Images courtesy of A Human Right.
Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:
Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs has the complete scoop on the arson-terrorist connection with regard to the California fires:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/10/firefighters-wa.html
A Keyboard and a .45 has the latest news about the Empty Holster Protest in Texas:
http://akeyboardanda45.blogspot.com/2007/10/unt-students-participate-in-national.html
Alphecca blogs on 'wheel guns':
http://www.alphecca.com/?p=491
Say Uncle gives us a Parker/Heller update:
http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/10/26/parkerheller_update-7/
Snow Flakes in Hell is worried about Republican fundraising efforts, and the prospects for the 2008 election:
http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=1788
Have you seen the sickening and enraging comment the Brady Bunch made about college students who want the right to carry guns? The War on Guns has it here:
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2007/10/campus-diversity-brady-style.html
Red's Trading Post has the late-breaking news of the bumbling idiots at the ATF, who lost over 500 records of gun businesses:
http://redstradingpost.blogspot.com/2007/10/breaking-news-atf-loses-over-500.html
Nicki at The Liberty Zone blogs about a woman she would like to see leave America:
http://libertyzone.blogspot.com/2007/10/i-would-like-to-see-her-leave-america.html
Nicki also posts these comments on the Bastard (my term for B. Hussein Obama):
http://libertyzone.blogspot.com/2007/10/obama-i-would-take-up-arms-myself-to.html
Tam reports that the Democrat-controlled U.S. House has passed H.R. 1955, which essentially makes all of us terrorists:
http://booksbikesboomsticks.blogspot.com/2007/10/were-all-terrorists-now.html
Cameron Bailey points to an important article on American companies helping totalitarian regimes around the world censure their citizens:
http://www.cameron-bailey.com/2007/10/censoring-internet.html
The Bitch Girls show us an example of the anti-gun ads running in Virginia:
http://www.thebitchgirls.us/?p=7535
Dustin's Gun Blog has an excellent read on Americans finding out the truth about gun control:
http://dustinsgunblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/good-news-americans-are-finding-out.html
Breda says that apparently someone in Iran has a fetish:
http://thebredafallacy.blogspot.com/2007/10/visit-2916.html
Mike McCarville reports that the Democrats are lamenting about this:
http://wwwtmrcom.blogspot.com/2007/10/democrats-losing-battle-for-voters.html
In case you missed it, Xavier Thoughts has the story on the MSM-bitch who was suspended for her treatment of the man who shot some vermin in self-defense:
http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/10/aguilar-speaks.html
In case you're interested in these sorts of things, a potentially deadly strain of drug-resistant staph has shown up in a South Carolina school district:
http://carolinacountryside.blogspot.com/2007/10/greenwood-school-district-has-deadly.html
14 comments:
what's the deal with you and the guns McFly?
Time to start supporting the one real conservative in the race. The Champion of the Constitution. Hope for American. The Modern Day Thomas Jefferson.
That candidate- Ron Paul
I won't dispute your accolades for Mr. Paul, but I think Hillary would trounce him in the general election.
LawyerChic,
I see you are either woefully ignorant of the principles of the Founding Fathers concerning the citizens' right to keep and bear firearms, or else you think that it is 'outdated,' 'irrelevant,' or 'non-progressive.'
Am I somewhere close to the truth about your views?
Well, his anti-war stance could be an asset in the general election.
Also, a recent poll had him leading Clinton among 40 year olds something like 47% to 44%. Not bad for the minimal name recoginition Paul has.
He is also doing well in New Hampshire- 7% in one of the latest polls and like 11% with independents, who can vote in the Republican primary in New Hampshire.
After learning more about Thompson and Huckabee I am not sure that they are all that conservative on alot of issues. Paul does seem to be the only conservative seeking the Republican nomination who has a chance of receiving it. Tancredo and Hunter are not at all likely to receive it.
I am not sure why you think Paul cannot beat Hillary. I think his chances are good, and in fact much better than anyone else's. Ghooliani or Romney if nominated, will destroy the Republican party. Many Republicans are already very disaffected and their nomination will only cement that even further. I also don't think either has a chance at beating Hillary, as many disaffected Republicans will not vote for the lesser of two evils this election.
lawyerchic: As for the deal with the guns; the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms is the one right that defends all others. This is true today as much as it was in 1776.
He has also scared many of the GOP faithful with his war comments, particularly in light of terrorism.
And he has also scared some voters to whom he may appeal on the war issue but who are against dismantling certain government agencies. I have no problem with the concept, but many in the anti-war movement have a BIG problem with it.
Both of these factors would hurt him, in my opinion, in the general election.
Yeah, but in the general election you don't think the GOP would overwhelmingly go to vote for him rather than allow the Hillarybeast to win?
