidding the use of the information to identify his political opposition which he refers to as "the enemy."

We have to ask ourselves:  Are we willing to trust a man who has lied constantly since elected with our 1st Amendment rights?  Well, are we?

I think not.  We're not ready for a Statist Regime that controls every aspect of our lives and tells us what to think and eat.  It's not 1984...and never will be.

Follow the link for the story.

Obama Administration Bypassing Congress to Institute Death Panel ‘Discussions’

There can be no argument.  This is what the left behaves and what they want and they'll do it if we let them.  Repeal is the only option.  

During the run-up to the last minute vote last year on the universally reviled Obamacare act last year the Left Stream Media blasted Sarah Palin for coining the phrase "death panels" because they couldn't find the term in their reading of that 2,000 + page monstrosity.  Of course, nobody in their right mind gives the Left Stream Media much credit for intelligence...other than themselves and their carefully selected "experts" and Sarah Palin was right.   In the end the Senate managed to take out the "end of life" counseling before the bill went to the President for his triumphant signing ceremony; but that only delayed the eugenics-minded left in creating the panels.  They now are in the process of conducting an end-run on the American people and are  putting them in place by executive fiat.

So Obama will have his "death panels"--or so he believes--anyway.  It's now up to the new House of Representatives to step-up and tell him and his Czar no.  Not only no but hell no!  It's high time that we defunded all the Czars, especially those involved in health care, and sent them packing.

Follow the link for more.  It'll boost your blood pressure.

The Death Panel's First Murder

Repeal!  And take back America from the Socialists.  

The liberals gasped and feigned shock when Sarah Palin came up with the "Death Panel" accusation in connection with Obamacare.  The Left Stream Media immediately went on the attack branding Palin with the usual slurs and denying that there would be anything close to "Death Panels" resulting from Obamacare.  In doing so, they blatantly ignored the stated beliefs of those who would be involved in setting up Obamacare.

I have two friends who are currently undergoing treatment for breast cancer:  one on the West Coast and one on the East Coast.  Both of these women are extremely good people with family and friends.  Both have undergone surgery and chemo.  As I look at them and think about what they have faced and still face, I think about what I faced with my own cancer when my daughter was only a few months old.  Thankfully I found an excellent doctor who using the latest techniques removed the cancer from my body and I am now cancer free.  The operation, like the medicine that the FDA has now essentially banned, was not cheap; but the fact that my 4 year-old daughter will have a father for many, many years to come made the treatment worth every penny.  How would I feel if a bureaucrat in Washington decided that the type of robotic surgery that I underwent was just not cost effective based on the number of years I have left in which to earn and pay taxes?  Sound a little 1984-ish?  I've got news for you out there:  That's exactly the way they are now determining what treatments we will receive.

Follow the link for more.  And when someone you love is denied treatment in the future because "it's just not cost effective" you'll know exactly where the blame lies.  Use that knowledge wisely.

‘Mainstream’ Islamist Group Wants ‘Global Caliphate’ and Islamist America

It's not being fabricated.  They speak for themselves.

Will we let people like this control the destiny of our children?

The inability of people to recognize the threat that organizations like this are to our Constitution and our way of life is frustrating.  Time an again we are told that not all Muslims are trying to destroy our country and that it's not Islam that's the problem but a small group of political fanatics that use Islam as a front or cover for the terrorism that they perpetrate.  Then something like this comes along and we find out that a "mainstream" Muslim group, in this case the Islamic Circle of North America, actually promotes the establishment of a worldwide caliphate and the subjugation of America to shari'ah law and in doing so advances the cause of the so-called political fanatics.

Will someone please tell us why our government leaders aren't calling these people out?  Will someone please tell us why our government is more concerned about criticizing Islamic organizations such as the ICNA and CAIR than it is about protecting our Constitution and way of life?  Will someone please tell us why liberals in the Left Stream Media and the entertainment world kowtow to Islam while feeling free to insult all Christians?  (Wait!  I think I know the answer to that.  See the pictures of Rage Boy and his friends above.)

Isn't it time that our leaders admitted that there is a problem?

Follow the link for more.

