A team of investigative reporters for Ammoland have exposed previously unpublished documents showing that the controversial U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), also known as the "small arms treaty," includes gun control for private "small arms and light weapons" as U.S. gun owners feared.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been negotiating the treaty at the United Nations on behalf of the Obama administration.
Clinton had assured the public that the treaty would include language prohibiting the treaty from mandating restrictions on U.S. gun sales. But the documents uncovered by Ammoland indicate otherwise.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
The 2A News Roundup: Top Ten for Tuesday, July 24, 2012
All guns and politics from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
Mike Vanderboegh reports that he and David Codrea will be back on Lou Dobbs on Fox Business Network tonight to discuss Fast and Furious.
GunRights4US comments on Obama's notion that government should take the credit for just about everything.
The Wandering Minstrel has re-named ABC news based upon their recent debacles concerning the Colorado shooting.
The Smallest Minority has an analysis of the notion that gun control makes us safer.
The New York Liberty Report highlights the fact that the U.S. has billions of barrels of oil representing millions of jobs, but Obama and the Democrats won't allow drilling for it.
Stand Up America reports a rather disturbing story of the creation and expansion of a Marine Corp Police Force...yes, you read that right, a law enforcement arm that can be used right here at home on our own soil.
Days of our Trailers notes the abject failure of gun control.
Mike McCarville says that a legislator has been honored by a 2nd Amendment rights group for his work in protecting gun rights and spearheading the successful passage of an open carry bill.
Pamela Geller reports that the Obama Administration has suppressed a report on Afghanistan that the public needs to see.
Roberta X opines on the mantra that many anti-gun bigots use that some people have "too much ammunition." Well, how much is too much? Who is to decide? Why is it anyone's business but the ones who buy it???
Mike Vanderboegh reports that he and David Codrea will be back on Lou Dobbs on Fox Business Network tonight to discuss Fast and Furious.
GunRights4US comments on Obama's notion that government should take the credit for just about everything.
The Wandering Minstrel has re-named ABC news based upon their recent debacles concerning the Colorado shooting.
The Smallest Minority has an analysis of the notion that gun control makes us safer.
The New York Liberty Report highlights the fact that the U.S. has billions of barrels of oil representing millions of jobs, but Obama and the Democrats won't allow drilling for it.
Stand Up America reports a rather disturbing story of the creation and expansion of a Marine Corp Police Force...yes, you read that right, a law enforcement arm that can be used right here at home on our own soil.
Days of our Trailers notes the abject failure of gun control.
Mike McCarville says that a legislator has been honored by a 2nd Amendment rights group for his work in protecting gun rights and spearheading the successful passage of an open carry bill.
Pamela Geller reports that the Obama Administration has suppressed a report on Afghanistan that the public needs to see.
Roberta X opines on the mantra that many anti-gun bigots use that some people have "too much ammunition." Well, how much is too much? Who is to decide? Why is it anyone's business but the ones who buy it???
Gun sales spike 41 percent after Colorado shooting
The Denver Post is reporting today that gun sales in Colorado have spiked 41 percent since the shooting at the Century 16 theater in Aurora last Friday. And the Colorado Bureau of Investigation reports that its approval of background checks for new firearms purchasers jumped 43 percent within the last four days.
In spite of claims by high profile news media personalities such as Piers Morgan and politicians such as U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., that the nation's "lax gun laws" cause such massacres, American citizens do not seem to be buying it.
Instead, Americans appear to believe that owning and carrying a gun is the best protection a citizen can be afforded in this era in which criminals find a way to get grenades, explosives, and other weaponry in spite of strict gun control laws like those in Aurora, Colo.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
In spite of claims by high profile news media personalities such as Piers Morgan and politicians such as U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., that the nation's "lax gun laws" cause such massacres, American citizens do not seem to be buying it.
Instead, Americans appear to believe that owning and carrying a gun is the best protection a citizen can be afforded in this era in which criminals find a way to get grenades, explosives, and other weaponry in spite of strict gun control laws like those in Aurora, Colo.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Monday, July 23, 2012
The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Monday, July 23, 2012
All guns and politics, from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
David Codrea questions the claims of Philippines police that Colorado-style mass shootings are rare in that country due to strict gun control laws.
WRSA entirely discredits the notion that "only the police and military need guns."
Gun Owners of America offers sane solutions to the shootings such as the one in Aurora, Colo. which fly in the face of the "let's ban guns" mantra of the anti-gun bigots.
Way Up North posts the quote of the day from Noah Webster. Do yourself a favor and read it.
Tam calls attention to Roger Ebert's insanity in purporting to address an issue about which he has little or no insight.
Standing By says that the federal government now thinks it owns us. Yep. We are now officially slaves. Now, just wait till they start treating us like it, up close and personal.
Nicki illustrates the mantra of "never let a crisis go to waste" as applied to the Colorado shooting.
Brigid writes masterful commentary on so-called "gun free zones."
Alphecca cites a study showing that the most common precipitating factor in rampage shootings is the loss of a job.
Stand Up America reports that terrorism and terrorist threats are rising sharply, and it's all connected. The Colorado shooting is part of it.
David Codrea questions the claims of Philippines police that Colorado-style mass shootings are rare in that country due to strict gun control laws.
WRSA entirely discredits the notion that "only the police and military need guns."
Gun Owners of America offers sane solutions to the shootings such as the one in Aurora, Colo. which fly in the face of the "let's ban guns" mantra of the anti-gun bigots.
Way Up North posts the quote of the day from Noah Webster. Do yourself a favor and read it.
Tam calls attention to Roger Ebert's insanity in purporting to address an issue about which he has little or no insight.
Standing By says that the federal government now thinks it owns us. Yep. We are now officially slaves. Now, just wait till they start treating us like it, up close and personal.
Nicki illustrates the mantra of "never let a crisis go to waste" as applied to the Colorado shooting.
Brigid writes masterful commentary on so-called "gun free zones."
Alphecca cites a study showing that the most common precipitating factor in rampage shootings is the loss of a job.
Stand Up America reports that terrorism and terrorist threats are rising sharply, and it's all connected. The Colorado shooting is part of it.
Gun owners outraged at television station over database
Gun owners are expressing outrage toward a television station in Raleigh, N.C. that linked to a database that allows any reader to access the number of concealed carry permit holders in the station's viewing area.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Sunday, July 22, 2012
Democrats double down on demands for gun control
In a renewed onslaught only one day after they called for more gun control in the wake of the Colorado shooting, Democrats in Washington today doubled down on their demands that average American citizens relinquish some or all of their firearms rights in order to prevent criminals from getting guns.
U.S. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., and U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., claimed Saturday that lax gun laws led to the mass shooting that killed 12 movie goers in Aurora, Colorado early Friday morning just after midnight.
Today the two Democrats were joined by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who stated that "weapons of war don't belong on the streets." Feinstein renewed her call to reinstate the so-called "assault weapons ban" that would prohibit citizens from purchasing semi-automatic weapons with high capacity magazines.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
U.S. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., and U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., claimed Saturday that lax gun laws led to the mass shooting that killed 12 movie goers in Aurora, Colorado early Friday morning just after midnight.
Today the two Democrats were joined by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who stated that "weapons of war don't belong on the streets." Feinstein renewed her call to reinstate the so-called "assault weapons ban" that would prohibit citizens from purchasing semi-automatic weapons with high capacity magazines.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Saturday, July 21, 2012
Democrats call for strict gun control after Colorado shootings
As expected, Democrats in Congress today are calling for strict gun control measures in the aftermath of the Colorado shootings in which a deranged assailant claiming to be "the Joker" killed 12 people and wounded 58 in a crowded movie theater during a screening of the new "Dark Knight" film.
The alleged shooter, James Holmes, was incorrectly identified by Brian Ross of ABC News as a member of the Tea Party. Ross later issued an apology and a correction.
Gun control proponents in the media immediately jumped into action to use the shootings as a tool for pushing the anti-gun agenda. But as this reporter predicted in an article Friday, if past incidents such as these are any indication, it would not be long until the usual firearms critics in Congress would begin to issue calls for strict gun control measures.
Right on cue, those critics did exactly that today.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
The alleged shooter, James Holmes, was incorrectly identified by Brian Ross of ABC News as a member of the Tea Party. Ross later issued an apology and a correction.
Gun control proponents in the media immediately jumped into action to use the shootings as a tool for pushing the anti-gun agenda. But as this reporter predicted in an article Friday, if past incidents such as these are any indication, it would not be long until the usual firearms critics in Congress would begin to issue calls for strict gun control measures.
Right on cue, those critics did exactly that today.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Friday, July 20, 2012
Media exploits Colorado shooting to push gun control
No sooner had alleged shooter James Holmes pulled the trigger killing 12 movie goers at the new Batman film in Colorado this morning than the mainstream media had jumped into action blaming gun owners and pushing for new gun control laws.
The incident took place in Aurora, Colorado at a cinema that was introducing the new film at a special midnight showing.
CNN's Piers Morgan tweeted that the shooting illustrates that "America has got to do something about it's gun laws" and that it should be 100,000 times harder to buy a gun.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has a reputation of being a gun control fanatic, asked, "What are Obama and Romney going to do about guns?"
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
The incident took place in Aurora, Colorado at a cinema that was introducing the new film at a special midnight showing.
CNN's Piers Morgan tweeted that the shooting illustrates that "America has got to do something about it's gun laws" and that it should be 100,000 times harder to buy a gun.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has a reputation of being a gun control fanatic, asked, "What are Obama and Romney going to do about guns?"
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Thursday, July 19, 2012
The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Thursday, July 19, 2012
All guns and politics from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
David Codrea reports that the ATF is in damage control mode in the aftermath of new info on retaliation against whistleblowers.
Mike Vanderboegh has a must-read on what the elitists now think of the rest of America. And the thing is, these supposed "intellectuals" are so ignorant of the thinking of the Founders, the Bible, and other pillars of western civilization that they are impossible to reason with.
Standing By says that John Sununu does not need to apologize for suggesting that Obama needs to "learn to be an American." Agreed. Obama DOES need to learn that!
WRSA reminds us of someone I have not thought about in a long time but who was a major thinker of the 20th century and a Russian dissident who blew the lid on the ugly truth about Soviet Communism--Alexandor Solzhenitsyn. Follow the links to immerse yourself into some great truths and their application to America today.
Market Guru Karl Denninger has all of the ugly truth on the economy, if you are interested in the real truth and not the spin of the MSM and Barack Obama.
Tam provides another report from the firing range during her trip to Portland, Oregon.
Nicki declares that "Schumer is a d**khead." It seems Little Chucky has yet again pulled some gory horror by stating on the Senate floor that there needs to be more restrictions on free speech! How much longer are we going to put up with these outright Commie-Fascists (yes, they are basically the same thing with minor differences) who have infiltrated this government!!??
CLO further blows the whistle on the anti-free speech crowd in Congress that wants to shove the Disclose Act down our throats. I am seriously thinking it is time to change the law to allow law enforcement to march down the middle of the aisle of the House and Senate and place the Commie-Nazis in cuffs, and haul them straight to jail pending trial for treason.
Alphecca notes a controversy in Rochester, NY concerning an ad on a bus for a gun store that has at least one resident in an uproar.
Pamela Geller reports the enraging news that the Bulgarian Jihadist who murdered all of those Israeli kids on that bus had once been in Gitmo.
David Codrea reports that the ATF is in damage control mode in the aftermath of new info on retaliation against whistleblowers.
Mike Vanderboegh has a must-read on what the elitists now think of the rest of America. And the thing is, these supposed "intellectuals" are so ignorant of the thinking of the Founders, the Bible, and other pillars of western civilization that they are impossible to reason with.
Standing By says that John Sununu does not need to apologize for suggesting that Obama needs to "learn to be an American." Agreed. Obama DOES need to learn that!
WRSA reminds us of someone I have not thought about in a long time but who was a major thinker of the 20th century and a Russian dissident who blew the lid on the ugly truth about Soviet Communism--Alexandor Solzhenitsyn. Follow the links to immerse yourself into some great truths and their application to America today.
Market Guru Karl Denninger has all of the ugly truth on the economy, if you are interested in the real truth and not the spin of the MSM and Barack Obama.
Tam provides another report from the firing range during her trip to Portland, Oregon.
Nicki declares that "Schumer is a d**khead." It seems Little Chucky has yet again pulled some gory horror by stating on the Senate floor that there needs to be more restrictions on free speech! How much longer are we going to put up with these outright Commie-Fascists (yes, they are basically the same thing with minor differences) who have infiltrated this government!!??
CLO further blows the whistle on the anti-free speech crowd in Congress that wants to shove the Disclose Act down our throats. I am seriously thinking it is time to change the law to allow law enforcement to march down the middle of the aisle of the House and Senate and place the Commie-Nazis in cuffs, and haul them straight to jail pending trial for treason.
Alphecca notes a controversy in Rochester, NY concerning an ad on a bus for a gun store that has at least one resident in an uproar.
Pamela Geller reports the enraging news that the Bulgarian Jihadist who murdered all of those Israeli kids on that bus had once been in Gitmo.
Republicans say new ATF video threatens whistleblowers
The ATF has issued a new video designed to warn agency whistleblowers not to go "outside the chain of command" to report alleged illegal activity by the agency. The warning contains a strongly worded caution that there will be "consequences" for those who fail to obey the new directive.