As for his anti-war stance- I consider myself to be very conservative (with a bit of libertariansism) and I voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004 and supported the war in Iraq up until the point where I started seriously considering Paul as a candidate. The liberals and Code Pink type certainly didn't persuade me one bit in their anti Iraq war stance. But Paul has. He is a consistent conservative and is right the the Republican party is traditionaly against going to war. Paul did however, vote to use military force against Al Qaeda in Afganistan.
Listen, after September 11 no one wants to hear someone say our foreign policy may have motivated terrorists to attack us, myself included. I, like many Americans just wanted to go after the terrorists and kill them. But, it is now over 6 years later and who better to inform us than a very consistent conservative. Our current foreign policy is mostly a holdover from the Cold War where we were concerned about the spread of communism. Our military is spread all across the world, now I suppose not to prevent the spread of communism, but to make the world safe for democracy (or more likely one world government).
I am sure you are aware of Bush's current apparent support for the NAU. The Security and Prosperity Partnership, the Law of the Sea Treaty, Bush's case in the Supreme Court against the State of Texas, and of course we have ex-President Vicente Fox's recent comments on CNN about an Amero currency and the integration of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. The preponderance of the evidence leaves me deeply suspicious of our countries foreign policy goals and I fear both parties now support a one world government (no conspiracy theory here-it is being done right out in the open).
If I wanted to promote one world government I would see two big problems- one- the Middle East- two- American citizens deeply attached to the concept of nationalism and individual rights and of course that damn piece of paper- the U.S. Constitution.
I really think we should immediately (within reason) withdraw all of our troops from the Middle East (Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iran- I'm sure we are already there covertly, etc.). I believe our policing of the world is directly contributing to our loss of sovereignty as we are acting as the U.N.'s police and military arm. We are enforcing a U.N. resolution in Iraq, remember?
As a red blooded American Patriot, I can tell you I would fight to defend my country against foreign threats (I would also respond with nuclear weapons to any nation who attacked us with WMD). We as Americans would probably not be happy with hostile foreign nations setting up camp in Canada or Mexico. Why should Iran or any other country be any different? Let's just get out of the Middle East and stop being the U.N.'s police force. We are only helping the New World Order set up their global socialist vision for a better world. Do we really think that our nuclear weapons will not eventially be on the table as well? And of course, American citizens firearms are very close to being on the U.N. chopping block. The U.N. already has put out that citizens have no legitemate reason to use force; only governments can legitemately use force.
I have lost all confidence in Bush. He really seems to be implementing the New World Order plan for a one world government. The NAU is just the beginning. One World government doesn't have any room for individual rights and we should oppose such a thing by all possible means.
I would vote for any GOP candidate over the Hildabeast, but not because I am a staunch Republican, which I am not. Of the two Parties that can mount competitive national campaigns, the only one that has candidates that are not Socialists is the GOP.
I would not even vote for Billy Richardson if he got the Democratic nomination and ran against Giuliani.
My main objective is to support a candidate who is an advocate for human liberty from top to bottom, and who at the same time can be competitive with a powerful Hillary Clinton money machine.
If we make a big mistake in the GOP nominating process, we will most definitely be in for some of the most tragic and saddest years in the history of this Republic.
I am not anti-Ron Paul. I am against anti-freedom, and the Democrats are the ones who are the worst offenders.
The entire gang of thugs that runs Congress needs to be voted out of office in addition to losing their bid to gain the White House.
Oh, by the way, Brent...I have the very same deep concerns about Bush, the U.N., personal freedom, and world government that you have.
This is an ominous time for America and its Constitution. I would start by pulling out of the U.N. entirely. In fact, I would shut them down and tell them they are no longer welcome on our soil.
The U.N. today is perhaps the single biggest purveyor of anti-freedom in the world. And our politicians just sit there as if it is just hunky-dory.
We are on the brink of losing the United States of America and its Constitution...and George W. Bush is helping in that process. He has turned out to be a dud, another big government, anti-freedom, and dangerous threat to human liberty.
The thing is, if we get Hillary, or Obama, or Biden, or ANY of those guys, it will be much, much worse.
Marty, you are dead wrong, I think its not only a right but a necessity to bear arms, I'm buying myself a gun for xmas this year....a nice one:)
and if anybody runs up on me i'll shoot first and ask questions later...no joke.
the only reason I was asking about the guns is because every other post is about guns...like Marty has a fixation, I like the second amendment...all the other amends are cool too...
I don't have a fixation. I am merely doing my part, in my corner of the world, to educate the masses that guns are not our enemy.
In addition, my posts are not predominately about guns, except for the 'Second Amendment News Roundup,' but about politics.
And what's with this 'Marty' business, anyway? Nobody calls me that, so I am forced to assume you are referring to someone else.
The name is Martyn...Prissy.
Oh, by the way, Prissy, glad to see you are all for the Second Amendment referring to the citizens' right to own and carry firearms.
Glad to see you are going to buy one, too...every women needs one for protection, provided she knows how to use it.
damn straight marty, every woman might actually need two guns and a spray can of mace to protect herself...
Post a Comment