“Executive Cleanup in Isle One”

Never let a good title go to waste, so I won’t. Not to worry because we do have a mess of presidential proportion. You know it is bad when O’Reilly scolds people about using the word scandal because we just don’t have enough information or know, presumably, “IF” it is a scandal.

By coincidence, at MSNBC Lawrence O’Donnell said the same thing on the same night. Wow, everyone cautioning not to label the presscapade thing a scandal. We have to wait and see. And the IRS thing, at least now they have the report. Barry was saying before its release that “if this happened” (big if, they admitted it) “then there has to be accountability”. Where did I see this movie before? I’m sure I have, several times.

Then over on CNN, Wolf asks congressman Chaffetz if he thinks Benghazigate is an impeachable ordeal that the congressman seemed to be calling for it? Chaffetz corrected Wolf saying we cannot take it off the table. He added that impeachment was not their motivation or immediate objective. Of course that is lost on mainstream media.

To paraphrase them: ‘you mean the door is wide open to impeachment? – Wow!‘ Sure, it always is unless they forgot about our Constitution — that irrelevant ancient relic. For Bush, it was always an option, wasn’t it?

Now the Obama regime has its share of messes. Its like being at the grocery store seeing a couple of separate kids drop a jar on the floor. Whether it was intentional or not does not change the size of the mess. Someone has to clean it up. They may quickly run to the next isle but the mess remains. Hence, the “cleanup” reference.

So the AP story hits them where they live and breathe: in the back channels of the media — where stories are born and die. Having a grand inquisition into their phone records does not thrill them. But its okay when all the questions and heavy-handed government measures are used against the right, say snooping into their tax records, or detailed information about gun owners, or posting addresses of handgun permit holders. Then they overlook the dictocrat measures.

But sum it up, there is a heck of a mess, through how many departments and government? It’s a walking talking scandal from one end to the other. And some hesitate to overuse the word scandal. I will use it liberally. Sure some of it may not be a full-fledged scandal, but so much of it is. Taken together it paints the picture of a government out of touch with the realities around it. In fact, all that seems to matter to this government is politics and the regime’s Alinsky-style tactics, and their appetite to use them to their advantage.

All part of the same strategy, whether it be never let a crisis go to waste, Benghazi, terrorism, the energy problems, the war on terror, or its own duties that people rely on. And along with politicizing all parts of government, he has also scandalized much of it. Now we are cautioned about overusing the word scandal. But isn’t it just Scandalicious?

It is one big mess, and it all summons the president and his spokespeople, frequently, to the podium to make a non-statement about it trying to explain it away. Then, on top of it, we the people always get lectured. (funny how that works)

How many scandals or messes are there? I’ll try making a partial list. I don’t care if some say they aren’t all scandals, they are all symptoms at least of an out of control government that cannot be accountable for its own laundry. They usually have the nerve to turn the blame on the people, or others, as if that solves the problems messes. The word scandal is not an issue with this overwhelming mess.

There is fast and furious – dead officers and dead Mexicans
Gun-running here and in M/E
There is Benghazi
There is the IRS scandal
There is the phone records of AP reporters
There is the justice department — Black Panthers intimidating voters in Philadelphia.
There are the green scandals.
There is Solyndra and countless others, daily
there is the GM deal
there is the bailout fallout.
there is the stimulus — or is it stimulae or stim-u-lie
there is the EPA
there is the State Department and its handling of Benghazi
Don’t forget the labeling of the Fort Hood attack workplace violence.
There are his statements like “you didn’t build that” — some might argue they aren’t really scandals, but its all in his presidential excuses or fallout of such statements. And there are a slew of them.
There was the secret service one – pretty amusing one
there were the innuendo investigations of Petraeus and other military officials.
there were the Hagel problems and the Brennan appointment problems.
there is the drone campaign
There is the overall lack of accountability for anything he has done. (a big and important one)
There is the old racism canard… always sprouting new chutes.
There is ObamaCare and ‘pay to play’ (several others nested under the main one)
There is the birth control and contraceptive one — with lawsuits.
There is the “death panel” one and the denial. “”There are no death panels in ObamaCare…”
There is the main argument (and court battle) over ObamaCare “mandates”- states and otherwise
There is the battle over whether ObamaCare uses a tax or penalty
There are his many too radical for prime time appointments.
Selling F-16’s and tanks to Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhoods running Egypt.
Involvement in Arab Spring from beginning
Libya intervention from the beginning
The entire department of energy under Chu (the man is a walking scandal himself)
The Van Jones connection appointment
The statements to Russian Prez to be more flexible after election
The Keystone Pipeline – ongoing
The moratorium and battle of drilling
The sequester concocted by the president. (scandal and micro-scandal)
Telling governmental bodies to make the sequester cuts obvious to people.
The release of prisoners and blaming the sequester
Threatening cuts to border enforcement
The blaming of the sequester for TSA and every other governmental failure:
i.e. “Its the sequester, stupid!”
Fort Hood – workplace violence
Labor department and Boeing
Military pay and benefit cuts
His military cutting agenda
Spending and priorities
War on terror and Afghanistan become overseas contingency operations
Gun Control, handling the shootings in Newtown.
Fiscal Cliff — coming soon to a theatre near you.

Do I think I overused the word scandal, not a chance. The guy scandalizes his own proposals. Obama is one big radical scandal, and the more people that see him and his administration as such, the better for we the people. But don’t lecture US on using the word scandal or pointing out his failures.

Or… maybe its just time to replace the word scandal with the word Impeachment?

Opportunism run amuck

This is a rant about the gun control non-debate. I heard this commercial several times. It is from a lobby affiliated with the anti-gun campaign but doesn’t matter.

They talk about gun control saying because of the events, this is the best “opportunity” to push through gun control they have had. Maybe I get offended whenever the word opportunity is used in politics? But that certainly touched my nerve, never have they had such a great opportunity to pass gun control.

Is that what this is a great “opportunity”? We also have Rahm Emanuel’s doctrine, “never let a crisis go to waste”. It is all the same thing. Opportunity? Is the murder of the kids in Newtown now reduced to an opportunity? I am not surprised.

