Making The Case For INCREASED Gun Ownership

There is a city in Cobb County, GA called Kennesaw  – where gun ownership is mandatory. It’s not the “Wild West” like some people predicted when it passed a mandatory gun ownership law. “The city of Kennesaw was selected by Family Circle magazine as one of the nation’s ‘10 best towns for families.’

In 1982 the city passed the following ordinance [Sec 34-21] which was in response to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill.

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.

(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.

The city's website states that Kennesaw “has the lowest crime rate in Cobb County,” one of the most populous counties in Georgia. In fact, from 1982 through 2009, Kennesaw had been nearly murder free with one murder occurring in 2007.

There were three murders in 2010 committed by the same man in what is described as a “school safety zone,” an area extending 1,000 feet from any school, including adult colleges and technical schools. This means that even though Kennesaw has the most liberal gun laws in the United States, employees at the facility where the murders were committed could not have a gun on the premises.

Statically, it has been shown that - nationwide - as legal gun ownership by law-abiding citizens increases, violent crime decreases.  Yet the left (including the socialist-dominated United Nations) constantly argues for greater restrictions on private firearms ownership.

There is a discomfiting pattern developing in the USA.  One of increased government intervention in, and control of, our Constitutional rights. One of collusion on an International scale, and one which could very easily permit Obama to abrogate his presidential responsibilities in favor of UN demands. The left-wing Obama administration is "chomping at the bit" for an opportunity to sign on to the UN's Arms Trade Treaty. That way - when the international gun grab begins - Obama can maintain a high degree of deniablility from the actions. There is much more to the UN ATT than meets the eye. It is worded in such a fashion that loopholes large enough to drive a military tank through exist... possibly for the purpose of actually driving military tanks through them, and down Mainstreet, USA, as the jackbooted, blue-helmeted UN thugs kick down doors and confiscate whatever they determine to be "illegal firearms". The goal of the "United Nations" is WORLD DOMINATION, and the majority of the 192 country/states that make up the UN are inimical to the USA, our successes, our freedom, and our way of life in general.

Contact your Senators and demand that they OPPOSE the UN's Arms Trade Treaty. It's not good for American citizens, and it's not good for the USA. In WWII, the Japanese decided against a land battle within the USA because - according to Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Japanese Navy - "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." It is our ability, as a nation, to defend our country, our culture, our sovereignty and our Constitution, particularly at the individual level, that keeps us free from land invasions (other than via our southern border, anyway. Mexico has been invading us for decades!).

William Daley, President Obama’s Chief of Staff, Resigns

Another rat leaving the sinking ship?

The Next Election Is Not About Who Will Become Our Next President...

it's about who will work to restore our Democratic Republic! The socialist who is in the White House right now has shown that he is totally incompetent as your president, but extremely competent at destroying this once-great nation. The upcoming November 2nd election is all about saving the USA! If you don't vote against NObama, or don't vote at all (which is essentially the same as voting for him), you will voting for the continuation of this Constitution ignoring charlatan's term in your country's highest office.

NObama was put into office by the millions of people who wish to suckle at the government teat (most of whom are shiftless parasites), that prefer to have others pay for their existence, rather than become productive, taxpaying members of our society. They are still out there in sufficient numbers to continue draining our economy, and increasing our national debt. Although the more intelligent Obamabots, which are relatively few in number, have awakened to the pitfalls of socialism, there will always be those who put their personal welfare above that of their country.

The portion of the North American landmass we occupy is known as the United States of America, or USA. It is NOT the United Socialist States of America (although, with czars as the senior advisers to the current occupant of the White House, we are rapidly heading toward becoming the USSA). You can see a complete list of NObama's czars in my blog of July 26, 2011, complete and correct as of that date.

Granted, the Republican candidate for the office of the president, will be nothing to get excited about, and there are no Democrats other than the incumbent who have officially announced their candidacy for the office, so our choices are quite limited. Personally, I would vote for almost anybody other than Barack NObama. He has done nothing to improve our lives - his policies give with one hand, and he takes away with the other. Obamacare promises medical coverage for all... and then it limits what care you can get, and establishes conditions and limits on when! At the same time -as good as 'healthcare for all' sounds to some - the odds are severely against the timely availability of critical care, because of the sharply increased patient-to-physician ratio! His fiscal policies are bankrupting our country, and I have reached the point where I would vote for almost anybody who runs against NObama - including Rocky Suhayda, Chairman of the American Nazi Party. I realize that is a very extreme position to take, but at least Suhayda is honest and upfront about who and what he is - a white supremacist, life-long racist and Aryan revolutionary. I don't agree with his views any more than I do NObama's policies, but I will vote for the opponent of NObama regardless of who he or she may be. And, keep in mind that if you vote for somebody just because of their race, you're as much a racist as anybody who votes against that person for the same reason. My vote will be a "just because this person is not NObama" vote, and has nothing to do with his race. I would vote for Alan Keyes, Alan West, Condie Rice or any other person of color that ran against Obama... IF they were Constitutionally conscious, fiscally aware, and American by birth!

IN 2012 THE KEY TO THE SURVIVAL OF OUR NATION IS THE REMOVAL OF BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT.
(And, come to think of it... we wouldn't notice MUCH
difference if there was NO replacement elected.)

