Sunday, May 08, 2016

Trump: The Great Orange Hope?

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires” 2 Timothy 4:3

By now we know that bombastic businessman Donald Trump is the presumptive nominee for President as a Republican this election.

I am at a total loss as to how so many allowed themselves to be deluded by such a charlatan running what I can only call a “slash and trash” campaign, very reminiscent of the actions years past with Ron Paul supporters.

Interesting enough, now those same people that joined Trump in trashing any and every body not supportive of the poseur are now demanding we all get behind and support his bid, engaging in fear mongering of a Hillary Clinton win.

Sorry, but I have said all along that Trump was nothing more than a shill for Hillary, sort of a Ross Perot on steroids if you will.

Particularly curious to me now is that after the past seven years of complaints of no vetting for Barack Obama, no curiosity of his past stances or history, these same people either refuse to look at or just outright ignore Trumps record and history.

They ignore all evidence of his distancing himself from the Republican Party as early as 1999 when he was quoted in a New York Times article saying, “I really believe the Republicans are just too crazy right.”

But today, voters are to believe he is the true Republican running even further right than those he condemned back then?

His positions wander all over the board, not too long ago stating five different positions just on abortion alone!

Along with his trashing of Jeb Bush he claimed if elected, “you will find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center. It wasn’t the Iraqis.”

Never mind that no one ever said it was the Iraqis or that Saddam Hussein had any hand in it.

Little wonder the Bush Presidents, both of them have stated they will remain on the sidelines this election and not endorse anyone.

He has even expressed support for a single payer healthcare system, the actual goal of Liberal Democrats with Obamacare. But wants you to believe he will repeal Obamacare?

And replace it with what, the Liberal Democrats actual end goal for healthcare?

That wall along the Southern Border we have been hearing about now for decades and he promises will be built? Not so fast, he has waffled there admitting how he even used immigrants, benefiting from low wage undocumented immigrants.

His list of flip flops just keeps growing and growing with no end in sight.

Will he one day flip flop on his support of the second amendment? He quickly flipped on an Assault Weapons ban as he progressed. How can anybody be certain he won’t flip back if elected?

Now we are to believe that he is “the Great Orange Hope” to save America from Hillary Clinton, after his many years of praising her and courting both her and other Democrats?

And now, mush as we saw with rabid, foaming at the mouth Paulbots in the past, devotees rely on fear mongering and actual threats to forcibly grow support for him?

I get that he said many things early on that conservatives have been saying and the Republican Party did not support in years past. But he never gave any solutions, just “trust me, I’ll fix it.”

He never explained just how he will gain any Congressional support for his plans, leading me to believe that he would rely on Executive orders, bypassing Congress.

I’m sure you recall Obama’s reliance on Executive orders that many complained about for years were violating the constitutional separation of powers.

I imagine that opposition would evaporate when their “Great Orange Hope” engaged in the practice.

He’s made a lot of noise on bringing jobs back to America, but somehow neglects to mention all of his profits made by outsourcing jobs to Bangladesh, China, Honduras and other low-wage countries for his line of apparel.

His devotees are now running around claiming if Hillary is elected president, the fault rests on the heads of those of us that have said we will not vote for Trump under circumstances.

They are wrong!

Any fault rests squarely on their own heads as for months we have tried to warn people of the close links between the Clinton’s and Trump. We have spoken of how he has portrayed the Republican Party in the vilest of light he could every time he spoke.

We have shown evidence of what I call draft dodging during the Vietnam War that I and many others without wealthy fathers were sent to, all ignored.

Although I never formally signed on, Ben Howe of #NeverTrump lays out my own views and feelings perfectly.

I can only add to his words, you Trump devotees wanted him, you got him. How you will get him elected is your problem, not mine.

You elected Hillary, not us.

As Paulbots of years past wanted with Ron Paul, get who they want nominated by hook or crook, just get him nominated, ignoring how many state no way ever would they vote for him. Trump devotees now carry the same disillusion that people will just blindly jump in behind their chosen poseur.

Y’all are about to be smacked square in the face with a huge dose of reality.

If only our own media were interested in vetting Trump.

Oh people in America, what you have done!

Saturday, May 07, 2016

Who the Next President Should Be

It is no secret the country is bitterly divided now that Donald Trump is the presumptive Republican nominee and likely will face Hillary Clinton in the November general election.

To say neither is qualified to occupy the Oval Office is a gross understatement, regardless of what either of their starry eyed devotees my claim.

Both are well known New York Liberals that care only about themselves and both would devastate our country if not plunge us into a bloody war.

But we have to have a president and we need a candidate worthy of our votes. And, given the choices the parties present us, I believe I have found the perfect man for the job.

He is well known and highly popular with people from both parties.

He has been seen frequently on television singing opera, directing orchestras and is an avid hunter, telling me he would defend our second amendment rights with his every being.

He’s not afraid of getting his hands dirty, having actually prospected for gold at one time.

He’s never been caught up in any sexual scandal or seen cavorting with women of questionable reputation.

He’s been a strong supporter of our Military throughout our wars doing what he could to sell war bonds.

Granted he has a slight speech impediment, but it does not stop anyone from clearly understanding him or how words and you have never heard foul language coming from his mouth either.

His bipartisan appeal is likely his strongest suit as his efforts over the years have pleased many, brought smiles to their faces and eased their souls during troubled times.

He’s never amassed a fortune, although others have amassed wealth due to his hard work for so many years.

In fact, given the poor choices we see before us this election, I can’t think of a better man for the job.

Forget Trump.

Forget Hillary.

Let’s put our efforts behind a true American that will really make America what it could be.

I'm proudly casting my vote for Elmer Fudd this year. He stands heads above either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.

Wednesday, March 23, 2016

Honoring Our First Responders

The children from Tussing Elementary School are known for the videos thanking and honoring the Military and Veterans. They now add one honoring First Responders.

