Welcome to my blog. Here you will find information that is both interesting and useless. You can even see how Steve, my camera, sees the world through my eyes, or get your hands on my latest novel, Jihad Joe at:


Thanks for visiting. Hope you enjoyed the coffee and cake. Sorry we ran out of donuts.

Saturday, July 30, 2011

Da Debt

Harry Reid is blaming the Republicans for not solving the debt problem.  "I haven't heard anything from the Republican leaders. .  .  we have a proposal we know the president will sign . . . " but what are the Democrats bringing to the table? Nobody is really sure because they aren't saying.  Next Reid mentioned the 2 wars that "this administration didn't start; [I] don't want to go into that (so mentioning it is not 'going into that' according to Reid) and then said the American people believe there should be shared sacrifice. What is shared sacrifice? Tax increases? One less on-demand abortion for a liberal's teenage daughter? Socialism? Marxism?  Reid also claimed the president has been involved in the debt crisis, but let's be serious, the only way Obama could have been involved was by texting his input or posting it on Facebook. The only time he actually was involved (speech making doesn't count) is when he offered a budget plan that was so out in left field, he didn't even get one 'yes' vote.  Personally, I feel sorry for Obama because I'm sure this situation is ruining his golf weekends and effecting his handicap, (even though he hasn't made an appearance, but is keeping up appearances by not playing golf).  So the House rejected the Senate debt plan with the vote 173 yes, 246 no, and CNN is having an Ireport where viewers can make videos where they beg Congress to get the deal done. I have yet to see one conservative making a video--they just might tell the Republican party to stay strong and don't give in. CNN doesn't want to go there.

It was just announced that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are on their way to the White House to speak with Hussein Obama. It makes me wonder how they're planning on getting there. Pelosi is used to signing out US Air Force jets for herself and her friends to get around, and I suspect Reid may balance that by taking a bicycle. Well, it doesn't really balance it, but it looks good for the liberals and the mainstream media isn't going to mention Pelosi's jet-setting. They will, of course, mention the bike and how Harry Reid is helping the environment, won't they? Of course I'm kidding about the bike, but I'm totally serious about the USAF jets, and wrote it about it in a previous blog. Pelosi has literally cost taxpayers millions for jet fuel, booze and personnel, but she, like Obama, wants to tax corporate jet owners. What hypocrisy.

Who liberals love
Now John Boehner will be speaking about the vote. He feels the only thing standing in the way is Obama and Senator Reid.  Senator Mitch McConnel also spoke about the charade of the Reid bill not passing in the House. Boehner said that it's time for the president to tell us what he's for, and it's time for him to act.  I'm surprised Senator McConnel doesn't know that Obama is for socialism and sharing other people's money.  He's also for nuclear disarmament of the world, and when he is finally elected King of the World, he will finally get his wish.

So, the Republicans say they were in agreement with the Democrats but the Dems walked away, and the Democrats denied this assertion, instead claiming the Republicans are refusing to compromise. Why aren't these talks made public? Why can't we hear this process for ourselves? This is, after all, our money, our country, and our right to know what's going on. Instead the information we're hearing sounds more like a campaign response than a concerted effort to keep our nation solvent.

So we are hours away from the deadline and it's possible for the first time in American history, our country will default on its debts. Imagine the elderly who have been forced to put a substantial portion of their paychecks into Social Security, and a government that took their money to pay for things other than what the money was intended for--then ask yourself just who should be the target of their anger.

Friday, July 29, 2011

Shiela Jackson Lee: Deep Thoughts by a Shallow Dem

Peter King (R-NY) is the Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security and has been holding hearings about radical Islam and terrorism in the USA. Some of the finest minds have given testimony on this topic, providing us with information about the dangers radical Islam can incur, but along with their take on the problems came a response from one of the most blathering idiots ever elected to public office--I refer to Shiela Jackson Lee (D-Tx).  The input from Rep. Lee is proof positive that a Yale education and an appointment as judge in no way guarantees the holder of such a background is necessarily a person with a fully functioning brain. In fact, one might go so far as to say that Ms. Lee is an idiot, but saying so would probably get you labelled a racist because that is the only response she and most liberals know how to use in retaliation to the truth. 

At the committee hearings, Peter King gave her five minutes floor time, which she used to request that right wing extremist groups be investigated along with the alleged 9/11 phone hacking of terror victims, an issue that seems to be coming from left field and having nothing to do with the issues at hand, but that's just my opinion. You see, prior to Jackson Lee opening her mouth and getting her silver tongue in gear, the committee was voicing real concerns about al-Shabaab, an al-Qaeda affiliate and how it is recruiting young American Somalis for jihad. These Islamic men are attending terrorist camps and at least 40 are known to have done so and died as a result of suicide bombings. But Jackson Lee was undaunted in her quest for the irrelevant and went on about Rupert Murdoch and those right wing extremists. Several weeks ago, she spoke about extreme Christian groups when the committee met to discuss Islamic conversions in the prison system.  This is when she threw a curve ball to the committee by mentioning the crazy Christian right who are such a danger to the country and are recruiting in the prisons for Jesus. And yes, Shiela Jackson Lee is also the same person who felt that hurricane names are "too white" and she would like them to have more "black sounding names." 