FBI Violent Crime Statistics vs Concealed Carry Permits

Recently released FBI Violent Crime Statistics report that "preliminary January-through-June figures showed the number of violent crimes declined 6.4 percent from the previous year, led by a 5.7 percent drop in murders and a 5.1 percent decrease in rapes. In other violent crime categories, robberies declined 7.7 percent while aggravated assaults fell 5.9 percent. The FBI's regular statistical report did not give any reasons for the lower crimes nationwide."

Is it just a coincidence that in 1980 there were only one million concealed firearm permits in the USA, and that today there are over six million concealed firearm permits issued? Is it simply another coincidence that the FBI - an agency of the currently left-wing federal government - "did not give any reasons for the lower crimes nationwide."? Or, is it possible that the leadership of the FBI, fearing reprisal from within the liberal, Marxist-Socialist Obama administration, opted not to suggest that contrary to the administration's position on gun control (which position is contrary to the Second Amendment), the vast majority of gun owners in our country are responsible, law-abiding citizens?

Eric Holder's Department of "Justice" was recently caught up in the tangled web of "Operation Fast and Furious", a government sponsored program that forced several border state gun dealers to sell some serious firearms (fully-automatic machine guns, sniper rifles, etc) to straw buyers for the Mexican drug cartels. Why? So the administration could say, "American guns are being illegally sold to, and used by, Mexican drug lords. We need more stringent restrictions on gun ownership in this country!!" The administration wasn't about to mention that those illegal gun sales were conducted at the direction of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE). And, by the way, the BATFE issues and controls licensing and inspections of firearms dealers. That control was used to leverage gun dealers into cooperating in "Operation Fast and Furious"... which resulted in the deaths of two federal agents, and the feds inability to account for more than half of the 2,200 firearms illegally sold under their direction. Technically, our government is probably one of - if not the - largest illegal firearms traffickers in North America!

Amendment II of the US Constitution closes with "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Therefore any modification of the 2nd Amendment is a violation of what is arguably our most important Constitutional right. The 2nd Amendment insures "We the People" have the capability to keep all the other rights.

Sculpture in front of United Nations

Supreme Court to Decide Arizona Immigration Law

The Supreme Court? THE Supreme Court? Is that a bit extreme, or am I the only one who sees it as overreaching? True, Arizona's new immigration law is essentially an insignificantly "tweaked" version of the unenforced USC, Title 8 (Chapters 6 and 12 inclusive) "Immigration and Nationality". However, it is not the legality of the federal law being challenged, nor is it the failure of the federal government to enforce the provisions of USC, Title 8 that's being challenged. What is under siege by the Obama administration's DOJ lackey, Eric Holder, Jr., is the right of the states to create their own laws. Here comes that pesky Constitution again...

Amendment X

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

The Constitution gives the United States the power to make laws... it also charges them with the responsibility to enforce those laws! The logical questions seem to be; If the United States chooses to abdicate its responsibility to enforce certain laws, does the enforcement of those laws not fall to each of the respective states, to deal with as they see fit? Also, do the states not then have the responsibility - and the right - to create specific laws that are applicable within the geographical boundaries of those states to insure that persons within their borders are legally entitled to be there? If the protections of our national sovereignty and citizenry are not enthusiastically pursued by the federal government, is it not then incumbent upon the states to provide such protections?

Logic aside (which is always the federal government's position), the Obama administration wishes to pick and choose which laws they will enforce. The United States of America is being invaded by illegal aliens on a daily basis. Who are they? Indeed, some are hard-working, law-abiding people looking for a better way of life. Some are criminals of varying degrees (ALL illegal aliens are technically criminals, because they have violated USC Title 8 upon crossing our border without legal authorization). Some come here for the entitlement benefits, such as public assistance (welfare) and free medical care. Their reasoning makes no difference - if they are not legally entitled to be in this country, they are de facto criminals. But, for some strange reason, these non-citizens are permitted to vote, and those votes are what Obama and the Democrats want. Votes that will enable them to continue to lead this country into economic disaster and soon achieve what we now refer to as "Third World" status.

In the meantime, the Holder-controlled DOJ bypasses the Arizona State Supreme Court, which (again, logically) should decide cases relating to Arizona State law under the Arizona State Constitution. Why? Probably to insure the court hearing the case will be more inclined toward supporting the position of the Federal Government, under the precept of what I call "circumventional victory" (which basically says, "If you don't feel that you can beat them on the appointed field, move the game to your home town"). The feds rarely lose a case in front of the SCOTUS, but the good news is that they don't always win! Finally, there is "hope" - although not of the kind Obama promised, and "hopefully" the "change" will come in November 2012, when Obama is replaced... before he and his cronies completely destroy our Democratic Republic! Keeping the borders open, overwhelming our public assistance programs, borrowing money, and the endless printing of more dollars (thereby devaluing those few that we may have in our possession) is the key to bankrupting the USA.

For further information on the mechanics involved in destroying a nation, Google the "Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis".

Of course there is always the possibility that I could be wrong about all of the above. The odds of that are about the same as the odds against the rising of the Sun in the east tomorrow morning. I may not have all the answers, but I do know what questions need to be asked.

Here's Some Old News That Is Re-Emerging...

This was published about 2 years ago, but the issue remains open today - same requester, same amount, same Western nations targeted:

UN asks: How can we extract payment of $100 Billion a year from westerners to redistribute to other countries?

The Manchester (England) Guardian newspaper reports that Larry Summers, President Obama's chief economics adviser, George Soros, the hedge fund trader, Lord Stern, the economist, and others have met in London at the request of Ban Ki-moon to discuss ways in which $100 billion dollars a year could be raised from the citizens of western countries and redistributed to Africa, South and Central America and other poorer areas

QUOTE -

--------------------------------------…
"the world's top financiers have been told to work out how to raise at least $100bn a year for the rest of this decade, cash that will be used to help the world's poorest countries adapt to climate change.

