by Al Benson Jr.
Well, wonder of wonders, we have yet another shooting in West Texas. Is anyone surprised? It seems as if we have a new shooting somewhere about once every three weeks now.
And you know what all the politicians are going to say now--"Why doesn't Trump do something about all this?" There will be more howls for unconstitutional "Red Flag" laws and some of the more radical Demoncrats will be hollering for total gun confiscation. Because, in the final analysis that is what all these shootings are really all about. They are geared to force Trump into doing something about gun control that will alienate his political base and these shootings will continue until he does just that. Once he does that, watch and see if the shootings don't ease off.
Am I suggesting there is some sort of anti-Second Amendment agenda at work here? Oh heavens no! Why I'd be the absolute last one to ever suggest that! Let's just say that all these shootings in the frequency of their occurrence is simply an amazing coincidence. That's all, folks, just a series of coincidences. Nothing to see here so just move along.
We better come to grips with the fact that there is an anti-gun agenda at work here and the dissolution of our Second Amendment rights is the name of the game. Contact your congress critters and tell them to vote NO on anymore gun control bills, otherwise you will work to defeat them in the next election.
The would-be Mexican Irish person, Beto O'Rourke says he will, if elected president, force people to sell their guns to the government. This is nothing other than more gun control under a different name.
Showing posts with label Gun control. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gun control. Show all posts
Saturday, August 31, 2019
Wednesday, August 07, 2019
Mass Murders Be Hanged--Gun Confiscation Is the Name of the Game
by Al Benson Jr.
Who would have thought that during the administration of Donald Trump we would have had to worry about gun control and/or gun confiscation? Just goes to show you that, in the political realm nothing happens by accident and you can trust almost no one.
You might say, in our present circumstances "The shootings will continue until the attitude toward gun control improves." Many naïve people think that, once all the guns are confiscated from honest people then all the shootings will cease. I've got news for you "useful idiots" who think that. It won't happen that way. Once the criminal element figures out that no one our there can fight back their criminal excursions will markedly increase because they will know that no one will have the means to resist what they do.
And don't kid yourselves for even a little minute. The people in Washington WANT YOUR GUNS, all of your guns and they don't give a hoot about what the criminals can do to you. Their agenda is to disarm honest people. That's all they're concerned about. They have been told to get the guns, any way they have to and they don't look beyond that. Most of them live in gated communities or have armed guards, so they couldn't care less what happens to you or your families. Their families will be secure--the hell with yours!
Trump now claims he is in favor of background checks for guns. Doesn't he realize that background checks are but the precursor to confiscation? He should have figured that out by now. And he wants Red Flag laws about guns, which means that some bureaucrat in Washington will get to decide who is a potential threat and the feds will just move in and take his guns, even though he has committed no crime. In other words, he's guilty until proven innocent!
Trump has got to realize that if he continues to go along with this insanity then he stands a good chance of alienating his base of voters. This is NOT what they elected him for. They elected him to prevent this sort of thing and now he is going along with it.
Everyone out there needs to contact their senators and tell them to vote against any new gun control measures, and let them know that if they support any new gun control measures then you will work to expose and defeat them in 2020.
We didn't elect Trump so he could cave in to the gun grabbers. Hillary would have done that. I expected better than that from Trump. Maybe I was naïve. Maybe my confidence was misplaced?
Who would have thought that during the administration of Donald Trump we would have had to worry about gun control and/or gun confiscation? Just goes to show you that, in the political realm nothing happens by accident and you can trust almost no one.
You might say, in our present circumstances "The shootings will continue until the attitude toward gun control improves." Many naïve people think that, once all the guns are confiscated from honest people then all the shootings will cease. I've got news for you "useful idiots" who think that. It won't happen that way. Once the criminal element figures out that no one our there can fight back their criminal excursions will markedly increase because they will know that no one will have the means to resist what they do.
And don't kid yourselves for even a little minute. The people in Washington WANT YOUR GUNS, all of your guns and they don't give a hoot about what the criminals can do to you. Their agenda is to disarm honest people. That's all they're concerned about. They have been told to get the guns, any way they have to and they don't look beyond that. Most of them live in gated communities or have armed guards, so they couldn't care less what happens to you or your families. Their families will be secure--the hell with yours!