Feel free to share with any Law Enforcement, Firefighter or Emergency Crews you may know.


Monday, February 29, 2016

Tax Increases, Affordable Housing, What About Jobs?

We all realize there is a homeless population in our community. A population that for any number of reasons, seems to have grown over the last couple years. Along with that growth comes the problem of how do we deal with them.

Once was the time they were referred to as bums, ho bo’s, vagrants, derelicts, tramps and such and communities did their best to usher them away. A kinder term from years ago was a drifter. From what I have read it seemed to peak during the years of the Great Depression, but has been around for all time.

But times have changed and now they are seen as “homeless,” people simply down on their luck, pushed out of jobs by greedy corporations, landlords or just the economic times as we continue struggling to climb out of the Great Recession that started about 9 years ago.

Truth be known, the reasons are as varied as are the people. Some really are merely down on their luck due to the economy. Others are addicted to drugs or alcohol while still others are mentally ill. Some just choose to live such a lifestyle, unencumbered by the daily responsibilities of contributing to society.

This presents us with a very complex issue on who to help and just how as it is obvious a ‘one size fits all’ cannot possibly address all of the varied issues contributing to the problem.

Enter the Vancouver, Wa. City Council and their notion of raising property taxes on middle class homeowners in order to “make a dent in the community’s growing problem with housing instability and homelessness” by constructing “affordable housing” downtown.

A lofty and compassionate goal, but what about those homeowners, some that are struggling to make ends meet, care for their own families and avoid becoming homeless themselves?

Is it really fair to just expect them to keep paying more and more as they are faced with other taxes and fees increasing, the possibility of coming under the nation’s first ever carbon tax scheme, higher gasoline taxes and license fees to build and repair infrastructure, even the potential of a mileage tax as well?

We’re told this tax increase would only be “50 cents per $1,000 of assessed property value for up to 10 years.”

Left out of it is that is on top or in addition to all of the rest of the tax and fee increases coming at us. Gasoline, utilities, sales tax, the ongoing push to impose an income tax and more and each claims pretty close to the same, “it’s only X amount for this.”

Yes, but add them all together and it adds up quickly.

Ironic in all of this is this City Council is largely opposed to the proposed Tesoro Oil Terminal at the Port of Vancouver, even though it holds a promise of job creation that many of our homeless population could benefit from by returning to the workforce.

Vancouver Energy USA states,
Vancouver Energy will generate $2 billion in economic value to the local and regional economy of the City of Vancouver, Clark County and surrounding counties through labor income and tax revenues, as well as income and profits created as a result of the oil terminal’s direct, indirect and induced impacts.

Vancouver Energy will produce $1.6 billion in labor income during its construction and assumed first 15 years of terminal operation. It will also make a more than $22 million payment in state and local taxes during construction and generate more than $7.8 million in tax revenue annually that will go to state and local governments for public facilities and services.

Clark County and surrounding counties will benefit with approximately 320 full-time jobs during the construction of Vancouver Energy. Plus, 176 direct on-site jobs and 440 direct off-site operations jobs will be created to operate the facility.

More than 1,000 jobs will be supported by Vancouver Energy each year once the terminal is fully operational.
The claim has been made that those jobs would be going to existing personnel brought up from Texas and Oklahoma. While managers of the terminal already trained very well may be relocated, the bulk would go to local workers as it costs too much to relocate many workers.

And it also must be remembered, this is not a drilling or refining operation proposed, but storage and transfer facility to carry crude drilled in the Midwest up and down to west coast to existing refineries.

Some seem to fear the oil could be exported to other countries. While that is not slated at this time, would it be a bad thing if it were? Who would we rather foreign countries buy crude oil from, Middle Eastern Countries that support terrorists like ISIS and fund their warfare?

Or the good old United States of America that will use to funds to provide more jobs to our people, funnel revenues into social programs to help the needy and yes, some would go to pay to defend our way of life.

All of that would seem some of the current homeless population become employed, earn paychecks and contribute revenue into the system to help others, not just receive it.

The expansion of jobs outside of the terminal to provide newly employed people with tools, clothing, food, homes, cars, entertainment and more would also be of benefit to other homeless people wanting to work.

Our ancestors built this country into a superpower by working. They did not want handouts but wanted to earn their pay.

For those still wanting to work, we need these jobs to get them back in the workforce and get the country moving again.

I invite you to review many past articles this blogger has written on how the energy sector could be a major contributor to our economic recovery and freedom at Energy Post Archives.

All that is standing in the way is bleeding heart politicians that would rather increase taxes on struggling middle class families than see viable family wage jobs created.

Friday, January 29, 2016

Porous Borders, It’s Not “For the Children”

For many years many of us have protested and complained about what is seen as “porous borders,” illegal aliens essentially waltzing across our Southern Border for Mexico and parts further south. As we raised alarms, bleeding hearts would shoot us down with claims of bigotry against Hispanics and just being cold-hearted to the plight of the poor people struggling to better their lives by illegally sneaking into our country or the escape violence and poverty in theirs.

Somewhere along the line it was changed from “Illegal Alien” to “Undocumented Workers.”

We were assured there was no problem and that allowing such porous borders only enhanced our economy and the people were better off here instead of striving to improve conditions wherever they originated from.

We were accused of engaging in hyperbole and exaggerating the problems as a couple years ago, we saw masses of unaccompanied children flood over the border and instead of arranging their return to their parents, for the ones fortunate enough to reach our country and not be killed or slaughtered along the way, arrangements were made by Bureaucrats to house them with people or groups across the country.

Democrats, in their usual manner, vowed more tax dollars be directed to immigration while plans were being made to build more shelter for the influx of unaccompanied children.

All was well, they said, we can easily continue being the world’s welfare office and our own burgeoning federal debt was no consequence.

What they didn’t tell us was just exactly what was being down with these unaccompanied children they were having housed all over the country.