Recently, at a town hall meeting to discuss Obamacare, Jackson Lee was being asked a question by a cancer survivor. See her response on this video.  One can say that it doesn't get ruder than that. Of course when she spoke with Greta Sustern, she was even ruder when Greta tried to ask a question, so perhaps it does get ruder than that after all.   

Mark Levin also spoke about Jackson Lee and minces no words when he describes how she talks about how her constituents are ill informed.  She may be right since these are the people who voted for her, but I suspect they didn't know who she was, much the same way we didn't really know Obama--unfortunately, we still don't know Obama in spite of his incredible transparency--why is that, I wonder. 

Frick and Frack
I hope Shiela Jackson Lee does nothing to upset the findings or the work of the House Committee on Homeland Security. This issue is absolutely too important to pretend that it's equivalent to right wing extremism. She sees the killing of late-term abortion clinic doctors the same as the killing of 3000 people on that sunny day back in 2001. Since the 1970's there have been 8 murders of late-term abortion clinic doctors--a horrible thing in and of itself, but compare that to the 17 thousand people who have died at the hands of Islamic terrorists (and I refer to acts of sheer terrorism, not from formal Islamic wars, which are also too frequent to dismiss). Oh, and come to think of it, compare it to the 59 million babies who were murdered in abortion on demand clinics.  That's 8 doctors versus 59 million babies. Why don't liberals see something wrong with this?

Your comments are always welcome.   

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Ethically Speaking

It seems as if ethics is a dying value.  My wife works in retail sales, a job she took when we moved to our new home, and the one thing she has learned is that many people are not ethical.  Her coworkers would steal her customers when her back was turned, or say she wasn't at work, when, in fact she was at the back of the store.

The Wikipedia definition is: "Ethics, also known as moral philosophy, is a branch of philosophy that addresses questions about morality--that is, concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice, justice, etc."

While an obvious lack of ethics can be seen at my wife's place of business (by the way, she is very ethical and this may account for why she is one of the top salespeople in the entire area), it is also a problem in government; particularly in big government.  Take for example the case of "Fast and Furious" whereby agencies of the US government allowed rifles to be purchased by 'straw purchasers' and then sold to Mexican drug cartels.  These AK 47-variants were eventually lost in tracking.  Is it ethical to use American taxpayer dollars to secretly fund an illegal program, and only get "outed" when someone died from one of the "Fast and Furious" guns?  If you don't know the answer to that question, I know a retail store that would hire you on the spot.

Ethical debate
So we have the head of the Department of Justice (DOJ), Eric Holder, who either lied about being in the loop of the "Fast and Furious" debacle whereas four people just below him were in on it, or is he so incompetent that he isn't even capable of running the DOJ and being included in the "loop"? And we have a president who claims to know nothing about this illegal undertaking and we'll likely never be privy to the truth in that case. But we do know for a fact that our POTUS is a liar because he has been caught in numerous lies since taking office.

Just for starters, he lied about his mother's healthcare, or lack of it actually, when she was dying of cancer in her early fifties.  Obama claimed she died as a result of the lacking of medical funding, when, in fact, her healthcare provider paid for everything but the monthly deductible, which came to about $200.  Then he lied when claiming his healthcare bill would not increase the deficit one dime--wait, that isn't a lie--it increased the deficit somewhat more than a dime--can you say billions?

About his father, he claimed he was a goat-herder, when it turns out his father was clearly a man of priviledge.  And while we're on the topic of Obama's Muslim father, Obama claimed that he, himself, had never prayed in a mosque--this had to later be retracted by his campaign people.

The real Obama
Circumventing the Constitution with the claim that we aren't at war with Libya because there are no "boots on the ground" and therefore, he didn't need congressional approval for the non-war in Libya, is another lie.  First of all, there were CIA spotters on the ground to assist the aircraft in their missions.  But even more blatantly, to say our action in a country is not a hostile act, and thus does not qualify as a war, begs the question: and if we simply dropped a nuclear weapon on Libya with no boots on the ground, would that still not be considered a hostile action? 

We may all remember how Obama said that he wouldn't rest until the BP oil spill was stopped and plugged.  If you consider playing golf, entertaining the Duke Blue Devils after winning the NCAA Championship, greeting the US World Cup Soccer team and getting in some photo ops with Joe Biden, Bill "I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lowenski" Clinton spending Memorial Day weekend in Chicago, and taking a weekend off at Mount Desert Island, not resting, then he was true to his word.

Obama is an amateur president. He was an amateur Senator before being whisked into the job as president. He was a community organizer--that's a dude who organizes anti-something-or-other protests for more money from those that have it to those that don't. This is Obama. Holder is his protege along with Tim Geithner, who didn't pay his taxes. Along with his other cronies and phonies. Make him a one-term wonder (as in "I wonder why anyone voted for that loser").

