Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Obama's UN Speech Supported the State Dept's Benghazi Lie

Slowly the facts are coming out about what happened during the Sept 11 attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi. This attacks were initially blamed on some video that muslims rioted over because they were told by their peers that the video insulted Mohammad.

In reality, proof is coming out that the Government knew from the start that the attack on the US Consulate was a terrorist attack and not some video protest that turned tragically violent. Take a look at the following timeline, keeping in mind that right from the start, they knew this was a terrorist attack (See the full timeline here which includes numerous other instances where the video was blamed):
  • 11 Sept
    • During the day - Protests in Egypt over the Mohammad video
    • In the evening - Attack on US Consultate - Ambassador killed
    • Later that evening - Attack on CIA Safe House - Two Americans killed
    •  Hilary Clinton blames video for violence
  • 16 Sept
    • Susan Rice Makes TV show rounds and blames the video
  • 25 Sept
    • Obama makes his speech at the UN
President Obama, surely knowing that this was a terrorist attack, still pushed the video lie in his speech to the United Nations.
There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. There is no video that justifies an attack on an Embassy. There is no slander that provides an excuse for people to burn a restaurant in Lebanon, or destroy a school in Tunis, or cause death and destruction in Pakistan. - Link
President Obama's entire UN speech reinforces the lie created by Hilary Clinton and his State Department, that the deaths of 3 Americans were the result of some video that nobody saw. His UN speech only mentions terrorists once, and that is in reference to Iran. Instead, he refers to the terrorist attack on the US Consulate as some mere violent religious outrage. The President was right in that there was no video that justified an attack on a US Embassy. However, terrorists do not have to justify their actions.

Now the President's UN speech might not matter just yet, but once Congress hears evidence from Administration officials who have direct knowledge of what actually happened, everything the President, Secretary of State Clinton and other Administration officials said about this attack will become an issue. Even more so if it turns out that lies were made to protect Obama's reelection. At the very least, Obama's speech was a full two weeks after the attack. All of the relevant Administration officials would have been aware of the facts or will have been told a lie agreed upon by others high up in the Government.

This growing scandal might even bring down the Obama Administration. Even better if it ends Hilary's 2016 run for the White House. As it stands, both persons were very likely fully knowledgeable of both the facts and the lies put forward.

Monday, April 15, 2013

Simply Put - A path to citizenship for Illegal Aliens is AMNESTY

Senator Marco Rubio was out on the Sunday talk shows stating that the draft Illegal alien immigration bill about to be dropped on the US Senate is not amnesty.

This is a lie if there is any path to citizenship in the bill for illegal aliens. You can legalize them, give them the right to work and this alone will solve the issue at hand of them being in the country already, illegally. 

There is no reason to put citizenship on the table. The illegal alien issue can be solved solely by providing a path to legal residency. It is fiction to say that those here will simply be put at the end of the line as many of them could not even get in line to come here if they had stayed in their own counter.

Personally I think they should all be deported, but as a realist, if this is not possible, then fine offer some path to legalization for those who have not committed crimes other than illegal entry and working without authorization. And for the others, show them the door. We have enough criminals here already.

Citizenship is a valuable reward for those who come here legally and agree to live by our rules. We should not give this reward away so cheaply.

As for Senator Rubio and any other Republican who backs this POS legislation, don't count on my vote for President. I'd just assume not vote at all.

Wednesday, April 10, 2013

Police Officer Poll Confirms that Anti-Gun Legislation in Congress Will Do Nothing to Prevent Gun Crime

The Police Officer Gun Control Survey posted at PoliceOne.com is an amazing confirmation that the Democrat-push gun control legislation will do little to no good in combating gun crime, starting with the Democrat demand of banning high capacity magazines.
Virtually all respondents (95 percent) say that a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

The high capacity ban that the Democrats are pushing is stupid for a number of reasons.
  • There are literally millions of them in existence already.
  • It takes but a second to change out magazines
  • Banning high capacity magazines does nothing to prevent shootings. Are Democrats saying that it is not so bad if a shooter manages to shoot up to ten people as opposed to shooting more?
And let's not forget the idiotic and completely unenforceable law in New York State forbidding you to put more than 7 rounds in your magazine. Of course there is plenty of opportunity for police to catch law-abiding people breaking this law. They can also catch criminals breaking this law, but they will already have them for criminal use of a firearm. A crime they are likely to punish them lightly.

Of course, the cornerstone of current anti-gun legislation is the goal of banning 'assault weapons'. The police polled, logically noted that this is not very useful legislation. One reason of course is that rifles and handguns that are not classified as assault weapons function identically to the targetted weapons and are equally lethal.