Trump now claims he is in favor of background checks for guns. Doesn't he realize that background checks are but the precursor to confiscation? He should have figured that out by now. And he wants Red Flag laws about guns, which means that some bureaucrat in Washington will get to decide who is a potential threat and the feds will just move in and take his guns, even though he has committed no crime. In other words, he's guilty until proven innocent!
Trump has got to realize that if he continues to go along with this insanity then he stands a good chance of alienating his base of voters. This is NOT what they elected him for. They elected him to prevent this sort of thing and now he is going along with it.
Everyone out there needs to contact their senators and tell them to vote against any new gun control measures, and let them know that if they support any new gun control measures then you will work to expose and defeat them in 2020.
We didn't elect Trump so he could cave in to the gun grabbers. Hillary would have done that. I expected better than that from Trump. Maybe I was naïve. Maybe my confidence was misplaced?
Tuesday, March 27, 2018
"Okay, we will pry them from your cold dead hands"
by Al Benson Jr.
Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America
Needless to say, there are still lots of questions yet unresolved about the recent school shooting in Florida. It still smacks of a false flag operation and when you see how events have turned out since it happened, you have to wonder if the whole thing was a well-orchestrated false flag,everywhere from the emergence of a small dedicated cadre of Leftist gun control freaks that are students, to the promotion of events like this recent "March for our lives" that went down last Saturday. Through all the continuing Left-wing hype you should be able to discern on thing--these people want to totally negate the Second Amendment and confiscate your guns. They can deny it all they want (and they don't do a very good job at that) but that's what this is really all about--total gun confiscation.
If you are naive enough to have difficulty believing that then you need to look at some of the signs that were displayed by some of the marchers last Saturday--signs like "Ban all guns" or "I wish Obama HAD taken all your guns" or "Yes, in fact, I am here to take your guns."
An article on www.Infowars.com for March 26th noted that: "The gathering of around 200,000 people in Washington DC was reported as a 'call for tighter gun laws,' but going by what was written on the placards of those attending, it was about the elimination of the right to bear arms entirely." That's an accurate observation. That's exactly what this whole fuss os all about. The Infowars article also noted: "One of the current student speakers at the march also let slip the wider gun confiscation agenda when she said during a speech "When they give us that inch, that bump stock ban, we will take a mile."
In another Infowars article it was noted that: "George Soros funded March for our Lives rally is an attempt for foreign actors to take control and steer our public education narrative toward total gun confiscation." You are supposed to think that the vast majority of public school students, all but about a dozen "deplorables" in this country want Dad to turn over his hunting rifles and target pistols to the Feds immediatelly--if not sooner. I can't speak for other parts of the country, but if you happen to live in the South or the West--excluding parts of Florida and California--you realize that this is hogwash of the highest grade. You should have observed in all this, that you almost never get to hear a peep out of any student who is not 100% in favor of gun control/confiscation. Normal kids, it seems, have been excluded from this debate. You are not supposed to be aware of them and you are not supposed to be bright enough to ask "Where are all the kids that are not in favor of gun control? Why have we not heard from them also?"
Almost the only one you hear anything from is this David Hogg, as though, somehow, he has been appointed as "youth spokesman" on gun control for all the kids in America. And let's face it, he does speak for someone, but it is hardly the youth of America, no matter how many of them can be bused in for marches and demonstrations. What you really need to start doing is looking for who pays for all these demonstrations and who pays for ferrying all these anti-gun youths around the country so they can propagandize us all on gun control/confiscation. It takes people with big bucks to do that stuff.
Alex Newman on https://www.thenewamerican.com for March 26th noted: "One of the Astro Turf leaders paraded all over America's TV screens was David Hogg, whose father is a former official with the FBI and whose mother is a far-left activist." Hogg is talking about "starting a revolution." And undoubtedly those that write his scripts have that in mind.
The site https://www.dailywire.com on March 24th had a picture of Hogg and the article along with the pic labeled him as a "Far-left activist..." If you can pick up this site take a good look at the picture. It portrays a grim-looking David Hogg with his hand up in the air, giving the typical Communist clenched fist salute. That's to let all those "in the know" on the political and theological Left know that Comrade Hogg is "one of the boys" and anytime you can be useful in pushing whatever agenda this youthful "useful idiot" has been scripted with, you need to do it.
Alex Newman's above mentioned article on the New American goes into some of those who are funding this latest leftist gun control/confiscation push. In conjunction with all this, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) have, just this past Monday introduced a piece of legislation that they call the Ammunition Background Check Act of 2018. This little goody would require a background check on everyone anywhere that wanted to buy ammunition. So, if you want to buy a couple boxes of 22 shorts to do a little plinking with on Saturday afternoon you would have to undergo a background check to be able to do that.