According to Fox News today, ATF Acting Director B. Todd Jones issued a stern warning to whistleblower agents about going straight to Congress with their charges. The film, and the warning from the director, are said to be having a chilling effect on the willingness of ATF agents to come forward with their knowledge of illegal activity.
Republicans in Congress immediately jumped into action, charging that the Jones warning is a "threat." Federal law prohibits agencies of the government from threatening retaliation against employees who blow the whistle on illegal or unethical activity.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
According to Fox News today, ATF Acting Director B. Todd Jones issued a stern warning to whistleblower agents about going straight to Congress with their charges. The film, and the warning from the director, are said to be having a chilling effect on the willingness of ATF agents to come forward with their knowledge of illegal activity.
Republicans in Congress immediately jumped into action, charging that the Jones warning is a "threat." Federal law prohibits agencies of the government from threatening retaliation against employees who blow the whistle on illegal or unethical activity.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Justice Department withheld key Fast and Furious memo
A report on Tuesday in the Washington Guardian indicates that the Justice Department (DOJ) withheld key Fast and Furious memos from Congress concerning ATF whistleblowers who alerted reporters of deep corruption revolving around the scheme to place U.S. guns in the hands of Mexican drug cartels.
The memos date back to February of 2011 when DOJ officials notified ATF supervisors, warning them not to retaliate against agents who blow the whistle on illegal activity.
But as the memos were being circulated the DOJ was informing Congress that no illegal activity had occurred and that no "gunwalking" had taken place in the Fast and Furious operation...
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
The memos date back to February of 2011 when DOJ officials notified ATF supervisors, warning them not to retaliate against agents who blow the whistle on illegal activity.
But as the memos were being circulated the DOJ was informing Congress that no illegal activity had occurred and that no "gunwalking" had taken place in the Fast and Furious operation...
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Tuesday, July 17, 2012
All guns and politics from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
Stand Up America says that the Obamanoids are using Bain Capital to deflect attention away from their own felonies, which are numerous.
The New York Liberty Report provides more info on the Democrats' threat to drive the U.S. off of the financial cliff unless Republicans agree to a major tax increase.
Roberta X has a suggestion for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Read it and see what you think.
Every Blade of Grass posts "20 reasons why it's good to be Barack Obama." Good comic relief.
The Wandering Minstrel has guns in a 3D photo cube. Neat!
The War on Guns notes that there is growing publicity being given to the ethics complaint against Eric Holder at the D.C. Bar.
The Stiletto asks, "Does being rich make you a jerk?"
Squeaks says she's starting a new channel on YouTube for her video logs.
Bloviating Zeppelin announces he's ending his blog after 8 years. But there is good news within the announcement. Take a look.
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership has an important read on Hillary's "small arms treaty" at the U.N. A must read.
Stand Up America says that the Obamanoids are using Bain Capital to deflect attention away from their own felonies, which are numerous.
The New York Liberty Report provides more info on the Democrats' threat to drive the U.S. off of the financial cliff unless Republicans agree to a major tax increase.
Roberta X has a suggestion for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Read it and see what you think.
Every Blade of Grass posts "20 reasons why it's good to be Barack Obama." Good comic relief.
The Wandering Minstrel has guns in a 3D photo cube. Neat!
The War on Guns notes that there is growing publicity being given to the ethics complaint against Eric Holder at the D.C. Bar.
The Stiletto asks, "Does being rich make you a jerk?"
Squeaks says she's starting a new channel on YouTube for her video logs.
Bloviating Zeppelin announces he's ending his blog after 8 years. But there is good news within the announcement. Take a look.
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership has an important read on Hillary's "small arms treaty" at the U.N. A must read.
Law of the Sea Treaty is dead for this year
U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., announced Monday evening on Twitter that the controversial Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) being pushed by the United Nations, President Obama, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is officially dead for this year.
DeMint stated that two more senators had declared against the treaty, bringing the total number of those opposed to 34. LOST needed 67 votes to be approved by the Senate.
Read all of the details by clicking here to go to Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Monday, July 16, 2012
The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Monday, July 16, 2012
All guns and politics from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
David Codrea reports that a cold wind has blown through the ranks of whistleblower ATF agents as they report heightened fears of retaliation, preventing some from coming forward. This is a felony. Thus, the DOJ is a lawless agency.
Kurt Hofmann says that anti-gun bigots who are rampant in California are up to more shenanigans, this time mounting an effort to sue the California Attorney General.
Mike Vanderboegh asks, "Do Obama's Executive Orders Reveal a Pattern?"
Way Up North points to a hard lesson in "She Wished She Had a Gun."
Tam provides a firing range report from Portland, Oregon.
WRSA posts a sermon to the governor and legislature of Idaho, and asks that we listen with an open mind.
Alphecca says that Wisconsin police chiefs are hoping someone will introduce federal legislation to require background checks on all gun sales.
Days of our Trailers has a news story showing that idiotic people often call for idiotic laws. Maybe there is a lesson somewhere in that.
Pamela Geller confronts the Huffington Post for refusing to allow her to respond to yet another hit piece the leftwing rag has published against her.
Mike McCarville is running a piece written by Oklahoma Congressman Tom Cole on why the U.N. Small Arms Treaty is such a grave danger.
David Codrea reports that a cold wind has blown through the ranks of whistleblower ATF agents as they report heightened fears of retaliation, preventing some from coming forward. This is a felony. Thus, the DOJ is a lawless agency.
Kurt Hofmann says that anti-gun bigots who are rampant in California are up to more shenanigans, this time mounting an effort to sue the California Attorney General.
Mike Vanderboegh asks, "Do Obama's Executive Orders Reveal a Pattern?"
Way Up North points to a hard lesson in "She Wished She Had a Gun."
Tam provides a firing range report from Portland, Oregon.
WRSA posts a sermon to the governor and legislature of Idaho, and asks that we listen with an open mind.
Alphecca says that Wisconsin police chiefs are hoping someone will introduce federal legislation to require background checks on all gun sales.
Days of our Trailers has a news story showing that idiotic people often call for idiotic laws. Maybe there is a lesson somewhere in that.
Pamela Geller confronts the Huffington Post for refusing to allow her to respond to yet another hit piece the leftwing rag has published against her.
Mike McCarville is running a piece written by Oklahoma Congressman Tom Cole on why the U.N. Small Arms Treaty is such a grave danger.
Obama tells CBS News he expected more Republican cooperation
During a comprehensive interview that CBS News has gradually broadcast over several days, President Obama stated that he expected more cooperation from Republicans than he got when he took office.
The segment of the interview in which Obama lamented the supposed lack of GOP cooperation was aired today on CBS This Morning.
"My expectation was that we would see more cooperation," Obama stated.
However, as this reporter noted in a fact check article Sunday, the president did not exactly come to Washington in a bipartisan mood, ready to meet Republicans halfway...
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
The segment of the interview in which Obama lamented the supposed lack of GOP cooperation was aired today on CBS This Morning.
"My expectation was that we would see more cooperation," Obama stated.
However, as this reporter noted in a fact check article Sunday, the president did not exactly come to Washington in a bipartisan mood, ready to meet Republicans halfway...
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
Obama says Washington 'feels as broken as it did 4 years ago'
In an appearance on CBS Sunday Morning today, President Obama stated that Washington "feels just as broken as it did four years ago" when he first assumed the presidency.
Admitting that he feels "frustrated" by his inability to change the atmosphere in the nation's capital, Obama stated that there is "enough blame to go around for that."
Digging deeper into the dynamics of Washington politics over the last six years, it is difficult to find factual justification for Obama's contention that there is shared blame for the gridlock and hyper partisanship.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Admitting that he feels "frustrated" by his inability to change the atmosphere in the nation's capital, Obama stated that there is "enough blame to go around for that."
Digging deeper into the dynamics of Washington politics over the last six years, it is difficult to find factual justification for Obama's contention that there is shared blame for the gridlock and hyper partisanship.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Saturday, July 14, 2012
More Republicans go on the record to oppose UN treaty
As the Obama administration continues to engage in negotiations on two controversial U.N. treaties, more Republicans have now gone on the record to oppose the measures that critics say will encroach upon U.S. sovereignty.
On Friday U.S. Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb., added his name to the growing list of Republican senators who oppose the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST).
To read the names of other senators who have joined Johanns, plus a statement by a key Democratic senator, click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
On Friday U.S. Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb., added his name to the growing list of Republican senators who oppose the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST).
To read the names of other senators who have joined Johanns, plus a statement by a key Democratic senator, click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Friday, July 13, 2012
The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Friday, July 13, 2012
I had to miss yesterday's Roundup due to a family emergency. So, I decided I would present the Roundup on Friday, which I never do. But a lot has been happening of late, and I wanted you to be up to snuff.
So, here is the roundup of guns and politics news from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
David Codrea reports that the DOJ has downplayed the ethics complaint against Eric Holder, referring to it as "specious" and "frivolous."
Mike Vanderboegh says that those who oppose government monopoly of violence are now referred to as "nullifiers." Actually it is THEY who wish to "nullify" us!
Stand Up America provides late breaking news on the testimony before Congress of Col. Allard on government leaks and media bias.
WRSA has a very important read titled, "Pay It Forward," which highlights one citizen's intention to help others in the coming collapse.
Way Up North posts commentary of interest to patriots who like to keep up with the news.
Standing By issues "a little truth about 'fair share' and taxes." Read it!
Brigid has the quote of the day.
Nicki posts a brief example that can easily be used to describe those with the excessive fear of guns.
Roberta X says she is sick today. Here's good thoughts and wishes for a quick recovery!
Alphecca provides some gun rights stuff you may be interested in seeing!
So, here is the roundup of guns and politics news from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
David Codrea reports that the DOJ has downplayed the ethics complaint against Eric Holder, referring to it as "specious" and "frivolous."
Mike Vanderboegh says that those who oppose government monopoly of violence are now referred to as "nullifiers." Actually it is THEY who wish to "nullify" us!
Stand Up America provides late breaking news on the testimony before Congress of Col. Allard on government leaks and media bias.
WRSA has a very important read titled, "Pay It Forward," which highlights one citizen's intention to help others in the coming collapse.
Way Up North posts commentary of interest to patriots who like to keep up with the news.
Standing By issues "a little truth about 'fair share' and taxes." Read it!
Brigid has the quote of the day.
Nicki posts a brief example that can easily be used to describe those with the excessive fear of guns.
Roberta X says she is sick today. Here's good thoughts and wishes for a quick recovery!
Alphecca provides some gun rights stuff you may be interested in seeing!
Lou Dobbs interviews Vanderboegh and Codrea on Fast and Furious
Veteran news anchor Lou Dobbs featured an interview Thursday evening with Mike Vanderboegh and David Codrea concerning the Fast and Furious scandal that has engulfed the Obama administration.
The interview aired on Dobbs' regular program which is featured on the Fox Business Network.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
The interview aired on Dobbs' regular program which is featured on the Fox Business Network.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Thursday, July 12, 2012
Vanderboegh warns of civil war if UN small arms treaty enforced
The continually developing story of the two U.N. treaties that President Obama intends to sign continues to provoke controversy around the country today. The two treaties, the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) and the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) or "small arms treaty," have created a firestorm of protest among citizens who see both as a threat to American freedom and U.S. sovereignty.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Obama administration faces increasing ire over UN treaties
Two controversial treaties originating at the United Nations have created a firestorm of controversy this week resulting in demands that senators go on the record declaring how they will vote.
Citizens have expressed their ire, and outright rage, at the Obama Administration for even considering such treaties. Yet at the urging of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, President Obama has confirmed that he will sign both treaties.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Citizens have expressed their ire, and outright rage, at the Obama Administration for even considering such treaties. Yet at the urging of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, President Obama has confirmed that he will sign both treaties.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Tuesday, July 10, 2012
All guns and politics from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
Brigid provides commentary on some items in the news of late involving guns and violence in streets.
David Codrea states that unsealing the indictments against the Brian Terry murder suspects could endanger their lives. And remember, we are dealing with the Obama-Holder DOJ. Are these indictments designed as red herrings to draw attention away from the real perpetrators? Don't put it past them!
Alphecca has news about an important court ruling involving stolen guns that were used in crimes. Are the gun owners liable? The court said no! Take a look.
Mike McCarville reports that Romney's main hope of winning the White House is the fact that voters now see the many failures of Barack Obama.
Pamela Geller notes that yet again Obama has snubbed Israel, refusing to include the nation in an international counterterrorism forum.
CLO has more info on the UN small arms treaty, as provided by Gun Owners of America.
The New York Liberty Report quotes a CBS reporter who declared, "The Supreme Court's conservatives are mad as hell at Chief Justice Roberts."
GunRights4US writes an interesting story about some events occurring at a local cemetery regarding the hiding of guns and ammo.
Nicki provides the 'spit take of the day.'
The Wandering Minstrel shows us some neat new holsters.
Brigid provides commentary on some items in the news of late involving guns and violence in streets.
David Codrea states that unsealing the indictments against the Brian Terry murder suspects could endanger their lives. And remember, we are dealing with the Obama-Holder DOJ. Are these indictments designed as red herrings to draw attention away from the real perpetrators? Don't put it past them!
Alphecca has news about an important court ruling involving stolen guns that were used in crimes. Are the gun owners liable? The court said no! Take a look.