2.) The majority of respondents — 71 percent — say a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of some semi-automatics would have no effect on reducing violent crime. However, more than 20 percent say any ban would actually have a negative effect on reducing violent crime. Just over 7 percent took the opposite stance, saying they believe a ban would have a moderate to significant effect.

The two issues above are the biggest gun control legislative goals of Congressional Democrats. As far as America's police are concerned, these measures are useless at best and worse potentially harmful.


Monday, April 8, 2013

MSNBC Host Melissa Harris-Perry » All Your Kids Belong To Us (Video)

You know what the sad thing is about this, is that there are lots of inner-city kids and their parents that probably can gain from some sort of community support in raising their kids, especially single parents. But these are not the kids that Democrats are interested in inserting themselves into their lives. Nope, it is the kids of conservative parents.

Sorry, but this lady is dead wrong. For both good and bad, kids do belong to their parents. If I decide that my child is not going to do something or is too young to learn about something, that is between me and my wife just as when we decide to teach our child something that other parents, or meddling adults think I should not.

Again, my kids do not belong to 'the whole community'.  Really, what kind of sick twisted logic brings her to this conclusion? Anyway, just another socialist professor...

Thursday, April 4, 2013

Canadian Oil Forced to Rail by Obama Keystone XL Boycott = Oilspill

As noted before, (Canada Shipping Oil to US By Rail To Get Around Obama's Keystone XL Blockade) crude oil from Canada is going to come to the US, whether the Keystone XL pipeline get built or not. The failure of the Obama Administration to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline has been a boon to the railroads who are shipping ever greater amounts of crude oil to the US. Unfortunately, rail transport is not as efficient or safe as rail when transporting liquids.

So, it comes as no surprise to me that one of these trains has derailed, spilling oil.
A mile-long train hauling oil from Canada derailed, spilling 30,000 gallons of crude in western Minnesota on Wednesday, as debate rages over the environmental risks of transporting tar sands across the border.

The major spill, the first since the start of a boom in North American crude-by-rail transport three years ago, came when 14 cars on a 94-car Canadian Pacific train left the tracks about 150 miles northwest of Minneapolis near the town of Parkers Prairie, the Otter Tail Sheriff's Department said. - Daily Mail, UK
It is going to happen again. Surely many other transportation professionals will agree. Such large quantities of crude oil should be moved by pipeline.
'It is good business for the rails and bad safety for the public,' said Jim Hall, a transportation consultant and former chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board.

'Railroads travel through population centers. The safest form of transport for this type of product is a pipeline. This accident could - and ought to - raise the issue for discussion.' - Daily Mail, UK
As I said before, Liberals, you want the pipeline...

Monday, April 1, 2013

This makes sense: ‘Illegal immigration is to immigration what shoplifting is to shopping’

I love the following analogy:
‘Illegal immigration is to immigration what shoplifting is to shopping’ - Link
There is video discussion at the link.

Simply put, we need to have immigration rules. For them to mean anything, we need to ensure that the rules are respected and to ensure that, they need to be enforced.

The alternative is the situation that we have now. There is no fear of breaking immigration law. There is little fear of being caught and even if they are caught, there are many examples of people being set free to continue living (and working) here illegally.

Anyway, if the country is so willing to legalize illegal aliens, why not just annex Mexico. Then we can offer citizenship to all Mexicans, not just those who decided to violate our immigration laws.

Sunday, March 24, 2013

As Predicted - Democrats Plan to Give Obamacare to Illegal Aliens

The Senate is planning to come up with some plan to legalize illegal aliens and all indications is that they are going to give them VIP treatment - an opportunity to get citizenship and access to Obamacare. I predicted back in 2010 that this was their plan all along. They first needed to pass Obamacare because the expense of caring for millions of illegal aliens more that canceled out thir fake savings and the reason for passing Obamacare.

And just to be clear how outrageous this giveaway vote is, keep in mind that legal immigrants, such as foreign spouses, have no access to any Government assistance until they have worked full-time for ten years paying taxes and into the Social Security system.

Senate votes to give Obamacare to Illegals - Roll Call

Monday, March 11, 2013

Jim Rogers - Central planners' policies are punishing the prudent in favor of rescuing the irresponsible

I read the following by financial commentator Jim Rogers and it really fits with what I think has been happening for the last couple of years:
To Rogers, the bigger danger that concerns him is the hollowing out of the 'saving class' resulting from this situation. Central planners' policies are punishing the prudent in favor of rescuing the irresponsible. This has happened before in world history, and the aftermath has always had grievous economic, social -- and often human -- costs:
Throughout our history – any country’s history – the people who save their money and invest for their future are the ones that you build an economy, a society, and a nation on.