These youthful anti-gun comrades who promote gun control/confiscation are openly talking about threatening our elected representatives if they fail to enact gun control bills. One little thing here--most of these kids are not old enough to vote yet, but most of us are.
Maybe we better start contacting our congress people and letting them know we are watching what they do with this gun control madness--and what they decide to do will probably have a major bearing on how we vote in the next election they have to run in. If enough of us will take the trouble to do that, I think they will understand where we are coming from. Youthful Leftist activists should not be the only ones our elected representatives hear from!
Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America
Needless to say, there are still lots of questions yet unresolved about the recent school shooting in Florida. It still smacks of a false flag operation and when you see how events have turned out since it happened, you have to wonder if the whole thing was a well-orchestrated false flag,everywhere from the emergence of a small dedicated cadre of Leftist gun control freaks that are students, to the promotion of events like this recent "March for our lives" that went down last Saturday. Through all the continuing Left-wing hype you should be able to discern on thing--these people want to totally negate the Second Amendment and confiscate your guns. They can deny it all they want (and they don't do a very good job at that) but that's what this is really all about--total gun confiscation.
If you are naive enough to have difficulty believing that then you need to look at some of the signs that were displayed by some of the marchers last Saturday--signs like "Ban all guns" or "I wish Obama HAD taken all your guns" or "Yes, in fact, I am here to take your guns."
An article on www.Infowars.com for March 26th noted that: "The gathering of around 200,000 people in Washington DC was reported as a 'call for tighter gun laws,' but going by what was written on the placards of those attending, it was about the elimination of the right to bear arms entirely." That's an accurate observation. That's exactly what this whole fuss os all about. The Infowars article also noted: "One of the current student speakers at the march also let slip the wider gun confiscation agenda when she said during a speech "When they give us that inch, that bump stock ban, we will take a mile."
In another Infowars article it was noted that: "George Soros funded March for our Lives rally is an attempt for foreign actors to take control and steer our public education narrative toward total gun confiscation." You are supposed to think that the vast majority of public school students, all but about a dozen "deplorables" in this country want Dad to turn over his hunting rifles and target pistols to the Feds immediatelly--if not sooner. I can't speak for other parts of the country, but if you happen to live in the South or the West--excluding parts of Florida and California--you realize that this is hogwash of the highest grade. You should have observed in all this, that you almost never get to hear a peep out of any student who is not 100% in favor of gun control/confiscation. Normal kids, it seems, have been excluded from this debate. You are not supposed to be aware of them and you are not supposed to be bright enough to ask "Where are all the kids that are not in favor of gun control? Why have we not heard from them also?"
Almost the only one you hear anything from is this David Hogg, as though, somehow, he has been appointed as "youth spokesman" on gun control for all the kids in America. And let's face it, he does speak for someone, but it is hardly the youth of America, no matter how many of them can be bused in for marches and demonstrations. What you really need to start doing is looking for who pays for all these demonstrations and who pays for ferrying all these anti-gun youths around the country so they can propagandize us all on gun control/confiscation. It takes people with big bucks to do that stuff.
Alex Newman on https://www.thenewamerican.com for March 26th noted: "One of the Astro Turf leaders paraded all over America's TV screens was David Hogg, whose father is a former official with the FBI and whose mother is a far-left activist." Hogg is talking about "starting a revolution." And undoubtedly those that write his scripts have that in mind.
The site https://www.dailywire.com on March 24th had a picture of Hogg and the article along with the pic labeled him as a "Far-left activist..." If you can pick up this site take a good look at the picture. It portrays a grim-looking David Hogg with his hand up in the air, giving the typical Communist clenched fist salute. That's to let all those "in the know" on the political and theological Left know that Comrade Hogg is "one of the boys" and anytime you can be useful in pushing whatever agenda this youthful "useful idiot" has been scripted with, you need to do it.
Alex Newman's above mentioned article on the New American goes into some of those who are funding this latest leftist gun control/confiscation push. In conjunction with all this, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) have, just this past Monday introduced a piece of legislation that they call the Ammunition Background Check Act of 2018. This little goody would require a background check on everyone anywhere that wanted to buy ammunition. So, if you want to buy a couple boxes of 22 shorts to do a little plinking with on Saturday afternoon you would have to undergo a background check to be able to do that.