Mike McCarville reports that Romney's main hope of winning the White House is the fact that voters now see the many failures of Barack Obama.
Pamela Geller notes that yet again Obama has snubbed Israel, refusing to include the nation in an international counterterrorism forum.
CLO has more info on the UN small arms treaty, as provided by Gun Owners of America.
The New York Liberty Report quotes a CBS reporter who declared, "The Supreme Court's conservatives are mad as hell at Chief Justice Roberts."
GunRights4US writes an interesting story about some events occurring at a local cemetery regarding the hiding of guns and ammo.
Nicki provides the 'spit take of the day.'
The Wandering Minstrel shows us some neat new holsters.
Senators clarify stance on UN treaty
In the 24 hours since this reporter's first news story was published Monday on the controversial U.N. treaties, the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) and the so-called "small arms treaty," several U.S. senators have clarified their position on LOST.
The small arms treaty has garnered very little support, but LOST has a chance of being approved.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
The small arms treaty has garnered very little support, but LOST has a chance of being approved.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Monday, July 09, 2012
McConnell says no to UN treaty
In a breaking development in the progression of the controversial Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) in the U.S. Senate, this reporter was contacted today by John Ashbrook, staff director of the Senate Republican Communications Center of the office of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to state that the Senator will vote no on the treaty.
More breaking news on LOST and the small arms treaty can be found at Anthony G. Martin's National Gun Rights Examiner.
More breaking news on LOST and the small arms treaty can be found at Anthony G. Martin's National Gun Rights Examiner.
The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Monday, July 9. 2012
All politics and guns from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
Stand Up America has the photos and the complete story on the 5 who are charged with killing Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in the Fast and Furious scandal.
Kurt Hofmann reports that the New York Times is hosting a nationwide call to get rid of the right to keep and bear arms! So, it has come down to this.
Mike Vanderboegh sounds the alarm about something called "The Little Blue Book" which serves as a guide to collectivists on how to think and talk. Get familiar with it. We MUST know what the enemy is thinking.
The War on Guns displays the evidence of Vanderboegh and Codrea's latest work in going after Eric Holder.
Way Up North always shares neat photos from his trips. He has some for today.
WRSA says this is the time to focus only on the things that matter. The time is short.
Tam posts an important entry about ammo. Take a look.
Standing By has a must-read on the faux "reporter" who claims no gun walking took place in Fast and Furious. She even wrote a book on these lies and has peddled her fantasies on CNN.
Days of our Trailers asks, "What is an extremist?"
Brigid provides a review of the Dragon Leatherworks holster for your firearm.
Stand Up America has the photos and the complete story on the 5 who are charged with killing Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in the Fast and Furious scandal.
Kurt Hofmann reports that the New York Times is hosting a nationwide call to get rid of the right to keep and bear arms! So, it has come down to this.
Mike Vanderboegh sounds the alarm about something called "The Little Blue Book" which serves as a guide to collectivists on how to think and talk. Get familiar with it. We MUST know what the enemy is thinking.
The War on Guns displays the evidence of Vanderboegh and Codrea's latest work in going after Eric Holder.
Way Up North always shares neat photos from his trips. He has some for today.
WRSA says this is the time to focus only on the things that matter. The time is short.
Tam posts an important entry about ammo. Take a look.
Standing By has a must-read on the faux "reporter" who claims no gun walking took place in Fast and Furious. She even wrote a book on these lies and has peddled her fantasies on CNN.
Days of our Trailers asks, "What is an extremist?"
Brigid provides a review of the Dragon Leatherworks holster for your firearm.
20 Republicans set to uphold controversial UN treaty
Upon the advice of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, President Obama has confirmed his intention to sign two controversial U.N. treaties -- the Law of the Sea and the so called "small arms" treaty.
Although many citizens and elected representatives are sounding the alarm about the small arms treaty, such as this entry Sunday at the Daily Paul, some political observers note that the treaty is unlikely to pass the Senate. But a very different scenario is developing for the Law of the Sea (LOST).
Twenty Republican senators are set to join with Democrats in upholding LOST.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Although many citizens and elected representatives are sounding the alarm about the small arms treaty, such as this entry Sunday at the Daily Paul, some political observers note that the treaty is unlikely to pass the Senate. But a very different scenario is developing for the Law of the Sea (LOST).
Twenty Republican senators are set to join with Democrats in upholding LOST.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Sunday, July 08, 2012
McConnell says GOP has even odds of taking Senate
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., stated in an interview on CNN Sunday that Republicans have a 50-50 chance of regaining the Senate majority in the November elections, as reported by The Hill.
"I think it is going to be a very close, competitive election," McConnell said.
In spite of the oft-repeated references to the "Republican Congress" by the Obama campaign and even many in mainstream media outlets, Republicans have not held the majority in the U.S. Senate since 2006, when a Democratic Party sweep placed Democrats in firm control of both the House and Senate with supermajorities.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
"I think it is going to be a very close, competitive election," McConnell said.
In spite of the oft-repeated references to the "Republican Congress" by the Obama campaign and even many in mainstream media outlets, Republicans have not held the majority in the U.S. Senate since 2006, when a Democratic Party sweep placed Democrats in firm control of both the House and Senate with supermajorities.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Saturday, July 07, 2012
More retaliation reported against ATF agents
In the days and months after whistleblower agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) went public with their explosive charges of corruption and illegal activity by those within the agency and the Justice Department as a whole, supervisory agents immediately went to work to retaliate against those who exposed the chicanery.
The numerous instances of retaliation, some of which turned potentially deadly, were widely reported.
Today, however, ATF agents report that even more retaliation is being conducted by supervisors within the agency, in spite of the fact that the ATF has been warned repeatedly by U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., that such actions are illegal and are to be stopped immediately.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
The numerous instances of retaliation, some of which turned potentially deadly, were widely reported.
Today, however, ATF agents report that even more retaliation is being conducted by supervisors within the agency, in spite of the fact that the ATF has been warned repeatedly by U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., that such actions are illegal and are to be stopped immediately.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Friday, July 06, 2012
Senate set to approve controversial UN gun treaty
As the United Nations prepares its final push to ratify a controversial gun treaty, the U.S. Senate is set to approve the measure which critics say will not only give away U.S. sovereignty but directly attack the individual gun rights of American citizens, according to a report published Thursday at Stand Up America.
Democrats still hold the majority in the Senate.
Known as "the U.N. small arms treaty," the measure would regulate private gun ownership, according to firearms rights watchdog groups.
Retired Lt. Gen. William Boykin, who has been at the forefront of citizen opposition to the treaty, stated...
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Gun Rights Examiner.
Democrats still hold the majority in the Senate.
Known as "the U.N. small arms treaty," the measure would regulate private gun ownership, according to firearms rights watchdog groups.
Retired Lt. Gen. William Boykin, who has been at the forefront of citizen opposition to the treaty, stated...
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Gun Rights Examiner.
Thursday, July 05, 2012
Concerned citizens declare 'we are all terrorists now'
In a panoramic scan of conservative talk radio shows on Independence Day, this reporter noticed that while some programming was pre-taped for the holiday, most were presented live, particularly those that originate locally.
One show in particular allows local residents to call in with their questions and viewpoints. Apparently the hot topic of the day was a new study funded in part by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which declared that citizens who are concerned about individual liberty and are suspicious of centralized government authority are "extreme right wing terrorists."
This prompted one caller to declare, "We are all terrorists now."
He wasn't the only one.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
One show in particular allows local residents to call in with their questions and viewpoints. Apparently the hot topic of the day was a new study funded in part by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which declared that citizens who are concerned about individual liberty and are suspicious of centralized government authority are "extreme right wing terrorists."
This prompted one caller to declare, "We are all terrorists now."
He wasn't the only one.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Wednesday, July 04, 2012
Tuesday memo reveals more trouble for Holder
Late Tuesday afternoon U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, revealed a memo in his possession showing that one day prior to the infamous letter of Feb. 4, 2011, in which the Justice Department falsely informed Congress that no illegal activity had taken place in the Fast and Furious operation, it appears that several top level Justice officials were well aware of the illegal practice known as "gunwalking."
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Happy Independence Day
I wish you all a Happy Independence Day.
Although I celebrate the liberty we claimed on that day in 1776, I admit that ours is a nation in deep distress.
Thus, in my heart I fly the American flag upside down--the classic distress signal.
We are, indeed, under heavy attack from within.
Pray for our great country. God bless.
Although I celebrate the liberty we claimed on that day in 1776, I admit that ours is a nation in deep distress.
Thus, in my heart I fly the American flag upside down--the classic distress signal.
We are, indeed, under heavy attack from within.
Pray for our great country. God bless.
Tuesday, July 03, 2012
Reporters file ethics complaint against Holder
The two reporters who first broke the Fast and Furious story in December of 2010, Mike Vanderboegh and David Codrea, announced today that they have filed an ethics complaint against Attorney General Eric Holder with the Bar Association of the District of Columbia.
PLUS! More breaking news on the Fast and Furious scandal!
Click here to read it all at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
PLUS! More breaking news on the Fast and Furious scandal!
Click here to read it all at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Monday, July 02, 2012
Professor traces Obama healthcare views to Communist mentor
A new book which is scheduled for release on July 17 traces Barack Obama's views on government controlled healthcare to a Communist mentor that had significant influence on the president when he was growing up in Hawaii, according to a new article today at American Thinker.
Paul Kengor, a professor of political science at Grove City College in Grove City, Pa., has written a book titled, "The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama's Mentor." The book focuses on Obama's formative years in Hawaii during the 1970s and identifies Davis as one who had significant influence on Obama at a time when his political views were being developed.
Kengor states that he has evidence proving that Obama was mentored by Davis from the time Obama was eight years old until he was 18.
Davis was a card carrying member of the Communist Party, a pro-Stalin, pro-Soviet, and pro-Mao "statist" who described himself as a "progressive."
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Paul Kengor, a professor of political science at Grove City College in Grove City, Pa., has written a book titled, "The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama's Mentor." The book focuses on Obama's formative years in Hawaii during the 1970s and identifies Davis as one who had significant influence on Obama at a time when his political views were being developed.
Kengor states that he has evidence proving that Obama was mentored by Davis from the time Obama was eight years old until he was 18.
Davis was a card carrying member of the Communist Party, a pro-Stalin, pro-Soviet, and pro-Mao "statist" who described himself as a "progressive."
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Sunday, July 01, 2012
CBS News offers an opinion about the Roberts opinion
If the CBS News analysis is correct, the Supreme Court decision on ObamaCare is even worse than I thought because it presumes that while Roberts did, in fact, change his mind to support the liberals in the ruling, he did so fairly early--by June 1--and for more rational reasons.
The piece also says that the four conservative justices who held firm against the law were so angry with Roberts that they refused to engage with him at all in debate. Their dissent is joint and unsigned, and never mentions the Chief Justice by name.
If you accept this explanation, and I do NOT, although I can see where parts of it are probably true, then in reality Roberts' decision bodes much more ill for the country that we had initially thought, for it presupposes that he actually believes along with the Constitution-killers that Congress has the power to tax human existence and non-behavior.
Of course, as usual, CBS is suspect automatically because it has a penchant for bias toward liberal positions along with NBC, ABC, CNN, and MSNBC (with the exception of Sharyl Atkkisson's exceptional work on the Fast and Furious scandal).
For what it is worth, here is the CBS piece.
The piece also says that the four conservative justices who held firm against the law were so angry with Roberts that they refused to engage with him at all in debate. Their dissent is joint and unsigned, and never mentions the Chief Justice by name.
If you accept this explanation, and I do NOT, although I can see where parts of it are probably true, then in reality Roberts' decision bodes much more ill for the country that we had initially thought, for it presupposes that he actually believes along with the Constitution-killers that Congress has the power to tax human existence and non-behavior.
Of course, as usual, CBS is suspect automatically because it has a penchant for bias toward liberal positions along with NBC, ABC, CNN, and MSNBC (with the exception of Sharyl Atkkisson's exceptional work on the Fast and Furious scandal).
For what it is worth, here is the CBS piece.
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Musings After Midnight--So What Was Roberts REALLY Up To in the ObamaCare Ruling?
Good evening my dear friends. Some of you are reading this in the afternoon on a hot day during which you are staying indoors, as I am, enjoying the coolness of that God-sent invention, air conditioning.
These are supposed to be musings that I post after midnight on sleepless nights. But in this case, sleep overcame me before I was able to finish and get it posted.
But you can rest assured that the framework and direction for this post was laid well after midnight last night, lest I be accused of "lying" as some of my detractors are always quick to charge.
I would not under any circumstance wish to give them any more fodder for propagating that charge, although if I do, in fact, lie, as we all are prone to do at least on occasion, I am quite certain that my monitors will hop all over it in an attempt to discredit every single word that proceeds from my mouth.
So, I will make a sincere and proactive attempt to refrain from lying, especially now that I have so many out there who carefully parse every single word I write. Heck, I am probably the most honest person on the Internet now. I don't like to be called out for every little thing.
On a more serious note, and I do hope you caught the subtle humor in the discourse above, I have a few things to say in light of the Supreme Court ruling this week on ObamaCare.