In America, many people saved their money, put it aside, and didn’t buy four or five houses with no job and no money down. They did what most people would consider the right thing, and what historically has been the right thing. But now, unfortunately, those people are being wiped out, because they are getting 0% return, or virtually no return, on their savings and their investments. We’re wiping them out at the expense of people who went deeply into debt, people who did what most people would consider the wrong thing at the expense of people who did the right thing. This, long-term, has terrible consequences for any nation, any society, any economy.

If you go back in history, you'll see what happed to the Germans when they wiped out their savings class in the 1920s. It didn’t lead to good things down the road for Germany. It didn’t lead to good things for Italy, which did the same thing. There were plenty of countries where it wiped out the people who saved and invested for their future. It’s usually a serious, political reaction, desperation in some cases, and looking for a savior and easy answers is usually what happens when you destroy the people who save and invest for the future.
- PeakProsperity.com
The United States all of a sudden has no shortage of irresponsible people. Nothing is anyone's fault anymore. Too many demand free money and more from the Government. And all too often Liberals and even Conservatives are giving it to them, in exchange for votes at election time.

Don't get me wrong, some people do legitimately deserve assistance, but way less than we are supporting now. And none of these people are going to help build a better country. It is the saver who invest and it is investment that drivers our country and others to an ever better future. It is also savings and investment that improves the welfare of many. Take the 'evil' oil companies. If they really were making so much money and were such cash cows, why not say 'me too' and put some money into these corporations? You can do direct investing in ExxonMobil for as little as $250. Is that too much money, well that is the point of saving. You save until you have enough to buy what you want. Point to someone who has no money and I bet I can point to their way too expensive sneakers, sunglasses, clothing, car, gadgets, vacations, etc... that they also don't have money for but somehow manage to get anyway.

Worse, many of them are liable to have children that will also require support for most of their lives. The Democrats are counting on this, because these people will continues to be their base voters for years to come. 

This is also why the Democrats are pushing to legalize illegal aliens and provide them with a 'Path to Citizenship'. Many of these illegal aliens are 'High Needs' parents. It does not mean that there is something wrong with their children or that their children need special care. Instead, it is the parents that need to be told and reminded about everything about being a good parent to their children. This was as explained to me by a pediatrician in Washington, DC. My kid's first pediatrician. This was during a checkup where she was advising us that she was leaving because she was being burned out due to all the high needs parents she had to deal with. It just so happened that these 'high needs' parents bills were being paid by tax payers. Even the co-pay. It was not that the parents did not have $10, $15 or even $20 to pay for the ability to take their kid to the doctor. It was simply because if they did have to pay anything, they would not take their kid to see a doctor. 

This is the heart of the problem. And this problem will only grow until we stop paying out like a broken ATM.

Friday, March 1, 2013

Canada Shipping Oil to US By Rail To Get Around Obama's Keystone XL Blockade

So it is two months since my last post on the Keystone XL pipeline (Keystone XL Pipeline - You Don't Get a Much Better Example of How Anti-Business (and Petty) This Administration is) and our petty President has still not gotten out of the way of construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline. 

His liberal followers are doing their best to silence criticism of the President in this matter. Take a look at a recent post on Business Insider, 'Why We'll Have To Keep Waiting For Obama's Decision On The Keystone XL Pipeline', where Liberals killed every comment by flagging them as offensive, including a comment by the author who eventually turned comments off for the post. They even flagged their own comments which is unfortunate as it is interesting to see their thinking, which included comments that since thie project will only product 5,000 jobs, that it was irreverent in terms of creating work. But as I have said before, the Democrats Hate Your Job, especially jobs like these.

But they cannot stop the flow of oil coming out of Canada. One recent story which validates my original post is the following noting the rising demand for tank cars for the transport of oil:
The number of tank cars ordered for shipping crude and expected to be delivered by the end of 2014 will be enough to move two million barrels of oil per day, almost three times what is currently extracted from the Bakken shale basin, Mr. Kolstad said.

That’s the size of two Keystone XLs and one Seaway pipeline.

As much as 40% of the orders are from Canadian entities desperate to get their crude out of Western Canada and into U.S. refineries in the East and on the Gulf Coast. - Financial Post (22 February 2013)
Read the rest of the story. So good job liberals. The oil you hoped to keep trapped in Canada is coming to the US, in a more expensive mode of transportation, which happens to also be less safe and less green.

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Idiot Politician of the Day - Republican Senator John McCain

John McCain is a Republican Senator from Arizona. He ran for President against Barack Obama and lost. I voted for John McCain because he would have been a better President than Barack Obama. That does not mean that Senator McCain is not an idiot. Being an idiot is not what cost him the election, especially given that he lost the election to an even worse Senator. That said, if this is what Senator McCain thinks counts as serving his country, then I say that Senator McCain has served our Country long enough.
Earlier, the former Republican presidential nominee said he expects Hagel to be confirmed as defense secretary even though he doesn’t plan to vote for him.