These youthful anti-gun comrades who promote gun control/confiscation are openly talking about threatening our elected representatives if they fail to enact gun control bills. One little thing here--most of these kids are not old enough to vote yet, but most of us are.
Maybe we better start contacting our congress people and letting them know we are watching what they do with this gun control madness--and what they decide to do will probably have a major bearing on how we vote in the next election they have to run in. If enough of us will take the trouble to do that, I think they will understand where we are coming from. Youthful Leftist activists should not be the only ones our elected representatives hear from!
Sunday, February 18, 2018
Florida--Another False Flag? Probably!
by Al Benson Jr.
Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America
During the reign of Comrade Obama there were several school shootings and others that were labeled by those who follow this kind of thing as "false flags." False Flag events are designed to elicit a certain response from the general public and are usually conducted with some help from some government agency or part of one.
For instance, one of the big agendas during the Obama Regime was the dismantling of the Second Amendment and our God-given right to defend ourselves and our families. This is definitely a no-no, because if some rogue group in the government, or the government itself, plans FEMA extended vacations for those who oppose it they can't have lots of folks out there with firearms, nor can they have a public atmosphere that is favorable to private ownership of firearms.
Therefore, those in government who want our guns have to create an environment amongst the public that will allow them to seize our weapons with little opposition, physical or otherwise from the general public. One way to create such an environment is to have a series of school shootings where children are either harmed or appear to be harmed and such an event is then heralded by the prostitute press and many in Congress as a reason to "regulate" (eventually confiscate) firearms. They will never admit this--that would give away their agenda.
Obama and his Marxist cronies in government (many of whom still remain in the new Trump administration) were especially good at acting out this scenario. If I recall, I can remember one congressman getting on television and weeping huge crocodile tears for "the children" as he worked tirelessly to eradicate our Second Amendment protection. This scenario has been repeated so often that after awhile you get so you recognize all the various parts of it as the Establishment weaves it all together into a package that it can sell the public to promote its gun control agenda.
There is usually (supposedly) only one shooter, and he ends up dead in most cases so we never get to hear anything he might have said about what really went down. In this most recent case in Florida they caught the patsy (supposed perpetrator) alive. I have heard, from some sources, that the Sheriff in Broward County is an honest man so that may be why the alleged shooter was taken alive. I also heard that the Sheriff, not the FBI, is handling this case, as of now. That may well have saved the alleged shooter's life. After noting such incidents as the Ruby Ridge killing of Randy Weaver's wife and the murder of Lavoy Finicum in Oregon a year ago, you can't blame most folks for figuring that the FBI's intended victims don't often get out alive, to testify or to do much else.
The school shootings during the Obama reign just about all followed the same pattern--a bunch of kids killed in gun free zones and the Obama and other Soros flunkies paraded before the public to plead for them to contact their congress critters and beg them to enact "sensible" (eventual confiscation) gun control laws to prevent this from ever happening again. You've heard it all before. I call it "the shootings will continue until the public has the right attitude" scenario. Obama, the Marxist president who claimed he was not after our guns was one of the biggest anti-Second Amendment people around. He might only have been exceeded by "Madame President" had she managed to steal the election.
Thankfully, organizations like the Gun Owners of America (not the NRA) managed to put enough pressure on Congress that, while Obama was in office, they didn't dare vote to confiscate our guns. But, just think of the coup the political left could claim now if they managed to get a gun control (confiscation) bill enacted while Trump is in office. Trump has been a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. Just think of the hay they could make if they managed to get a gun control bill enacted while Trump is in office and he ended up vetoing it. They could scream to the universe that Trump is a callous monster and that he doesn't care about "the children." You all know where that line of bull would go.
Mitt Romney, who is no doubt positioning himself with the Establishment for a presidential run in 2020, has started whimpering that "we have to do something." You're right, Mitt, we do. So how about we start by doing away with gun free zones and by allowing qualified teachers to start carrying during school hours? That would be a big step in the right direction, don't you think?
But that wouldn't fit the agenda of the gun grabbers because, at root, they don't give a tinker's damn about school safety. What they want is gun confiscation, maybe not all at once, but gradually. They will take the Fabian approach if it gives them what they want eventually. Just remember one thing "Gun Control is People Control" and once you surrender your Second Amendment rights you ain't about to get them back before the Second Coming. A good reason to write your congress critters and tell them to vote NO for any new gun control bill, no matter how innocent it may sound.
Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America
During the reign of Comrade Obama there were several school shootings and others that were labeled by those who follow this kind of thing as "false flags." False Flag events are designed to elicit a certain response from the general public and are usually conducted with some help from some government agency or part of one.
For instance, one of the big agendas during the Obama Regime was the dismantling of the Second Amendment and our God-given right to defend ourselves and our families. This is definitely a no-no, because if some rogue group in the government, or the government itself, plans FEMA extended vacations for those who oppose it they can't have lots of folks out there with firearms, nor can they have a public atmosphere that is favorable to private ownership of firearms.
Therefore, those in government who want our guns have to create an environment amongst the public that will allow them to seize our weapons with little opposition, physical or otherwise from the general public. One way to create such an environment is to have a series of school shootings where children are either harmed or appear to be harmed and such an event is then heralded by the prostitute press and many in Congress as a reason to "regulate" (eventually confiscate) firearms. They will never admit this--that would give away their agenda.
Obama and his Marxist cronies in government (many of whom still remain in the new Trump administration) were especially good at acting out this scenario. If I recall, I can remember one congressman getting on television and weeping huge crocodile tears for "the children" as he worked tirelessly to eradicate our Second Amendment protection. This scenario has been repeated so often that after awhile you get so you recognize all the various parts of it as the Establishment weaves it all together into a package that it can sell the public to promote its gun control agenda.
There is usually (supposedly) only one shooter, and he ends up dead in most cases so we never get to hear anything he might have said about what really went down. In this most recent case in Florida they caught the patsy (supposed perpetrator) alive. I have heard, from some sources, that the Sheriff in Broward County is an honest man so that may be why the alleged shooter was taken alive. I also heard that the Sheriff, not the FBI, is handling this case, as of now. That may well have saved the alleged shooter's life. After noting such incidents as the Ruby Ridge killing of Randy Weaver's wife and the murder of Lavoy Finicum in Oregon a year ago, you can't blame most folks for figuring that the FBI's intended victims don't often get out alive, to testify or to do much else.
The school shootings during the Obama reign just about all followed the same pattern--a bunch of kids killed in gun free zones and the Obama and other Soros flunkies paraded before the public to plead for them to contact their congress critters and beg them to enact "sensible" (eventual confiscation) gun control laws to prevent this from ever happening again. You've heard it all before. I call it "the shootings will continue until the public has the right attitude" scenario. Obama, the Marxist president who claimed he was not after our guns was one of the biggest anti-Second Amendment people around. He might only have been exceeded by "Madame President" had she managed to steal the election.
Thankfully, organizations like the Gun Owners of America (not the NRA) managed to put enough pressure on Congress that, while Obama was in office, they didn't dare vote to confiscate our guns. But, just think of the coup the political left could claim now if they managed to get a gun control (confiscation) bill enacted while Trump is in office. Trump has been a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. Just think of the hay they could make if they managed to get a gun control bill enacted while Trump is in office and he ended up vetoing it. They could scream to the universe that Trump is a callous monster and that he doesn't care about "the children." You all know where that line of bull would go.
Mitt Romney, who is no doubt positioning himself with the Establishment for a presidential run in 2020, has started whimpering that "we have to do something." You're right, Mitt, we do. So how about we start by doing away with gun free zones and by allowing qualified teachers to start carrying during school hours? That would be a big step in the right direction, don't you think?
But that wouldn't fit the agenda of the gun grabbers because, at root, they don't give a tinker's damn about school safety. What they want is gun confiscation, maybe not all at once, but gradually. They will take the Fabian approach if it gives them what they want eventually. Just remember one thing "Gun Control is People Control" and once you surrender your Second Amendment rights you ain't about to get them back before the Second Coming. A good reason to write your congress critters and tell them to vote NO for any new gun control bill, no matter how innocent it may sound.
Tuesday, September 27, 2016
Presidential Debates Work Better If the Moderator Doesn't Help the Democrat
by Al Benson Jr.
Presidential debates are hardly my favorite source of entertainment or of information for that matter. Elections are often fraudulent and rigged and so are presidential debates. They are part of what has been dubbed "political theater" by Lew Rockwell. In fact he has a section on his web site www.lewrockwell.com called "political theater."