That’s what the Left is all about, opportunity. The shooting in Colorado or the  shooting in Newtown, is just the greatest opportunity they’ve had. Note how cavalier they say it.

That’s why I relate politics to extortion, and extortion to terrorism. They extort the events for political gain. Politicians are out to get as much as they can from the circumstances. With progressives it is a jihad. They are opportunists. And what do terrorist do? Take advantage of circumstances to serve a political agenda.

I am so sick of their opportunism. No matter how horrible the event or circumstance, opportunists run to take full advantage of it. Hello, Barney Frank on Boston.

Like the death of a wealthy person, family members come out of the woodwork looking for a piece of the pie. When a disaster happens, people try to take advantage of victims. Opportunistis et al. Politicians looked at the banking/economic collapse the same way, “how can we use this?”

It is professional extortion, and all of us are the victims. There can be no doubt the Left is declaring jihad on guns, the second amendment, and gun owners. They tell us. They issued a fatwa to the American people that they want our second amendment rights. At the same time they will not defend the right to life. All part of the same fatwa.

But Liberals and pols will tell you that is just the way our system works.

Now the Boston bombing presents serious national security concerns while they push illegal immigration legislation and amnesty. But all of a sudden the Left cries foul and claims the bombing should not be “used” to deter their illegal immigration agenda. A legitimate national security issue is not relevant to illegal immigration? Beam me up!

There must be a bylaw for the left: when opportunity presents itself, bust down the door. Use a battering ram if possible.’…’when opportunity knocks, beat the hell out of victims.’

In fact, I heard political strategists/pundits talking about illegal immigration “reform” – whatever the hell they call the current concoction. The MSM loons complained that for the right to use the bombing in Boston against “immigration reform” is absurd. “Off sides…personal foul..95 yard penalty. “They can’t understand any remote connection. Say what?

They then accused the Republicans of playing politics and trying to use the illegal alien issue for political gain. Is that a hoot, using the issue for political gain? The gods of opportunism cry foul.

Obama and his cohorts already denounced Rand Paul and others for accusing Obama and the Left of standing on the graves of victims, playing politics with the second amendment, and using family members as “Props” in their anti-gun “campaign”. Oh no, attack the messengers, even if they happen to be right.

Angry Obama lectures vengeance in elections


Sourpuss Obama gives angry Rose Garden lecture

An Angry Obama Lashes Out After Gun Control Defeat

By Zeke J Miller — Swampland

Calling the defeat of his gun control efforts “a pretty shameful day for Washington,” a defiant and angry President Barack Obama announced in the Rose Garden Wednesday that the fight would go on.

Stoned faced and curt, the President used unusually pointed words to criticize the 45 Senators, including four Democrats, who successfully defeated the bill, which would have expanded mandatory background checks to gun shows and online sales. Obama said the bill met his own test of worthwhile gun regulation, but “too many Senators failed theirs.” Vice President Joe Biden stood with a fixed grimace to his left, as families of victims from the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting and former Rep. Gabby Giffords stood nearby, fighting back tears. Dour-looking aides looked on from the colonnade.

“I’ve heard some say that blocking this step would be a victory. And my question is, a victory for who?” he continued. “All that happened today was the preservation of the loophole that lets dangerous criminals buy guns without a background check. That didn’t make our kids safer.”

/….

Obama’s condemnation was joined by others who promise to continue to push for new gun control measures. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has promised to fund a multi-million dollar ad campaign against those who block new gun controls, said in a statement that the vote was a “damning indictment of the stranglehold that special interests have on Washington.” He blamed both parties for the defeat. “Democrats – who are so quick to blame Republicans for our broken gun laws – could not stand united,” he said in a statement. “And Republicans – who are so quick to blame Democrats for not being tough enough on crime – handed criminals a huge victory, by preserving their ability to buy guns illegally at gun shows and online and keeping the illegal trafficking market well-fed.”

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2013/04/17/an-angry-obama-lashes-out-after-gun-control-defeat/#ixzz2QmjIxtjr

Then King Obama was sort of upstaged by dribbling news on the Marathon massacre, with an on again-off again briefing scheduled in that same time slot.

And finally an arrest of a Ricin mailings suspect. So many reasons to be mad, including members of his own Party. And he scolded anyone listening to throw opponents of gun control out in the 2014 election.

Then he took out a group of Democrats to a hotel to talk about gun control, illegal immigration, and his budget. A very full and partisan day for Obastid-in-Chief — while bitterly clinging to gun control, with antipathy toward those different than him.

“Shameful day” means he is exactly back to where he and Michelle began his reign over America: being ashamed of it, and wearing his pattented bitterness on his sleeve as he projects the same on others. Pathetic.

ATF Seeks ‘Massive’ Database of Personal Info: ‘Assets, Relatives, Associates and More’

Socialism is not the Answer

CNS News

A recent solicitation from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) reveals that the agency is seeking a “massive” online database capable of pulling up individuals’ personal information, connections and associates.

View original post 239 more words

NY, Cuomo and Gun Con-trol

March 25, 2013 4:00 A.M.

Cuomo’s Shameful SAFE Act

Rushed law is bad law, even when it’s “for the children.”

By Charles C. W. Cooke — NRO

All things being equal, New York State’s infamous new gun laws will go down in history as a prime example of the folly of hysterical calls to action; and Governor Andrew Cuomo, who led the chase for the measures, will join them in disgrace. After 20 children were killed in Newtown, Conn., last December, progressives saw a golden opportunity to reverse the liberalizing tide of recent firearms law and leverage the national outrage in favor of long-desired gun-control codes. Freed by his reelection, the president declared, in an increasingly tiresome formulation, “Now is the time to do the right thing for our children, our communities, and the country we love.” In Albany, it appears that the governor took him literally.