“I don’t believe he is qualified,” McCain said. “But I don’t believe that we should hold up his nomination any further.” - HotAir.com
Senator McCain is playing old-school Senate games. The President however is counting on the Republican Senators to play by these rules as he breaks them and uses them to his advantage. After all, it was President Obama who declared that the Senate was on recess so that he could push through some of his political appointees that the Senate was holding pro-forma sessions specifically to prevent the President from appointing without confirmation from the Senate.

Senator McCain has become a useful idiot and an enabler of the left. Take the calls for more gun control. Lets forget that the Democrat suggestions and demands are unreasonable. You don't hear Senator McCain defending the rights of Americans. No. Instead he is eager to find compromise with the democrats. This compromise will be at the expense of our rights. And for what? So that Senator McCain can continue to be a big-ish man in Congress. Forget it.

The point of Senate Confirmation is to ensure that Presidential appointees are competent and qualified to serve in the positions that they have been appointed to. If you think that Hagel is unqualified, than do what you can to keep this unqualified idiot from a position in charge of the Pentagon.Senators have such powers, especially when they act together. McCain would rather move along. That is unfortunate. Many people busted their asses working to help McCain become President. It would be nice if McCain busted his ass once in a while in return...

Given that you can't teach this old dog any new tricks, can't we just send him home.

Monday, February 11, 2013

Americans Being Treated Worse Than Illegal Aliens - Immigration

Talk about being unequal before the law. Americans are forced to go through evermore humiliating inspection and investigation at the border, while millions of illegal aliens bypassed our border controls and now enjoy near immunity when it comes to being held to account for violating our immigration laws:
The Department of Homeland Security’s civil rights watchdog has concluded that travelers along the nation’s borders may have their electronics seized and the contents of those devices examined for any reason whatsoever — all in the name of national security. - Wired.com
Now compare this with how illegal aliens are free to roam the country with little fear of arrest, even able to appear before Congress.
Breitbart News has learned that one of the witnesses at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on immigration next week will be outspoken illegal immigrant Jose Antonio Vargas--who will be seated at the same table as Chris Crane, leader of the Immigrations and Customs Enforcement employees’ union that is suing the government over Obama administration rules that make it very difficult for ICE agents to arrest illegal immigrants. - Breitbart.com
Jose Antonio Vargas is not just an illegal alien, he has also been caught with bogus documents and has been let go. Imagine what would happen if you were caught with bogus documents these days. Sure he came here when he was twelve so technically you could blame his immigration problems on his parents, but the Government is not going to blame, or punish, them either.

The inequality does not stop at the border either. In order to get a Green Card for my wife I agreed to be fully responsible for her. She is not eligible f or unemployment or welfare until she performs 40 quarters (10 years) of full-time work. In addition, there was the physical, the interviews, the multiple meeting and hours of time wasted not to mention well over $1,000 in fees. 

Any legalization of illegal aliens best come with a boatload of requirements like I was forced to sign. The kicker was that if we got divorced after two years, she would get to stay and I would still be fully responsible. You can bet that the Obama Administration is planning to give legalized illegal-aliens free health care (At least this is my prediction). Funny how they don't do that for legal immigrants even banning access as part of a precondition for entry.

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Idiot Politician of the Day - Democrat Congressman John Conyers

Here we have a member of Congress not only not upholding the law, but also advocating the destruction of the rule of law. This is simply inexcusable.
Opening the first immigration hearing of the new Congress, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee warned his colleagues not to use the term "illegal immigrant" as the debate goes on.

"I hope no one uses the term illegal immigrants here today. Our citizens are not — the people in this country are not illegal. They are are out of status. They are new Americans that are immigrants," said Rep. John Conyers Jr., Michigan Democrat. - Washington Times
If this is the position of Democrats, then can they please explain why the rest of us, actual documented American citizens and documented residents and immigrants have to be subjected to what used to be considered protecting our borders but now only seems to be harassment, unfair and unequal treatment before the law. We might as well get rid of immigration at the airports and save the expense and hassle.

Everyone arriving by air and sea is pre-checked by immigration prior to starting travel to the US. So why do we have to be poked and prodded once we get here? Illegal aliens are not. Along with that, why are we subjected to a customs inspection? Do you think illegal aliens have to put up with this crap? Hell, legal immigrants are forgiven at the airport for all sorts of violations because they may not understand the law, while Americans are whacked with fines in the hundreds of dollars for simple violations of having with them sandwiches, made in Europe by their mom (As documented on one of the border reality shows. See another example here). You could say that the US Government is discriminating against US Citizens and legal residents compared to how they treat illegal aliens.