While we were arguing over a county councilor’s facebook page or rehashing old policies of being forced to accept light rail or raising taxes for schools or whatever else the legislature desired it for, it has now come to light that many of these unaccompanied children were being placed in pure hell by the Bureaucrats assigned to help them.

The Washington Post recently published, Obama administration placed children with human traffickers, report says.

“The Obama administration failed to protect thousands of Central American children who have flooded across the U.S. border since 2011, leaving them vulnerable to traffickers and to abuses at the hands of government-approved caretakers, a Senate investigation has found.”

“The Office of Refugee Resettlement, an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services, failed to do proper background checks of adults who claimed the children, allowed sponsors to take custody of multiple unrelated children, and regularly placed children in homes without visiting the locations, according to a 56-page investigative report released Thursday.”

“And once the children left federally funded shelters, the report said, the agency permitted their adult sponsors to prevent caseworkers from providing them post-release services.”

It is even more disturbing to read in their article, Overwhelmed federal officials released immigrant teens to traffickers in 2014 how Hispanic teens were held against their will in Ohio as slave labor working on an egg farm.

While we worried over being banned on facebook, these kids were being threatened with bodily harm and death if they tried to escape.

While Liberals were blasting us for being cold-hearted or of harboring hate against Hispanics, there were children being placed in slavery and handed over to human traffickers in the very manner we wanted prevented.

And no, it wasn’t every child I am sure. But that it happened to any is inexcusable.

Our immigration laws are not written out of greed or to be hateful to others. They are a protection, not only for our own people but for people from other countries that wish to be here.

And yes, not everybody is allowed in, never have been since all countries began immigration laws. Thousands arriving at Ellis Island were sent back for any number of reasons.

Many Illegal Aliens are good people; I agree and have known some. But not all are. The good people though, that merely want to improve their lives leave themselves vulnerable to unscrupulous traffickers or those seeking slave labor to work and make profits for them.

Open borders is not answer either as what is reported here shows. We simply do not have the facilities or resources to continue being the world’s welfare department.

How many adult or teen women are still out there in forced prostitution is unknown. We do know human trafficking is a problem, a big problem that law enforcement is fighting.

We do not help in that fight by throwing vulnerable people to the wolves as easy prey for human traffickers.

We must enforce our borders and immigration law for everybody’s well being.

As seen above, doing so actually would be “for the children.”

Monday, December 28, 2015

Are Democrats Embracing Sharia?

As we all know, there is little that the Democrat Party and Republican Party can find to agree on today. The division is so broad that I see no reconciliation between the warring ideologies in my lifetime.

Even where the parties were briefly united on opposing radical Jihadists and their acts of terror, I see a shift towards more acceptance and tolerance of the barbarism of radical Jihadists now beginning on the left.

My view is not based on misguided hyperbole as I will be accused of, but in their acts of defense of Islam after an attack as we saw in San Bernardino and even the open acceptance of largely unvetted “refugees” from Syria in spite of witnessing massive problems in Europe where they were first accepted.

But it doesn’t stop there. No, I am beginning to see Democrats such as Robert B. Reich include supportive comments towards Islamic Sharia in his appeals for donations in support of Democrats I receive in email.

Click image for larger view

As you will note where I highlighted, Reich includes in his email slamming Donald Trump, “Keeping Sharia law out of a city near you” as one of three reasons he supplies to oppose Trump and Republicans in general.

Let it first be said that I neither support Trump nor the Republican Party, they have massive problems within their ranks as well.

But, seeing Reich use “Keeping Sharia law out of a city near you” as a reason to oppose both is downright scary to me.

For any not aware, Sharia is “the basic Islamic legal system derived from the religious precepts of Islam, particularly the Quran and the Hadith.”

Those like Reich would not be tolerant of a theological form of governing based on Christianity and the Holy Bible as it would violate our concept of “Separation of Church and State,” governing based upon religious doctrine instead of our constitution.

Yet here we have a prominent Democrat and former Secretary of Labor under the Clinton administration seemingly ready to accept such a religious rule, but from Islam, not Christianity.

Shouldn’t our country also be practicing Separation of Mosque and State since Churches and Synagogues are not permitted to govern over the country?

Especially concerning is where the Left stands on some issues, Homosexual rights, Women’s rights, children’s right and such that are not only largely nonexistent in the Middle East where Sharia is practiced, but goes against nearly all of what Democrats claim to believe in.

Women and young girls are routinely put to death in a brutal manner for what is labeled “dishonoring” the family, like divorcing an abusive husband or being gang raped against their will, often being stoned to death or beheaded.

Young girls not even developed into women are married off to much older and lecherous old men.

Homosexuals are hanged or thrown off of tall buildings to their death.

Human rights as we in the West know them are not practiced by the radicalized Muslims such as we have seen with ISIS, Al Qaeda and other such groups that practice the brutality of Sharia Law.

Yet mixed in with other hyperbolic smears of Republicans from Democrat Reich is “Keeping Sharia law out of a city near you?”

Shouldn’t they, who oppose religion in public or adherence to religious doctrine in a secular government, applaud “Keeping Sharia law out of a city near you” instead of condemning such a call?

And where is the neutered and spineless Republican to point out this unbelievable call from a Democrat?

I really don’t care if you are left or right, that is your business. But I do care that the world being left for my grandchildren may include their facing the brutal lashes of Sharia one day.

Democrats, you especially should be outraged over this call of Reich’s since Sharia is largely the antithesis of everything you claim to believe in.

And, if you think it is much ado about nothing, just recall that the smallest seed grows into the largest plant in your garden.

Sunday, December 13, 2015

Playing Politics With Your Life

In what I can only describe as placing political gain over the safety of American citizens, Democrats have once again shown that nothing matters much to them but political power as they now play political games to score points over actually addressing the problem of terrorism.

From the Hill we read the headline, Dems shift terror debate to guns and the words

“Democrats are seeking to limit the political fallout from the attack in San Bernardino, Calif., by pressing for legislation that would prevent terrorism suspects from buying a gun.”