Legislation cast in the wake of tragedy invariably carries with it the stench of the mob, and when it’s contrived in haste to protect “the children,” this is doubly so. Parliaments and institutions might protect us from the sight of angry, rash, pitchfork-wielding villagers in search of blood, but, however sanitized our politics have become, the impulse of rabble-rousing politicos is the same: Something must be done, it must be done right this second, and all naysayers are on the side of the monster. Wise men understand this, and they act to cool passions. Andrew Cuomo, we have learned in recent months, is not a wise man. His signature now adorns a law that has proven unworkable from start to finish. Next time we are told that we cannot wait for democracy or reflection to soothe passions, we might remember the course that New York has taken.

In Newtown’s aftermath, reacting became synonymous with fixing the problem; expressing support for change was treated as if it were the same thing as preventing tragedy; and those who urged patience or reason were seen as siding with the devil — or, worse, the Second Amendment. These tendencies were widespread, but Cuomo’s rhetoric stood out in particular, ranging as it quickly did into the extreme. So grave was the new threat, Cuomo warned, that New York State should consider “confiscation” of “assault weapons,” or, if that was too drastic, it should enforce “mandatory sales to the state.” There had been, we were told, a “sea change” in America. From now on, everything would be different.

SHOUTING his way through his State of the State speech on January 9, 2013, the governor outlined his thinking. “Guns impose huge economic costs, as well as [a cost in] lives,” he bellowed. “Fear of gun violence invades neighborhoods, causing disruptions in the normal rhythms of life, work, and school. That threat depresses property values and puts a drag on economic development.” This being so, and legislation being inescapable, there would be time for neither public input nor committee hearings. In a startling move, Cuomo issued a “Message of Necessity,” using a provision in the state’s constitution designed to permit expedited state action in a case of emergency. This gave Cuomo the power to suspend the usual democratic rules and charge forward.

He couldn’t allow public debate, he argued, lest it “cause a rush on the market of people who wanted to buy assault weapons.” He couldn’t allow the usual three-day waiting period between a bill’s being introduced and a vote’s being held, in case legislators asked difficult questions or tried to stall the measure. In a move that would have made Nancy Pelosi proud, Cuomo allotted state lawmakers mere minutes to read the bill before voting on it. Indeed, so aggressive were Cuomo’s tactics that the Albany Times Union, which was supportive of the basic thrust of the legislation, editorialized that he behaved like a man possessed of “a truncated view of the legislative process and a cynical view of representative government.” The governor disagreed: “If there is an issue that fits the definition of necessity,” Cuomo shot back, “I believe it’s gun violence.”

See complete in-depth article at NRO
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/343805/cuomo-s-shameful-safe-act-charles-c-w-cooke?pg=1

The empirical governor sounds a lot like Barack Obama blaming the sequester for everything from his TSA and firefighter threats to airport delays and White House tour cuts, and then falsely blaming Republicans. Birds of the feather. Just throw it all in there.

Anyone willing to suspend Constitutional government for his agenda — or hold it hostage in Obama’s case — and incite panic amongst the people, is willing to say just about anything to defend it. (as we see from Obama)

Oh, he says nothing about the fears he caused by enacting the legislation and the process he employed to do it. That is the fear of tyrannical government that really disturbs people. That is the threat of deceitful, scheming, tyranny at its worst. Not to mention all the shouting he did along the way. Different indeed!

The fallout of his political maneuvering?

(NRO)Before the massacre at Newtown, Cuomo had an approval rating of 74–18. After he pushed the bill, it dropped to 59–28, still high but a dramatic drop. Among Republicans in the state, he moved from 68–18 to 44–43. Cuomo “was afraid of the public rising up — and the public has risen up,” New York Conservative-party chairman Mike Long says. “There are 52 counties that have introduced resolutions calling for repeal. There are 40 counties that have passed resolutions. Three weeks ago, citizens held the largest rally that ever took place in Albany: over 5,000 people.” By the time people took to the streets, a petition urging Cuomo to revisit the law had collected 83,000 signatures.

But who really cares about Cuomo’s political survival when he took a Samurai Sword to the 2nd amendment, the state constitution, and the bill of rights? How it is legislators could go along with his machinations is beyond reason. Are they really telling people that, like legislators in the federal District of Corruption, there isn’t a damn thing they can do about it? “By George”, I think they have!

I guess it is just too bad for the subjects of his Empirical State.
 photo Cuomo-Quote_zpsd8812bf4.jpg

So why does Obama need 1.6 billion hollow-point bullets? – Safety?

As it turns out, those people who “cling to their guns” are not so wacky after all. I’d vouch for their sanity over an out of control government any day. Interesting how both Cuomo and Obama fancy themselves as a model to others. And neither can ever be shamed out of office. We saw the same scenario with Clintons and it has only gotten (much)worse since.

It’s time we get familiar with the truth, so we know how it all went down.

Jim Carrey goes ballistic against Heston and guns

Jim Carrey is officially reducing himself to “has been” status. Carrey did a video ad mocking Charlton Heston, to light off his attack on gun owners in the US. He’s now crossed the point of no return like some before him, including Rosie O’Donnell.

Who knew Carrey was in dire straights before this? He must be desperate for any attention he can get. He pounced on the late Charlton Heston at a time anti-gun lobbies and some legislators are salivating over the opportunity, post Newtown, to regulate guns.

The late Charlton Heston had been a leading advocate of gun owners and the NRA. Plus he was well-respected. This appeared to be an opportunity to take down Heston’s and NRA’s status on the issue. And Carrey comes out swinging in every direction in a frantic, helter skelter skit mocking Heston and his views toward guns – especially the “from my cold dead hands” quote.

Call it a character assassination or whatever you like.

Jim Carrey can only hope that this rallies support for him and the whole gun control issue as planned. In doing so, he revealed himself to be just another self-centered Hollywood elite clamoring to make himself relevant. While he is likely taking all calls from his pals and celebrity fellow travelers, he is not answering calls to explain or debate his positions anyplace on non-sympathetic outlets. Satire rumor has already begun.

Time will tell if he’s the new big anti-gun zealot on the stage. Outside the Piers Morgan or David Letterman, where else can he really go? He dug himself into a foxhole and he doesn’t seem to care that he alienated a large portion of the public.