I was quoted by both Yahoo News and the Atlantic Wire in resoundingly condemning Chief Justice John Roberts for issuing such a blatantly indefensible and incomprehensible majority opinion. I still condemn him for it, and I stand by what I originally said about him. He has betrayed us and is no more fit for the Court than the other Constitution killers who sit on the bench--Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer, and Ginsberg.
Now, I am fully aware of the nuggets within the Roberts ruling that can work to our benefit in the future. For one, the ruling robs the Obama campaign of an important rallying cry in the run up to the November election. Obama can no longer talk about those evil conservatives on the court who took away healthcare from granny after the law passed both the House and the Senate (while Democrats held supermajorities in both chambers I might add).
Obama, further, can no longer claim that those stingy, mean Republicans are intent on forcing citizens to suffer because of their greedy inability to show compassion for those who cannot afford insurance.
But wait a minute. The ObamaCare bill forces the poor to buy insurance they cannot afford, or else they get penalized for it by the IRS. Funny as to who turns out to be "mean," isn't it.
Nevermind, though. Facts are not pertinent to any argument made by progressives.
Obama would have, indeed, turned such a claim into a big campaign issue and probably would have gotten significant traction out of it. This he can no longer do because a Bush appointee on the court, a Republican, a self-described conservative who believes in strictly interpreting the Constitution, has allowed his healthcare reform bill to stand.
Further, I am well aware that Roberts has left us a gift within his ruling. By ruling ObamaCare to be a tax he has made it possible for Republicans to more easily repeal the law in Congress. By a simple majority vote Congress can repeal ObamaCare using a rule known as "budget reconciliation." Thus, rather than needing the usual supermajority to repeal ObamaCare, which would mean 60 votes in the Senate, Republicans now only need 51 votes to repeal.
And then of course there is the rather strongly worded statement by Roberts that the commerce clause can NOT be used to justify forcing citizens to purchase healthcare insurance or any other item or entity. This is a very important move, given that Roberts wrote the majority opinion for the court. In the ruling Roberts made it abundantly clear that Congress does not have the authority to force citizens to buy anything, and they certainly cannot use the commerce clause as an excuse to do so.
This one statement alone restores original intent to the interpretation of the commerce clause--something which the nation has not seen since the early 1930s.
In the years to come conservatives will thank Chief Justice Roberts for that gift that is tucked into the ruling.
Some conservatives have suggested that Roberts worded his ruling in the manner in which he did precisely so that liberals would be robbed of an important campaign issue thus making it easier for the Republican candidate to win the White House in November. Some have also suggested that Roberts ruled this way in order to make it easier for Republicans in the Congress to repeal the law. Still others have said he wished to protect the reputation of the court so that he would not be open to the charge of making highly partisan decisions, such as the Bush v. Gore ruling of 2000 under Chief Justice William Renquist.
While there are definitely some benefits to be gleaned from the ruling, as delineated above, none of them make sense from the standpoint of arguing intent on the part of Roberts. In order to accept the premise that the ruling was designed specifically to benefit conservatives, then one must accept the premise that Roberts intentionally went along with a very bad law, using very bad reasoning as justification for doing so, just so that our side can benefit down the road.
Such reasoning is sheer folly, my friends.
As the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Roberts is not only the guardian of the court's reputation, but he is generally viewed as the quintessential jurist, a person of exceptional legal skills who is uniquely qualified for the role. To believe that Roberts would risk his reputation as a jurist just to satisfy some progressive's vision of what the court's reputation should be defies all rationality.
Even Charles Krauthammer, who normally submits well reasoned, detailed explanations for these types of issues, fell into this trap of illogic by stating that as Chief Justice, Roberts felt he was forced to protect the court's reputation from the criticism that a ruling against ObamaCare was purely politically motivated.
Rubbish!
Jurists like Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Kennedy, and others like them, are not charged with the task of considering political ramifications when making a ruling. Their only task is to determine the constitutionality of a law placed before them, regardless of the political fallout.
If Roberts made his decision based upon a perception that progressives would hammer the court hard over a ruling against ObamaCare, then he has failed miserably to fulfill his duty as a jurist, especially since he is viewed as an originalist who is primarily concerned with the original intent of the Framers.
Further, a mere cursory scan of the Roberts decision is a lesson in Twilight Zone styled fantasy. The bill as presented before him was never presented as a tax in its written form, in spite of the fact that Obama lawyers argued in their oral presentations that it is, indeed, a tax. But oral arguments aside, the Justices are charged with dealing with the actual law that is presented in writing before them.
This is where Roberts veered off into the Twilight Zone.
As if to reach up and grab it out of thin air, Roberts focused on ObamaCare as a tax and ruled on it as a tax.
Where did such a notion come from? It is not in the bill. The bill is a mandate forcing citizens to buy health insurance. And if they refuse, they will be penalized through the IRS.
The fact that the IRS happens to be the agency charged with the task of assessing penalties does NOT automatically make it a tax. In order to qualify as a tax, ObamaCare would have to withhold a certain amount of money from our paychecks to pay for the program. THAT is a tax. A penalty for failing to obey some government body in buying health insurance is NOT a tax. It simply means you are being punished for failing to bow down to the masters in Congress who have had the audacity to tell you that you must purchase a health insurance policy whether you can afford it or not.
And this is where Roberts goes so far off the rail as to suggest mental instability. His reasoning is deeply flawed. He accepted the bumbling, laughable arguments of Obama lawyers who sounded more like Keystone cops than attorneys, when they argued one day that ObamaCare is a tax and argued the next day it is not a tax.
Any competent jurist who is worth his salt would have rejected such a display outright, and forthrightly at that.
This is why the dissenting Justices were entirely nonplussed over the Roberts drivel. Anthony Kennedy stated that what the court did was illegal. Antonin Scalia stated that there is no way rationally to conclude that a mandate to buy insurance is a tax.
In short, they too questioned Roberts' sanity in this ruling, even charging that the Chief Justice went as far as to engage in illegal activity by approving the law.
THAT does NOT "protect the reputation of the court" as Krauthammer laughingly claimed the day of the ruling. At the very least it damages not only the reputation of the court in accepting a law that is so preposterous that it would be hilarious were it not reality, but damages the reputation of the Chief Justice himself who is now open to having his fitness for the Court called into question.
However, there is another explanation that lurks beneath the surface here that warrants careful consideration, one that could potentially absolve Roberts from his sins but at the same time pose a dire and dangerous scenario for the country.
This President is known for bullying the court. We saw it in his first State of the Union speech, which was so outrageous that Justice Samuel Alito shook his head and said "NO!" under his breath. Millions of Americans saw it on TV as it happened.
When the ObamaCare law finally reached the Supreme Court, Obama continued with the bullying, threatening the court with all sort of highly questionable activity for a president--including the threat of writing an Executive Order to force the law on us even if the court ruled against it.
We have no way of knowing for certain what took place behind the scenes in the days leading up to the ruling.
But what we DO know is that at first, late last week and early this week, it appeared that the court was set to rule against the law. And some legal scholars have noted that in Antonin Scalia's dissent, he writes as if his is the majority opinion and Ginsberg's is the dissenting opinion, suggesting that Roberts only changed his mind and decided to throw in with the liberals at the very last minute.
This is most unusual.
But why did it happen?
It is no secret that Roberts was under intense pressure. This was widely reported in most major news outlets. But what, exactly, was the nature of that pressure?
A jurist with the exceptional skills and flawless reputation of Roberts would not under any circumstance deliberately damage that reputation with such a flimsy majority argument, UNLESS something happened behind the scenes that forced his hand.
We know that Antonin Scalia has received death threats during this session. Was Roberts threatened as well? And by whom?
Consider the background of the Obama team. Rahm Emanuel looms large. Remember he is known for sending the Mafia symbol of a dead fish wrapped in newspaper to a pollster in Chicago who wrote a critical piece about him in the newspapers.
Obama, Rahm, and a host of others in the Administration are widely known to bully critics, reporters, and others unless they fall into lockstep and march to the orders of "the One."
And remember that this very week Obama issued yet another threat to the court about the ObamaCare ruling. It was after that last threat that Roberts was said to change his mind and vote for the law.
This goes back to my last entry in this series, Musings After Midnight, a post I entitled, "A Dire Warning from the Ground," in which I relayed a disturbing warning I received by keeping my ear close to the ground, a warning that had to do directly with a lethal attack against this Republic by evil forces with malevolent intent.
As one good friend of mine who has been in politics all his life told me, "I don't put anything at all past these people. Nothing. Keep that in mind going forward. We are in real and imminent danger."
Thus, it is time for the multi-millions of citizens who engaged in the Tea Party and other rallies to take to the streets yet again between now and election day. This nation is under attack from within. And real Patriots are sorely needed to step up to the plate to defend it.
These are supposed to be musings that I post after midnight on sleepless nights. But in this case, sleep overcame me before I was able to finish and get it posted.
But you can rest assured that the framework and direction for this post was laid well after midnight last night, lest I be accused of "lying" as some of my detractors are always quick to charge.
I would not under any circumstance wish to give them any more fodder for propagating that charge, although if I do, in fact, lie, as we all are prone to do at least on occasion, I am quite certain that my monitors will hop all over it in an attempt to discredit every single word that proceeds from my mouth.
So, I will make a sincere and proactive attempt to refrain from lying, especially now that I have so many out there who carefully parse every single word I write. Heck, I am probably the most honest person on the Internet now. I don't like to be called out for every little thing.
On a more serious note, and I do hope you caught the subtle humor in the discourse above, I have a few things to say in light of the Supreme Court ruling this week on ObamaCare.
I was quoted by both Yahoo News and the Atlantic Wire in resoundingly condemning Chief Justice John Roberts for issuing such a blatantly indefensible and incomprehensible majority opinion. I still condemn him for it, and I stand by what I originally said about him. He has betrayed us and is no more fit for the Court than the other Constitution killers who sit on the bench--Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer, and Ginsberg.
Now, I am fully aware of the nuggets within the Roberts ruling that can work to our benefit in the future. For one, the ruling robs the Obama campaign of an important rallying cry in the run up to the November election. Obama can no longer talk about those evil conservatives on the court who took away healthcare from granny after the law passed both the House and the Senate (while Democrats held supermajorities in both chambers I might add).
Obama, further, can no longer claim that those stingy, mean Republicans are intent on forcing citizens to suffer because of their greedy inability to show compassion for those who cannot afford insurance.
But wait a minute. The ObamaCare bill forces the poor to buy insurance they cannot afford, or else they get penalized for it by the IRS. Funny as to who turns out to be "mean," isn't it.
Nevermind, though. Facts are not pertinent to any argument made by progressives.
Obama would have, indeed, turned such a claim into a big campaign issue and probably would have gotten significant traction out of it. This he can no longer do because a Bush appointee on the court, a Republican, a self-described conservative who believes in strictly interpreting the Constitution, has allowed his healthcare reform bill to stand.
Further, I am well aware that Roberts has left us a gift within his ruling. By ruling ObamaCare to be a tax he has made it possible for Republicans to more easily repeal the law in Congress. By a simple majority vote Congress can repeal ObamaCare using a rule known as "budget reconciliation." Thus, rather than needing the usual supermajority to repeal ObamaCare, which would mean 60 votes in the Senate, Republicans now only need 51 votes to repeal.
And then of course there is the rather strongly worded statement by Roberts that the commerce clause can NOT be used to justify forcing citizens to purchase healthcare insurance or any other item or entity. This is a very important move, given that Roberts wrote the majority opinion for the court. In the ruling Roberts made it abundantly clear that Congress does not have the authority to force citizens to buy anything, and they certainly cannot use the commerce clause as an excuse to do so.
This one statement alone restores original intent to the interpretation of the commerce clause--something which the nation has not seen since the early 1930s.
In the years to come conservatives will thank Chief Justice Roberts for that gift that is tucked into the ruling.
Some conservatives have suggested that Roberts worded his ruling in the manner in which he did precisely so that liberals would be robbed of an important campaign issue thus making it easier for the Republican candidate to win the White House in November. Some have also suggested that Roberts ruled this way in order to make it easier for Republicans in the Congress to repeal the law. Still others have said he wished to protect the reputation of the court so that he would not be open to the charge of making highly partisan decisions, such as the Bush v. Gore ruling of 2000 under Chief Justice William Renquist.
While there are definitely some benefits to be gleaned from the ruling, as delineated above, none of them make sense from the standpoint of arguing intent on the part of Roberts. In order to accept the premise that the ruling was designed specifically to benefit conservatives, then one must accept the premise that Roberts intentionally went along with a very bad law, using very bad reasoning as justification for doing so, just so that our side can benefit down the road.
Such reasoning is sheer folly, my friends.
As the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Roberts is not only the guardian of the court's reputation, but he is generally viewed as the quintessential jurist, a person of exceptional legal skills who is uniquely qualified for the role. To believe that Roberts would risk his reputation as a jurist just to satisfy some progressive's vision of what the court's reputation should be defies all rationality.
Even Charles Krauthammer, who normally submits well reasoned, detailed explanations for these types of issues, fell into this trap of illogic by stating that as Chief Justice, Roberts felt he was forced to protect the court's reputation from the criticism that a ruling against ObamaCare was purely politically motivated.
Rubbish!
Jurists like Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Kennedy, and others like them, are not charged with the task of considering political ramifications when making a ruling. Their only task is to determine the constitutionality of a law placed before them, regardless of the political fallout.