“Leaders in the party think they have a winning message in pushing legislation that would ban gun sales to people on the federal terror watch list, and have made the bill a focal point of their response to the shooting.”

Simply astonishing that after 14 more innocent people have been gunned down by a couple of radicalized Muslims, Democrats are more worried about political fallout than seeking a way to limit or combat the growing threat of radical terrorists.

Since the attack, I have received several emails from Democrats and supportive groups also promoting this fallacy of relying on the “no-fly list” to block a gun purchase as a means to stop any future carnage.

It’s bunk!

OFA released this nifty image promoting what sounds like an effective means, tugging at your senses saying, “Right now, some people on the No-Fly List -- people suspected of potential terrorist activity -- can legally walk into a store and buy a gun.”

DNC Chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz sent out a plea concluding,

“It's time for us to take action -- action that the vast majority of Americans, including most law-abiding gun owners, support -- and make some commonsense reforms to our nation's gun laws that will keep guns out of dangerous hands. It may not be easy, and it may require the political courage to stand up to well-funded special interests, but it is the morally right thing to do.”

Immediately after Obama’s speech Sunday Dec 6, the White House sent out an email opening with, “Tonight, I addressed the nation from the Oval Office on my top priority as President: Keeping the American people safe.”

As we know, that address supposedly to update the country on the San Bernardino attack focused more on guns and not blaming Islam than anything else.

And that is supposed to “Keep the American people safe?”

It’s difficult to know just where to begin, but let’s begin with the cry of the “no-fly list.”

While on the surface it sounds reasonable and responsible, neither of the two that carried out the San Bernardino attacks were on the no-fly list. Additionally, they did not purchase the guns used themselves, but someone else purchased them and gave them to them. An act that is seen as questionable, if not illegal under California law already.

Not exactly bastions of conservative thought, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) posted an article on Dec. 7, 2015: Until the No Fly List Is Fixed, It Shouldn’t Be Used to Restrict People’s Freedoms and where they write,

“As we will argue to a federal district court in Oregon this Wednesday, the standards for inclusion on the No Fly List are unconstitutionally vague, and innocent people are blacklisted without a fair process to correct government error. Our lawsuit seeks a meaningful opportunity for our clients to challenge their placement on the No Fly List because it is so error-prone and the consequences for their lives have been devastating.” (emphasis added)

We also have a video of South Carolina Republican, Trey Gowdy grilling Department of Homeland Security official Kelli Ann Burriesci on due process of this no-fly list and not receiving answers.

We also have this same DHS official being questioned on visa waivers and unable to answer a single question.

This does not inspire any sense of security or confidence in this supposed “no-fly list” what with apparently no one seeming to know how someone is placed on it or seeing the headaches someone wrongfully placed on it must go through to be allowed to board an airplane again.

I can only imagine how many innocent people in need of self defense could possibly be denied that right guaranteed them because some bureaucratic snafu wrongfully placed them on this list. The odds of them being gunned down by a stalker, estranged spouse or any criminal might be very likely prior to having their right restored that never should have been taken from them.

As I said, on the surface it sounds like a good idea, but peeling back just the top layer shows the goal is more to score political points than to “Keep the American people safe.”

Also being called for once again is an “Assault Weapons Ban.”

Also pure bunk as such a ban would not have prevented the San Bernardino attacks, evidenced by a rare Geppetto Checkmark from Fact Checker on Sen. Marc Rubio’s claim, “no recent mass shootings would have been prevented by gun laws.”

Showing the futility, during the last Assault Weapons Ban, there were 15 Mass Shootings, including the horrific Columbine School shooting.

The ban did nothing of any substance, other than score some political points for Democrats to appear as if they were doing something.

We are also beginning to see more and more attacks using a knife or other sharp instrument, but the outrage has not yet risen to Democrats calling on restrictions for them as did Great Britain after they banned guns and criminals resorted to adding knives to their arsenal.

And even with their gun ban, crime committed with a gun have not gone away as the UK Mirror reports London overtaken as gun crime capital of England and Wales.

The gun is merely an instrument, an inanimate object that does nothing on its own and requires action by a human being to operate.

In the hands of a responsible person, that action can and has saved lives.

In the hands of a bad guy, be they criminal or terrorist, innocent lives are taken as they target primarily “Gun-Free Zones” where they know they will not be facing a good guy with a gun and their deed will be finished before Police arrive.

A lot is said about background checks, but what good is one if HIPAA Laws prevent relevant medical history from being included and a mentally disturbed individual passes such a background check?

I’m not wholly opposed to a background check and patiently waited for the completion of such a check on myself to obtain my Concealed Carry License.

But, some people that should not have been able to purchase a gun under our laws passed the same background check I did.

And, did not Tashfeen Malik, the female terrorist involved in the San Bernardino attack pass not one, but three background checks in order to legally enter the United States on her fiancé visa?

Yes, we do need to do something to curb gang style killings. To stop terrorists before they strike. To cut down on gun crime.

But disarming innocent, law-abiding citizens and placing scoring political points over saving innocent lives is not the answer.

Saturday, December 05, 2015

Sorry Muslims, You Are Not the Victim

As the investigation continues into the heinous shooting this past week in San Bernardino, California, an all too familiar narrative is once again being heard. That being, “Muslims feel a backlash” since the two people that committed the terror attack, Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik was both Muslim.

You Muslims in America are not the victims here.

Don’t worry, I’m not launching into a smear of Islam or denigrating your beliefs as some do. But it wasn’t long after the first shooter’s name was made public that CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) held a hastily assembled press conference to remind us all, “we are a religion of peace” and “this is not who we are.”

Seeing little if any opposition to ISIS, Al Qaeda and other fanatic groups coming out of the Islamic religion, we don’t know who you are, but in spite of several incidents around the globe where innocent people are slaughtered in the name of Islam, what would you expect us to think?