It is the next best thing for his career to strapping on a suicide vest and declaring himself Fire Marshall Bill, then yanking the detonator with his patented smirk. The only question now is how far can  he propel his remains, “Let me show you somet’ing

But wait, there’s more. Don’t overlook the obvious, he’s also taking aim at Midwestern flyover folks by portraying the people as slow and dumb. Ah shucks, Jim! You really can’t miss that either. Its a twofer for the former headliner. He made a beeline straight for the hog pen, mocking how antiquated and stupid they and the whole gun rights thing are. Jim, you’re a special kind of stupid, aren’t you? You’re the one out of touch.

The last time I felt an insult with this much venom it was Obama talking about gun clinging, Bible thumping, bigots in rural America. Yea, like that one, file this under “how to win friends and influence political enemies”. It works every time. Insult the hell out of them to win them over. And maybe this is the hat trick or trifecta, because Heston after all is associated with playing roles in Biblical films. So it looks like Carrey has all his bases covered. Nothing will pry the issue from Carrey’s cold dead heart.

What’s next for Carrey? I know, why not light off some fireworks around John Wayne’s grave too. Cast a few aspersions on him — maybe a nice character attack. That should win over a few more folks to the anti-gun cause, don’t you think? Fire Marshall Bill had more class than this loony from Leftville.

He’s not a celeb, he just plays one on TV. So get a life, Jim, Heston’s is already taken.
Bye-bye, Jim. See you in the funnies….not.
Yep, he was destined for the old dustbin of stardom – “take a seat.”

Feisnstein – Senator Gun Grabber

Highlights:

“I’ve been on this committee for 20 years…. I’m not a lawyer but, after 20 years, I’ve been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it.” — that’s nice.

“Just know I’ve been here for a long time, I’ve passed on a number of bills, I studied the Constitution myself, I’m reasonably well-educated, and I thank you for the lecture. ”

Does any part of that — other than “I’ve been here a long time” — seem even halfway sincere?

Incidentally, it does not “prohibit”…it exempts 2,271 weapons. Isn’t that enough for the people in the United States?

The Constitution according to Queen Diane. Funny, the word “exempt” is not in my copy.

tr.v. ex·empt·ed, ex·empt·ing, ex·empts
1. To free from an obligation, a duty, or a liability to which others are subject
2. Obsolete To set apart; isolate.

Yep, mine still says “shall not be infringed”.

Photo: http://libertyendanger.com/tag/dianne-feinstein/

Moral to the story: It must be “open season” on the Constitution.

PA county seeks to preserve 2nd amendment

Pennsylvania county makes new federal gun laws “unenforceable”

Red Alert Politics

February 28, 2013

Worried about the federal government imposing overly-restrictive new gun laws? One Pennsylvania county is saying, “Not in our backyard!”

Susquehanna County commissioners have passed a resolution to fully protect the Second Amendment from any federal laws infringing upon it, as reported by The Times-Tribune.

The resolution states that that “any federal act, bill, law, rule or executive order that in any way infringes on our Second Amendment rights by attempting to reduce the private ownership of any firearm, magazine or ammunition shall be unenforceable in Susquehanna County.”

Republican Commissioner Michael Giangrieco, who proposed the resolution, admitted that the resolution was mostly ceremonial, but said it was an important message to send in response to harsher New York gun laws and laws currently being proposed in Pennsylvania.

The County has seen a sharp increase in gun permit applications since the Sandy Hook shooting, with about 175 in the first three weeks of January, already outpacing the 2012 monthly average of 133.

Meanwhile, back at sequestration

So the game show president, president not my fault, prez can’t cut the military enough, prez let the illegals out of jail, prez fast and furious, prez Benghazigate, prez can’t get enough gun control, president drone campaign, etc… that six-trillion dollar spendaholic president says the sequestration cuts “are just dumb”.

What could be wrong with that picture?

All the wasteful spending this government does and he thinks a cutting plan is stupid. An idea he put on the table, then threatened to veto anything that would remove it. He said that “none of this is necessary”.

And then he signs the sequestration order into effect, after calling it dumb. I think I have the answer, Obama finally ran out of adjectives and names for Republicans – his enemies. That must be it. Does he always sign dumb ideas into effect that were his idea? I think we know the answer.
Obama - Promises Change Changes Promise
All any of us in this country are to this tyrant are pawns in his political agenda. He doesn’t care about jobs or people, or anything else. He does care about spending money as his means. (votes get expensive) All he cares about is using everyone to his own political benefit. Yet he calls future spending reduction “just dumb”.

Down at the WH laundromat
Near the end of his sequestration speech, he mentioned gun control on a laundry list of things he will continue “pushing for” and added: “this is the agenda that the American people voted for.“. 

People never voted for gun control. I don’t remember that being the subject in the election. As usual, we the people just don’t understand what he says… now he is already redefining the election.

Obama’s par for the course

Obama hits the links after the SOTUS. “I deserve a second term” so he   can go to Palm Springs to play golf, and Michelle can dispatch to Aspen. Oh, let’s see what she wears?  I can’t wait.

However, what can wait is that budget. Who needs a stinking budget? But the gun-grabbing gun control cannot happen soon enough to suit his fancy.

So when he returns, it will be campaign time again that “we can’t wait!”
Let the gun control resume.

 

While Obama Vacations in Palm Springs, Michelle Obama to Vacation in Aspen

Feb. 15, 2013  

Katie Pavlich  TownHall

One couple, two taxpayer funded vactions. More from White House Dossier:

First Lady Michelle Obama plans to vacation in Aspen, Colorado this Presidents’ Day weekend, separately from her husband, who will land this evening in West Palm Beach for his own down time with the boys.

According to Aspen newspapers, both Michelle and Vice President Biden are expected on the slopes. The White House has not yet announced the trip, and it’s not clear when she will be leaving, though she will presumably go today.