"The prices we pay for our goods do not reflect one key cost: the damage that their production does to the planet's climate system," said Bob Ward, of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change at the LSE. "We need to find ways to extract payment from those who cause that damage and then use that money to fund developing nations so that they can protect themselves from the worst effects of global warming."

"The Trillion Dollar Question" The Guardian. Available online at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/20…
--------------------------------------…

To use their terminology for a moment, as we "Western nations" are "the ones causing the damage", how do you think the UN could best "extract payment" from us in the west to give to other countries?
Please keep in mind that it's only $100 Billion dollars PER YEAR, for at least a decade... so where will the money come from? Numerically speaking, we're talking about $100,000,000,000. That's a number that very few people can relate to, and I'm one of the majority who cannot. It boggles the mind! How does one quantify and visualize a number containing 12 digits? It has been estimated that there are 100 billion stars in our galaxy - the Milky Way - but we can't see them all simultaneously. Besides, how many lifetimes would it take to count them?

Consider first of all, that the United Nations consists of 192 nations, most of which are communist, socialist, and/or dictatorships... which goes a long way toward explaining their failure to thrive. "Western Nations" - also known as "First World Nations" - are comprised, at the most, of only 25 countries (I say "at the most" because there is yet some discussion over exactly what qualifications a "Western Nation" must exhibit). The majority of those 25 nations are made up of Western European countries, the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Assuming this "global warming debt" is apportioned equally, the cost per nation, per year, is $4,000,000,000 - that's 4 Billion USD per Western Nation. If, however, only the top ten industrialized nations are expected to foot the bill for the UN, that expense increases to $10,000,000,000 (10 Billion USD) per Western Nation.

The first question that comes to my mind is; Who objectively says there is such a thing as man-made global warming? Larry Summers, George Soros, and Lord Stern are all notorious left-wingers! Who were the "others"? Where is the balance in this meeting?
My second question is; Where does the U.N. get its authority to determine who must pay for this man-made non-problem?

OBAMA RELEASES "LONG FORM" BIRTH CERTIFICATE

WASHINGTON – Responding to critics' relentless claims, President Barack Obama on Wednesday produced a detailed Hawaii birth certificate in an extraordinary attempt to bury the issue of where he was born and confirm his legitimacy to hold office. He declared, "We do not have time for this kind of silliness."

Well, that should put an end to the debate... or should it? The article goes on to say that "the question was raised during his campaign". If it was, then why wasn't the question answered satisfactorily then? And, if the issue was "silliness", why didn't Obama put a stop to the "silliness" long before now by producing the long form certificate? Or, perhaps it took this long for one to be created for him. A forged certificate? Heavens no! No upstanding, honorable politician would even consider creating a document where none previously existed. (Oh, my error... honorable and politician are mutually-excluding terms, and I have seen no proof that the two terms can logically be combined when describing a politician.)

The "citizen/non-citizen" debate was allowed to continue for so long, and there was major confusion reported - even among Obama's African relatives - regarding to his birthplace, that I can't help but think that anything is possible in this case. And, with sufficient money and power, anything IS possible.

We Americans are a gullible lot. We tend to believe those politicians who tell us the lies that we want to hear, and I suppose that is just human nature. Tell us that you're for something that we want ourselves, and we'll support you!

God save us from our own stupidity!

OBAMA ADMITS ON VIDEOTAPE THAT HE IS NOT A NATIVE-BORN AMERICAN!

I am assuming (yes, I know...) as I post this video, that it has not been altered in any way... or at least any significant way, since it is made up from segments of various presidential "performances". HOWEVER... the first segment is where the verbal admission is made, and it appears to be virginal - the flow appears to be uninterrupted, and much too smooth for anybody to have edited. Here it is for your consideration...

The facts presented in this video are not particularly recent ones, as evidenced by the claim that Obama "spent $800,000 to date" on keeping his birth and school records (normally these documents are "public records") secured. The most recent figure I have heard was $1,500,000. That's ONE MILLION, FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND U.S. dollars! Who in their right mind would spend even a small fraction of that amount, to insure that such records were unavailable to the public... unless they had something to hide? My guess would be that the first segment speech was made just after his election to the U.S. Senate, after which he was magically transformed into a citizen.

There have been numerous (over a dozen the last I heard) lawsuits filed, challenging Obama's eligibility to even run for the office of President of the United States, much less serve in that office. The courts thus far have refused to hear them. I wonder why? I also wonder where the full Congressional Investigation into this matter is. Oh, that's right! I forgot for a moment that Congress is too busy investigating professional sports - and other extremely important things, to be bothered with something as trivial as answering the question of, "Is the person sitting in the office of the President really eligible to be there?"

McCain Calls Pentagon Study on Gays Flawed

Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank (especially Barney) and the rest of the left-wing, liberal-progressive, Marxist-socialists in the House and Senate have high hopes of repealing the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" act. They will support any effort to weaken our national security and self-defense efforts. They have been further emboldened by a recent "Pentagon Study", stating that 70% of those serving in our military believe that repealing the Act would have little noticeable impact upon the performance of our troops.