Peace out.

Saturday, July 23, 2011

What is a Patriot?

 If you ask a liberal what is a patriot, you're likely to get a reply that doesn't quite answer the question: "A patriot is a person who doesn't have to go to war to prove he loves the country." or "It's a person who isn't afraid to speak out and protest about what's wrong with this country." (Scratch a liberal and you get hives.)

I recently got a tweet from a twit who seemed to think along these lines. This person, and I believe it was a woman because she "felt sorry for [me] and [my] hatred of liberals.," had responded to a blog I posted on Twitter entitled "Conservatives as Terrorists," July 8, 2011.   If the twit was a guy, he might have tweeted something more like,"UR a freakin moron who nos nuthin bout bein a patriot." Instead, I got the genteel whinings of a morally superior patriot-liberal, which, when you think about it, is an oxymoron.  The blog I posted was in response to Chris "I sleep with a nightlight" Matthews' statement that conservatives are the equivalent to terrorists.  I thought about what it is to be a patriot and the following are some of my thoughts.

A true patriot  stands tall when he or she hears our National Anthem, rather than bemoaning the fact that it's a "war song, glorifying killing." To a patriot, the 'Star Spangled Banner'  stands for American persistence and triumph. The words were written by a 35 year old attorney, Francis Scott Key, after he watched the bombardment of Fort McHenry by the British Royal Navy along Chesapeake Bay in the Battle of Fort McHenry in the War of 1812. The words from Key's original poem, "The Defence of Fort McHenry" later became our National Anthem.  The Anthem can still make me misty because I know what it's about. Our drive toward freedom and democracy is one of the things that makes  us special in the  world. Liberals don't see the United States as special, as Obama pointed out, anymore than Sweden is special to Sweden, Norway to Norway, and you get the picture. No, a real patriot sees the USA as special and yes, the best country in the world.

A real patriot sees our Constitution and Bill of Rights as two of the finest documents written by our founding fathers. The Constitution is not sacred, because it is open for amending, but its concept and Judeo-Christian foundation, makes it the most humane and thoughtful legislation ever written. Nothing comes close and nothing should replace it or be an addendum without the proper amendment proceedures. Liberals are trying to reinterpret the Constitution, and Obama has declared it to be a "flawed document," and this coming from a flawed president who has taken our country in the direction of socialism and Communism, like his mommy and daddy would have wanted.  

The woman who was upset with me questioned my patriotism. I used to feel offended when anyone would do that--after all, I'm a war veteran, ex-Marine, yadda yadda. But I have come to understand liberals better now. For a liberal, the status quo is never good--it must always 'evolve' and change because change is good, it is always for the better in their liberal emoticon brains. They want big government; they want entitlement programs up the wazzoo because that allows the lazies to be the sucklings of the state, and also creates millions of meaningless jobs that the taxpayers fund. A conservative is called out as a "terrorist" by idiots like Chris Matthews because we conservatives are sick of these entitlements being fed by the obscene taxes individuals and the corporations pay. The government was never, never, never supposed to do that to us. The purpose of the government was basically to protect the nation from foreign oppressors and deal with the infrastructure; it was not meant to create programs whose purpose is merely to do what is necessary to stay funded. I know this is the way it is--I worked as a psychotherapist for a "Medicaid Mill" in New York City and this was precisely their purpose. I had to leave. I even had to get out of the profession and eventually work at something I found to be more creative, satisfying and productive.

Finally, but not last, a patriot is a person who, if necessary, is willing to die for his or her country. We have millions of these people--they're called Republicans. The liberals are too busy defending the rights of terrorist (they don't call them terrorists, they're 'freedom fighters'), to die for the USA. When the going gets tough, the liberals get going in the other direction. They retreat faster and better than the French in times of war. They pretend to love the USA but they don't--their version of 'equality' is that no matter how hard we work for what we have, and how passive some are about work, we must all share the wealth in order to be equal. This is not called equality; it's called Communism. It goes against human nature and goes along with Obama's agenda. And because it goes against human nature, it is never instituted without bloodshed.  Check out China and Russia if you're not certain of this.  Funny how the rich socialists are willing for you to part with your money, but aren't willing to part with theirs. Don't believe Warren Buffet--if he was serious about having millionaires and billionaires "pay their fair share" to the government, he would have paid it without popular concensus from his rich buddies, because that would be the right thing to do.  But these phonies are even more willing to spend your money (see my blog on Nancy Pelosi "On Our Dime" if you want to open your eyes to liberal spending) than parting with their own money. A real patriot does what he or she believes is right for the country, and does it without having to wait for others to do it. I wont hold my breath for Buffet to make the move to his wallet.

Peace. Your comments are welcome.

Friday, July 22, 2011

Is Anderson Cooper Keeping Himself Honest?

When you're a news organization, chances are pretty good that you have liberal views. But if you're a reporter for a liberal news station, you are not excused from reporting honestly, giving all the facts that both support as well as refute your claims, and letting the public decide. Hey, you're CNN--what do you have to lose anyway, your 455 viewers?