See.: Townhall.com

Incidentally, in Jan. 2012, CNN called Obama’s obsession with golf “par for the course for presidents”, digging up records about past presidents’ penchant for golf. But it was more like par for the course for CNN

So this term, expect to see a lot more golf and a lot more defense of Obama’s par.
But expect no “hole in one” on the budget.

Obama worse off script than on script

Repetition of ‘They Deserve A Vote’ Wasn’t in Obama’s Prepared Remarks

      By     Elizabeth Flock —  US News

February 13, 2013

President Barack Obama went off-the-cuff in more  than 20 places throughout his approximately 7,000 word State of the  Union speech Tuesday night. And each time, it seemed the president was  motivated to do so by a certain point he wanted to hammer home.

The  most interesting ad-lib happened when Obama spoke about gun control,  delivering an impassioned repetition of the phrase “They deserve a  vote,” in reference to victims of gun violence, including of the  December shooting in Newtown. In his prepared remarks, Obama said the  phrase “they deserve a vote” just once, then named the victims, then  reiterated that “they deserve a simple vote.” When he got to the podium,  the president added in the phrase four more times.

George  Lakoff, a professor of linguistics at the University of  California-Berkeley and a Democratic political strategist, says the  repetition of “they deserve a vote” was a reflection of a speech he says  was all about empathy.

“He’s saying… ‘Do you have empathy  for the victims? Are you afraid to even say that you don’t?’ It’s an  emotional moment. He’s saying ‘Look, who are you?'” The moment was made  stronger, according to Lakoff, because “the other guys [in Congress]  were just just sitting there not clapping, saying nothing.”

See more: US News and World Report

Maybe someone should tell Obama that America beat him to it. They already ratified the second amendment a couple hundred years ago. But not even a month into office, he reveals he isn’t going to keep his oath or any law he so chooses. Ignore the Constitution.

If he wanted a memorable tag line, he could call to “repeal the second amendment” and say “these people deserve it”. So the radicals who go into psychotic fits when they hear “repeal ObamaCare” — a law that isn’t even in full force yet, with no Constitutional authority, and which isn’t finished– want to repeal a Constitutional Amendment but they aren’t even honest enough to say it.

Now the Constitution “needs a vote”, even if they are ignoring it. So repeating that line over and over gives it some legitimacy? ‘Vote on emotion, ignore the Constitution.’ People thought four dead Americans in Benghazi deserved a response. He doesn’t care about that. Demand a vote on a budget? Secure and protect the Constitution? Nah. Too busy with gun banning gun control…too busy organizing brownshirts or blackshirts.

Too bad he didn’t run on gun banning in the campaign. How would that sound? “I, Barack Obama, want to repeal and abolish the second amendment…vote for me… And I’m not too thrilled with the first one either.”

“Click your heels three times and repeat….” — and hope no one catches on. His rhetoric has all the legitimacy of a stink bomb even if he has people cheering him.

SOTUS

State of the Union….

SCREWED!

(Sorry, but there area few pictures that convey the extent)
Cow dung

Piers Morgan’s anti-Constitution activism

How many rules of journalism does Piers Morgan break in this debate (for lack of other word)?
Or how much hypocrisy does he reveal?
Or how much common sense does he ignore? The end says it all.
See video at link by nycresistance

[Morgan gets angered over gun control debate with two women. Plays the “tank” card.]


Ignorance prevails.
“Hi, I’m Piers Morgan, and I’m sick of it….
And I also detest that 22nd Amendment of your Constitution that limits a president to 2 terms.” (little paraphrasing)

Not enough this Brit has issues with the 2nd Amendment, he also has an utter disdain for the 22nd on top of it. Well, maybe he has a personal phobia of the number two.

 

Rarely do two of my most unfavored people come together to air their views, but when they do this is what can happen:

Back in September 2012, he was all over the 22nd Amendment in an interview with Bill Clinton. It was like Piers trying to interview his alter ego. Sure, Larry King had major faults but this guy is totally shameless.

Morgan interviews Bill Clinton (excerpt – transcript)
MORGAN: That was that. You electrified the place. And they all say, why do we have this goddamned 22nd Amendment? Why couldn’t Bill Clinton just run again and be president for the next 30 years?

CLINTON: Well, we had it for a good reason. There — it’s a hard job being president. And you also have a vast array of people working for you. It worked, I think, well. We — I think we did the right thing to keep President Roosevelt for a third term.

But when he died shortly after being elected to a fourth term, and people didn’t really know a full measure of his health challenges, the 22nd Amendment passed. It’s ironic that the 22nd Amendment passed at a time when people thought the Democrats had a lock on the White House and then it was — then after the last 50 years, the Republicans had it more than the Democrats.

But I think there’s still an argument for saying that eight years, certainly eight years in a row, is enough. You don’t want this — you don’t want to run the risk of sclerosis in a democratic society. You want to keep the blood running. You don’t want to get the idea that any country, particularly not one this big and diverse and important as ours, is dependent on any one person.

You look at a lot of these dictators that have been deposed in the last few years, and the few that are hanging on. Almost all of them at one time were young and idealistic and incredibly capable. And they really meant to do something good. And they just kind of outstayed their welcome. So I love the life I have now.

I like helping the president. I like helping my country. I’m interested in politics, but I like what I’m doing. I think that, on balance, the system we have is better than the no limits.

Maybe someday the rules will be changed so if you can serve two years and lay out and — serve two terms and lay out a term or two, you could run again because for a simple reason, we’re all living so much longer and we’re maintaining the capacity to work and think clearly for a longer period. So some future people might be affected that — by that. It shouldn’t affect me or anybody who’s been president —

MORGAN: We’re trying to change the rules in Britain, actually, because if you can’t be president again here, we’d quite like you to be prime minister in our country. Are you available if it comes to — I get this through?

CLINTON: They — there are only two countries I’m eligible to run for the leadership position is if I move to Ireland and buy a house, I can — I can run for president of Ireland, because of my Irish heritage.

And because I was born in Arkansas, which is part of the Louisiana Purchase, any person anywhere in the world that was born in a place that ever was part of the French empire, if you move to — if you live in France for six months and speak French, you can run for president.