Idiot politicians like John Conyers are our immigration problem.

Monday, January 28, 2013

Idiot Politician of the Day - US Senator Robert Menendez

United States Senator for New Jersey is a very bad politician. I dare say that some of his bad behavior borders on the criminal. Just this week comes news that the bad Senator is being investigated for traveling to the Dominican Republic to take advantage of minor aged prostitutes.
Documents published online for the first time Thursday indicate that the FBI opened an inquiry into New Jersey Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez on August 1, 2012, focusing on repeated trips he took to the Dominican Republic with longtime campaign contributor and Miami eye doctor Salomon Melgen. TheDC reported in November that Menendez purchased the service of prostitutes in that Caribbean nation at a series of alcohol-fueled sex parties. - Daily Caller
Oddly enough, the Senator was on ABC News 'This Week' for a full hour and the host honored the Democrat by ignoring this latest embarrassing news and not bringing it up at all. You can bet that if the Senator was a Republican, that is all that we would have heard. Not surprisingly, this is not the only problem the Democrat-Party Senator is having to deal with. In addition to the underage prostitutes and unreported travel gifts, Senator Menendez also was exposed for having a registered sex offender who also happened to be an illegal alien working in his official office. Worse, the FBI was ordered not to arrest this illegal alien sex offender until after the election so as not to negatively impact his re-election.
Federal immigration agents were prepared to arrest an illegal immigrant and registered sex offender days before the November elections but were ordered by Washington to hold off after officials warned of “significant interest” from Congress and news organizations because the suspect was a volunteer intern for Sen. Robert Menendez, according to internal agency documents provided to Congress.
The Homeland Security Department said last month, when The Associated Press first disclosed the delayed arrest of Luis Abrahan Sanchez Zavaleta, that AP’s report was “categorically false. - Daily Caller
How many scandals, rules and laws does this Senator have to break before he is held to account.

Finally, Nice work New Jersey. You really sent one of your finest to represent you in Congress! He is a shining example of the best that the Democrats have to offer.

Thursday, January 24, 2013

nextgeneration.tv - Michelle Fields: The National Debt Is Unfair to the Next Generation

This video was highlighted on Instapundit:
This nation has a spending problem that is placing a massive debt load on younger generations. Hear why this is so unfair as Next Generation Correspondent Michelle Fields talks about our national spending problem. - Video Link

I look forward to seeing more from this new initiative. I do believe that the other side started talking about 'fairness'. So lets talk...

The website is http://www.nextgeneration.tv/

Monday, January 21, 2013

Idiot Politician of the Day - Virginia Democratic State Delegate Joseph Morrissey

This idiot, Democratic Delegate Joseph Morrissey, thought it would be great to pull out a rifle in the Virginia Legislature. As the picture below shows, he fails gun safety 101 by having a finger, his thumb, on the trigger of his rifle. All this stunt does is prove that he should not be in possession of a rifle.

However, like many good Democrat stunts, this one too backfires, in that it now seems that all Democrat Delegate Morrissey managed to do was highlight his criminal past.
A Virginia lawmaker who drew gasps from his colleagues when he brandished a borrowed AK-47 during an anti-gun speech Thursday was found guilty in 2002 of committing a vicious 1999 assault, was sanctioned for legal misconduct while prosecuting a rape case, spent six months in jail for contempt of a federal court, and saw his law license revoked in 2003. - Daily Caller
He represents an area just north of Richmond including a part of the city. He is a perfect example of part of the problem the US has with its Government. We have too many people who have no business being in politics representing us. How did such a person get to be a state delegate? Perhaps it is because he was not good at anything else.

Delegate Morrissey's stunt was part of an attempt to push gun control in Virginia. If anything, Virginia needs to ensure that the names of all persons who are ineligible to obtain a firearm are in the FBI background check database as well as ensuring that criminals (using guns or not) are sent to jail for their 'fair share' of prison time. Virginia executed the DC sniper. Maryland could not even bring itself to try the DC sniper with a possibility of him facing the death penalty. This despite their plea to try the sniper first that they would push for the death penalty. A promise that was later proven to be a lie.

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Idiot Politician of the Day - New York Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel (D-Great Neck)

Today New York State pass new laws against lawful gun owners, pretending that they will prevent some kind of mass shooting. Idiot Politician of the Day, New York Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel (D-Great Neck) made this bold statement:
“Make no mistake about it, everyone. I repeat, make no mistake about it, the number of gun deaths in New York State will decrease because of the bold actions we take today," - CBS News
Lets see about that. It's not like New York State outlawed murder with this law. The last time I checked, it was already illegal for criminals to even touch a gun. But as I noted before, the Government has been looking the other way when they actually have evidence of a criminal violating existing gun laws, leaving them out loose on the streets, until they get caught committing other crimes. It seems that Assemblywoman Schimel has nothing to say about that unfortunate statistic. 