Just another day on the job
Recently, CNN aired a piece of shamfully bad reporting on "Keeping Them Honest." I cannot imagine who is keeping Anderson "they punched me ten times in the face right in Tahrir Square--I'm such a pussy" Cooper honest. but he sure isn't doing it. I am referring to the smear-job they did on Walid Shoebat, an Islamic jihadist who saw the error of his ways and became a Christian who now helps people in Islamic countries obtain freedom. 

Before discussing Walid Shoebat, I would like to mention an article in Jihad Watch, run by Robert Spencer.  He discussed how Kerry Rubin, an Anderson Cooper assistant, approached him, ostensibly to ask if he would be interested in providing information for their show "Keeping Them Honest." Rubin said she wanted Robert to talk about issues regarding jihad and Islam.  Spencer, knowing Cooper's leftist leanings, was suspicious and terse with the questions he was asked by her, especially when she began asking about his recent work with the military, how it's funded, etc.  When Rubin saw that Spencer wasn't about to go for the bait, she said that she had another call that she must take and would get back to him--she was lying--something the left does all the time, but as long as they aren't hypocrites about it, there's no problem for them. She never called him back.
His softer side

In response to what occurred on CNN with Walid Shoebat, a friend of Spencer's, he printed a letter written by Joel Richardson, another friend and coworker of Walid Shoebat, entitled: "CNN's Anderson Cooper is a fraud, Walid Shoebat is not." The letter discussed the CNN ambushing.  In a report by Drew Griffin, a CNN crack reporter (you can define 'crack' more ways than one) tried to ambush Walid Shoebat on three points.

First, he claimed that Walid did not use his Foundation's funds to actually rescue Christians from Islamic oppression. Somehow he made it up, he is lying, and that's that. The reason they say this has to be so is because Walid refused to reveal how much money was involved--when this clown asked that question, he answered, "That is none of your business." Just because Walid was correct by telling him it was none of his business, and knowing that CNN would use anything he said to ambush him, he rufused to reveal the funding, which was simply good thinking. Of course, CNN tried to imply that he misused the money from his Foundation because he wouldn't tell Griffin the details.

The second point was that Walid lied when he said that he spent time in the Mascubia prison. They was certain he was lying because a fourth cousin of Walid's told them it was a lie. Had they vetted this fourth cousin, they would have discovered he was also related to two well-known terrorists and had good reasons to discredit him. Had they even looked deeper into the situation, they would have found that an even closer relative, a guy who was trying to discredit him three years prior to this, admitted he had been in this prison because at the time the video was made, this wasn't the "damning" issue they were discussing. 

Lastly, they said he never was involved with bombing the Bethlehem branch of Bank Leumi because they called the bank and this supposedly didn't happen. When it was learned that the Bethlehem branch no longer exists, Cooper and Griffin said they spoke with the Tel Aviv branch. Of course this branch had no records of the Bethlehem branch, so that's nonsense too. Finally, in order not to look like a the team from Dumb and Dumber, they said they spoke to the Israeli Police station in Bethlehem. Unfortunately, there is no Israeli Police station in Bethlehem.  Also, if they bothered to go to the same information given by the closer relative who actually had an axe to grind (literally), three years prior to this report, they would have heard him mention the fact that Walid was known to place a few "parcels behind the bank" from time-to-time. But CNN has its own agenda, and truth isn't on the list.

I have recently learned that CNN plans to do a "full expose" of "Islamophobia," a term made up by Islamists to shame the west into believing that we are racists and are phobic against Islam. It isn't a phobia if it isn't irrational. Americans are very sensitive to being labelled a 'racist.' Nobody wants to be thought of that way, which is why Islamists invented this term, and why if a non-Muslim calls you a racist, he or she is probably a liberal.

So anyway, here we have another mainstream media story that is full of lies, poor research, or worse, pure deception, and a television network that too many Americans believe is telling the truth. This is even true about the Daily Show, where most young liberals get their "news." After all, if it's on TV as news, it must be true.  You need to see this video about CNN and their lies--it's 8 minutes long and well-worth the time investment. If you're concerned, like any good American would be, you might just tune out CNN, or at least learn to question what is being told as truth. The mainstream media is in trouble, and it's all their fault. People are not as gullible as they believe, and they are getting their news from the blogs, online media, and hopefully they are looking at both sides of the issues. Americans are smarter than they give us credit for--Soros and his socialist colleagues think they have us all fooled, but that only makes them the real fools. America will prevail.

Comments are always appreciated.

Monday, July 18, 2011

What's In It for a Libtard

Islam is often touted to be the religion of peace.  Those who tout it the loudest tend to be liberals who really know as much about Islam as they know about Keynesian economics or the sexual behavior of Michael Moore.  I frequently post my blog on Twitter to give it more exposure and recently received a response that didn't surprise me except for the fact that someone on the left has actually read it.