Senator John McCain, (R)AZ suggests that the study is flawed, and those of us who have served in the military can understand such a suggestion. McCain's statement was directly challenged by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, the military's top uniformed officer who chairs the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

For those of you who haven't had the honor of serving in our military, understand this - the Chairman of the JCS is appointed by the president (with Senate confirmation) as a 4-star general or admiral, and serves at the pleasure of the president. One does not advance into the ranks of general officers - not even a 1-star) without some serious political connections. The Defense Secretary is also a presidential appointee who serves at the pleasure of the president.

My point is simple - unless one wishes to end their military career, or forfeit a cabinet position which pays almost $200,000 (plus perks) annually - they will support the agenda of he to whom they are indebted for their prestigious and prosperous position. As the Chairman of the JCS, Admiral Mullen is compensated at the rate of $216,734.40 (O-10 over 38 yrs service = $18,061.20 per month x12 [PLUS allowances and perks]). Granted, both these men were appointed by President George W. Bush, but they still serve at the pleasure of the current president, and technically, both Mullen and the Pentagon work for Gates... and Gates works for Obama. And Obama is the Head Lefty. Would a Pentagon Study dare be released if the results were other than supportive of the president' desires? If you believe it would, you'll be deeply disappointed on December 25th... while you're waiting up for the fat guy in the red suit to come down the chimney!

If I Ran The United States, How Would I Attempt To Modify It?

Suppose you awakened one morning to discover that you had been appointed imperial leader of the United States while you slept. What would you do with that ultimate human power? Would you rule or would you govern? Would you dictate or negotiate? Would you desire to be reasonably benevolent, or would you rule with an iron hand? Would you have personal advisers or boot-licking lackeys? If you chose to have advisers, would you actually listen to their advice and carefully consider it, or would they simply be "window dressing"?

The world of politics is treacherously labyrinthine, as evidenced by the almost annual coups d'état (the sudden, illegal deposition of a government) somewhere on this planet. For centuries a ruler's worst enemies were his closest relatives (it was a matter of "succession to the throne")! Second place on the "enemies list" seems to have been held by the general(s) in charge of a ruler's military forces, and Julius Caesar was stabbed twenty-three times - unto death - from dagger wounds inflicted by members of his own Senate.

Today, total strangers are also assassins of leaders. In 1950 an attempt was made on President Harry Truman's life by two Puerto Rican nationalists. Lee Harvey Oswald, with no known relationship to President John F. Kennedy, took that President's life. A lone Turk attempted to assassinate Pope John Paul II. The Pope was shot and severely wounded as he entered St. Peter's Square in the Vatican. The would-be assassin, Mehmet Ali Agca, was a member of a Turkish terrorist organization known as the Gray Wolves. The list goes on and on, showing perhaps hundreds of attempts we have never heard of.

Politics and large scale leadership positions can be a very dangerous place for those who have the strength of their convictions, but a safe-haven for the cowards of the world. Someone once said that "The United States of America has the best politicians money can buy", and money apparently does buy them. Who - enjoying good mental health - would spend millions of dollars running for an office that only pays in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars? An altruist? If you can show me an altruist in national politics, I'll show you a nun in a brothel!

If I became the Grand Poo-bah of the USA, there would definitely be some changes made. Let's begin with the most hotly debated issue affecting primarily the southwestern United States - "Immigration Reform": We have federal laws in-place forbidding entry into our country without the proper authorization, but the feds choose not to enthusiastically enforce those laws. Illegal immigrants have demonstrated their disregard for our laws simply by their unauthorized presence within our borders. Our government, disregarding the will of the people, has chosen to reward the illegal aliens by allowing them to not only remain in the country, but to provide them with benefits that average American citizens are denied. What's wrong with this picture?

In my world here's what undocumented visitors to our country would get... NOTHING!

1. It would be a violation of the law for illegal aliens to be given bank loans and, if they were given, the loan officer, the bank manager and the president of the bank issuing such loan would be arrested and prosecuted.
2. Housing would not be available to anybody unable to prove citizenship or government authorization. Anyone providing housing in violation of that law would be subject to arrest and prosecution.
3. Medical care - for anything other than life saving procedures - would not be available to illegal aliens. Hospitals would be required to report anyone without documentation - who requested a life saving procedure - to Homeland Security/I.C.E. Division. Failure to do so would make the offending medical personnel subject to arrest and prosecution.
4. Illegals would not be eligible for welfare, unemployment insurance or Social Security benefits. Any agent of a municipal, county, state or federal agency permitting illegal aliens to apply for such benefits would be subject to arrest and prosecution.
5. Any child born to an illegal immigrant would not receive automatic citizenship status upon birth. The child is determined to be as illegal as the parent(s) inasmuch as it was transported into the USA in violation of our immigration laws.
6. There would be no amnesty for reasons other than political persecution, and even then amnesty would be on a case-by-case basis. There would be no automatic amnesty.
7. Border enforcement would be the responsibility of the "National Guard". What is the purpose of a "National Guard" if not to guard the nation? The Governor of each state has the right and responsibility to activate that state's National Guard in times of emergency. What's the emergency? A subtle, silent "invasion" of our country - primarily across our southern borders.
(The presence of a foreigner in Mexico without proper authorization is classified as a felony. The penalty for the first offense is imprisonment, not to exceed 2 years. The penalty for the second offense is imprisonment, not to exceed 10 years. The Mexican government seems to take its sovereignty much more seriously than the US government takes ours.)