If Roberts made his decision based upon a perception that progressives would hammer the court hard over a ruling against ObamaCare, then he has failed miserably to fulfill his duty as a jurist, especially since he is viewed as an originalist who is primarily concerned with the original intent of the Framers.
Further, a mere cursory scan of the Roberts decision is a lesson in Twilight Zone styled fantasy. The bill as presented before him was never presented as a tax in its written form, in spite of the fact that Obama lawyers argued in their oral presentations that it is, indeed, a tax. But oral arguments aside, the Justices are charged with dealing with the actual law that is presented in writing before them.
This is where Roberts veered off into the Twilight Zone.
As if to reach up and grab it out of thin air, Roberts focused on ObamaCare as a tax and ruled on it as a tax.
Where did such a notion come from? It is not in the bill. The bill is a mandate forcing citizens to buy health insurance. And if they refuse, they will be penalized through the IRS.
The fact that the IRS happens to be the agency charged with the task of assessing penalties does NOT automatically make it a tax. In order to qualify as a tax, ObamaCare would have to withhold a certain amount of money from our paychecks to pay for the program. THAT is a tax. A penalty for failing to obey some government body in buying health insurance is NOT a tax. It simply means you are being punished for failing to bow down to the masters in Congress who have had the audacity to tell you that you must purchase a health insurance policy whether you can afford it or not.
And this is where Roberts goes so far off the rail as to suggest mental instability. His reasoning is deeply flawed. He accepted the bumbling, laughable arguments of Obama lawyers who sounded more like Keystone cops than attorneys, when they argued one day that ObamaCare is a tax and argued the next day it is not a tax.
Any competent jurist who is worth his salt would have rejected such a display outright, and forthrightly at that.
This is why the dissenting Justices were entirely nonplussed over the Roberts drivel. Anthony Kennedy stated that what the court did was illegal. Antonin Scalia stated that there is no way rationally to conclude that a mandate to buy insurance is a tax.
In short, they too questioned Roberts' sanity in this ruling, even charging that the Chief Justice went as far as to engage in illegal activity by approving the law.
THAT does NOT "protect the reputation of the court" as Krauthammer laughingly claimed the day of the ruling. At the very least it damages not only the reputation of the court in accepting a law that is so preposterous that it would be hilarious were it not reality, but damages the reputation of the Chief Justice himself who is now open to having his fitness for the Court called into question.
However, there is another explanation that lurks beneath the surface here that warrants careful consideration, one that could potentially absolve Roberts from his sins but at the same time pose a dire and dangerous scenario for the country.
This President is known for bullying the court. We saw it in his first State of the Union speech, which was so outrageous that Justice Samuel Alito shook his head and said "NO!" under his breath. Millions of Americans saw it on TV as it happened.
When the ObamaCare law finally reached the Supreme Court, Obama continued with the bullying, threatening the court with all sort of highly questionable activity for a president--including the threat of writing an Executive Order to force the law on us even if the court ruled against it.
We have no way of knowing for certain what took place behind the scenes in the days leading up to the ruling.
But what we DO know is that at first, late last week and early this week, it appeared that the court was set to rule against the law. And some legal scholars have noted that in Antonin Scalia's dissent, he writes as if his is the majority opinion and Ginsberg's is the dissenting opinion, suggesting that Roberts only changed his mind and decided to throw in with the liberals at the very last minute.
This is most unusual.
But why did it happen?
It is no secret that Roberts was under intense pressure. This was widely reported in most major news outlets. But what, exactly, was the nature of that pressure?
A jurist with the exceptional skills and flawless reputation of Roberts would not under any circumstance deliberately damage that reputation with such a flimsy majority argument, UNLESS something happened behind the scenes that forced his hand.
We know that Antonin Scalia has received death threats during this session. Was Roberts threatened as well? And by whom?
Consider the background of the Obama team. Rahm Emanuel looms large. Remember he is known for sending the Mafia symbol of a dead fish wrapped in newspaper to a pollster in Chicago who wrote a critical piece about him in the newspapers.
Obama, Rahm, and a host of others in the Administration are widely known to bully critics, reporters, and others unless they fall into lockstep and march to the orders of "the One."
And remember that this very week Obama issued yet another threat to the court about the ObamaCare ruling. It was after that last threat that Roberts was said to change his mind and vote for the law.
This goes back to my last entry in this series, Musings After Midnight, a post I entitled, "A Dire Warning from the Ground," in which I relayed a disturbing warning I received by keeping my ear close to the ground, a warning that had to do directly with a lethal attack against this Republic by evil forces with malevolent intent.
As one good friend of mine who has been in politics all his life told me, "I don't put anything at all past these people. Nothing. Keep that in mind going forward. We are in real and imminent danger."
Thus, it is time for the multi-millions of citizens who engaged in the Tea Party and other rallies to take to the streets yet again between now and election day. This nation is under attack from within. And real Patriots are sorely needed to step up to the plate to defend it.
Issa quietly drops major bombshell into the record
During the Thursday afternoon debate in the U.S. House of Representatives on the resolution to find Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., quietly dropped a major bombshell into the official record.
The bombshell was a letter containing information about the Fast and Furious scandal, and who knew about it and approved it, as detailed in a series of secret wiretap applications submitted to the Justice Department in March of 2010, fully a year before Holder or anyone else at Justice claimed they knew about the Fast and Furious operation.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
The bombshell was a letter containing information about the Fast and Furious scandal, and who knew about it and approved it, as detailed in a series of secret wiretap applications submitted to the Justice Department in March of 2010, fully a year before Holder or anyone else at Justice claimed they knew about the Fast and Furious operation.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Friday, June 29, 2012
Conservative fallout from ObamaCare ruling mixed
Thursday's decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the healthcare reform law known as "ObamaCare" was met with mixed reaction from conservatives. While most conservatives uniformly condemned the ruling, some pointed out some hidden gifts with the decision that could greatly benefit conservatives in the long run.
Yahoo News published an article by The Atlantic Wire that cited a prior story on the Roberts court and a quote by this writer at the blog The Liberty Sphere Thursday:
In July 2010, Conservative Examiner's Anthony Martin posted the headline, "Sources Say Smackdown of Obama by Supreme Court May Be Inevitable." Why? Roberts was mad at Obama -- he was even suspicious that Obama might not have been born in America. "The Roberts Court has signaled, in a very subtle manner, of course, that it intends to address the issues about which Obama critics have been screaming to high heaven," Martin wrote. Today? Martin has no more faith in the chief justice. The Obama administration's defense of Obamacare made no sense, Martin writes, so Roberts' upholding the law "is tantamount to the Court making law out of thin air, something that Roberts as a so-called 'conservative' claimed he rejects. Thus, at best Roberts is insane. At worst he is not a conservative at all but a plant, a closet liberal who is no more worthy of serving on the Court than the other Constitution killers--Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsberg, and Breyer."
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Holder held in contempt of Congress
As expected, the U.S. House of Representatives has voted today to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress due to his refusal to turn over subpoenaed documents to the House that are pertinent to the investigation into the Fast and Furious scandal.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Roberts' sanity in question
The ruling today on ObamaCare by SCOTUS has led me to question the sanity of Chief Justice John Roberts, a Bush appointee. Roberts sided with the liberals on the court to uphold a tax that the Obama Administration argued was not a tax.
And this leads me to my point.
Obama lawyers before the Court displayed a hilarious conglomeration of contradictions, misstatements, and hubris that was more consistent with the Keystone Cops than government attorneys.
One day they argued ObamaCare was a tax. The next day they argued it was not a tax. In the end, the bumbling buffoon of a Chief Justice accepted this chicanery, deciding as if to flip a coin that ObamaCare is, in fact, a tax, which Congress never decided nor placed in the bill.
This is tantamount to the Court making law out of thin air, something that Roberts as a so-called 'conservative' claimed he rejects.
Thus, at best Roberts is insane. At worst he is not a conservative at all but a plant, a closet liberal who is no more worthy of serving on the Court than the other Constitution killers--Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsberg, and Breyer.
And this leads me to my point.
Obama lawyers before the Court displayed a hilarious conglomeration of contradictions, misstatements, and hubris that was more consistent with the Keystone Cops than government attorneys.
One day they argued ObamaCare was a tax. The next day they argued it was not a tax. In the end, the bumbling buffoon of a Chief Justice accepted this chicanery, deciding as if to flip a coin that ObamaCare is, in fact, a tax, which Congress never decided nor placed in the bill.
This is tantamount to the Court making law out of thin air, something that Roberts as a so-called 'conservative' claimed he rejects.
Thus, at best Roberts is insane. At worst he is not a conservative at all but a plant, a closet liberal who is no more worthy of serving on the Court than the other Constitution killers--Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsberg, and Breyer.
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Second Childhood
Well, the asthma has flared up again, and that is why I have only done the minimum this week with my writing. The good news is I think this time I can keep from getting another lung infection from it due to the inhalers I now use.
Now, the unanswered question is, why would I now be beset with this ailment?
I had what was called "childhood asthma" when I was very young. I grew out of it at age 13. Now, here I am getting close to my senior years and I have it again.
My explanation? Second childhood.
That should explain a LOT of things.
Now, the unanswered question is, why would I now be beset with this ailment?
I had what was called "childhood asthma" when I was very young. I grew out of it at age 13. Now, here I am getting close to my senior years and I have it again.
My explanation? Second childhood.
That should explain a LOT of things.
Democrats defect to vote for contempt against Holder
A growing number of Democrats are defecting from the ranks to vote in favor of a contempt of Congress citation against Attorney General Eric Holder, according to several news reports published late this afternoon.
Holder's problems began to mount when an attempt by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to strike a deal with Holder that would ditch the contempt citation in exchange for subpoenaed documents failed.
Once it became clear that Holder and the White House would not cooperate on the documents, Boehner announced today that the full House vote on contempt will proceed Thursday as planned.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Holder's problems began to mount when an attempt by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to strike a deal with Holder that would ditch the contempt citation in exchange for subpoenaed documents failed.
Once it became clear that Holder and the White House would not cooperate on the documents, Boehner announced today that the full House vote on contempt will proceed Thursday as planned.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Jindal, Rubio top choices for Romney running mate
In a survey conducted and published by one of the top political blogs in the nation, Hot Air, Gov. Bobby Jindal, R-La., and U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., are the top choices of respondents for Mitt Romney's running mate in the 2012 presidential election.
The survey, published Saturday, shows Jindal topping the list with 594 votes, with Rubio coming in second with 509 votes.
Other top choices include Allen West, Paul Ryan, Condoleeza Rice, and Tim Pawlenty.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
The survey, published Saturday, shows Jindal topping the list with 594 votes, with Rubio coming in second with 509 votes.
Other top choices include Allen West, Paul Ryan, Condoleeza Rice, and Tim Pawlenty.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Monday, June 25, 2012
Sealed records of Brain Terry murder may contain highly embarrassing facts
When U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered in December of 2010 while investigating illegal gun and drug smuggling that turned out to be part of the Obama Administration scandal known as Fast and Furious, all records concerning the murder were sealed by the courts.
But in a bombshell revelation made by author and reporter Katie Pavlich on C-SPAN2's Book TV series Sunday evening, Pavlich told National Journal reporter Major Garrett that all of the evidence suggests that the reason the records are sealed is to prevent the public from finding out highly embarrassing information about the Obama Administration.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
But in a bombshell revelation made by author and reporter Katie Pavlich on C-SPAN2's Book TV series Sunday evening, Pavlich told National Journal reporter Major Garrett that all of the evidence suggests that the reason the records are sealed is to prevent the public from finding out highly embarrassing information about the Obama Administration.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Saturday, June 23, 2012
Democrats claim 'witch hunt' in Fast and Furious investigation
As investigators continue to close in on the facts in the Fast and Furious scandal, Democrats are increasingly using what appears to be desperate measures in attempting to defend themselves from the growing fallout of the scandal. Those measures include charges of a personal vendetta against Attorney General Eric Holder, charges of conducting a "witch hunt" and falsely claiming that the program was implemented by Bush and ended under Obama.
Former House Speaker and U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., stated Friday that the reason Republicans are investigating Fast and Furious and citing Holder for contempt of Congress is to silence the one in the Justice Department who is attempting to stop "voter suppression."
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Former House Speaker and U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., stated Friday that the reason Republicans are investigating Fast and Furious and citing Holder for contempt of Congress is to silence the one in the Justice Department who is attempting to stop "voter suppression."
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Friday, June 22, 2012
ATF tells Alaska Congressman it broke no laws
In a breaking follow up to a previous story concerning possible violations of federal law by agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) in Alaska, the ATF has written an official letter to an Alaska Congressman stating that it broke no laws.
U.S. Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, sent a letter to the ATF in April inquiring about reports that agents had visited numerous gun stores in the state asking that they turn over their "bound book" containing the names of customers and their purchases.
Government agencies are prevented by law from receiving or keeping such information unless it is part of an ongoing criminal investigation, and even then the requested information must be specific to the crime being investigated.
NRA to score vote on Holder contempt of Congress
The National Rifle Association (NRA) announced Wednesday that it will score the vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on the resolution to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for failing to turn over nearly 70,000 pages of documents related to the Fast and Furious scandal.