The woman, whose Twitter name implies that she enjoys knitting while drinking Jack Daniels, said that my blog article about Mohammad and Islam was uninformed and insulting. She added that she is a Jew but hates what Israel is doing to the poor Palestinian people. I asked her what she thought about what happened to the Sobel family, who were slaughtered in the middle of the night. They handed out candy the next day in celebration to the throat-slitting of an 11 year old boy, his 3 month old baby sister, a mother and father, and another older child.  This leftist's response was that they were killed by a migrant worker and besides, Jews celebrate whenever they terrorize the Palestinians. 

Where too many get their news
Now I realized that I was dealing with a card-carrying libtard. A libtard is a person whose identity with the left is more important than the absence of facts the left fails to supply for their arguments.  First of all, the Sobel's were killed by two terrorists, not one, and there is no incident the left can show where the Jews celebrated killing Palestinians--usually, this was done out of retaliation after a Palestinian lobbed a rocket or sent their child to blow itself up in front of some Jews.  The irony that libtards fail to see, or if they do, fail to admit, is that the Israelis have taken in wounded Palestinians to their hospitals and helped them.  This, in spite of many cases where the patients said that in spite of the help they received, they still wanted to see the death of Israel.

So my twit-sender now used the libtard handbook to respond: "You need to hate Muslims, so hate them."

Our dirtiest president ever
I'm grateful this sensitive, morally superior woman, gave me permission to hate, but she still showed her true libtard colors. I do not hate Muslims. My wife's family is Muslim and I do not hate them.  I do, however, hate the hatred Islam spouts against all other religions, along with their special hatred for the Jews, who are referred to as pigs. (Christians get off easier and are referred to as apes, which, at least, is closer to human than pig, I suspect). I totally reject their misogynistic treatment of women, who are literally thought of as less than men in all ways.  I hate their treatment of gays and lesbians too.  I still cannot understand how anyone who has actually read and understood the Koran, along with the Hadith, particularly by Bukhari, would not see this religion for what it really is, and its prophet for who he was: a pedophile who gave himself permission to marry a six year old and consummate the marriage when she was all of nine, take as many as 12 wives while his soldiers only got to have 4 wives; a man who beheaded 800 Jews (my libtard thought it was okay for him to do it because these Jews "betrayed" him) because they refused to convert to Islam, his taking of war booty, slaves, and so many horrible things. My libtard used the old "well they did it in the Bible and the Torah" argument, as if they're still doing it today. Not all Muslims are terrorists, as the saying goes, but today, most, not all, of the terrorists are Muslims.

My libtard Twit pal reminds me of Jon Stewart, a person who has no identity with Israel because of the lack of identifying with religion at all. The religion of the liberal is their liberalism--never their parent's religion. They are proud atheists or agnostics who believe the answer to the universe lies within; their Jon Stewart "Zen Moment." They don't see abortion as killing because they intellectualize it away.  They don't see that taking money from the rich is no less immoral than taking it from a mugging victim.  They never really see facts, but think the louder they yell, the more truthful their premise.

I have to say that I enjoyed my little tete a tete with my twit pal--it was eye-opening to discover that people with mental handicaps can still operate a computer, and maybe even knit--unless she was lying about that.


Friday, July 15, 2011

Dumber and Dumbest

I have no idea to what you're referring
Operation Fast and Furious could just as easily been named Operation Dumb and Dumber. But the point of the operation itself was not dumb, it was political. And the result of the operation was the death of two American law enforcement agents and over 150 Mexican nationals, along with the loss of well over a thousand rifles of the AK 47 variety and many thousands of live rounds of ammunition. The stated purpose for this botched operation was to allow straw purchasers to buy guns at legal U.S. gunshops, telling the shops to sell these guns in spite of their reluctance to do so, and then to trace the guns to the "Big Nacho Cheeses" across the border. Of course, since it was a government operation, the guns got lost within the first few hours, and there were no stand-out "Big Nacho Cheeses."

ATF Special Agent Vince Cefalu, one of the "whistleblowers" of Operation Fast and Furious, stated that Kenneth Melson, Acting Director of the ATF, was simply protecting his own ass when he testified before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on July 4th.  For Agent Cefalu, he was given a notice of termination from the ATF just one day after Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) sent a letter to the ATF warning them not to retaliate against agents who came forward to testify about the operation. This is approximately the same day that things at the ATF building started taking on a peculiar odor, and Attorney General Eric Holder developed a severe case of amnesia, a chronic condition for Holder who has experienced these symptoms several times before.

Emails revealed that certain people at the top of the food chain were aware of the operation. Specifically, Melson, Assistant Attorney General (Criminal Division no less) Lanny Breuer, Acting Deputy Director of the ATF William Hoover, DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart and Director of the FBI Robert Mueller all knew about it. Of course, Holder was kept in the dark because either they thought he was a moron whose incompetence is only exceeded by his poor judgment, or that memory problem of his was getting worse.