My second objective would be the elimination of Obamacare - the mandatory national health care program. The people don't want it... but the left-wing, bleeding-heart, Marxist, liberal-"progressives" in charge do. It's just another way for the government to increase citizen dependency upon the "Nanny State".

1. The government does not have the Constitutional authority to require citizens to buy a non-competitive government product or service, nor do they have the authority to monopolize any industry by legislating its competitors out of business. On the other hand, the current administration doesn't seem to be aware that we even have that pesky document call the Constitution.

2.Healthcare for all U.S. citizens is desirable, but those of us who have our own health insurance should not be forced to purchase that demanded by the government. Again, life-saving procedures should be available to all, regardless of their ability to pay. Colds, sprains and other sources of discomfort not being seen as "life-threatening" should not be treated on the public dime. Deal with it - as responsible people have for centuries.

3. No single "class" of people (i.e. - illegal residents) should be free from any taxation imposed upon the majority of citizens. Nor should our elected officials be free from the same healthcare system that would be forced upon the general population.

4. Healthcare should be available nationwide, and at reasonable rates in a competitive environment. Competitors should not be restricted to providing coverage only in a particular state or region as they are now.

Next I'll tackle "Outsourcing". This is probably the single greatest source of unemployment in the United States. Outsourcing is the practice of establishing production facilities and/or subcontracting the production of U.S. goods and services to a foreign nation. Why are manufacturers turning to outsourcing more and more? Quite simply it saves them money. How? Because the countries that are benefiting from outsourced American jobs do not have to engage in collective bargaining with the AFL-CIO and the SEIU. Labor Unions are responsible for the recent collapse of two-thirds of the U.S. automotive industry. Automotive assembly line workers in the U.S. (who may not even have a high school diploma) are making (as opposed to "earning") - on the average - approximately 60% more in their pay and benefits package (negotiated by the UAW, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO) than a tenured college professor. At the same time, we still produce an inferior automobile compared to Japan and much of Europe. Why? Because the union contracts make it almost impossible for Ford, GM and Chrysler to fire anybody. The attitude has become one of - just show up for work even if you don't do anything of quality... or anything period, since they can't fire you without facing potential work stoppages from your union brethren. How would I rectify this situation?

1. Eliminate labor unions. (I can hear almost the screams of outrage from the brotherhoods now!) I can understand why they love their union-supported "job". Union members are at the very top of the labor pay scale - stopping just short of junior corporate executives. In closed-shop states (union membership required in order to work) the cost of living is based upon union-scale wages, which is fine for the workers of that state. However, the increased cost of that which they produce, and consume, is felt nation-wide.

2. Collective bargaining between the employees and the corporation/company for which they work would be allowed in order to establish a fair wage and benefit package for the workers. There will be no outside involvement other than independent arbitrators

3. Any American corporation outsourcing jobs outside the 50 United States and its Trust Territories would be required to do the following:

a. Pay normal import taxes upon any product produced either by their overseas corporation, or any foreign subcontractor.

b. Pay complete unemployment compensation, including medical insurance, for each American job or product outsourced to a foreign location.

c. Any American business entity establishing its headquarters overseas will be treated as a foreign corporation and subject to all tariffs imposed upon a foreign corporation, plus be subject to a tax equal to the cost of providing American workers - equal to the total number of foreign employees of that corporation - with unemployment insurance, including medical benefits.

And THAT'S just for openers!

YOU ARE OWED NOTHING EXCEPT AN OPPORTUNITY TO FAIL ON YOUR OWN!

(and if you don't... CONGRATULATIONS!)

Some People May Think I Am Anti-Obama...

and those people would be absolutely correct! But let's not stop there... I am anti-anybody who would take steps to destroy our Republic and change it into a European-style socialist state. I stand against anyone who would introduce economic policies that will reduce the United States of America economically to the status of some Third World Banana-Republic Dictatorship! I am absolutely against anybody who spends our tax dollars frivolously - by supporting those who wish us nothing but harm; who bows to a Muslim king while failing to observe the same courtesy when granted an audience with a Christian queen; and also who snubs - and tries to dictate foreign policy to - our enduring allies.During these hard economic times I am totally UNsupportive of anyone who spends $73,000 of hard-earned taxpayer money for a "date night" in New York City, who rents a 28 acre Martha's Vineyard summer vacation estate for $50,000 a week, and who then hypocritically condemns "lavish lifestyles" and "saddling the rich with higher taxes".

Obama's motto seems to be, "There are some things money can't buy... and for everything else, there are taxpayers!

NOVEMBER 2ND IS LESS THAN SIX WEEKS AWAY! CHANGING OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE MAY SAVE OUR COUNTRY! WITHOUT THE RUBBER-STAMP SUPPORT OF A PREDOMINANTLY LEFT-WING CONGRESS, OBAMA CAN DO NO FURTHER HARM. REPLACE ALL THOSE WHO SUPPORTED OBAMA'S POLICIES WITH CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATES AND RESTORE THE CHECKS AND BALANCES TO OUR GOVERNMENT!
PERHAPS THE NEW CROP OF REPRESENTATIVES WILL GET THE MESSAGE -
"WE THE PEOPLE WILL BE HEARD!"

"THEY" WANT OUR MONEY - STOP GIVING IT TO THEM!

"They", in this case, being the liberal-progressive socialist-Marxists who presently control the White House, the DOJ, and the House and Senate.

If we fail to unseat this destructive liberal-progressive, socialist-Marxist, tax-and-spend government on November 2nd, our nation is doomed to enjoy the status of a 3rd world nation... like Zimbabwe, which has a history of inflation in the hundreds of percents daily!