Health Care Statists on the March

Health Care Statists on the March

In order to accomplish all they want to do for us, all we have to do is allow them to abrogate the Constitution by redefining the words to mean the exact opposite of what the Founding Fathers wrote and meant. 1984 is upon us. folks, and it is being led not only by Neo-Lib Democrat politicians abetted by Progressive Republicans, but by doctors who purport to want to give us "better" health care. Soon these same doctors will talk about our duty to die so that others may have our share of medical care and other resources that are necessary for life.

We must reject such intellectual trash. We've seen what nation states do when they practice the eugenics that is the driving force behind socialized medicine.  Eugenics is the basis of the rationing that is the natural outcome of socialized medicine because it provides a "scientific" manner of selection as to who will get the care and who will die.  It led to forced sterilizations in the early 1900's in the United States and National Socialist Germany took its application to the nth degree.  Eugenics has been so thoroughly discredited that the American Medical Association should be ashamed of itself. It's no wonder that many doctors that I've talked to no longer belong to the AMA.

Follow the link for more.

Self-Inflicted Defeat

The enemy.  He is not confused about who he wants to defeat.

Self-Inflicted Defeat

Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. - Sun Tzu

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. - Sun Tzu

Sun Tzu authored The Art of War centuries ago yet it is as applicable in the 21st century as it was in 300 BC. Unfortunately while professional soldiers spend their lives studying the precepts of Sun Tzu in many different forms, politicians generally fail to understand the lessons that were meant to be conveyed by the "wise" quotes that we are all used to seeing whenever authors want to appear wise when writing about war. Few politicians have read Sun Tzu and even fewer understand what was being conveyed in those writings. Obama has heard of Sun Tzu, I am sure, but I doubt that he read The Art of War and, if he did, he failed to understand it. Not that Obama is ignorant but his concept of battle comes more from the likes of Saul Alinsky than from classical strategic and tactical thought and this makes him less effective that even Lyndon Johnson who tried to run a very hot war from the White House. Democrats, with the exception of Harry Truman, have proven time and again that it just can't be done that way.

What we see with the Obama Regime, and with the Bush Administration before it, is the reticence to clearly define and identify the enemy. The failure of the Bush Administration was because after the shock of 9/11 wore off and the civil libertarians started their counter-campaigns to humanize the enemy, Republicans began acting like Democrats and paying homage to "political correctness" rather than giving the military a clear objective and allowing them to prosecute a war. With the Obama Regime, conducting war is something that has to be very tightly controlled so as to not cause any bad publicity or cause any blood to be splashed on their own shoes thus their reliance on Preditor strikes and covert action while publicly restricting the activities of troops committed openly to battle. As much as I like and admire Special Operators, folks, that is not the way to win a war. It is a way to ensure defeat, politically if not militarily. Just ask Lyndon Johnson.

You can be certain that the enemy, the Islamo-fascists who were historically allied with the National Socialists in WWII, are adhering to the teachings of Sun Tzu and von Clauswitz. You can be certain that their goal is absolute victory and they aren't worrying about looking bad in the Left Stream Media because they see the Left Stream Media, if it doesn't support them, as an enemy to be eventually eliminated as well. Their goal is total dominance. Under Obama, ours is to get along and be a "nice guy."

I wonder what Sun Tzu would say about that?

Follow the link for a very good commentary.

The Coming War on Bacon

The Coming War on Bacon

The nanny state is the result of the perverted, Neo-Lib socialist mindset in which personal responsibility is null and void and the collective is all that matters. It would seem to be logical that they would focus on things like marijuana, heroin and the prevention of AIDS but no, bacon is a problem that must be addressed. And salt, of course. We know how damaging that can be. And sugar! That should be rationed and taxed so that the masses don't eat too much.

If they outlaw bacon I can foresee a blackmarket rising. Instead of moonshiners it will be bacon smokers. Instead of baggies of green, leafy vegetable matter it will be paper wrapped packages of bacon strips. There will be street names for the illegal bacon, of course. I can imagine conversations like, "Hey! You know where I can score some Wild Piggie for tomorrow's breakfast?" And it will be Porkers instead of Pushers.

Follow the link for more.