And since this was an operation involving national security, heaven forbid Janet Napolitano would know anything, nor would Hillary, since there are serious international implications in a cross-border operation. So these lovely ladies are innocent, I'm sure.  Just like Holder .  .  .  and Obama are innocent. Why would Obama know? He's so busy doing the budget each night before bedtime--It's like a homework assignment for him.

I'm sure the New York Times could explain the real truth behind the operation. Like the unsigned editorial this rag printed on July 13th:  "These guns have no legitimate place in civilian life and were banned outright for 10 years until Congress and two successive administrations failed to fight for the ban's approval."  Of course if you actually refuse to believe everything you read in the Times, and you should, you would know this is a lie. ANational Gun Act in 1934 did this job and as it turns out, only 2 homicides in all these 77 years since, resulted from an automatic weapon. But this is the disgusting story of how a federal agency, an agency your tax money funds, has misused this money, all $10 million of it, for a scheme devised to make you believe that gun control is a necessary evil.  Well it's evil all right, and that's because our founding fathers knew that one day a smooth-talking socialist would convince you that he can change things and that things needed to be changed. 

The left is all about change. "Change is good." That's because they cannot be happy in their own skin, much less be happy with a government that allows for opposing points of view. They see the Constitution as flawed rather than as a document that is perfect because it can be amended, but only with the proper checks and balances. They see Obama as hope, and the right sees Obama as an imperialist who sees nothing special about America and therefore has no right to govern her.

Holder is just a symptom of the administration. He is a fraud, much like Obama and his ilk. Charles Rangel recently spoke about morality and Jesus--what a joke coming from a guy who tried to screw the government out of $75 thousand in rent. Like Rangel, Obama is all talk and all smoke and mirrors. Tim Gaithner is another tax cheat and this guy runs the IRS. One day they're going to make a comedy out of this administration.

Cefalu said that the operation was never about making arrests--it was about getting the ATF in the media, getting the anti-gun legislation on the table, and perpetuating the Democratic talking points about guns. Much like Obama's talking points about corporate jets, legal guns do not cause the catastrophic results the Obama administration would like you to believe. Just like he would have you believe that his mother's health was compromised because of the health care restrictions she had to undergo for her cancer--more lies. Why doesn't anyone call him on it?

Maybe it'll be a good thing if the government actually shuts down and these government agencies see that the American people are fed up about funding their waste. Of course this will likely not happen because most of Obama is not to be trusted--Mr. Transparency.

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

Holder the Clown

Go figure—some of the 2,000 firearms the feds allowed the Mexican drug cartels to acquire have begun showing up in some US cities. What a surprise; it’s like you just can’t trust smugglers anymore. Lori Jane Gilha of KNXV-TV in Phoenix, a subsidiary of ABC, said that the investigation carried out by her company found the federally sanctioned guns just blocks from each other in some parts of the cities. Evidence indicates that a number of guns have shown up in Arizona gun crimes, and it is possible that a quantity of firearms may have not even left the United States. Can you get the full impact of the stupidity of this operation?

 Of course, none of this should come as a surprise to anyone who knows how government agencies tend to run things. If there was a prize, let’s call it the Gross Incompetence Achievement Prize, government agencies would walk away with all of them, hands down. Fact: we now know that the ATF was giving guns to FBI and DEA informants and that these same agencies told gun dealers to sell guns to drug cartel members—this, in spite of the gun stores voicing concern about this crazy practice—and then they built cases against the gun companies for selling the guns. According to the Daily Caller, Carter’s Country, a four-store chain, was one of those targets.

To date, an independent prosecutor is to be appointed to determine who in the Obama (anti-gun) administration came up with this genius idea, who then authorized it and went along with it in spite of its illegality, and then who participated in the cover-up. Obama tried to throw Ken Melson, Acting Director of the ATF, under the
bus, but he opened up to congressional investigators on July 4th, but a Pajamas Media source are working like little evil bunnies to scapegoat a different DOJ official in an effort to deflect blame and save some dirty scumbags from prosecution. (I think I just heard Eric Holder and Hussein Obama give a loud sigh of relief.)

Pajamas Media believes that this case is worse than it seems and it doesn’t seem to want to go away anytime soon. It seems like Obama, Janet Napolitano, Eric “I just learned about it a few weeks ago” Holder, and Hillary, should be scared—they should be very scared. But I am not confident that justice will be served here—hopefully I’m wrong—because Obama is becoming an imperialist president and seems to be getting away with circumventing little things like the Constitution and the system of checks and balances. But again, I hope I’m wrong and Jughead gets impeached. We don’t need an imperialist, Marxist as president.