DO NOT BELIEVE THE LIES FROM THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION! Those lies are what put us in this position. They would love to be able to blame George Bush, and their believers still do. They conveniently forget to mention the fact that during the last 2 years of the Bush administration, the Congressional purse strings were controlled by the liberal, tax-and-spend Democratic Party!
REPLACE ALL THOSE FROM EITHER PARTY WHO VOTED TO SUPPORT OUR IMPENDING BANKRUPTCY. Perhaps you can't FIX stupid, but you can vote it out of office!
The citizenry must remember the intent of our Constitution, for the Congress has surely forgotten what it means. Demand adherence to the Constitution - VOTE CONSERVATIVE this November!

EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD SEE THIS VIDEO!

A representative of the peaceful and loving religion of Islam makes a humanitarian suggestion to help the USA reduce its population. I cannot attest to the integrity of the Arabic-English translation, but I have no reason to doubt it.

These are the demons with which Obama wants us to engage in open and honest discourse. Can you spell preemptive strike?

OBAMA NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PRESIDENCY - In his OWN WORDS!

There has been much heated discussion over your president's eligibility for office based upon his citizenship status. According to the United States Constitution: "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." To my way of thinking, that seems to be pretty straight forward - not much room for either discussion or confusion. I am one of those folks the left-wing, liberal, Socialist-Marxists have labeled a "birther", which means (according to the left) that I am obsessed with proving that Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States. That is not at all accurate. My concern is that Obama has spent in excess of one million dollars to keep his official birth certificate under wraps, and I have to ask myself why, if it proves him to be a natural born citizen, would he even spend a nickel keeping it hidden.

The following video seems to prove that he is not even a good American, much less a natural born citizen -

Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Blues...

Here's the crux of the Gulf oil spill problem - it's a first-time event. NOBODY has drilled at those depths before, and NOBODY was prepared for an ecological disaster of anywhere NEAR this magnitude.
Q. Why were they drilling 40 miles out to sea at that depth?
A. Because the "greenies" got a moratorium placed on off-shore drilling. The funny thing about oceans is the further toward the middle you get, the deeper the water gets.
Q. Isn't there a law about safety requirements including fire boats, auto shut-off valves, etc?
A. Yes. There has been a law on our books since 1984 requiring fire boats and skimmers to be on-site where drilling is being performed - apparently our government doesn't enforce those laws when the correct palms are "greased".
Q. Whose fault is it?
A. Everybody and nobody. Shit happens, even when your plans say no.

The Administration pussy-footed around for more than SIX WEEKS before really getting "involved " - even to the minor extent which they are now "involved". Our government rejected offer of help made 3 days after the spill began, and is CURRENTLY (as in STILL) REJECTING SUCH OFFERS!

And now - FINALLY - the Obama administration wants to appear as if they are "in command" and have a plan. BS! It took Obama almost two months to even talk with Tony Hayward, BP's CEO, and then - according to the media - Hayward was "summoned" to the White House. Hayward should have told Obama he was busy managing the cleanup effort... and to "go pack sand".

I have a dog whose leadership abilities equal (or exceed) those of Barack Hussein Obama. Perhaps Obama should "organize" the cleanup effort - it's the only area in which he has experience. Never wade in water that's deeper than you are tall.

HOW TO BUILD A TRULY "SUPREME" COURT

It appears that the Obama administration believes that nominees for judgeship on the nation's highest court need not have prior experience as judges at any level. Okaaaaay...

Let me take that line of thought a couple of steps further. Inasmuch as there is so much stupidity in our laws, and lawyers are running amok within the system, let's put some common sense into the judiciary! Why should the SCOTUS be composed of people with law degrees?

Here's my design for the makeup of the new, improved Supreme Court of The United States of America:
1. The Supreme Court will be composed of nine American citizens who have no political affiliation.
2. All nominees must have an above average IQ as verified by the administration of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-III).
3. All nominees must be capable of logical processing of information made available to them.
4. The membership of the Supreme Court will be:
a. One engineer or architect (good for linear thinking).
b. One archaeologist (puzzle solver).
c. One medical doctor.
d. One successful small business owner.
e. One law school graduate.
e. Four working-class/technical people all of differing backgrounds (mechanic, baker, law enforcement, teacher, plumber, driver, postal employee, homemaker, communications worker, roofer, gardener, computer programmer, etc) without duplication of skill sets.
f. Membership shall be one black, one Hispanic, one Native American, one Asian, one ethnic Jew, one naturalized citizen, one white male, and two females of different racial backgrounds.
5. Abstentions from voting are not permitted. You are a Supreme Court Justice - make a decision and DO THE JOB. In cases involving a conflict of interest a justice may recuse him/her self, but to avoid a deadlocked decision, one other justice must be excused from hearing that case before the court. The other justice excused will be selected by secret ballot among the justices.
6. Supreme Court appointments will be for 10 years only, with a possibility of reappointment at the end of term.

A Supreme Court composed of intelligent, aware, and rational people hearing the facts and rendering logical decisions may return balance and equity to the legal system, insuring that punishment is meted out when justified, and none when not justified.

I guess Obama rationalizes it this way - "I didn't need any real-life experience to become Emperor... ummmm, I mean President... why should the SCOTUS nominee?" Yeah... we can see how well that's working out.

Okay... I've Thought About It...