Holder turned over 80,000 pages to the Justice Department's own Inspector General, who is also investigating the scandal, but released only 8,000 pages of documents to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in its ongoing investigation implemented in 2011.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Holder turned over 80,000 pages to the Justice Department's own Inspector General, who is also investigating the scandal, but released only 8,000 pages of documents to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in its ongoing investigation implemented in 2011.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Thursday, June 21, 2012
The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Thursday, June 21, 2012
All guns and politics from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
Kurt Hofmann writes that Chris Matthews has played the race card on Fast and Furious.
GunRights4US points to 20 most self-absorbed moments of Barack Obama.
WRSA says that a bad moon is on the rise. Yep. To say the least.
Billy Beck offers a one-sentence commentary on the Obama claim of executive privilege.
Roberta X notes that some claim that the violence in Chicago is a "race war." Hmmm. I agree with her, if they were to change a few key things, the problem would be solved, race or not.
Way Up North describes what the summer solstice is like "way up north" in Alaska.
Pamela Geller issues a call for the FBI to close those mosques that have been identified as havens for terrorists.
The New York Liberty Report has the scoop on an entity you've probably never heard of but has already gathered tons of info on you and everyone else!
Stand Up America reports dire news from Wall St. and the Stock Market indicating that Moody's will downgrade hundreds of banks....in the United States!
Days of our Trailers calls our attention to some partisan hacks writing about Fast and Furious over at HuffPo.
Kurt Hofmann writes that Chris Matthews has played the race card on Fast and Furious.
GunRights4US points to 20 most self-absorbed moments of Barack Obama.
WRSA says that a bad moon is on the rise. Yep. To say the least.
Billy Beck offers a one-sentence commentary on the Obama claim of executive privilege.
Roberta X notes that some claim that the violence in Chicago is a "race war." Hmmm. I agree with her, if they were to change a few key things, the problem would be solved, race or not.
Way Up North describes what the summer solstice is like "way up north" in Alaska.
Pamela Geller issues a call for the FBI to close those mosques that have been identified as havens for terrorists.
The New York Liberty Report has the scoop on an entity you've probably never heard of but has already gathered tons of info on you and everyone else!
Stand Up America reports dire news from Wall St. and the Stock Market indicating that Moody's will downgrade hundreds of banks....in the United States!
Days of our Trailers calls our attention to some partisan hacks writing about Fast and Furious over at HuffPo.
Fast and Furious rhetoric insensitive to whistleblowers and victims
Certain reporters in the mainstream media and progressive politicians in Washington have engaged in rhetoric that exhibits a marked insensitivity to the whistleblowers and victims in the Fast and Furious scandal.
In the aftermath of the vote yesterday by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, certain mainstream reporters and progressive politicians went on a spree of hurling inflammatory statements at Republicans in the House and some of the reporters who broke the Fast and Furious story.
The hate spree has had the net effect of slamming and insulting the whistleblowers and victims who through no fault of their own found themselves caught up in a sordid scheme of illegal activity including gun and drug smuggling and murder, perpetrated by the Obama Justice Department and its agency, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
In the aftermath of the vote yesterday by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, certain mainstream reporters and progressive politicians went on a spree of hurling inflammatory statements at Republicans in the House and some of the reporters who broke the Fast and Furious story.
The hate spree has had the net effect of slamming and insulting the whistleblowers and victims who through no fault of their own found themselves caught up in a sordid scheme of illegal activity including gun and drug smuggling and murder, perpetrated by the Obama Justice Department and its agency, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Obama evokes memories of Watergate by invoking executive privilege
In a move that evokes memories of the Watergate scandal of 1974, President Obama today invoked executive privilege in the Fast and Furious scandal, placing off limits the subpoenaed documents the Justice Department had been ordered to submit to Congress.
The move gives at least some legal protection to Attorney General Eric Holder in his ongoing dispute with Congress over the documents. But executive privilege will not protect him from a citation of contempt of Congress or possible criminal charges.
Obama's move to invoke executive privilege is eerily reminiscent of the conflict between Congress and the Executive Branch during the Watergate scandal that destroyed the presidency of Richard M. Nixon.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
The move gives at least some legal protection to Attorney General Eric Holder in his ongoing dispute with Congress over the documents. But executive privilege will not protect him from a citation of contempt of Congress or possible criminal charges.
Obama's move to invoke executive privilege is eerily reminiscent of the conflict between Congress and the Executive Branch during the Watergate scandal that destroyed the presidency of Richard M. Nixon.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Prayers for David Codrea and his Family
David has relayed the news that his father passed away this morning.
We will want to remember in prayer David Codrea and his entire family during this time of grief.
David will be out of commission for a while, which is understandable. So, please hold off on comments at his blog.
We will want to remember in prayer David Codrea and his entire family during this time of grief.
David will be out of commission for a while, which is understandable. So, please hold off on comments at his blog.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Tuesday, June 19, 2012
All guns and politics from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
The War on Guns reports that Mike Vanderboegh is back in the hospital, and here he provides an update. Prayers for Mike are always appreciated.
Mike McCarville has news on Ron Paul's plans at the Republican National Convention. The candidate has given up on his chances at the nomination, but it's good to see he will use his power to influence Party principles to be set forth in the platform.
The New York Liberty Report has more on the Google-Obama axis to get personal information on citizens!
From Standing By: "Old gun grabbers never die, they just hide in the woodwork."
Blonde Sagacity provides cartoon editorial comment on the "Food Police."
The Smallest Minority posts the quote of the day on the importance of pulling your children OUT of the joke/unmitigated disaster called "the public school system."
Oleg Volk, photographer extraordinaire, always posts the most eye-grabbing photos involving firearms and the people who use them. This photo features a real beauty. The gun is pretty nice too. :)
Market Guru Karl Denninger comments on why Greece's actions this past Sunday did not and will not work.
Open Carry provides a plethora of updates on the movement in various states toward Constitutional carry.
Gun Owners of America provides the documents directly from the House Committee which delineate perjury, stonewalling, and support for gun control within the Holder Justice Department.
The War on Guns reports that Mike Vanderboegh is back in the hospital, and here he provides an update. Prayers for Mike are always appreciated.
Mike McCarville has news on Ron Paul's plans at the Republican National Convention. The candidate has given up on his chances at the nomination, but it's good to see he will use his power to influence Party principles to be set forth in the platform.
The New York Liberty Report has more on the Google-Obama axis to get personal information on citizens!
From Standing By: "Old gun grabbers never die, they just hide in the woodwork."
Blonde Sagacity provides cartoon editorial comment on the "Food Police."
The Smallest Minority posts the quote of the day on the importance of pulling your children OUT of the joke/unmitigated disaster called "the public school system."
Oleg Volk, photographer extraordinaire, always posts the most eye-grabbing photos involving firearms and the people who use them. This photo features a real beauty. The gun is pretty nice too. :)
Market Guru Karl Denninger comments on why Greece's actions this past Sunday did not and will not work.
Open Carry provides a plethora of updates on the movement in various states toward Constitutional carry.
Gun Owners of America provides the documents directly from the House Committee which delineate perjury, stonewalling, and support for gun control within the Holder Justice Department.
Supreme Court justices hint at healthcare ruling
In light of the pending ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court on the fate of ObamaCare, which is expected within days, Forbes writer Avik Roy yesterday stated that his sources have information concerning the ruling.
Roy further states that two Court justices have hinted at the outcome.
Sources with insider knowledge of the Court have told Roy that the justices have at the very least made a decision on the individual mandate. Anthony Kennedy has joined with the conservative justices to form a majority in striking down the mandate.
The thing that has not been decided is the extent of the ruling...
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Musings After Midnight--A Dire Warning from the Ground
Good evening, dear reader. And welcome to another segment of "Musings After Midnight"--the title I have given to these blog posts that are written during sleepless nights. But since it is 3 a.m., perhaps I should say "good morning" instead of good evening.
Be that as it may, I decided I would write to you during these wee hours of insomnia not simply to have something to do (I have my TCM movies to watch and reruns of Without a Trace, CSI Miami, and Criminal Minds) but because there has been a distinct warning from the ground in the darkness.
And you must be told about it.
Animals have a good feel for the ground. For example, it was said that prior to the Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami that ravaged Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India, and Thailand in 2004, the animals had already fled the coastal regions long before there was any inkling of disaster. Animals seem to have an extra sensitivity to certain movements and sounds that humans do not have, at least not consciously.
I believe that some humans are super sensitive to these things, not to the degree that the animals are but more sensitive than most people. I have never thought of myself as being that sort of person, but many have told me through the years that they sense an extra "something" in me that causes me to be extra sensitive to certain data that others miss, such as feelings, mental and emotional states, and the like. Some refer to this as intuitive or perceptive.
This has served me well in my previous work in mental health and addictions chaplaincy. Being able to sense feelings in another person or in a group of persons is one of the keys to successfully dealing with those who suffer from these conditions. And for those of us who happen to be compassionate, such knowledge can contribute to an empathetic response to those who need a connection with another human being during the loneliest and most troublesome times of their lives.
But such intuition is also highly valuable in politics. A person in my position, as a political reporter, must be able to know who to trust and who not to trust.
Sure, there are times I make mistakes in my assumptions. Feelings I have had about certain persons did not pan out at times. I am a flawed human being, and as such, there are times when I can be quite wrong. But when it comes to getting to the heart of an issue--the truth--by being able to cut through the chaff, the smoke, the bilge, the distractions and the diversionary tactics of those who wish to hide, I think my track record is among the best.
And this brings me to my point. Tonight I have been quite disturbed by what I am sensing as a result of "keeping my ear to the ground." I have been able to sleep quite well of late, much better than normal. But not tonight. And I don't think it is just a normal case of periodic insomnia. There is a warning I am picking up from the ground, just as those animals picked up a warning somehow in the days and hours prior to the Indonesian tsunami.
But in this case, there is no place to run. There is no place to hide. It is stand your ground and get set. Get prepared to defend your ground.
I have noticed over the last several weeks that increasingly the daily bombardment of major news concerning major change has reached a fever pitch. With each passing day so much is being hurled at us in the political, religious, and social realms that it is becoming too overwhelming for normal human beings to keep up. It is almost like the system is being deliberately overwhelmed, overloaded, and overburdened by an ominous force, an evil presence, that is intent not only to keep Americans in a state of perpetual information overload, leading to chaotic confusion, but to overwhelm the system of government to the extent that it collapses.
As I thought about these things this evening it occurred to me that I have heard and read about this phenomenon many times before.
Does Saul Alinsky ring a bell? How about Cloward-Piven?
A central theme that was common to the Leftwing extremists of the 1960s was that in order to bring about massive social, religious, and political change you had to so overwhelm the current system that it collapses under the weight. And once it collapses you have the perfect opportunity to quickly replace it with a Marxist system of some sort, whether it be Socialism or Communism, or some derivative of it.
Ever since the current Administration took office in 2009, the system has, indeed, been inundated with extraordinary stressors that have shaken it to its very foundation. In spite of a mountain of debt that most economists have admitted is unsustainable, Obama has contributed an additional $5 trillion on top of it within a mere three years. His ideologically-driven but highly impractical energy and environmental policies, coupled with a deadly policy toward jobs, the economy, and corporate taxes, have driven the jobless rate to the highest sustained level of unemployment since the Great Depression of the 1930s and an inflation rate in the costs of food, drugs, electricity, and clothing that is approaching the 13% rate of the Carter years (1976-1981).
On top of that, Obama and the Democrats rammed through the healthcare reform bill against the clear wishes of most Americans, in the dead of night, approving a bill in secret that was not written by Senators and Congressmen but by extremists in the Center for American Progress, ACORN, SEIU, and the Tides Foundation. The scumbags in Congress never even read the bill before passing it.
And I am hearing that the Supreme Court may well keep parts of this dreadful and unconscionable piece of legislation.
The pricetag for ObamaCare is at least a trillion bucks. Just wait till the taxes for it kick in in 2013--the year after the election.
And then there is the absolutely outrageous Executive Order Obama signed last week that immediately grants amnesty to 800,000 illegal aliens...bypassing Congress altogether. A President does not have that kind of power in the United States of America. The Constitution clearly states that only the LEGISLATIVE BRANCH--the Congress--has the power to write laws, NOT the Executive Branch--the presidency.
The Executive Order Obama signed essentially creates law out of thin air. This is a direct violation of Constitutional law.
Can you imagine what Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Adams, and Franklin would have done had a president in that era done such a thing? High crimes and misdemeanors, and treason, were so serious that those who dared commit them did so under the threat not only of being impeached but HANGED.
Added to all of this is the absolutely disastrous foreign policy implemented by this White House. Obama has managed to offend every single friend and ally that America has ever had, while befriending the most obnoxious and despicable fiends the world has ever known. The result? Israel is highly vulnerable in a vast ocean of extremist Muslim nations. A known terrorist organization--the Muslim Brotherhood--now controls Egypt. Russia is on the march unchecked, reasserting its power that it lost at the end of the Cold War. And China has been so empowered by a boneheaded, idiotic policy toward the ChiComs that even Leon Panetta admitted that the Communist giant is a major threat to U.S. security.
Meanwhile, Europe continues to self-destruct, and America is helping it. How? Our own government is trying to take us down the same path Europe took, which led to its present economic woes. And then, when the chickens come home to roost, and the piper must be paid, the banks bail them out, or the German government does so just as the U.S. government bailed out numerous large corporations that did not deserve to stay in business due to gross mismanagement.