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Words Used Liberally

When you call someone a terrorist, you dilute the word and render it meaningless--like when MSNBC's  Chris "I Pick My Nose Off-camera" Matthews, said that Republicans are terrorists. Same holds true for other terms, like calling someone is a Hitler. This is especially painful when the person you accuse of being this dastardly villain is Jewish.  Let's face it, nobody you know and dislike, is really a Hitler. They might be a liar like, say, Eric Holder, or a person like Obama, who likes to take your money and share it with people from other countries who are in the USA illegally, or even Nancy Pelosi,  a slimy Marxist-loving bee-atch, who took USAF jets with her friends, on booze flights costing you and me something to the tune of $2,100,429.59. In spite of her sliminess, I would never call her a Hitler, or even a Nazi. I might call her a Karl Marx, or someone similar who also suffers from bathing disorder, but as far as I can tell, she has never been personally responsible for someone's death.  But I'm no Eric Holder, if you know what I'm saying. 

I think we need to look beyond our pettiness with each other and look to our leaders, not just those of today, but those from the past. People like Ronald Reagan, who one could say had saved our country. He was more than a great American, he was a true hero. But when you think about it, that's what a great American is.

Monday, July 11, 2011

Holding Holder Accountable

Kenneth Melson, Acting Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) testified behind closed doors to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. This committee is chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif). While we don't know everything that was said, we do know that Mr. Melson stated that he was told to keep his mouth shut regarding Operation Fast and Furious. If you've been living under a rock, or have been out of the country for a long time, this was the operation that begun in September 2009 and escalated after Obama was sworn in as president. The idea of this operation was to allow smugglers to buy guns (usually varients of AK 47s) and then allow them to "walk" over the Mexican border where the guns would be tracked, and the upper echelon of the gun smuggling operations would be identified and eventually brought to justice. A similar operation "Operation Castaway," took place in Tampa, Florida, where the same screwed up tactics were used--smugglers could buy guns without being stopped--and these guns would be smuggled to Honduras.

Back in May, Holder was asked when he knew about Operation Fast and Furious, and while his answer sounded reminiscent of Jackie Gleason on the Honeymooners when he stammered "Ahominahominahomina," Holder finally got out the words he was searching for, stating the he "probably" learned about Fast and Furious in "the last few weeks." That's odd, because, unless Mr. Holder stepped through a time-hole, he bragged about his knowledge of the program back in 2009. 

Project Gunrunner, as it was called then, was discussed on the DOJ website, which was discovered by Big Government in their quest for truth. Holder boasted in a speech posted on the site:

"Last week, our administration launched a major new effort to break the backs of the cartels. My department is committing 100 new ATF personnel to the Southwest border in the next 100 days to supplement our ongoing Project Gunrunner, DEA is adding 16 new positions on the border, as well as mobile enforcement teams, and the FBI is creating a new intelligence group focusing on kidnapping and extortion. DHS is making similar commitments, as Secretary Napolitano will detail."

So, is Holder holding out? Probably. But if he isn't, then he's incompetent and needs to start chasing ambulances. 

This is certainly not the only questionable issue in Holder's career. Let us not forget the Center on American Islamic Relations where he refused to prosecute the case made public by the Holy Land Foundation trial where CAIR was named as an undicted co-conspirator. There is absolutely no good reason not to pursue this case, unless it has to do with Holder's religious beliefs, or under-the-table benefits of his position. Maybe our Islamic-loving president, Hussein Obama asked that he keep it out of the courts. But then there's that other case where Holder failed to file a case against a federal prosecutor who had pornography on his work computer, one of which was of a child, which is a felony. For what good reason would Holder not go forward with this case?

The real irony of Fast and Furious goes beyond Holder and his ties to the case. The real irony is how we have Obama, an anti-gun president, who slackens the laws on illegal firearms, where George W. Bush tightened them. This is the most hypocritical administration this country has ever seen, and the scariest part, I've just learned, is that the young voters are still in love with this imperialist.

Solution: Fire Holder. Make Obama a one-term wonder--you wonder why people voted for him in the first place. 

Friday, July 8, 2011

Conservatives as Terrorists

 I love it when liberals call conservatives names, because that just means they're scared. You can smell them when they walk into the room and they make all that noise and are filled with piss and vinegar and call you a terrorist. Of course, real liberals would never stoop so low as to call a real terrorist a terrorist--instead, they call them "freedom fighters" and blame America for their behavior. Liberals did that after 9/11 and they continue to do that today. Liberals never win a war, except for Truman, who was pressured into finishing the war he was destined to retreat from if liberals had their way. Liberals favorite slur for patriots, besides the label 'terrorist' is to shout "McCarthyism," as if McCarthy was wrong about the Communist party in the United States. Liberals defended Alger Hiss, and many still do today, in spite of the absolute proof, obtained from the Soviet Union, that showed Hiss was a spy and Chambers had it right along with Nixon who pursued the charge. Liberals worked very hard trying to damage Nixon when he went after Hiss, and when it didn't work, they never got over it and went after him for Watergate--something that was basically standard proceedure amongst politicians at the time.

You might think that I'm upset that Chris Oddball Matthews said conservatives are terrorists, and you would be correct. I am not as upset, however, as I am tired of hearing liberals using ad hominem attacks against people who love America and believe that all life is precious and abortion goes against God's design--the same liberals whose god is their liberal beliefs of moral superiority, and who believe that those of us who believe in God are misled. If only we'd believe Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins.