Assemblywoman Schimel however, had no problem in voting into law something that will turn tens of thousands of up to now law abiding New York State residents into criminals. Among other things, this law bans all magazines capable of holding more than 7 rounds of ammunition. That is basically all of them outside of those for the 1911 45 pistol.Personally I'm shocked they didn't pick 6 to F them as well. That will probably come next year after they pick up a criminal with one.
Restrict ammunition magazines to seven bullets, from the current national standard of 10. Current owners of higher-capacity magazines would have a year to sell them out of state. Someone caught with eight or more bullets in a magazine could face a misdemeanor charge. - CBS News
I suspect that this single part of the law will be the most widely ignored. Unfortunately, if the police want to get you for anything, they now have an easy excuse to arrest you.It is pretty convenient really to have all of the citizens criminals. Anyone can be arrested for anything.

Thank goodness that the Democrats taught us how to ignore laws. Laws against illegal drugs. Immigration laws. Tax evasion, campaign funding laws, and even enforcement of existing gun laws.

Too bad it is not supposed to work this way. And it is all thanks to crap politicians like New York Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel (D-Great Neck). Don't expect her to eat her words when her statement is proven wrong. It is not her fault. It's never their fault. Just like communism. There was nothing wrong with communism itself a supporter once told me. It was the people who failed to make it work...

congratulations to New York Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel (D-Great Neck) on earning her useful idiot points for today.

I am all for reforming our laws to improve them to keep weapons out of the hands of those who should not have them as well as punishing criminals who break our gun laws. This law will actually hurt the chances of any real reform as it is being pushed as such. As I covered in a previous post, Democrats are our Gun Crime Problem, Democrats in the New York Assembly actually opposed increasing penalties for real gun criminals.
Assembly Democrats back the most severe restrictions but, sources said, have repeatedly refused to agree to sharp increases in penalties for illegal gun possession or for the use of guns in violent crimes. - NY Post

Proscecution of Gun Crime Goes Down Under Democrat Presidents

It is interesting to note that Democrats are calling for new gun laws but at the same time they are refusing to enforce existing gun laws. Take the national background check for purchasing a firearm. Thousands of people who are not allowed to purchase a firearm are stopped each year during the background check process. Many of these people caught lying on their applications in an attempt to illegally purchase a firearm. Almost none of these cases are prosecuted. This was highlighted in a recent post. Even the (mostly) distasteful Mayor of New York, Mayor Bloomberg, finds this a truly inexcusable act of neglegence o behalf of the Government.
Some, including New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, are also pressing the Justice Department (DOJ) to get more aggressive in going after those convicted of trying to buy firearms by filing fraudulent background information. Citing 2009 figures, Bloomberg hammered the DOJ recently for prosecuting only 77 of 71,000 cases where people were found to have lied on their background checks. "These are gun criminals trying to buy guns illegally – and the federal government is just letting them walk," Bloomberg said during a speech in December. - The Hill
The Sandy Hook shooter tried to buy a gun a couple days before his attack. How many other dangerous people have tried and simply been turned away with no follow-up by the Federal Government? Do we have to wait until they too start shooting people? 

This kind of inaction is nothing new. Under President Clinton, there were complaints that his Administration was not serious in going after gun criminals. Worse, the then Administration actually hailed the law as working simply because they stopped and turned away criminal gun purchases. This would be like catching a bank robber, taking the money that he stole and then sending him on his way and calling it a success. this is sheer insanity.
President Clinton, Al Gore and their Congressional anti-gun allies continue to hold up the Brady Act as an effective crime-fighting tool, but they can`t explain why the 500,000 felons, drug dealers, stalkers and fugitives who walked into federally licensed dealers to purchase guns illegally were simply turned away. They committed multiple federal felonies, crimes punishable with 10-year prison terms. But these felons, drug dealers, stalkers and fugitives were not arrested. They were not prosecuted. They didn`t go to prison, and no community was made safer. - NRA ILA (17 October 2000!)
How many other crimes did these half million criminals who were left on the streets commit during the time that they could have been behind bars. How many people did they kill as a result of failure of the Government to put them in jail? I am going to make a guess that it was more than one. As our current Vice President notes, action should be taken if it can save even just one life. So how about enforcing our existing laws. That should save many more than one life...
Biden talked also about taking responsible action. "As the president said, if you're actions result in only saving one life, they're worth taking. But I'm convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of Americans and take thousands of people out of harm's way if we act responsibly."

Biden, as he himself noted, helped write the Brady bill. - The Weekly Standard
Well Mr. Vice President, how about pushing for the Brady Bill to be enforced...