(LAUGHTER)

CLINTON: However, I once polled very well in a French presidential race. And I said, you know, this is great, but that’s the best I’d ever do because once they heard my broken French with a Southern accent, I would drop into single digits within a week and I’d be toast. I just don’t think — that’s what I think. I think the system we have may have some opportunity costs.

You know, I was young, perhaps I could have done another term, but I thought Al Gore was going to win and I wanted him to win. I thought he would have been a good president. I still think so. And the thing that’s kept America going is that we’ve trusted the people over the leaders. And I love my life now.

And if I can help my country, I will. But I — we’re organized around institutions, values, restraints on power and people. And it’s worked out pretty well for us for 200 years. We ought not to fool with it too much.

And on another show he verbalized his disdain for the 22nd Amendment — as the worst thing they did — whatever his adjectives were.

Thanks to twg2a PitBull

THE WAKING GIANT

Never letting a good crisis go to waste, New York passed the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation in response to the school shooting in Newtown, Conn. Not only are semiautomatic rifles such as the popular AR-15 banned, but citizens who own handguns are limited to only seven bullets.

These law-abiding, gun owning Citizens have had enough!

“JUST TELL US NOW WHAT THE PENALTIES ARE GOING TO BE WHEN WE DON’T COMPLY!!”

View original post

Are there any adults in the room?

The only reason I mention this piece is it’s a provocative thought. (which was his objective) And these are his words — Rev Jim Wallis, one who Obama confides in.

I was putting my 9-year-old to bed a few nights ago. He said, “Dad I heard you talking on the phone about guns and the press conference you’re talking at tomorrow. ”

“What do you think about it Jack? What do you think about it Jack?” I asked him.

And here’s what Jack said:
“I think that they ought to let people who, like licensed hunters, have guns if they use them to hunt. And people who need guns — who need guns for their job like policemen and army. But I don’t think that we should just let anybody have any kind of gun and any kind of bullets that they want. That’s pretty crazy.

I agree with Jack.
– Jim Wallis

(copy paste link -www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-wallis/the-nras-dangerous-theolo_b_2505401.html)

The rest of the article was a type of lecture attacking NRA’s president and others on morality and theology. But he says he agrees with that statement of his 9-year old.

It is a statement from a 9-year old, just like those “letters” of children Obama used in his performance the other day in signing Executive Orders. They are still statements of children. We cannot really criticize the statements of children. (whatever inspired them) Maybe that is the political value of them to the left. They also portray the very innocence the left abandoned long ago.(think Roe v Wade)

But they do represent children’s thinking!

Call me crazy, I also don’t think children should be making the laws or policies, even though at times they might do a better job. Come on. Yea, who wants to argue with or against a 9-year old? Who wants a nation ruled by 9 or 14 year olds? Though I wonder what their view on abortion policy might be?

We are adults and should be a little more intelligent than that. The irony is he criticized Wayne LaPierre for simply suggesting a good person with a gun versus a bad one – or “good” and “bad” persons. Wallis lectured how that is not morally or theologically correct. But then look how a child thinks in his/her naïve innocence, he uses that as his example.

In the 60s you would have been hard pressed to find children who did not want to get rid of “the bomb” or war. Even though doing so does not guarantee a pristine society.

It is idealism on steroids to think just ridding us of guns will rid us of problems, dangers, or dangerous streets. Maybe, as a child might fantasize, we just need a law to outlaw bad and evil. Too bad we didn’t think of that.

No, not to knock any 9-year old’s thinking or idealism, we appreciate it. But they need parents to protect them, a society that doesn’t see them as expendable, and politicians or others who don’t want to extort them or their innocence for political gain either. So let’s put the children in proper perspective. Don’t confuse politics with childhood.

Since he came to office, Obama has been using children to make his case on one policy after another. But the left goes into hysteria when the NRA mentions children in an ad.

Are there any adults in the room?

The Scandal That Will Bring Obama Down

Western Journalism

January 11, 2013 By
 

It’s even worse than we previously thought. A retired four-star admiral is now claiming that Barack Obama intentionally conspired with America’s enemies to stage a bogus attack and the kidnapping of an American ambassador so he could “negotiate” the release of a “hostage” and bolster his mediocre approval ratings just prior to the election!

The Washington Examiner, quoting retired Four-Star Admiral James Lyons, writes: “the attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi… was the result of a bungled abduction attempt…. the first stage of an international prisoner exchange… that would have ensured the release of Omar Abdel Rahman, the ‘Blind Sheik’…”

But something went horribly wrong with Obama’s “October Surprise.” Although the Obama Administration intentionally gutted security at the consulate prior to the staged kidnapping, former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty disobeyed direct orders to stand down, saved American lives, single-handedly killed scores of attackers…and the attackers, believing that Obama had betrayed them, tortured Ambassador Chris Stevens and dragged his body through the streets.

Continue reading: http://www.westernjournalism.com/the-scandal-that-will-bring-obama-down/

 

There is a lot of food for thought to this, which is not all that new. Strange how this is the one issue Barry – or whatever his name is — does not talk about (just like fast and furious), when it sure seems he is very vulnerable on it. On everything else, they roll out the lies and excuses. He glosses over it just like fast and furious. He finally said “sloppiness” was a problem. Yuh think?

HotAir 12/31/12

Obama: What I’ve– my message to the State Department has been very simple. And that is we’re going to solve this. We’re not going to be defensive about it. We’re not going to pretend that this was not a problem. This was a huge problem. And we’re going to implement every single recommendation that’s been put forward.

Some individuals have been held accountable inside of the State Department and what I’ve said is that we are going to fix this to make sure that this does not happen again, because these are folks that I send into the field. We understand that there are dangers involved but, you know, when you read the report and it confirms what we had already seen, you know, based on some of our internal reviews; there was just some sloppiness, not intentional, in terms of how we secure embassies in areas where you essentially don’t have governments that have a lot of capacity to protect those embassies. So we’re doing a thorough-going review. Not only will we implement all the recommendations that were made, but we’ll try to do more than that. You know, with respect to who carried it out, that’s an ongoing investigation. The FBI has sent individuals to Libya repeatedly. We have some very good leads, but this is not something that, you know, I’m going to be at liberty to talk about right now.