Liberals are not terrorists--I would never say that. Liberals don't have the guts to be terrorists. But they are certainly not patriotic--if you happen to be a liberal, look up the word 'patriotic' and see how it doesn't apply to you. Liberals pretend to be patriotic by saying things like, "If we don't allow the Muslims to build the Ground Zero Mosque here, then we're not standing for what America really means." That's absolute crap, of course, because there are plenty of mosques in Manhattan, and the issue has to do with their sensitivity.  Instead, they use our wonderful laws to their evil advantage, and liberals only cite the Constitution, a document Obama feels is flawed (like all of his policies, plans, and appointees), when it is to make a point in their favor, regardless of common decency and common sense.

Liberal war heroes are guys like Big John Kerry--Swiftboat Bullshi**er. These people speak well but in reality, are empty suits. Obama is a perfect example--we have no balanced budget, unemployment continues to climb, and as of today is 9.2%. His policies and ideas are naiive--like his wanting to have every American attend college, when our college loan debt alone is $1 trillion. But liberals will defend him almost to the death (never exactly to the death, however, since liberals are so afraid of death that they would prefer Communism over death, if it came down to it). It doesn't matter how crazy a liberal idea is. What's most important is that it is a liberal, not a conservative idea and that's the end of it. 

Anyway, if after listening to Matthews, if you still believe he has full usage of his cerebral equipment, you may want to go have yours checked out.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          

Thursday, July 7, 2011

Casey Anthony and Terrorism

Now that the Casey Anthony trial is finally over, we can all go back to our normal lives of watching Judge Judy and pontificating over her decisions. The one thing this trial has showed me, and I must admit that I haven't followed it as closely as many people I know, is that we should never use civil litigation to try terrorists lest the same result be rendered and they slink away only to kill another day.

Just imagine a guy named Muhammad Mohammad Mohannad, let's call him 3M, (but no reflection on that wonderul American company nor their Scotch Tape) on trial for blowing up a Synagogue and killing fifty nine Jewish congregants during evening prayers. Let us also assume that he did, in fact, do this terrible crime, but let us also imagine 3M as an incredibly handsome 25 year old Arab, with piercing brown eyes, thick, black hair, a sturdy build, and who speaks perfect English with no foreign accent. Let's even say 3M was well-educated and looks a lot like Omar Sharif. He hires a hot shot attorney, a guy who makes Alan Dershowitz look like an ambulance chaser, and a jury of his peers is selected; only they aren't peers, of course, because peers would mean they would have to be killers themselves--they're just a bunch of people, a few of them women who happen to find 3M incredibly handsome, and men who find him to be the kind of guy you could have a beer with and discuss sports.

One of the witnesses for the prosecution is a maintenance man who works for the temple.  He is bald, overweight, and always looks like he wants to be elsewhere--let's call him Mr. Adolf Schnitzer. The jury watches Schnitzer and they hear how he was working on a broken water line near the front of the building and saw 3M running down the street, away from the temple. Next came the explosion and Mr. Schnitzer was knocked to the ground.

The hotshot attorney asks a lot of tough questions but Schnitzer's answers are nonwaivering and has the facts clear as to time and description of 3M, even though it was becoming dark outside. He saw 3M running from the Synagogue shouting, "Allahu Akbar!" and then the explosion.

The jury hears the facts, and they learn that 3M has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood through another Islamic organization called ISNA. They listen to the defense and watch 3M, other people testify and one even serves as character witnesses for him, and after days of testimony, the prosecution finally rests. The jury deliberates and after, say, eleven hours, they reach a verdict. Everybody waits as the anticipation builds, and finally the verdict is read by the jury foreman. The announcement is loud and clear: "Not Guilty." 3M hugs his attorney, walks away from the courtroom, not innocent, but not proven guilty. The jury could not believe that a nice looking, educated guy who looks a lot like Omar Sharif could kill innocent people as he was accused of doing. One of the jurists doesn't even like Jews all that much and was in full support of the Gaza flotilla, but that never came up in the voir dire, unfortunately.

Had this been a military trial, where 3M was considered to be an enemy combatant, there would be no emotional jurists, the outcome would have been different and justice would have been served.

As I mentioned, I hadn't seen a lot of the Casey Anthony trial, but many people who did believed that she was guilty and got away with murdering her child. The evidence was quite convincing, at least it was to Nancy Grace, who, I should add, was just as quick to condemn the Duke LaCross team players of raping a young lady, and who were found innocent. I don't particularly like Nancy Grace but just because she felt that Casey Anthony was guilty and was found not guilty does not mean she was wrong in her assessment of the trial. In the LaCross team's case, the accuser confessed to lying, but in this case we could only go with the evidence, which seemed to point to Casey's guilt. I hope this case serves as a wakeup call to our politicians who still want to try terrorists, enemy combatants, in civil courts where they are afforded the rights of an American citizen. They are not American citizens and do not deserve to be treated with the liberties and respect they seek to destroy.

Please feel free to comment and let me know what you think.