After the Ft. Hood terrorist attack in November 2009 by radicalized Major Nidal Hasan, that saw him murder 13 innocent soldiers, this blog penned An Open Letter To American Muslims that is just as relevant today as it was 6 years ago.

In spite of all that has occurred over the years, we still hear the same cries from the Muslim community of fearing some phantom backlash and being fearful for their lives.

I really can’t recall any mass shooting that left dozens of Muslims dead in the street or an office building in America.

What I do recall and see today is quick condemnation of both the NRA (National Rifle Association) and law-abiding gun owners in America after every single shooting, even though nearly every mass shooting occurs in a “Gun-Free Zone” where guns are prohibited.

Seeing an opportunity to score some political points in next year’s presidential election, Democrat candidates lined up to condemn the NRA, cry about too many guns in the country and call for another ineffective “Assault Weapons Ban,” ignoring that the last such ban did nothing to curtail mass shootings, 15 occurring during the time of the ban.

Ignored in these call is that California already has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation, the very laws Democrats now claim they want nationwide.

No, Mr. President, the NRA is not to blame

Hillary Clinton says “I want people to feel safe” and feels that disarming the general public or making it more difficult for the potential victims to obtain adequate means to defend themselves and their families against the bad guys that just ignore the law is the way to go about it.

I disagree.

It is said that a person’s religion isn’t mentioned unless the shooter is Muslim. Not wholly accurate.

In the recent shooting in Colorado Springs, Robert Lewis Dear, the obviously unhinged shooter there is described as coming from “a hotbed of religious extremism, fueled by clerics who preach holy war” and who “spoke of Jesus and the ‘end times’.”

More so-called “dangerous religious extremists” are found in the very Liberal leaning Slate article, The Terrorists Among Us.

Sorry Muslims, you aren’t the only ones.

Within hours of the shooting by Farook and Malik and them dying in a shoot-out with Police, the editorials began, even before bodies were recovered.

The LA Times gave us Terrorism? Angry worker? Whichever, the carnage came from legal guns.

Not quite as explained in a Wall Street Journal article (behind a paywall) stating,
“While they were originally sold legally, with magazine locking devices commonly known as bullet buttons, the rifles were subsequently altered in different ways to make them more powerful, according to Meredith Davis, a special agent with the ATF.”
“The Smith & Wesson rifle was changed in an attempt to enable it fire in fully automatic mode, while the DPMS weapon was modified to use a large-capacity magazine, she said.”
“Those alterations made the weapons unlawful under California’s ban on assault weapons, which bans guns with magazines that can detach for quick reloading.”

On the same day of the shooting, possibly within minutes of Farook and Malik being shot and killed, the LA Times also gave us The U.S. infatuation with guns is bordering on a society-wide suicidal impulse.

The New York Times gave us in their anti-gun rant, The Horror in San Bernardino the ironic claim,
“Amid the chaos were the horrifying and familiar aspects of a mass assault by the latest ‘active shooter’: bodies on gurneys, innocents weeping under desks at the rattle of gunfire, desperate emails for survival, SWAT teams massed at a war zone of civilian casualties. All the familiar terror was back, as a father received a text from his daughter: ‘People shot. In the office waiting for cops. Pray for us’.” (emphasis added)

The irony is that both prayers and guns were being condemned, yet those hunkered down in fear of their lives in this “gun-free zone” were praying for prayers and someone with a gun to arrive and save them.

I saw no shaming of Muslim prayers, not even all of the prayers Syed Farook is said to have been excused frequently from work to offer as per his religious belief.

In fact, other than some of the regular hothead types that few people really pay attention to, I see no mass hysteria or mass calls to deport all Muslims and certainly nothing that would even rise anywhere near to the mass hysteria we all saw over the Confederate flag after another accused “Devout Christian,” Dylann Roof shot down a group of innocent Black people during a Prayer Service at their Church in Charleston, South Carolina.

There are no editorials lambasting Islam as we saw over the Confederate flag.

Neither Muhammad, the Qur’an nor Allah is being Pilloried by any of the national media.

No, just the NRA, law-abiding gun owners and Christian beliefs are.

Sorry Muslims, you are not the victims here.

If you feel we shouldn’t look to your community with a wary eye, then it is long past time for you to join the fight to oust and destroy those hiding among your midst and committing heinous acts of terror in the your name.

You cannot remain ‘neutral’ to the horror that seeps out of your community any longer.

To you gun-grabbers wanting to repeal our second amendment, go to hell. Our second amendment rights are the only thing standing between us and them and we’ll be damned if we will allow you to disarm us and put our families in harm’s way without a fight.

We refuse to become victims.

Saturday, November 14, 2015

Presidential Reactions

From FDR to Obama, how our Presidents have reacted to dangers facing Western Civilization

Will the Left Wake-up Now?

Yesterday, as I was posting a post on my more local issues blog, word began breaking over news networks of what we today know was another horrific act of terror from ISIS in Paris as they systematically slaughtered innocent people again.

I refrained from posting on it yesterday, although I did make several comments on my facebook page, as anything I put down here would amount to little more than an anger filled rant.

Even if justifiable, my anger over so many innocents being slaughtered by ISIS on the very same day Obama came out claiming how they “were contained” would not have come across in how I choose to pattern my writing.

Unbelievable, but the whining college kids my previous post was about actually came out last evening, increasing their level of pampered whine, complaining how the media took focus off of them and looked towards Paris.

Grow up, children, y’all ain’t that important, never were.

In response to the attacks, French President Francois Hollande, a fairly left-leaning president by our standards stated, “We are going to lead a war which will be pitiless,” and adding, “Because when terrorists are capable of committing such atrocities, they must be certain that they are facing a determined France, a united France, a France that is together and does not let itself be moved, even if today we express infinite sorrow.”