Federal Prosecutions of Criminal Use of Guns
FY 1992-1998
You know that this is bad when even the NRA is complaining that the Government needs to do more to put gun criminals behind bars....

As I have said before, Democrats want gun criminals on the streets. Otherwise they loose a campaign issue. Gun crime victims mean little to Democrats other than votes on election day. If they really cared about the people they would push for putting gun criminals behind bars.

Saturday, January 12, 2013

Mayor Bloomberg - 'Let Them Eat Pain!'

Now lets keep in mind that State and Federal Governments have already been putting restrictions on these types of medicines, some of which need to be accounted for pill-by-pill. But since drug addicts are still finding ways to obtain these drugs, the Mayor's next plan to fight this kind of drug abuse is to take the drugs away from those who will legitimately benefit from them. This is not really a surprise given that this is the same solution he has for combating gun crime, basically targeting those who legally own and would like to legally own weapons.

Mayor Bloomberg's latest rant is that he is going to restrict the availability of painkillers to people who need them at NY area hospitals. His reasoning is that there are people in New York City who are addicted to them. This however will do nothing but punish responsible people who do not abuse these medications, leaving some in pain.
“Number one, there’s no evidence of that. Number two, supposing it is really true, so you didn’t get enough painkillers and you did have to suffer a little bit. The other side of the coin is people are dying and there’s nothing perfect … There’s nothing that you can possibly do where somebody isn’t going to suffer, and it’s always the same group [claiming], ‘Everybody is heartless.’ Come on, this is a very big problem.” - Politicker
So because people are dying from prescription medicine abuse, abuse that I have no control over, the Mayor's logic is that I must have less or even no pain killers because people who don't need it, are consuming too much. 

As for Mayor Bloomberg's comment that some people are just going to have to suffer a little bit, this is the same guy who can't suffer for a minute and wait for his car to cool down on a hot summer day and has his car cooled down by a custom-made air conditioner system. All this from the same guy who puts strict anti-idling laws in place and then breaks them.

Enough with the politicians who think they are better than the rest of us. If we are going to start openly treating people as part of distinct social classes, then lets do it all the way. This way we can stop treating the majority of the population like crap because of a tiny minority. Lets single out this tiny minority and give them the fair treatment that they have earned.

Thursday, January 10, 2013

Crazy - "40 percent of deadly Illinois crashes involve drivers who don't have a license"

This is what happens when you do not fairly enforce the laws of our country. First you ignore the immigration laws. They you are forced to abandon enforcing driver licensing laws as well as drunk driving checkpoints, as special interest groups will accuse you of 'unfairly' targeting illegal aliens.
Lawmakers believe there are as many as 250,000 undocumented immigrants on Illinois roads and that more than 40 percent of deadly Illinois crashes involve drivers who don't have a license. - NBC Chicago
You can surely bet that a majority of those drivers did not have insurance either, not that is going to help any dead people. However, just how many accidents overall involve illegal aliens? 

Keep in mind that this is a group that generally has 'broken no laws' except our immigration laws, and driver laws,  and employment laws and taxation laws, and identity theft laws. It's not their fault, really. If you stupid Americans would just give them a little more..... they'll demand something else.

In the case of Illinois, they are going to give illegals drivers licenses. So that that the illegal aliens can be just like you and me, and the 9/11 hijackers.

Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Surprise - 'Gun prosecutions under Obama down more than 45 percent'

The calls from Liberals for more Gun Control keep growing. Lets forget that basically none of the new proposals would have prevented the last gun crimes. Instead keep in mind that the Government is not even taking violations of existing gun laws very seriously. With that comes the news that 'Gun prosecutions under Obama down more than 45 percent'. From the Washington Examiner:
Despite his calls for greater gun control, including a new assault weapons ban that extends to handguns, President Obama's administration has turned away from enforcing gun laws, cutting weapons prosecutions some 40 percent since a high of about 11,000 under former President Bush.

"If you are not going to enforce the laws on the books, then don't start talking about a whole new wave of new laws," said a gun rights advocate. - Washington Examiner
As I mentioned in a previous post, the Government is barely going after any criminals who violate gun purchasing laws. It's almost as if they want criminals to be out and about committing crime. Unfortunately, all this means is that the Government creates more victims. It seems that the best defense is having a gun and shooting criminals yourself as it appears more and more that the Government is no longer in the business of punishing criminals, other than those who cheat on their taxes and other economic criminals. Take this from 'Project Exile' which was intended to go after gun criminals by using Federal gun laws:
From the left, Project Exile was condemned, as racist, by Families Against Mandatory Minimums, and opposed by several members of the Congressional Black Caucus on the grounds that in targeting its enforcement at inner city communities such as in Richmond and Atlanta, and the disproportionate effects the federal gun laws' "prohibited possessor" categories have on African-Americans. - Wiki
Of course these laws would have a disproportionate effect on African Americans but you can bet that African Americans are also disproportionately effected by gun crimes and end up as victims at a disproportionate rate. And when you look at it that way, it is proportionate. However, since the criminals happen to be black, going after them is racist, so we can't do it. And it is the greater black community that mostly pays for voting soft on crime Democrats into Congress.