It is an endless cycle toward economic doom. Spend yourself into oblivion with borrowed money, go into such debt that you have no more money to pay for the freebies, and then get somebody to bail you out--just like a bunch of very sick, demented drug addicts who are perpetually dependent on their enablers rather than learning how to become independent and standing on their own two feet.
Greece is not going to save Europe, no matter how they voted this past Sunday. Spain also teeters on the edge. So is Portugal. So is Italy. So is Ireland.
Are the European banks going to bail out everybody? How? And with what?
The problem with bailouts is that it rewards bad behavior. Thus, the actions that led to the disaster are reinforced and nobody learns a damn thing from their mistakes.
The world needs to face a cold, hard fact. Were it not for printing paper money out of thin air, at least 75% of what governments are able to do in their hallowed social programs would no longer be possible.
We are living in a house built on sinking sand. A palace of paper. A worthless bundle of printed "notes" that promise value but have nothing of real value to back them up.
When the jig is up on this house of cards, and make no mistake, my friend, there is always, always a day of reckoning sooner or later, then the world will discover there is no more money. And when there is no more money then it is bye bye to pensions, social security, bank accounts, and everything else people have been counting on to take them through old age.
No matter how much the Left talks about how essential it is to provide for the disadvantaged and such, when the money dries up, who will pay for it?
The answer is nobody. Everyone will be flat broke. It is then that reality sets in. Dreams are shattered. Untold suffering ensues. The rich, and the middle class, are thrown into abject poverty. And no government agency will come around to "help" because government has to get money from citizens to pay for this help. And when citizens have no money left, then there is nothing for government to confiscate through taxation. That means there is no more beloved "social safety net."
Do you think I am being too graphic, too much of an alarmist? Well, I disagree. I am being realistic--and honest. I am telling you things your politicians won't tell you. Nor will the mainstream media.
But you had best pay attention because I'm telling you that a major catastrophe of historic proportions is on the way, and it may be much, much worse than anything this country experienced in the Great Depression, two World Wars, and a Civil War combined...unless major changes are made soon in the course this country has taken.
The thing that really disturbs me, however, is the number of our fellow citizens who have been duped by the smooth-talking politicians with their sweet promises of utopia if we will but embrace "hope and change." The dumbed down educational system, which is run by Leftists who indoctrinate our children with Leftist propaganda, has produced millions upon millions of mindless zombies who parrot the party line of the Marxists who buy support through the promise of more freebies. 48% of the country today pays no taxes at all. That means that roughly half of the population lives off of the public dole in some manner.
How is it that citizens can expect to pay no taxes at all when they use services and goods that are paid for with the money government confiscates from citizens who DO pay taxes? You use roads and highways, don't you? You benefit from police protection, fire protection, military protection, and a myriad of other services government provides. So, tell me how it is acceptable for some citizens to avoid paying anything at all for these things?
Even those at the lowest rung of the income ladder can pay a dollar or two per payday for these things. But when half the population has come to expect others to carry their share of the load, a mindset is developed in which there is an expectation that politicians will continue to make it possible for them to get the freebies without paying a dime for them, and if those politicians don't perpetuate that scheme they will be voted out of office.
Thus, the standard becomes the lowest possible reason for casting a vote for a candidate, one that is based entirely upon who can do the most for "me" rather than who is best for the country as demonstrated by their commitment to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Let us never forget that over 50% of Americans who voted cast their vote for Barack Obama. Over half the country. Our fellow citizens whom we see day in and day out put that man in office. And many of them will do the same damn thing yet again in 2012, even after all we've learned about him.
This does not bode well for the future of the country. While Patriots were asleep at the wheel, the enemies of this country from within have been busy at work brainwashing, influencing, and persuading fellow citizens to swallow an ideology that is totally foreign to everything that made this country great. And we are on the brink of losing forever the Republic that the Founders gave us. If Obama wins reelection, and if he has enough support in Congress, then it's over. America is gone. The Constitution will be rendered entirely meaningless and powerless.
And make no mistake about it, my friends. If Obama is reelected, we've lost the Supreme Court for good as well, meaning that Obama will have free reign. One more Leftwing extremist on the Court will change its entire complexion. Obama will more than likely have the opportunity to appoint two or three new justices. That will put the final nail in the coffin for the country.
Frankly, I am worried about the election for several reasons. For one, I have lost trust in my fellow citizens. The things I hear coming out of people's mouths who should know better send cold chills up my spine. They are uninformed, fickle, easily swayed, and prone to a mob mentality. If the economy rebounds a bit, and gas prices continue to drop, and if enough of the recipients of amnesty for illegal aliens vote, then I can easily see a scenario where Obama could be reelected, in spite of his Marxism, his lies, his scandals, his ineptitude, and his extremism.
In addition, in a national emergency, which could very well happen at any time, citizens are prone to vote for stability. They will often return a known entity to office even if they don't like him that much, simply because they want at least some continuity in troubled times.
But there is another aspect of a national emergency that is even more ominous. In some cases the emergency is so dire that Martial law is imposed and elections are suspended. In that case, Obama would remain in office indefinitely.
And another factor that further complicates the issue is that Republicans appear to have chosen a candidate that is not particularly liked by most conservatives. It is still uncertain as to what some conservatives will do on election day. Are they so opposed to Romney that they will sit out the election or vote for a third party or a write-in candidate, even though by doing so they virtually insure Obama's reelection?
I have written at length about this issue before and related to you my dilemma. I believe that people should vote their conscience, no matter what. And some people I know cannot in good conscience vote for Romney. I struggle with the same issue. But I am at this point leaning toward voting for him because I believe that the most important issue in THIS election is getting rid of Barack Obama and ALL of his Democrat enablers in Congress. If the election involved someone other than a dangerous extremist, it would be very different. But this year, the election is ALL about ridding the government of Obama and his ilk, and thus, I don't think I can allow myself to do anything that could tip the election in his favor.
Thus, I am leaning toward voting for Romney if he becomes the chosen nominee at the Convention, but only because I want Obama to lose. I don't want to risk a third party pulling votes away from Romney and thus insuring an Obama victory. Once we get rid of Obama, we can then go to work on cleaning up the Republican Party and getting rid of the RINOS.
I know that Ron Paul is still in the race, and if he wins the nomination I will vote for him. I would prefer him over Romney, for sure. But, I don't see any way he can win. He simply does not have the delegates he needs.
But here is the bottom line, my friends, as I have attempted to explain to you the critical nature of what we face. The period of time we have now entered is a very dangerous period. Tyrants such as Obama and the big money behind him do not leave office without a fight. Back them into a corner and they turn brutal. Their actions have already resulted in the murders of a Border Patrol agent and an Ice agent in the Fast and Furious scandal. Hundreds of Mexicans who live just south of the border have also been murdered with the guns the cartels received from the ATF. They will not hesitate to kill ordinary citizens if we get in their way. They don't call Obama thug Rahm "Dead Fish" Emanuel "the godfather" for nothing. He got that designation for a reason.
We have already seen part of what Obama will do when his back is against the wall. When his poll numbers started to tank, he signed an illegal Executive Order granting amnesty to 800,000 illegals who will show their appreciation by voting for Obama and the Democrats.
What will happen next if his numbers continue to plummet?
Tyrants who become desperate will do ANYTHING.
However, looking at the much broader picture, there are any number of major catastrophes that could happen at any moment--the European economic crisis, Syria, Egypt, Iran, Russia, China, the collapse of the U.S. economic system due to the unsustainable debt load, gasoline shortages due to mounting tensions in the Middle East, Islamic terrorists who have already been confirmed to be operational at the southern border (and hence, the multiple beheadings that are NOT indicative of Mexican culture at all), or further encroachments on the rights of citizens and Constitutional law by a president who is consumed by his own self-importance.
So, what is the main source of the "warning from the ground" I picked up on during this sleepless night? Is it one of the scenarios I mentioned above? Or is it a combination of several if not all of them coming together at the same time?
That I cannot answer. All of the factors delineated above are equally serious and dangerous. All I know is that I heard distinct rumblings beneath the surface that caused me some alarm--enough to keep me awake.
I have learned not to ignore these warnings. And I have to admit that I am on edge. I thought you should know, not for my sake, but yours.
Be that as it may, I decided I would write to you during these wee hours of insomnia not simply to have something to do (I have my TCM movies to watch and reruns of Without a Trace, CSI Miami, and Criminal Minds) but because there has been a distinct warning from the ground in the darkness.
And you must be told about it.
Animals have a good feel for the ground. For example, it was said that prior to the Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami that ravaged Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India, and Thailand in 2004, the animals had already fled the coastal regions long before there was any inkling of disaster. Animals seem to have an extra sensitivity to certain movements and sounds that humans do not have, at least not consciously.
I believe that some humans are super sensitive to these things, not to the degree that the animals are but more sensitive than most people. I have never thought of myself as being that sort of person, but many have told me through the years that they sense an extra "something" in me that causes me to be extra sensitive to certain data that others miss, such as feelings, mental and emotional states, and the like. Some refer to this as intuitive or perceptive.
This has served me well in my previous work in mental health and addictions chaplaincy. Being able to sense feelings in another person or in a group of persons is one of the keys to successfully dealing with those who suffer from these conditions. And for those of us who happen to be compassionate, such knowledge can contribute to an empathetic response to those who need a connection with another human being during the loneliest and most troublesome times of their lives.
But such intuition is also highly valuable in politics. A person in my position, as a political reporter, must be able to know who to trust and who not to trust.
Sure, there are times I make mistakes in my assumptions. Feelings I have had about certain persons did not pan out at times. I am a flawed human being, and as such, there are times when I can be quite wrong. But when it comes to getting to the heart of an issue--the truth--by being able to cut through the chaff, the smoke, the bilge, the distractions and the diversionary tactics of those who wish to hide, I think my track record is among the best.
And this brings me to my point. Tonight I have been quite disturbed by what I am sensing as a result of "keeping my ear to the ground." I have been able to sleep quite well of late, much better than normal. But not tonight. And I don't think it is just a normal case of periodic insomnia. There is a warning I am picking up from the ground, just as those animals picked up a warning somehow in the days and hours prior to the Indonesian tsunami.
But in this case, there is no place to run. There is no place to hide. It is stand your ground and get set. Get prepared to defend your ground.
I have noticed over the last several weeks that increasingly the daily bombardment of major news concerning major change has reached a fever pitch. With each passing day so much is being hurled at us in the political, religious, and social realms that it is becoming too overwhelming for normal human beings to keep up. It is almost like the system is being deliberately overwhelmed, overloaded, and overburdened by an ominous force, an evil presence, that is intent not only to keep Americans in a state of perpetual information overload, leading to chaotic confusion, but to overwhelm the system of government to the extent that it collapses.
As I thought about these things this evening it occurred to me that I have heard and read about this phenomenon many times before.
Does Saul Alinsky ring a bell? How about Cloward-Piven?
A central theme that was common to the Leftwing extremists of the 1960s was that in order to bring about massive social, religious, and political change you had to so overwhelm the current system that it collapses under the weight. And once it collapses you have the perfect opportunity to quickly replace it with a Marxist system of some sort, whether it be Socialism or Communism, or some derivative of it.
Ever since the current Administration took office in 2009, the system has, indeed, been inundated with extraordinary stressors that have shaken it to its very foundation. In spite of a mountain of debt that most economists have admitted is unsustainable, Obama has contributed an additional $5 trillion on top of it within a mere three years. His ideologically-driven but highly impractical energy and environmental policies, coupled with a deadly policy toward jobs, the economy, and corporate taxes, have driven the jobless rate to the highest sustained level of unemployment since the Great Depression of the 1930s and an inflation rate in the costs of food, drugs, electricity, and clothing that is approaching the 13% rate of the Carter years (1976-1981).
On top of that, Obama and the Democrats rammed through the healthcare reform bill against the clear wishes of most Americans, in the dead of night, approving a bill in secret that was not written by Senators and Congressmen but by extremists in the Center for American Progress, ACORN, SEIU, and the Tides Foundation. The scumbags in Congress never even read the bill before passing it.
And I am hearing that the Supreme Court may well keep parts of this dreadful and unconscionable piece of legislation.
The pricetag for ObamaCare is at least a trillion bucks. Just wait till the taxes for it kick in in 2013--the year after the election.
And then there is the absolutely outrageous Executive Order Obama signed last week that immediately grants amnesty to 800,000 illegal aliens...bypassing Congress altogether. A President does not have that kind of power in the United States of America. The Constitution clearly states that only the LEGISLATIVE BRANCH--the Congress--has the power to write laws, NOT the Executive Branch--the presidency.
The Executive Order Obama signed essentially creates law out of thin air. This is a direct violation of Constitutional law.
Can you imagine what Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Adams, and Franklin would have done had a president in that era done such a thing? High crimes and misdemeanors, and treason, were so serious that those who dared commit them did so under the threat not only of being impeached but HANGED.
Added to all of this is the absolutely disastrous foreign policy implemented by this White House. Obama has managed to offend every single friend and ally that America has ever had, while befriending the most obnoxious and despicable fiends the world has ever known. The result? Israel is highly vulnerable in a vast ocean of extremist Muslim nations. A known terrorist organization--the Muslim Brotherhood--now controls Egypt. Russia is on the march unchecked, reasserting its power that it lost at the end of the Cold War. And China has been so empowered by a boneheaded, idiotic policy toward the ChiComs that even Leon Panetta admitted that the Communist giant is a major threat to U.S. security.