Even the Vatican has chimed in with a statement from Father Federico Lombardi, Holy See press office director, “We pray for the victims and the wounded, and for all the French people. This is an attack on peace for all humanity, and it requires a decisive, supportive response on the part of all of us as we counter the spread the homicidal hatred in all of its forms.”

The U.N. Security Council condemned the “despicable” terrorist attacks and demanded immediate release of those held hostage in the Bataclan theater, while ISIS terrorist systematically murdered them one by one, over 100 people at last count.

Body counts had not even yet been completed as we began seeing a new Peace Symbol being displayed with France’s Eiffel Tower in the middle.

From leftists worldwide we now see cries of, “Don't allow this horrific act allow you to be drawn into the loss of your humanity or tolerance” by actor Mark Ruffalo.

A pianist played John Lennon’s Imagine outside of the Bataclan Theater.

Elton John quoted Martin Luther King, “Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”

Across facebook, people are displaying the flag of France in various manners to show solidarity or condolences over the attack.

As could be expected, many also are making mention of the feckless leadership of our own milquetoast Barack Obama that tell us these terrorists are nothing more than “a JV Team,” while he continues downsizing our own Military.

Oddly enough, that brings out from the left, “this is not a time for partisanship.”

Odd as back in 2003 when the War on Terror moved into Iraq, it was the left that began making it a partisan issue, used by John F’n Kerry in his 2004 presidential run.

Democrat Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi made it a partisan issue when they succeeded in 2006 in taking majority control of Congress.

It was even a partisan issue in the 2008 election of Barack Obama in defeating John McCain.

The War on Terror was used to beat President George W. Bush over the head with throughout his presidency with cries of “he lied us into war,” “the surge is a failure,” “impeach Bush over Iraq,” “we need a ‘New Direction’,” and Harry Reid’s “the war in Iraq is lost… The failure has been political. It has been policy. It has been presidential.”

Yes, it was very partisan then. But for some reason, it should not be partisan now, even though Obama has shown such poor leadership that we also read, World Waits for America To Pick New President Capable of Leadership.

U.S. Navy Captain Dan Ouimette gave a rousing speech on November 2, 2004, America Needs To Wake Up! If you read no other link in this post, I urge you to read his.

ISIS Statement of Responsibility

In spite of a succession of terrorist attacks leading up to our own horrific September 11, 2001 attacks, we keep falling back asleep. We keep hearing from ‘Peaceniks’ that we must not over react to these barbarians, we must show them kindness and other such nonsense.

Extremists count on such weak reaction from the west as they continue to spread their barbarism across the planet. Their leaders have proclaimed, “The extent of your impotence and weaknesses has become very clear. When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature they will like the strong horse.”

It is well past time Western Civilization showed these extremists that we are not “impotent and weak” and will engage them as President Hollande described above, “a war which will be pitiless.”

Their brutality must be destroyed by brute force, giving no quarter.

And it must be a multi-national force including Arab nations and their forces.

If Obama doesn’t have the stomach, replace him with someone that does. Democrat or Republican makes no difference just as long as they have the stomach for the fight.

We civilians must be willing to make sacrifices as was done back in the 1940’s in the Second World War.

Efforts to disarm or make it more difficult for citizens to obtain arms and protect ourselves must stop. Armed citizens have shown effectiveness in stopping or minimizing attacks, even though our media neglects to report on them when it happens.

If nothing else, should the extremists try another attack as seen in Paris in our country, armed citizens may be able to neutralize them before the body count reaches a high count.

These extremists have shown themselves as unpredictable. They operate under the radar and often our high tech measures fail to pick up on their intent.

Since they are Muslim extremists, other Muslims absolutely must begin exposing them and outing radical Imam’s that preach such hate.

Let us not forget, Muslims are slaughtered in far greater numbers by these extremist madmen than any others.

As gruesome and horrific as the attacks in Paris were, it is but another wake-up call to the peace-loving world.

The terrorists will not stop with pleas of ‘pretty please.’ They laugh at such weak responses and plot their next attack.

They have shown their goal is not just to conquer and rule the Middle East, but to force the entire world to kneel before their radicalism and plunge us backwards thousands of years and live under their brutality where a woman is not considered a human and any opposition to their rule means instant death.

Are you awake now?

Or are you just going to roll over and hit the snooze button yet again?

Monday, October 26, 2015

Heroes' Song

The latest from the wonderful children at Tussing Elementary School, by Michael and Angela Souders. For Memorial Day / Veteran's Day 2015

Toilet Paper, Apples and Hot Dogs

About all I can say is, hang on, here we go again. Another effort underway to create a frenzy over something people occasionally enjoy is out as we read eating a hot dog is equivalent to smoking cigarettes now.

Nobody with an ounce of brains will argue that cigarettes aren’t bad for a person, although second and third hand smoke is still debated. But the all American hot dog now too?

Actually, to make it even more cynical, bacon is listed right alongside of hot dogs now as WHO (World Health Organization) has jumped onboard with some group that back in 2011 erected a billboard saying “Hot Dogs As Bad as Cigarettes.”

Between you and me, I have little doubt if hot dogs were the mainstay of your diet they wouldn’t be conducive to good health. But who really eats hot dogs that much?

Most of us have maybe a few over a years’ time, at ball games, a quick lunch, backyard BBQ or just a quick dinner.

So why whip another frenzy over what is little more than another comfort food?

USA Today reports Hot dogs, bacon, processed meats linked to cancer.

Yes, cancer, the big C as some call it, a debilitating disease in many varieties that too many have died from too soon.

Linking something to cancer, regardless of how remote has long been claimed in many foods we enjoy and mostly still do, closer research revealing the cries were more alarmist or politically motivated that health related.

Remember the scare over ALAR just a couple decades ago that resulted in tons of nutritious fruit being left to rot on docks worldwide or in the fields, people scared to death to enjoy an apple?

And what of the eggs we often eat for breakfast? Remember how they too were linked to all sorts of health concerns not too long ago?