From the NY Post: "US taxpayers will be helping to foot the bill for the Greek bailout, via the International Monetary Fund. And if the Obama administration doesn't draw a clear line, Uncle Sam may soon be on the line for even more and larger European "rescues."

The Greek government, with its high taxes and profligate spending to support large bureaucracies and social programs, is bankrupt. Its bonds have been downgraded to junk status."

WHAT IF the United States borrowed money from either the International Monetary Fund or China in order to prop up the Greek economy? Then you could simply change the words "Greek Government" in the preceding paragraph to "U.S. Government", and the message would still be accurate.

Is Washington unaware that we are in dire financial straits ourselves? If this idiotic government were in charge of maintaining the oceans, they would be bone dry in 10 years.

WHAT IF there were a "global currency", as recommended at a G-20 meeting a bit over a year ago? The Euro surprised me by lasting more than 18 months. Why? Because the result was the successful European economies were keeping the less successful afloat, by reducing the value of all currencies to somewhere in the middle! A global currency would have the same impact... everyone's currency would be worth the same, but it would be worth less. Can somebody explain to me how this is different than "redistribution of wealth"? It's exactly the same thing, just on a grand scale!

WHAT IF instead of taking from rich individuals, the global currency would have the practical effect of taking from the more prosperous nations and redistributing the currency to the less prosperous nations? How does national prosperity become anyone's responsibility other than the government of the nation in question? How do our taxes become another country's prosperity? (Global currency is closer to reality than you may know - Russia introduced their proposed version of it at a G-20 meeting a bit over a year ago.)

WHAT IF our Congress followed the original intent of the Constitution, rather than trying to find ways to defeat it?

WHAT IF our elected representatives in Washington D.C. actually represented the people instead of big business, lobbyists, and their own personal interests?

WHAT IF all the members of the House and Senate, who are up for reelection in November, are replaced with people who do not believe that the road to national prosperity is paved with more bureaucracy, bigger government, and increased borrowing, spending and taxing?

WHAT IF We the People - the employers of those in the House and Senate - decided to fire the lot of them? Would their replacements be intelligent enough to understand the message we were sending to Washington? Just in case, here it is in plain English:

WE ARE TIRED OF BEING IGNORED BY THOSE WHO "REPRESENT" US!

WHAT IF we actually HAD "border security"? Anybody who votes for "amnesty" or "open borders" should be forced to live right on our southern border for 6 months... and then have another vote. Our borders are almost as secure as Heidi Fleiss' (the infamous "Hollywood Madam") virginity!

ARIZONA TAKES STEPS TO PROTECT ITS OWN - FEDS UPSET!

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed into law, legislation making it a state crime, as well as a federal crime, to enter the state of Arizona if you are not a legal resident of the United States! All of our southern border states should follow Governor Brewer's lead and enact similar legislation. It is the only way we can stop the illegal invasion of foreigners into our country from Mexico.
The problem is magnified when, as in Arizona, American citizens have been murdered by illegal aliens. Arizona is not the first state to suffer from homicides committed by those who were in our country illegally. There have been dozens, perhaps hundreds, of murder, rape, arson, kidnapping, and robbery cases throughout the country - all perpetrated by illegal immigrants - that did not receive national coverage.

The federal government is remiss in its duty to protect our southern border. The Obama administration is counting on those illegal aliens and their liberal supporters to place illegal votes in order to maintain the socialist-progressive momentum his administration has created. Amnesty for 12 million lawbreakers is NOT what our country needs. They have demonstrated their desire to thwart our most basic law of residency, and if they are rewarded in that action, they will be emboldened to disrespect other laws within our borders. We do not need more scofflaws... we have plenty of the homegrown variety. We do not need to import them from other countries! Rewarding illegal behavior simply encourages more illegal behavior.

Who are the supporters of illegal residents? Their legal and illegal friends and families, our own expansionist tax-and-spend government which needs them to complete creation of a socialist environment within our previously Democratic Republic, and those who believe that Obama's socialist-progressive, Marxist-Communist, giveaway and redistribution agenda is something other than the key to the ruination of our once-great nation. This may well be THE turning point in American history. The erosion/elimination of the freedoms we citizens are guaranteed by the Constitution, and the decline of our economy until we are on the same level as Zimbabwe, which has a hyperinflation rate loom on the horizon. The last time inflation was officially recorded in mid-2008 it had soared to 231 million per cent. Today, using some kind of voodoo mathematics, it is reported to be approximately 5.5%. (There's a n old saying, "Figures can lie, and liars can figure." The issuance of a $50 TRILLION ZD banknote is a good indication that all is not yet well in Zimbabwe.)
The "entitlement whores", who have received multiple mentions in my blog, are all for whatever the government wants as long as the government continues to care for them as if they were dependent children. Who are these people that I refer to as "entitlement whores"? They are those whose way of life is to work the system's social programs. Their main product is children, which they produce in quantities significant enough to insure they themselves do not have to work. They get financial assistance (welfare), housing assistance (HUD), virtually free medical assistance (MedicAid), government food programs, etc.. All the things that the majority of us labor for in order to provide for ourselves and/or our families are provided to them by the government! Naturally they want to see government expand, because by that expansion the government creates more giveaway programs for them to work to their advantage.

We the People - the entrepreneurs, the craftsmen, the technicians - all those who perform labor for the rewards it provides, deserve those rewards. WE HAVE EARNED THEM! There should be no thought of "redistribution" of the fruits of our labors by the government. The government does not have that Constitutional right. If the government wants to "help" the needy, the government should provide them with one free thing - JOB TRAINING.