The Ugly Side of Social Justice

The Ugly Side of Social Justice

Social justice is not justice. It is a term that today more accurately means using the façade of justice to justify crime because the one making the judgment favors the one being judged. Liberal-progressive-socialist Democrats love the idea of social justice because it excuses their actions which would be considered criminal in any other setting. For instance, destroying millions of dollars in property by burning a Hummer dealership is not a crime under social justice because Hummers are bad for the environment. Never mind the destruction of personal property or the monetary loss for workers or the owners. Social justice doesn't just take into consideration the motive, it demands that the motive be considered as an excuse. I'm sure that social justice would have been comforting to the non-surviving members of the Donner Party. And I'm certain that Martin Bormann would have been excused for the crimes of the National Socialist Party in Germany had he been tried in Iran as social justice would have demanded it.

Social justice is not justice. It is merely a way to excuse the illegal and illegitimate actions of those who support the ruling liberal elite or to condemn those who oppose the policies of the liberal-progressive-socialist Democrats. That is all it is. Nothing more. Nothing less. And contrary to the comments of some men who call themselves "religious leaders," ministers or priests, Jesus would not have advocated for social justice as envisioned by the left today. His social justice required that the judge be blind to the social standing of those before the court so that the rich and the poor, the downtrodden and the powerful, were all treated alike. His social justice advocated that all men were created equal and and thus must be judged equally.

Follow the link for more.

'Al Gore Receives Honorary Doctorate' By Doug Powers

As the writer points out, there is no degree field for Hoaxology and that's what AlGore, the Wrong Reverend of the Religion of Global Warming, does best.  Remember:  It's not really about the climate; it's about money (yours and how you'll have less of it) and political power (the ruling elite's).

Keep that in mind and write your Senators about the latest travesty that they are rolling out to hurt We the People.

Follow the link for more.

The Real Reason the Left Loves Illegals

The Real Reason the Left Loves Illegals

Or, "How the Liberal-Progressive-Socialist Democrats took to Voter Fraud and Learned to Love It"

Yes, the real reason. And the reason that you have to show a government-issued picture ID to open a bank account, to drive a car, to board an airplane, to buy medicine in a pharmacy or to enter a government building. But you DON'T have to show a picture ID for the most important thing you can do as a citizen: vote. The Democrats trot out racism and discrimination claims every time the issue comes up because if people actually had to be citizens when they voted, the chances of Democrats winning elections would drop by 50%.

Follow the link for more.

EDITORIAL: Black Panthers but no white rights - Washington Times

EDITORIAL: Black Panthers but no white rights - Washington Times

There was hope for a short while after his election that Barack Hussein Obama would be the symbol of a post-racial America. I admit that even though I looked at that as a silver lining in the clouds that were gathering over America. Unfortunately that hope was as short lived as a snowball in Hades. We now know that far from being post-racial, Obama thrives on and encourages racial divisions. In Obama's America, only white people can be racist. All others can discriminate all they want but in the end, in Obama's eyes, it is always the fault of the white guy. Especially if he is a police officer. That is political correctness under the Obama Regime.

In the New Black Panther case, it was inarguably the worst incidence of voter intimidation since the Civil Rights movement began. But in Eric Holder's eyes, and the eyes of Barack Obama, the New Black Panthers could not be guilty for two reasons: 1. They were black and blacks can't be racist; and, 2. The New Black Panthers were early supporters of Barack Obama when he announced his run for the presidency.

This isn't just wrong, it's corrupt, arrogant, crass evil.

Follow the link for more.

FCC to U.S. Court of Appeals: Drop Dead!

Could the U.S. become an Internet Black Hole, or merely a propaganda tool for the Government? Or will it remain free?

FCC to U.S. Court of Appeals: Drop Dead!

An excellent piece on the move by the FCC to take regulatory control over the internet despite prior court rulings that the internet isn't in the purview of the FCC. You will remember that the Chairman of the FCC, Julius Genachowski, couldn't win the consent of the Senate so became a recess appointment and while I do not dispute the President's power to make recess appointments, Genchowski's almost immediate move to ignore precedent and court rulings makes me wonder about the Regime's actual goal.

President Obama, despite his recent claim that he was technologically deficient in using an iPod or an iPad, had a presidential campaign that was able to make extraordinary use of the internet for both campaigning and raising funds. There is no doubt that his claim in a speech was pure artifice. Given that, why the move to have the government take control of the internet? Is is pure crony capitalism so that he can ensure that his favored companies, like Google, profit? Or, because the internet has proven to be as formidable an opponent as it was an ally, is it so that the Regime can better control the information flow?