On our way into church last Sunday morning one of our church members asked me something to the effect of "Do you plan to watch the political mockery tomorrow night?" I can't disagree with his assessment. I've watched enough political debates over the years to know that they are hardly instruments of revealed truth.
If you have two candidates, one of which is supposed to be conservative and patriotic while the other one is a screaming cultural Marxist, you have to know going in, that the moderator and the cultural Marxist are going to work together and gang up on the conservative. It's standard operating procedure. They did it to Mitt Romney when he debated Comrade Obama before the 2012 election charade, not that Romney was any kind of real conservative, but, bad as he was, he made chopped liver out of Obama in their first debate. Obama didn't have his teleprompter and without that he was dead in the water. He had four or five stock lines and all he could do throughout the debate (not possessing an original thought of his own) was to find different ways of restating those stock lines. In their second debate you can be sure the teleprompter was there and the moderator helped Obama carry the debate load with his commentary. By this time Romney knew the game and just played along--the loyal "opposition" as it were.
I hadn't planned on watching this current charade but a friend living in the town I live in invited me over to his house to watch it. When he had lived in the North he had belonged to the Tea Party and so I figured he's pretty much be on the same page as I was, and he is.
And the debate between Trump and "Hillary the unindicted" was a carbon copy of most of the ones I have watched previously. The moderator, Lester Holt bent over backwards to give Hillary as much help as he could possibly give without totally giving himself away and he badgered Trump as much as he could get by with and gave Hillary as much extra time to present her points as he could while restricting Trump to his allotted time. Mr. Holt was in Hillary's corner and that was plain to see. Objective he was not and even his pretense of it was shallow.
Noted libertarian author Tom DiLorenzo had it figured out also and he noted in brief commentary on www.lewrockwell.com that Hillary's running mate had said that: "He hopes the moderator, Lester Holt, will expose Trump's 'lies' while at the same time giving Hitlery time to express her 'vision' for America."
He further said: "This is a warning to Lester Holt from the Clinton Crime Family: Don't do what Matt Lauer did and ask questions and then let the candidate respond to the questions. Badger him, challenge everything he says, insinuate that he is a liar or a buffoon (or better yet, both), interrupt him, while allowing Queen Hitlery to be her good old visionary self. Or else, Lester." I would say Lester responded to the prompting quite well. He was going to make sure he didn't end up being chopped liver.
And so "Queen Hitlery" made her points for her vision for America (no guns for Americans but lots of aliens (preferably illegal) for Americans, although she didn't quite say it that way. If you have learned to understand Marxist doublespeak you know what she was talking about. It was almost as if Mr. Trump had been cautioned not to fight back, a persona that is at odds with where he usually is. I hope this was just a learning experience for him and not something worse, because if it ends up being something worse then you can kiss the country goodbye, and your God-given liberties will be chopped liver.
Presidential debates are hardly my favorite source of entertainment or of information for that matter. Elections are often fraudulent and rigged and so are presidential debates. They are part of what has been dubbed "political theater" by Lew Rockwell. In fact he has a section on his web site www.lewrockwell.com called "political theater."
On our way into church last Sunday morning one of our church members asked me something to the effect of "Do you plan to watch the political mockery tomorrow night?" I can't disagree with his assessment. I've watched enough political debates over the years to know that they are hardly instruments of revealed truth.
If you have two candidates, one of which is supposed to be conservative and patriotic while the other one is a screaming cultural Marxist, you have to know going in, that the moderator and the cultural Marxist are going to work together and gang up on the conservative. It's standard operating procedure. They did it to Mitt Romney when he debated Comrade Obama before the 2012 election charade, not that Romney was any kind of real conservative, but, bad as he was, he made chopped liver out of Obama in their first debate. Obama didn't have his teleprompter and without that he was dead in the water. He had four or five stock lines and all he could do throughout the debate (not possessing an original thought of his own) was to find different ways of restating those stock lines. In their second debate you can be sure the teleprompter was there and the moderator helped Obama carry the debate load with his commentary. By this time Romney knew the game and just played along--the loyal "opposition" as it were.
I hadn't planned on watching this current charade but a friend living in the town I live in invited me over to his house to watch it. When he had lived in the North he had belonged to the Tea Party and so I figured he's pretty much be on the same page as I was, and he is.