Four Americans are dead, we were “sloppy”, but “we have a few leads” — 3 1/2 months after the fact. This is equivalent to “now move along, nothing to see here”.

How do you “fix” four dead Americans?

A few “very good leads”….yea, that’s the answer. “We’ll try to do more than that…This is not something I’m going to be at liberty to talk about right now.” Oh really? The accountability he talked about is ZERO.

Now his number one proirity seems to be gun control.(cover one scandal with another one) “Sloppiness?” Anything you say, No-Drama Obama. But we don’t need to talk about it. It makes me sick.

Gun control, meet freak central

There is a hint of sarcasm and a dash of satire within.
Funny how…

Only the people who could carry out fast and furious could say they are the people who need to take action on “common sense” gun control.

Only the people who perfected the use of drone assassinations around the world could be trusted to fix the gun problem – as libs refer to it.

Especially the people who allowed four great Americans including an ambassador to be killed in Benghazi without lifting a finger, could say they are interested in protecting Americans: “if we can only save one life, we must act!”

Just one, Joe? What about those four in Benghazi? And they saw that attack as it happened. You can’t even protect an ambassador and the consulate in Libya — after “liberating it” — but you are out to protect Americans at all costs? Where was Biden’s time for action comments on Fast and Furious? You must have missed that one, Joe.

Trust Obama, Biden and the Party that will go to any length to “preserve the right” of a woman to kill her baby, to look out for you and save the lives of children.

And then they’ll have you believe the only thing that stands in their way of saving Americans’ lives is the NRA.
 

Mark Levin puts their gun control fetish in perspective comparing it with what they did on DDT. Listen here.This is how government works,” he says.

 

Morgan to the Rescue

I stumbled onto an article about the Piers Morgan freak show. Tip to JTR for a post inspiring the idea. Some left-media are talking about Piers Morgan’s show and they presented a certain view. It got me thinking. It made me wonder about Piers Morgan’s nightly rants on guns. If the left is getting the idea that people are big mouth crazies for supporting gun rights, is that a coincidence? (I don’t get that conclusion, but the left seems to)

The mission and objective:

Isn’t it quite possible that Piers is deliberately trying to –A) paint gun advocates as crazies and to B) project a self-fulfilling narrative that “we can’t have a rational discussion”?

You have Piers daily provoking guests into heated arguments. So Piers Morgan has become the Jerry Springer of gun control. He constructs the narrative to show that they are just trying to have this “discussion” about guns and look what gun advocates are doing. All projection. Of course, it requires you ignore Morgan’s irrational blowouts, rants and character attacks at his guests. That’s no problem for libs or MSM.

Morgan said on Twitter:

“the more we hear from [Jones], the better chance proper U.S. gun control legislation will be passed.”

Now he is trying to tame his rhetoric a little bit. I guess the feedback was not very flattering, even from libs. I really think that is what is going on here. Leave it to the left to choreograph something for political gain.

It’s a structural problem

It pays to go back to founding ideas, and my favorite is the Declaration of Independence.

The words flow like milk and honey.
Skip to the often quoted passage:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

Houston, we have a problem! It is no longer the “consent of the governed” but the unjust power of the elite ruling class that dictates. That’s what we got with ObamaCare. It was obvious that was not consent of the governed. They stood against the will of the people.

Deals and bribes by the consent of the ruling class using its unjust power to dictate. We were told this is the way things are done. Our founding philosophy was breached and the elite ruling class gave us what they wanted.

Then we saw it again in the debt ceiling and the fiscal cliff.

“What we’ve got here is a failure to communicate.”

It is not even by sleight of hand, the elite ruling class arrogantly and defiantly decides our government as well as our fate. And it derives its unjust power from itself. No one saw this coming or thinks it is absurd? It is not only Democrats who are guilty either.

Is it any wonder that things are going the way they are?  Liberal-progressives and their tyrant in the White House have declared war on the economy, war on energy, war on business owners,  war on Catholics and Christians, war on religious freedom, war on values, war on the rich, war on babies, war on women and war on the Constitution. Now they declared war on gun owners.

They’ll use every bit of the unjust power they created for themselves to rule. If they can’t legislate it, they’ll use executive power, and use executive power to thwart our efforts. If they can’t get the legislative results they want, they’ll use the courts and their unjust power to create fiat law through regulation. It is all derived from their unjust power.

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. – [DOI]

Guns front and center… Fast and Furious, fuhgeddaboudit

Texas YNN
Obama returns to the podium in the briefing room again. But he should have issued some strict rules and guidelines. It set off a firestorm of reaction following his speech, when off topic questions invaded the press conference.

It is a little hard to swallow Obama’s passion on the issue as ‘gun-runner in chief’. He thwarted, stonewalled, and blocked inquiries into Fast and Furious using executive privilege, now his priority is gun control. This was his third speech about it — gun control. Contradiction never occurred to him, nor does hypocrisy.

Then gun control advocates were frustrated when questions after were about fiscal cliff negotiations. Reporters were even called on to justify their fiscal cliff questions in view of the presidents remarks limited to gun and violence issues. They had to explain the rationale for their questions about the looming debacle.

But when did he make a national speech or commission about violence and murders, many of them children, in Chicago? He didn’t. Oh the president is the only one that can create a task force and then say “this is not a commission”. Does it matter what you call it? He promises it will not stretch out for months and inaction, you know, like Fast and Furious.

Just because the nation is headed for a fiscal cliff in a few weeks, with stalled negotiations, does not mean anyone should be asking about that subject. Nah. Piers Morgan led a charge of gun control advocates against the ofenders. That prompted statements today from reporters to justify their questions.

Gun running to Mexico can’t even be questioned or discussed. And there is no media firestorm about it. That was only “a manufactured scandal”. Obama has no time for such nonsense. He suggests the gun control should not be political and dragged out while they made Fast and Furious partisan ordeal, dragging the Dems for how many months now? They deny public outcry about it. They politicized the Newtown massacre from day one.