Thursday, January 3, 2013

Democrats are our Gun Crime Problem

Democrats are very quick to call for more gun control. But these calls are always aimed at reducing the availability of guns to law-abiding Americans. Personally, I think that Democrat politicians intentionally resist going after actual gun crime and criminals simply because without gun crime they lose one of their campaign rallying cries.

Take this example as highlighted at the Ace of Spades blog, noting that out of the 4,000 firearm purchase background checks per year that are deemed a violation of Federal and/or state law and referred for prosecution, that under 200 of them are actually prosecuted. These are the very people who the Government has decided should not have a gun and one would think that 'gun control' Democrats would be in favor of ensuring don't get a gun. But for some reason, the Government has no interest in punishing for violating existing gun laws. From a 2009 Government-funded Brady Gun Law report:
ATF and U.S. Attorneys have developed referral criteria for all 94 judicial districts that reflect the types of cases most likely to merit prosecution. Cases involving restraining orders, domestic violence misdemeanors, non-immigrant aliens, violent felonies, warrants, and indictments are most often included in referral criteria. - Report link in PDF 2009 report here
So here we have actual gun crime where the main response from the US Government is to look the other way. (And just how many illegal aliens do you think the Government goes after for trying to purchase a gun.....)

And what about those Democrat calls for increasing gun control? Just as long as you don't try to punish the actual gun criminals. Take for instance the New York Democrat politician calls to simply confiscate guns from New York. Take them from the law-abiding citizens, but don't you dare increase sentences for actual gun criminals:
Efforts by Cuomo to reach an agreement with the Legislature on a package of gun-control laws has, so far, gone nowhere.

Senate Republicans, who will retain enormous power in January, have made it clear they don’t support confiscation of assault weapons or any new severe restrictions on their ownership.

Assembly Democrats back the most severe restrictions but, sources said, have repeatedly refused to agree to sharp increases in penalties for illegal gun possession or for the use of guns in violent crimes. - NY Post
Democrats do not want tougher penalties for gun crime and criminals simply because they depend on this as a wedge issue. After all, if they let the Republicans put the criminals behind bars, then what use are they? Take Senator Diane Feinstein's new attempt to bring back the assault weapon ban. The original ban was so useless that is did nothing to remove assault weapons or even high capacity magazines from the market. Not for anything, but it is still legal to purchase and own currently registered fully automatic weapons. A new assault weapons ban will not change availability either. Although I have to admit that the threat of regulations has managed to enact one form of gun control, by selling out the market as a result of panic buying.

Back to the proposed assault weapons ban, here are some comments via Forbes's article titled ''Assault Weapon' Is Just A PR Stunt Meant To Fool The Gullible':
Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) has announced that she will be introducing legislation to reenact the ban on so-called assault weapons that she authored in 1994. The evidence is in on the effect of her previous assault weapons ban: zero, zilch, nada, as the saying goes. The ban made no perceptible difference in the gun violence statistics when it went into effect, and no perceptible difference when it was allowed to expire 10 years later, in 2003.

That is because the term “assault weapon” is just a PR stunt that fools the gullible and easily deluded. It is defined in legislation by cosmetic features that frighten white bread suburbanites, but do not involve any functionality of any gun. We tried it, conservatives said it wouldn’t work, and it didn’t work. Yet, it is the liberal answer to the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Newtown, Conn.

Why do the hard work of actually making a difference, when with no work at all you can perform a meaningless and irrelevant gesture that won’t make any difference? A Connecticut state law already banned assault weapons. The difference that made in stopping the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary: zero, zilch, nada, as the saying goes. - Forbes
Deciding that some guns are more dangerous than others is ridiculous. Take the Walther P22. It is a 22 target pistol and as far as I know would not be effected under any sort of assault weapons ban, unless some variations get banned simply due to how they are colored. The gun comes with a 10 round magazine, which is not considered a high capacity magazine. Despite this, a Finnish mass murderer used one of these pistols to kill ten people, in the process shooting over 200 rounds, 10 at a time.

The trick here is to deny access to guns from those who would misuse them, prosecute those who illegally try to purchase them, jail those who use them in a crime, regardless of whether legally obtained of not. If you do these things, you should still be able to guarantee access to those who legally are entitled to them as recognized in our Bill of Rights.