How did most of "the needy" become that way? By dropping out of school, thereby eliminating their first free service... a free education. Add to that the abuse of drugs and alcohol, and the adornment of their bodies with tattoos and piercings (which makes them less attractive to potential employers), the adoption of a gang mentality, and the seductive siren's song of the welfare program, and they create their own condition of neediness. Being needy is - in a general sense - a self-inflicted condition.

You may be thinking to yourself "This guy is one heartless son-of-a-bitch!". But it has nothing to do with heartlessness. It has to do with reality - the "hosts" reality versus the "parasites" reality. The condition of the needy in this country is truly a shame, but the shame is not mine. I have been given nothing in this life for which I have not labored and thereby earned. I finished my basic government-funded education (luckily, I did so before it became government-funded indoctrination). I served my country in our military, and have held numerous jobs within our society - some relatively menial, and others of relative importance in "the grand scheme of things". I am a "host", and I don't appreciate "parasites". Since the age of 17 my function has been to make my own way in the world, dependent upon the fruits of my labors to provide for my needs. I was successful because I was raised not to burden society with my care.
America is the "land of opportunity", but only for those who wish to take advantage of the opportunities America offers. The opportunity to take advantage of 12 free years of education, the opportunity to learn a trade, the opportunity for advanced education and training, the opportunity to earn a living, and the opportunity to become a responsible, self-supporting, contributing member of our society. There's an old saying, that goes like this" "There's no such thing as a free lunch." And it's true. If you get something for "free" from the government, there are always strings attached, even if those strings aren't visible. What you get costs you either in taxes or freedoms. Government dependency erodes one's freedoms, for in order to continue to receive, you must also continue to support the government's growth.

I could be wrong about all this... and Osama bin Laden could be America's best friend. What are the odds...

Would You Rather Fish For Freedom... or Cut Bait For Obama?

Referring to slavery, Abraham Lincoln said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure permanently half-slave and half-free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved - I do not expect the house to fall - but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other."

Paraphrasing our 16th President, yet referring to a different kind of slavery - "A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure permanently half socialist-progressive and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved - I do not expect the house to fall - but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other." (emphasis added)

I, on the other hand, would not be surprised to see the Union dissolve. Thirty-three states have felt it necessary to reaffirm their sovereignty over the past 12 months. Why do you think that is? Were their State Legislatures bored, and had nothing better to do? The reason is that they can see The Beast of government growing larger on an almost-daily basis - stealing more power for itself while attempting to reduce the powers granted to the States by the United States Constitution, Amendment X - "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
Any government is essentially a parasite. Our government is much like a leech - one which "supports" itself by simply taxing the earnings generated by the blood, toil, tears and sweat of the citizens of the fifty sovereign states. The government ignores the expressed will of the people, for we are not nearly as intelligent as "The Chosen One". We are just the ignorant worker-drones whose only legitimate function is to feed The Beast. But The Beast is insatiable.

SAVE THE REPUBLIC - IMPEACH OBAMA!

CAN YOU HEAR US NOW, WASHINGTON?

Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts over Martha Coakley sent a loud, clear message to Washington D.C. this week - one that could have been heard by the entire student body at Gallaudet University. In case some of our elected officials weren't listening I will spell it out for them -

"WE'RE MAD AS HELL, AND WE'RE NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANY MORE!"

The seat occupied by Ted Kennedy (D-MA) for almost a half-century was won by a republican. In the past 6 months, the Democrats have lost every noteworthy special election in the country, yet Obama has failed to take heed and make a course correction... or has he? His goal hasn't changed one bit. His destination is exactly the same - socialism forced down the throats of Americans! What has changed is the amount of pressure he puts upon the accelerator.

Have you ever wondered why Obama is in such a hurry to get things done? Have you asked yourself why legislation consisting of thousands of pages - that nobody will take credit for drafting - is passed without having been read by the House or Senate? Have you not puzzled over why Obama is spending us into fiscal oblivion? Stevie Wonder could see the answer to those questions, and, like so many of our fellow citizens, he may be loathe to admit it - even to himself. EVEN OBAMA RECOGNIZES THAT HE IS ONLY A ONE-TERM PRESIDENT (if his luck holds out)!

Obama has proven himself to be a totally unqualified captain of our "Ship of State", but he is well-qualified for his real job... which is to scuttle her. (For those of you who may not be familiar with the nautical term "scuttle", it means" - 1 : to cut a hole through the bottom, deck, or side of (a ship); specifically : to sink or attempt to sink by making holes through the bottom 2 : destroy, wreck; also : scrap) He is blithely joined in this act of national piracy by his crew of underlings - who control both the House and the Senate. The cargo in the hold of our Ship of State is PORK.

Anonymous legislation gets passed simply because of the Democrats super majority, which translates as "We have all the votes we need to pass those bills without a single 'conservative' vote" being cast in favor of it. A super majority is essentially nothing more than a politically partisan dictatorship.

Creating crises is what Obama is about. It's perfectly in line with the Cloward-Piven Strategy (see my 7/13/09). Create crises and diversions, overload the system, collapse the government, then remake the nation in the desired socialist image.

Rather than go against Obama, Democrats in Congress are retiring, resigning, "walking the plank" (committing political suicide by supporting Obama and going against the expressed wishes of their constituents) and/or "jumping ship" (changing party affiliation).

November isn't that far away - remember what we have seen from the Democrats control of our government thus far and vote accordingly.