Follow the link for more on the story.

Julius Caesar of the Internet

Are you ready for the specter of the government, especially the Obama Regime, controlling the internet?  You'd better be, because that's exactly what they plan to do.

The linked WSJ article talks about how they plan to take over the internet to enforce the safe sounding idea of "net neutrality."  Net neutrality seems reasonable enough.  But wait, isn't the net neutral as it now exists?  Can't you find just about every kind of idea on the net.  Can't you do research on all sides of any issue now?  Of course you can!  With blogs ranging from the Daily Kos and Huffington Post to Red State and Rush Limbaugh you can find open, vibrant political discourse covering all issues from the far, far left to the far, far right.  You can find discussions on scientific research.  You can find discussions on religion–every religion–without any problem at all.  So what is this thing that they call "net neutrality" and why is the Obama Regime so hot to implement it?

And most importantly, who will profit from its implementation?  Will it lower prices?  If so, for how long?  Will it stifle free speech in any way?  Will the government control net content in any way? Will there be censorship?

So many questions that need to be answered about the innocuous sounding two-word phrase:  Net neutrality.

The person driving the issue for the Obama Regime is Julius Genachowski, a recess appointment who could not pass muster and get approval by the Senate because of his radical ideas and agenda, and Julius believes that he can change the rules to get around a federal appeals court ruling that the FCC lacks the authority to regulate the Internet.  I am hoping that he is wrong and I certain his attempt will be seriously challenged in court.

Until then, it's important that we watch this very carefully and try to find out the true answers to the questions above and the truth, you can be certain, won't be handed to us by Julius because he's on a mission.  With the crowd that is government now, it's better to be very careful with our trust.  After all, "net neutrality" is a non-phrase straight from George Orwell's 1984.  If they're using that kind of double-talk we'd best keep one hand on our wallet and the other on our freedoms.  They'll steal both in a heartbeat if they think they can.

Follow the link for more.

LAPD lobbying to end gun rights

Remember when Obama said that he wouldn't try to take away the guns of honest, law-abiding Americans?  When you see the bill that was introduced by his party it is clear that was just another lie that he used to get elected.

This is a bill that should not be passed.  It is a direct assault on the Constitution on both the Due Process and 2nd Amendment grounds.  Worse yet, it doesn't address the problem because it's not meant to address the problem.  It's meant to be a tool that the liberal-progressive-socialist Democrats can use to abrogate the 2nd Amendment and, like the thieves of Tammany Hall, ensure that only the ruling elite and their supporters have that right.

Imagine, your name is put on a list of suspected terrorists by someone you don't even know because maybe, just maybe, you wrote a harsh letter to a newspaper, a Senator or a Congressman.  Or maybe you belong to the NRA or write a blog like this one.  Then you go down to buy a new shotgun to hunt with and, WHAMMO!, your purchase is denied.  You ask why and the dealer says he doesn't know.  All he has is a rejection on the instant check through the State Police.

You ask the State Police and they say they don't know anything and all they have is that it's "Federal."  You go to the FBI, ATF and the Justice Department and are met with blank stares and shrugged shoulders.  Now you know that in order for you to buy a shotgun to hunt with you will have to hire a lawyer and file a suit in Federal Court.  So you have the money and you do so.

All your attorney is given is a heavily redacted document that makes no sense.  The judge can't even see the full file.  The government's position is that it can't be revealed.  You can't face your accuser because the government won't identify the accuser.  You can't call witnesses because the government won't show you the full accusation.  You are in a system that would make Joseph Stalin smile with pleasure.

And they plan on doing it in the name of making us safer.  These Senators, liberal-progressive-socialist Democrats all, along with enablers like Mike Bloomberg and Chief Kelly and the Chief of the LAPD, absolutely plan to take away the guns of honest, law abiding citizens.

I guarantee you that Barack H. Obama will sign the bill if it gets to his desk.  He knows he lied but that was to get elected.  Now he has to consolidate his power as fast and far as he can so he can retain that power.  And if not him, the next socialist president.