And the debate between Trump and "Hillary the unindicted" was a carbon copy of most of the ones I have watched previously. The moderator, Lester Holt bent over backwards to give Hillary as much help as he could possibly give without totally giving himself away and he badgered Trump as much as he could get by with and gave Hillary as much extra time to present her points as he could while restricting Trump to his allotted time. Mr. Holt was in Hillary's corner and that was plain to see. Objective he was not and even his pretense of it was shallow.
Noted libertarian author Tom DiLorenzo had it figured out also and he noted in brief commentary on www.lewrockwell.com that Hillary's running mate had said that: "He hopes the moderator, Lester Holt, will expose Trump's 'lies' while at the same time giving Hitlery time to express her 'vision' for America."
He further said: "This is a warning to Lester Holt from the Clinton Crime Family: Don't do what Matt Lauer did and ask questions and then let the candidate respond to the questions. Badger him, challenge everything he says, insinuate that he is a liar or a buffoon (or better yet, both), interrupt him, while allowing Queen Hitlery to be her good old visionary self. Or else, Lester." I would say Lester responded to the prompting quite well. He was going to make sure he didn't end up being chopped liver.
And so "Queen Hitlery" made her points for her vision for America (no guns for Americans but lots of aliens (preferably illegal) for Americans, although she didn't quite say it that way. If you have learned to understand Marxist doublespeak you know what she was talking about. It was almost as if Mr. Trump had been cautioned not to fight back, a persona that is at odds with where he usually is. I hope this was just a learning experience for him and not something worse, because if it ends up being something worse then you can kiss the country goodbye, and your God-given liberties will be chopped liver.
Thursday, March 03, 2016
The Republican Establishment--Is It Really a Criminal Conspiracy?
by Al Benson Jr.
After having watched the political gyrations the Republican Party is going through in their efforts to reject the candidacy of Donald Trump I have to come to the conclusion that all that many have said about them over the years is correct. They really are no different than the Democrats. The Council on Foreign Relations/Trilateral Commission really does give them their marching orders and the only difference between them and the Democrats is that they have been directed to hide their socialist proclivities where the Democrats have been allowed to let them all hang out. The two political parties really are nothing more than two different wings on the same socialist turkey and, as usual, and by design, it is flying in the wrong direction.
The American people are being stiffed by the Internationalists and it is on purpose and with the consent of all three branches of the government. As I have said before, the Constitution is no protection whatever for the public when all three branches of government are in collusion to ignore it and are aided and abetted by a prostitute media.
If the Republicans were really "conservative" they would not be having the problem they are with Donald Trump. If the other Republican candidates were really as conservative as they claim they would not all be looking for ways to dump him. You have to come to the conclusion with Trump, that if the left and the so-called right both hate his guts then he must be doing something right! And the fact that both left and "right" are so anxious to deep six him tells you that, at root, they have the same socialist agenda. The left is left. The "right" is really left and the American public has no one in government to defend it. All they want to do is to make sure they get your guns before you start to realize this.
I think all this talk about "indicting" Hillary is a big joke. Does anyone honestly think the Loretta Lynch's "Just Us Department" of which the FBI is a part will ever have her indicted? Come on folks, you have to be kidding! The only way she will ever get indicted is if, for some reason, the CFR/Trilateralist/Bilderburger group decides she is too much of a liability to become president and they decide to throw her under the bus. Other than that, she's a shoo-in, no matter how many votes she does or doesn't get. After all, we all know it's who counts them, not who votes that makes the difference.
And the Republicans are heartily trying to resurrect that tired old retread, Mitt Romney so he can take support away from Trump. They are also looking for another weak Republican candidate that will not be able to beat Hillary and if Romney couldn't beat Obama then Hillary will have him for lunch--and it's all according to plan.
The Ruling Establishment knows the public is fed up. They couldn't care less! They figure whatever they shove down our throats we'll take it. We're too stupid to do anything else! One of these days they may be in for a rude awakening and when that happens it may get messy--but they don't realize that yet so they will keep on pushing.
If the Republican Party were going to stand up for conservative and patriotic values they would have done it when they got a majority in Congress. Instead they just continued to cave in to Obama. When conservatives arose in protest over John Boehner's caving in they finally, reluctantly, removed him and gave us Paul Ryan who is nothing more than Boehner-Lite, so nothing changed. And nothing will change no matter who we get for president either. They will find some way to sidetrack Trump and we will get the weakest possible Republican candidate to run against Hillary and it will be business as usual in the "District of Corruption."