Meanwhile, Europe continues to self-destruct, and America is helping it. How? Our own government is trying to take us down the same path Europe took, which led to its present economic woes. And then, when the chickens come home to roost, and the piper must be paid, the banks bail them out, or the German government does so just as the U.S. government bailed out numerous large corporations that did not deserve to stay in business due to gross mismanagement.
It is an endless cycle toward economic doom. Spend yourself into oblivion with borrowed money, go into such debt that you have no more money to pay for the freebies, and then get somebody to bail you out--just like a bunch of very sick, demented drug addicts who are perpetually dependent on their enablers rather than learning how to become independent and standing on their own two feet.
Greece is not going to save Europe, no matter how they voted this past Sunday. Spain also teeters on the edge. So is Portugal. So is Italy. So is Ireland.
Are the European banks going to bail out everybody? How? And with what?
The problem with bailouts is that it rewards bad behavior. Thus, the actions that led to the disaster are reinforced and nobody learns a damn thing from their mistakes.
The world needs to face a cold, hard fact. Were it not for printing paper money out of thin air, at least 75% of what governments are able to do in their hallowed social programs would no longer be possible.
We are living in a house built on sinking sand. A palace of paper. A worthless bundle of printed "notes" that promise value but have nothing of real value to back them up.
When the jig is up on this house of cards, and make no mistake, my friend, there is always, always a day of reckoning sooner or later, then the world will discover there is no more money. And when there is no more money then it is bye bye to pensions, social security, bank accounts, and everything else people have been counting on to take them through old age.
No matter how much the Left talks about how essential it is to provide for the disadvantaged and such, when the money dries up, who will pay for it?
The answer is nobody. Everyone will be flat broke. It is then that reality sets in. Dreams are shattered. Untold suffering ensues. The rich, and the middle class, are thrown into abject poverty. And no government agency will come around to "help" because government has to get money from citizens to pay for this help. And when citizens have no money left, then there is nothing for government to confiscate through taxation. That means there is no more beloved "social safety net."
Do you think I am being too graphic, too much of an alarmist? Well, I disagree. I am being realistic--and honest. I am telling you things your politicians won't tell you. Nor will the mainstream media.
But you had best pay attention because I'm telling you that a major catastrophe of historic proportions is on the way, and it may be much, much worse than anything this country experienced in the Great Depression, two World Wars, and a Civil War combined...unless major changes are made soon in the course this country has taken.
The thing that really disturbs me, however, is the number of our fellow citizens who have been duped by the smooth-talking politicians with their sweet promises of utopia if we will but embrace "hope and change." The dumbed down educational system, which is run by Leftists who indoctrinate our children with Leftist propaganda, has produced millions upon millions of mindless zombies who parrot the party line of the Marxists who buy support through the promise of more freebies. 48% of the country today pays no taxes at all. That means that roughly half of the population lives off of the public dole in some manner.
How is it that citizens can expect to pay no taxes at all when they use services and goods that are paid for with the money government confiscates from citizens who DO pay taxes? You use roads and highways, don't you? You benefit from police protection, fire protection, military protection, and a myriad of other services government provides. So, tell me how it is acceptable for some citizens to avoid paying anything at all for these things?
Even those at the lowest rung of the income ladder can pay a dollar or two per payday for these things. But when half the population has come to expect others to carry their share of the load, a mindset is developed in which there is an expectation that politicians will continue to make it possible for them to get the freebies without paying a dime for them, and if those politicians don't perpetuate that scheme they will be voted out of office.
Thus, the standard becomes the lowest possible reason for casting a vote for a candidate, one that is based entirely upon who can do the most for "me" rather than who is best for the country as demonstrated by their commitment to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Let us never forget that over 50% of Americans who voted cast their vote for Barack Obama. Over half the country. Our fellow citizens whom we see day in and day out put that man in office. And many of them will do the same damn thing yet again in 2012, even after all we've learned about him.
This does not bode well for the future of the country. While Patriots were asleep at the wheel, the enemies of this country from within have been busy at work brainwashing, influencing, and persuading fellow citizens to swallow an ideology that is totally foreign to everything that made this country great. And we are on the brink of losing forever the Republic that the Founders gave us. If Obama wins reelection, and if he has enough support in Congress, then it's over. America is gone. The Constitution will be rendered entirely meaningless and powerless.
And make no mistake about it, my friends. If Obama is reelected, we've lost the Supreme Court for good as well, meaning that Obama will have free reign. One more Leftwing extremist on the Court will change its entire complexion. Obama will more than likely have the opportunity to appoint two or three new justices. That will put the final nail in the coffin for the country.
Frankly, I am worried about the election for several reasons. For one, I have lost trust in my fellow citizens. The things I hear coming out of people's mouths who should know better send cold chills up my spine. They are uninformed, fickle, easily swayed, and prone to a mob mentality. If the economy rebounds a bit, and gas prices continue to drop, and if enough of the recipients of amnesty for illegal aliens vote, then I can easily see a scenario where Obama could be reelected, in spite of his Marxism, his lies, his scandals, his ineptitude, and his extremism.
In addition, in a national emergency, which could very well happen at any time, citizens are prone to vote for stability. They will often return a known entity to office even if they don't like him that much, simply because they want at least some continuity in troubled times.
But there is another aspect of a national emergency that is even more ominous. In some cases the emergency is so dire that Martial law is imposed and elections are suspended. In that case, Obama would remain in office indefinitely.
And another factor that further complicates the issue is that Republicans appear to have chosen a candidate that is not particularly liked by most conservatives. It is still uncertain as to what some conservatives will do on election day. Are they so opposed to Romney that they will sit out the election or vote for a third party or a write-in candidate, even though by doing so they virtually insure Obama's reelection?
I have written at length about this issue before and related to you my dilemma. I believe that people should vote their conscience, no matter what. And some people I know cannot in good conscience vote for Romney. I struggle with the same issue. But I am at this point leaning toward voting for him because I believe that the most important issue in THIS election is getting rid of Barack Obama and ALL of his Democrat enablers in Congress. If the election involved someone other than a dangerous extremist, it would be very different. But this year, the election is ALL about ridding the government of Obama and his ilk, and thus, I don't think I can allow myself to do anything that could tip the election in his favor.
Thus, I am leaning toward voting for Romney if he becomes the chosen nominee at the Convention, but only because I want Obama to lose. I don't want to risk a third party pulling votes away from Romney and thus insuring an Obama victory. Once we get rid of Obama, we can then go to work on cleaning up the Republican Party and getting rid of the RINOS.
I know that Ron Paul is still in the race, and if he wins the nomination I will vote for him. I would prefer him over Romney, for sure. But, I don't see any way he can win. He simply does not have the delegates he needs.
But here is the bottom line, my friends, as I have attempted to explain to you the critical nature of what we face. The period of time we have now entered is a very dangerous period. Tyrants such as Obama and the big money behind him do not leave office without a fight. Back them into a corner and they turn brutal. Their actions have already resulted in the murders of a Border Patrol agent and an Ice agent in the Fast and Furious scandal. Hundreds of Mexicans who live just south of the border have also been murdered with the guns the cartels received from the ATF. They will not hesitate to kill ordinary citizens if we get in their way. They don't call Obama thug Rahm "Dead Fish" Emanuel "the godfather" for nothing. He got that designation for a reason.
We have already seen part of what Obama will do when his back is against the wall. When his poll numbers started to tank, he signed an illegal Executive Order granting amnesty to 800,000 illegals who will show their appreciation by voting for Obama and the Democrats.
What will happen next if his numbers continue to plummet?
Tyrants who become desperate will do ANYTHING.
However, looking at the much broader picture, there are any number of major catastrophes that could happen at any moment--the European economic crisis, Syria, Egypt, Iran, Russia, China, the collapse of the U.S. economic system due to the unsustainable debt load, gasoline shortages due to mounting tensions in the Middle East, Islamic terrorists who have already been confirmed to be operational at the southern border (and hence, the multiple beheadings that are NOT indicative of Mexican culture at all), or further encroachments on the rights of citizens and Constitutional law by a president who is consumed by his own self-importance.
So, what is the main source of the "warning from the ground" I picked up on during this sleepless night? Is it one of the scenarios I mentioned above? Or is it a combination of several if not all of them coming together at the same time?
That I cannot answer. All of the factors delineated above are equally serious and dangerous. All I know is that I heard distinct rumblings beneath the surface that caused me some alarm--enough to keep me awake.
I have learned not to ignore these warnings. And I have to admit that I am on edge. I thought you should know, not for my sake, but yours.
Monday, June 18, 2012
The 2A News Roundup--Top Ten for Monday, June 18, 2012
All guns and politics from the best gun rights and liberty bloggers on the Internet.
Mike Vanderboegh's original exclusive report on the latest in the Fast and Furious scandal, published today, is here.
Here is David Codrea's take on the Vanderboegh report.
WRSA provides a must-read on the eventual consequences of "swatting"--the practice of a few Leftwing nutcases to anonymously call the cops and report that SWAT teams are needed at the homes of conservative bloggers.
Brigid has some musings on the Second Amendment.
Stand Up America reports that Judicial Watch, the main government watchdog in D.C., has sued the Obama Administration to get info in the Fast and Furious scandal.
Way Up North provides graphics that answer the question, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?"
Days of our Trailers says that David Hardy has written a very important paper on McDonald v. Chicago, the landmark case that incorporated the Second Amendment right to arms.
Alphecca notes that TIME magazine is continuing with its attacks on gun rights.
Around O-Town issues a timely warning about the house of cards inherent in the Euro zone crisis. The vote in Greece yesterday will NOT fix the problem. Be sure to watch the video. It's like a genius speaking to a room full of stooges who have been lobotomized.
Pamela Geller publishes an article that most assuredly will cause many conservatives, including this one, to reconsider our support for National Review, the magazine founded by William F. Buckley, Jr. Bill would be surely turning over in his grave if he knew what the present cabal of writers were doing at the magazine!
Mike Vanderboegh's original exclusive report on the latest in the Fast and Furious scandal, published today, is here.
Here is David Codrea's take on the Vanderboegh report.
WRSA provides a must-read on the eventual consequences of "swatting"--the practice of a few Leftwing nutcases to anonymously call the cops and report that SWAT teams are needed at the homes of conservative bloggers.
Brigid has some musings on the Second Amendment.
Stand Up America reports that Judicial Watch, the main government watchdog in D.C., has sued the Obama Administration to get info in the Fast and Furious scandal.
Way Up North provides graphics that answer the question, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?"
Days of our Trailers says that David Hardy has written a very important paper on McDonald v. Chicago, the landmark case that incorporated the Second Amendment right to arms.
Alphecca notes that TIME magazine is continuing with its attacks on gun rights.
Around O-Town issues a timely warning about the house of cards inherent in the Euro zone crisis. The vote in Greece yesterday will NOT fix the problem. Be sure to watch the video. It's like a genius speaking to a room full of stooges who have been lobotomized.
Pamela Geller publishes an article that most assuredly will cause many conservatives, including this one, to reconsider our support for National Review, the magazine founded by William F. Buckley, Jr. Bill would be surely turning over in his grave if he knew what the present cabal of writers were doing at the magazine!
Obama's media hit man linked to Fast and Furious
A name that most Americans have probably never heard is Denis McDonough, who serves as Deputy National Security Adviser for the President. But McDonough is perhaps one of the two or three most influential advisers on the Obama team, and he is now directly linked to the Fast and Furious scandal.
According to an exclusive report published today, McDonough's relationship with the President goes far beyond the political and professional. The two are close friends. McDonough is Obama's basketball buddy. And it is McDonough who has interjected himself as Obama's protector, a "media hit man" of sorts who will dress down reporters in a heartbeat if they veer off of the official Administration spin.
Investigative journalists have provided details on McDonough's background and work history in politics, but the information that makes McDonough relevant to the continually breaking news on the Fast and Furious scandal is his role in silencing complaints from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) about the "gunwalking" activity of the ATF and the FBI.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
According to an exclusive report published today, McDonough's relationship with the President goes far beyond the political and professional. The two are close friends. McDonough is Obama's basketball buddy. And it is McDonough who has interjected himself as Obama's protector, a "media hit man" of sorts who will dress down reporters in a heartbeat if they veer off of the official Administration spin.
Investigative journalists have provided details on McDonough's background and work history in politics, but the information that makes McDonough relevant to the continually breaking news on the Fast and Furious scandal is his role in silencing complaints from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) about the "gunwalking" activity of the ATF and the FBI.
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Sunday, June 17, 2012
Report describes Russian move into Syria as 'Cold War II'
In a report today revealing a move by Russia to send arms to Syria and maneuver its navy into Syrian waters, a political research organization founded by former Fox News military analyst and retired Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, U.S. Army, the events occurring presently in the Middle East and other parts of the world are described as the beginning of "Cold War II."
The original Cold War began after World War II. Communists in the former Soviet Union set about to spread their power by setting up numerous satellite nations under their control, including all of the countries of Eastern Europe...
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
The original Cold War began after World War II. Communists in the former Soviet Union set about to spread their power by setting up numerous satellite nations under their control, including all of the countries of Eastern Europe...
Click here to continue reading at Anthony G. Martin's National Conservative Examiner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)