But read Obama’s lips, this is no commission on guns….even if it promisses to be a commission on guns. And let’s put that partisan hack, Baretta Biden, in charge of it.

Photo credit: http://austin.ynn.com/content/local_news/289711/president-pushes-reformed-gun-control–talks-fiscal-cliff

Newtown horror, town loses its innocence

I’ve been searching for ways to talk about the unspeakable horror in Newtown, Ct. It’s tough to come to this point. Churchill said “Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing…after they have exhausted all other possibilities.”

In this case, the point may not be exhausting all other avenues but finding the words to express it. We’re told that it is important to talk about feelings. Liberals banter that philosophy around a lot. However, I don’t think it is important to talk about every little or large feeling one may have. Some of them may be better kept private between him/her and God.

But I’ll  say that, on something like this matter, thoughts should not be kept personal. On that I’d agree with liberals, though it doesn’t mean I agree with their methodology or conclusions. It was a horrible event causing personal and mass sadness. I’m offended by evil. I grieve for the victims, families and children. “Tragedy” does not do it justice.

Somewhere on the web I saw this thought:

The time when all the politicians tell you “Today is not the day” is EXACTLY the day to start talking. You talk when the armies of lobbyists haven’t got their ground game down, you talk before the talking points are distributed, you talk when the public eye is focused like a laser onto those in power whose only goal should be making our lives better and our children safer but do neither in a quest for more personal gain. To not hold them accountable and do anything less is dereliction of duty. — unknown

Mourners gather for a vigil service for victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, at the St. Rose of Lima Roman Catholic Church in Newtown, Conn. Friday, Dec. 14, 2012.

Are we all talking about the same world? One where a video critical of Islam results in burning embassies; and a world where Liberals advocate sharing every feeling one has? Yet they slam you if you dare offend persons of a certain persuasion, while advocating attacks on their own political enemies. That world, in which liberals are judge and jury on free speech.

I found my voice and apparently so has the NRA in issuing a press statement that its several days of silence was “out of respect for the families, and as a matter of common decency.” Don’t count on mutual “respect” from media or the left. MSNBC went into political-mode almost immediately. Then Ibama, hijacking the memorial service to further politicize it, stepped it up.

Sorry about the rambling but there is a central theme to it all. It’s the same world where progressives want to make all the rules, “rules of the road”. Now they claim that everyone should be so offended by this event in Newtown that it should bring about “meaningful action and change”– defined by the left, of course. Obama says it calls for action. But their idea of action is one thing, what is truly called for is another.

Conservatives have long railed about the coarsening of culture, or the sickness of it. That criticism gets dismissed whenever they bring it up. Oh, the glories of enlightenment. But we have something like this happen and they clamour for action and legislation.    Would they want to crack down on violent video games and movies? No, they just want to blame guns for causing this horror. The gun didn’t pull the trigger, a madman did. Yet when we blame the culture and misplaced values it gets dismissed. “Sit down and shut up.”

They don’t want to deal with that aspect. Just do a few photo ops with clergy and family, then run to Washington asap to pass new laws and regulations. It doesn’t matter if they are right or not, just hurry up and do something to satisfy their feelings – the quicker the better. Strike while the iron is hot is their motto. Emotions rule.

In fact, they really don’t want to discuss” the issue, they want immediate action. Remember Pelosi saying “we have to pass a bill before you can find out what is in it”. That pretty much sums up their rush to legislate philosophy. Then we get a Casablanca moment, “shocked”. Don’t listen to their disingenuous, dishonest talk and calls for dialogue, look at what they do. Now, despite the tough reelection, Obama now claims another mandate for his arsenal — to legislate guns.

But cry out about government inaction over fast and furious or Libya? Not so much. They’ll drag their feet till the cows come home on those issues. And Obama will use executive power to halt the inquiry into F&F. Congress will stage a walkout. Mr. Zero-accountability will hide his failures behind executive privilege. But he’s right on point when it comes to attacking the 2nd amendment, and Congress can’t move fast enough for him to legislate. “Never let a crisis go to waste.”

They don’t want to merely act, they want to legislate by emotion. That’s nothing new for liberals, it’s what they do, even if bureaucrats are still writing it. Emotions rule, from Roe to the bench to the purse. When anyone mentions the coarsening culture of death, they don’t want to hear it. They staged a phony “war on women” and started a “war on religion” to create their self-fulfilling prophecy. They mocked any talk of “death panels” in ObamaCare, they ridicule pro-lifers, and defend murdering babies as a right. But the biggest problem is guns.(culture is giving that a run for their money) They don’t even want to recognize evil for what it is when staring it right in the face, or in the mirror.

There is as much potential harm in the legislative pen or executive order, as there is any gun. Both must be used responsibly.

There are two bodies in Congress, the Senate is known as the cooling saucer. But in this case — and never mind that the leader of the Senate is waging nuclear war on the filibuster — the Senate is moving at breakneck speed to get out a bill on gun control. The man who couldn’t get a budget through will suddenly find all kinds of ways to move this. Plus Obama has the executive pen which he promised to use in other circumstances. A scary thought when you think the second amendment is on the chopping block.

Especially considering if they sense support for more legislative controls, they will go as far as they can like they always do. If they have one chance, then grab as much as they possibly can while they can — just like with ObamaCare, the stimulus and the rest. “Take it to the limit”. Feinstein wants incremental controls, and then make it illegal to possess certain guns to top it off. And they will smile all the way to the scrap yards. That’s their plan and they’re sticking to it. They have useful MSM idiots who will push the issue.

So Manchin and Warner go wobbley on guns. Really, who would have predicted that? A Democrat turn coat. Remember Bart Stupak, Democrats for life and ObamaCare? That was the illusion of dissent. Then we saw DNC’s convention against God and Israel? — there was the real dissent.

Newtown lost its innocence and was violated. And innocence was lost in the public square… quite some time ago.