Not surprising, turns out those concerns were overblown.

Coffee seems to be another so-called ‘experts’ keep changing their minds on. Good for us one day, bad the next only to return to good a gain a few days later.

And what of good old butter? Weren’t we told margarine was better due to less fats, only to subsequently be told margarine had even more fat and was more detrimental to our health?

Being diabetic myself, I try to watch my diet and I am told to avoid potatoes, rice and “anything white.” While I eat less of them, I find moderation is the rule as my blood sugar is maintained at levels it needs to be.

Salt was another big concern, linked to high blood pressure and people avoided is. Turns out, it is a necessary element our bodies need, some people more than others. But again, moderation is the rule.

As expected, numerous other scientists dispute the claim as we read in the UK Telegraph; Experts attack claims that bacon is ‘as big a cancer threat as smoking.’

When I was a young boy, we were taught to eat a balanced diet and being raised a dirt poor Southern boy, that wasn’t always possible. We ate what my parents could afford, after my Dad got his booze and my Mom her cigarettes.

A lot of times it was beans and rice, collard greens and some slab of meat, beef or pork, whatever was on sale or close to expiration date. Chicken was a real luxury. Fired Baloney and hot dogs were fun and cheap.

But we ate and were active, having relatively few health problems growing up.

And I feel that is more the problem than what we occasionally eat, we are a lot more inactive than we used to be.

Yes, we are cautioned there by other ‘experts’ too.

Maybe that is also part of our problem, too many ‘experts’ deciding what is good or bad for others and a gullible population, eager to follow the latest trend or go off in a panic over claims made, even if just a late night Television joke.

That’s right, you young people likely don’t know about it, but in 1973 the country went into a panic over a Johnny Carson joke on the Tonight show about a toilet paper shortage that manufactured a frenzied panic in people rushing out and buying all of the toilet paper they found, resulting in a very real toilet paper shortage.

The Great Toilet Paper Scare of 1973

So from where I sit, I’d take these ‘experts’ with a grain of salt. Enjoy yourselves, eat a balanced diet. Enjoy that occasional hot dog if you desire and go outside a play more.

You might as well enjoy yourselves as much a humanely possible because let’s face it, life is short and none of us are going to get out of this life alive.

Thursday, October 15, 2015

Las Vegas, "A Timeless Veteran's Memorial"

Received from the American Legion. I hope to travel to Las Vegas to view this once completed.

In my opinion, a very respectful concept.

Sunday, October 11, 2015

Anti-Gun Nuts Going,, Well,, Nuts!

Once again tragedy has struck in yet another ‘Gun-Free Zone,’ this time in the small community of Roseburg, Oregon. Another unhinged person shot and killed people on the campus of Umpqua Community College.

For those that claim the campus was not ‘Gun-Free’ due to Oregon law, please recheck your sources as the laws on guns on campuses in Oregon is much more complicated than believed.

Be that as it may, tragedy struck and 10 people are dead, 9 innocents and the shooter with more wounded, hopefully to survive and regain their lives.

And as we see all too often, gun-haters come out of the woodwork before any corpses are cold to blame guns, the NRA, the Second Amendment, Conservatives, everybody except the actual shooter.

Cries go out to disarm the public with comparisons to Australia and the UK as banning guns and not having any gun violence now, a claim as naïve as any ever heard as both countries still have gun violence in spite of such claims. Also ignored by gun-grabbers citing that claim is the incidence of ‘knife violence’ that has had the country of Great Britain actually considering more bans on knives and certain sharp objects and campaign launched, ‘Save a Life, Surrender Your Knife,’ even trotting out the Doctors calling for knife bans years ago.

While gun-grabbers might technically be correct in their “less gun violence” claims, to me there is no consolation in someone murdered with a knife instead of a gun. The violence did not ebb is the point.

And of course, Liberal gun-grabbers with their knee jerk reactions and emotions over logic state the most inane things, as seen under another of Lazy C’s Greg Jayne editorial.

If he weren’t serious it would be comical. But he is serious, sad to say.

Let’s deconstruct this ridiculous comment.

A “so-called right” that is clearly expressed in the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights? If that right so clearly stated is but “so-called,” what of the rest of rights enumerated in our Bill Rights? Say, like his freedom of speech and assembly?

And what of the 13th Amendment freeing slaves and banning future enslavement of one human being owning another? Does he see that as just “so-called” as well?

How can they argue just one is “so-called” and not include all?

And of course, the ever present hate spewed against those with a differing view of matters as Liberals so often do. Blame everything on conservatives.

But what this commenter fails to recognize in his rant, the Second Amendment was not written in order to put down any slave rebellion. What was being passed after the Civil War was gun control measure designed to disarm freed slaves.

Yes, true history reveals just the opposite of what is claimed, early gun control was meant to disarm a minority race and oppress them, much like happened in the 1930’s when Germany disarmed the Jews prior to the Holocaust.

Knee jerk hyperbole and emotional outbursts is what they have to rely on, far from Jayne’s call of “acknowledging the problem.”

One cannot acknowledge something when they have no clue what it is.

Another fallacy being spouted elsewhere is “294 mass shootings (four or more people killed or wounded) in the United States” so far in 2015.

Even politically Liberal Politifact states of that number, “The statistic came from Mass Shooting Tracker, a crowdsourced site, which defines mass shooting as any in which four or more people are shot at, regardless of whether they die or are injured.”

In other words, as I read it, redefine what a “mass shooting” is to suit the agenda and whip up anti-gun hysteria.

Politifact then quotes a more reliable source as “approximately 18 mass killings by firearms so far in 2015.”

And let’s face it, that is 18 too many.

But, is the gun really to blame? We hear there are far more guns in American society than citizens, so if true that the gun is at fault, shouldn’t we hear of millions of shootings? I would think so.

We don’t, so apparently the gun isn’t the real problem anymore than Ford, Chevrolet or Chrysler are fault for DUI’s or traffic accidents.