S. 1317, titled "Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009" should actually be titled "Denying Any American a Firearm Just Because We Say So Act of 2009."  It gives Eric Holder, the worst, most incompetent Attorney General in history, the discretion to deny anyone the right to purchase and own a firearm not based on Probably Cause but only on mere "suspicion" and "belief." It is a direct affront to the Constitution and a slap in the face of all law-abiding Americans.

To make matters worse, there is a companion bill, S.2820 that is titled "Preserving Records of Terrorist & Criminal Transactions Act of 2009" which is in fact a national gun registration bill.  No gun sale is exempted even if the person isn't on the nebulous "Terrorist Watch List" so it's clear that all Americans are considered "Terrorists & Criminals" if they buy a firearm.

Contact your Senators and Representatives now.  This is something that must be stopped.

And make sure you donate to whoever is running against Senators Lautenberg, Schumer, Levin, Reed, Feinstein and Whitehouse.  These people need to become unemployed as soon as possible.

Finally, if I were a New Yorker, I'd start thinking about what Mike Bloomberg, who got into office as a closet liberal-progressive-socialist in RINO clothing and now acts more like a petty dictator who wants to tell everyone else how to live their lives, has really done for New York City.  Are your taxes lower?  Is business better?  Do you enjoy life more?  If not, then you should fire him next election.  New York would be better off as New York, New York, rather than as New York, just-like-California.  (Broke, over-regulated and over-taxed.)

Follow the link to read more details about the bills.

Physician-Owned Hospitals Casualty of ObamaCare

Obamacare was touted by the liberal-progressive-socialist Democrats as the cure for outrageous health care in the United States.  It's clear now that it was more of a declaration of war on the ability of Americans to get adequate health care.

The chant for November is "Repeal and Replace!"  It's our only hope.

Follow the link for the story.

Shutting Down Free Speech

There is a real danger when the government attempts to direct and control political speech and since Richard Nixon no American President until has taken as many steps towards control as Obama.  Clearly he is thin-skinned to criticism of his policies and politics and his reaction to, and disdain for, speech that opposes him is alarming.  Presidents have to get used to the heat of the kitchen or, as President Harry Truman said, "get out!"

As we are a nation of freedoms, President Obama should listen to President Truman.

Follow the link for more.

When Indignation Trumps Information

My recommended read of the day from George Will.  An excellent piece on illegal immigration and the inane comments made by those who object to Arizona's law.  The problem with the left is that they don't use reason in their arguments but emotion.

It is emotion, not reason, that is driving the illegal immigration argument in the United States today.  Spurred-on by the Left Wing Media, the left is demonstrating and making bold statements that are factually false in support of their contention that the status quo is good enough.  Of course the left sadly says that the crimes committed are terrible but driven by their need for a permanent underclass that can be exploited for labor and political gain, they do nothing to solve the problem.  Amnesty is not a solution but that's what they have in mind.

There can be no amnesty if we are to solve the problem.  Amnesty will only exacerbate the problem.

Follow the link for more.

May Day Immigration Protests: The Other Side of 'Mostly Peaceful' | NewsBusters.org

May Day Immigration Protests: The Other Side of 'Mostly Peaceful' | NewsBusters.org

It goes without saying that had the Tea Party ever conducted "Mostly Peaceful" rallies we'd be hearing about the violence morning, noon and night. The Left Wing Media has another agenda of course so the violence in the anti-Arizona demonstrations won't be reported in depth and will be quietly swept under the rug.

The goal of the liberal-progressive-socialist Democrats, darlings of the media that they are, is to continue to encourage illegal immigration as it causes both the havoc on our society that they desire and provides them with a ready-made underclass that they can exploit for political purposes. If that weren't the case the issue would have been solved long ago.

Follow the link for more.

Dems spark alarm with call for national ID card - TheHill.com

Dems spark alarm with call for national ID card - TheHill.com

This seems like a good idea only if you are truly trying to create a fascist state. Think about the irony in this. They (the liberal-progressive-socialist Democrats) are complaining about Arizona's statute at the same time they are putting together legislation to create a biometric National ID Card that will have to be carried by all Americans and produced on demand.

Hey, Webster's! If you're looking for a definition of hypocrisy I've got one for you here.

Follow the link for the story.