No, the driver is at fault and it is the same with a gun, the person pulling the trigger is at fault.

So what good will banning guns do?

Liberals seem to think a simple ban will take guns away from shooters and that is a fallacy as well. Murderers already ignore written laws, so why would they follow a new one?

And what of murder rates where guns were banned and murderers just substitute a knife, hammer or even baseball bat?

Do we ban those as well?

To wrap this up, let’s look at another common claim from Liberals after a school shooting, banning guns on school grounds and heavy opposition when we call for trained, licensed and qualified staff and teachers to be allowed to carry concealed.

As we know, the most deaths in these tragedies occur where the shooter knows he will face the least opposition, a “gun-free zone.”

Never acknowledged by the left gun-grabbers is the times such a shooting was stopped early on before much more carnage was allowed to happen by someone armed with a gun, that I covered back in 2006, The School Shooting They Never Mention.

In closing I will say to Mr. John M. Kowalski, the Second Amendment was not written in order to put down any slave rebellion, acknowledged by honest gun restriction advocates, but to keep us from becoming enslaved to a tyrannical regime.


Monday, July 20, 2015

Sorry Black Folks, You’re Not Equal!

From the TV Mini-series "Roots"
Somebody has to say it and that somebody is me, you Black folks in America are far from equal, time to admit it.

Now, before you come and burn my house down or have the thought Police imprison me for not holding on to “pure thoughts” that please Liberals, indulge me for a few minutes and I’ll show you just how unequal Black conservative people in the United States are today, 50 years past the Civil Rights bill passing into law.

Us White folks have the freedom to formulate, hold and express our own personal thoughts, even though our conservative views are attacked or belittled by Liberals. Still, even though suffering ridicule for deviating from the preferred thought, we can be safe physically in speaking what we feel and believe, even if labeled “racist” for opposing Obama’s Liberal policies.

Black Liberals are also assured of safety for following the train passed down from on high through the NAACP, New Black Panthers and Democrat Party of today.

And that is where the equality ends for any Black person that has conservative views and dares to speak them, especially if in defense of Southern Heritage or the Confederacy.

You see, in order to be truly equal one must have the security of forming, holding and expressing their own individual values and views without fear of repercussion or physical assault.

Black conservatives are not afforded that security as seen time and again when they dare speak their views in public, they are either physically assaulted or personally insulted, called Uncle Toms, Sell Outs, House Negroes, Oreo’s and more.

And that comes from other Blacks and even White Liberals who repeatedly claim to be accepting and tolerant of other views, but astonished to find out there really are differing views and it is a Black person daring to speak them.

Most recently we see down in Mississippi where after attending a pro-Confederate flag rally in Alabama, a Black man and woman were run off the road by a “car full of jeering Black men,” killing 49 year-old Anthony Hervey, author of “Why I Wave The Confederate Flag, Written by a Black man.”

Mr. Hervey was a well-known and respected figure around the South at rallies supporting Southern Heritage and the Confederacy. Alabama Today says, “Anthony Hervey gave his life for something he believed in, reaching across racial lines to preserve history and protect our Constitutional rights.”

Over several years many other Black people have faced personal scorn and assaults too, although not killed for speaking their individual conservative views.

Before jumping back on the D.C. party circuit, as Secretary of State for President George W. Bush, retired General Colin Powell was labeled a “House negro” by Harry Belafonte, entertainer and staunch Black Liberal.

After Gen. Powell left and was replaced by Condoleezza Rice, a highly successful and very intelligent Black woman, she too came under fire from Liberals with a series of racist cartoons printed in newspapers.

Dr. Ben Carson, well known retired Neurosurgeon and Conservative Black man was recently ridiculed by Jamilah Lemieux, senior editor at Ebony magazine.

Again, his ideals were not countered, he was personally ridiculed for having a differing view than the left.

MSNBC’s Goldie Taylor has been heard saying of Black People appointed to former President Bush’s cabinet as “very, very dangerous to diverse communities,” and “self-hating minorities.”

Retired US Army Lt. Col Allen West, also a former US Representative from Florida said, “When black conservatives are attacked viciously by white liberals you don’t hear anything.”

Two Black Conservatives, Deneen Borelli and Rev. C.L. Bryant were verbally attacked at the 2014 NAACP Convention because of their association with FreedomWorks and that it is funded in part by the much hated Koch Brothers.

The woman assaulting them with her vicious words said, “They don’t stand for any of the values of what the NAACP stands for. They don’t need to be in here.”

Silly me, I always thought the initials NAACP stood for National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. I never knew Black Conservatives “need not apply.”

Black Conservative actress, Stacey Dash was smeared in an Ebony magazine review with, “Her conservative, clueless political slant sparked controversy time after time this year, making Dash notoriously trendy for all the wrong reasons.”

The National Black Republican Association has often been ridiculed for holding fast to their personal values as conservatives.

Even Black Liberal Fox News contributor Juan Williams said a few years ago on Black Conservative attacks, “It’s Sickening to Me.”

But the assaults have not decreased; they have actually increased, now seeing a Black Conservative killed.

We Conservatives are labeled “haters,” “racists” and “White Supremacists” for daring to disagree with a Black Liberal like Obama, but the attacks a Black Conservatives are going well beyond that, making me fear we will see more physical attacks and possibly more deaths of Black Conservatives for daring to step off of the Democrat, NAACP, Black Panther Plantation.”

It is not Conservatives that do not allow Black people to hold their personal, individual values and views, it is Liberals, both Black and White.

And as I said above, if they are not secure in the freedom to formulate, hold and freely express their views publicly without such vicious personal attacks, not on their views, on their person, they are not equal in the eyes of Liberals.

Imagine, for all of the calls how Conservatives are racist and hate Black people, we are who sees Black people as our equals.

Liberals refuse to allow Black people the very equality they claim they support.