After having watched the political gyrations the Republican Party is going through in their efforts to reject the candidacy of Donald Trump I have to come to the conclusion that all that many have said about them over the years is correct. They really are no different than the Democrats. The Council on Foreign Relations/Trilateral Commission really does give them their marching orders and the only difference between them and the Democrats is that they have been directed to hide their socialist proclivities where the Democrats have been allowed to let them all hang out. The two political parties really are nothing more than two different wings on the same socialist turkey and, as usual, and by design, it is flying in the wrong direction.
The American people are being stiffed by the Internationalists and it is on purpose and with the consent of all three branches of the government. As I have said before, the Constitution is no protection whatever for the public when all three branches of government are in collusion to ignore it and are aided and abetted by a prostitute media.
If the Republicans were really "conservative" they would not be having the problem they are with Donald Trump. If the other Republican candidates were really as conservative as they claim they would not all be looking for ways to dump him. You have to come to the conclusion with Trump, that if the left and the so-called right both hate his guts then he must be doing something right! And the fact that both left and "right" are so anxious to deep six him tells you that, at root, they have the same socialist agenda. The left is left. The "right" is really left and the American public has no one in government to defend it. All they want to do is to make sure they get your guns before you start to realize this.
I think all this talk about "indicting" Hillary is a big joke. Does anyone honestly think the Loretta Lynch's "Just Us Department" of which the FBI is a part will ever have her indicted? Come on folks, you have to be kidding! The only way she will ever get indicted is if, for some reason, the CFR/Trilateralist/Bilderburger group decides she is too much of a liability to become president and they decide to throw her under the bus. Other than that, she's a shoo-in, no matter how many votes she does or doesn't get. After all, we all know it's who counts them, not who votes that makes the difference.
And the Republicans are heartily trying to resurrect that tired old retread, Mitt Romney so he can take support away from Trump. They are also looking for another weak Republican candidate that will not be able to beat Hillary and if Romney couldn't beat Obama then Hillary will have him for lunch--and it's all according to plan.
The Ruling Establishment knows the public is fed up. They couldn't care less! They figure whatever they shove down our throats we'll take it. We're too stupid to do anything else! One of these days they may be in for a rude awakening and when that happens it may get messy--but they don't realize that yet so they will keep on pushing.
If the Republican Party were going to stand up for conservative and patriotic values they would have done it when they got a majority in Congress. Instead they just continued to cave in to Obama. When conservatives arose in protest over John Boehner's caving in they finally, reluctantly, removed him and gave us Paul Ryan who is nothing more than Boehner-Lite, so nothing changed. And nothing will change no matter who we get for president either. They will find some way to sidetrack Trump and we will get the weakest possible Republican candidate to run against Hillary and it will be business as usual in the "District of Corruption."
Wednesday, January 06, 2016
Our Would-be Dictator Wants to Confiscate Your Guns ASAP
by Al Benson Jr.
Toward the end of last year our Marxist-in-Chief warned us that he was coming after the guns in 2016. For once he didn't obfuscate or prevaricate. He told us the truth. Such a novelty! Oh, he didn't couch it in quite those terms but the meaning was clear. He's talking now about how to prevent more "gun violence" when there are already laws on the books covering all the situations he is supposedly concerned about. He gave a news conference today (1/5/16) where he shed alligator tears for the camera about all those poor kids killed by guns. Apparently, though, he has no tears for all those unborn kids killed by abortion. After all, that's not on the leftist agenda. His performance was so convincing he even fooled Donald Trump, who said he thought Obama was sincere with his tears. Maybe Mr. Trump doesn't fully understand the Marxist mindset.
Supposedly all Obama wants to do is implement background checks so your guns will now have to be registered with the feds, no matter how, when, or where you got them. Folks, lets quit trying to kid everybody and cut to the chase! He wants to confiscate the guns, ALL the guns. In essence he wants to nullify the Second Amendment. Something else the "news" media hasn't seen fit to inform you of showed up on an Infowars.com article, also on January 5th is the real possibility that, according to Obama's new executive orders on guns "Americans critical of government can lose gun rights due to executive order." The Infowars article noted that: "Americans critical of government could have their Second Amendment rights restricted if psychologists diagnose them with 'Oppositional Defiant Disorder' or a similar diagnosis as a result of Obama's new gun control executive action." Not only is he working at gutting the Second Amendment but he is also working at gutting the First Amendment.
House Speaker Paul Ryan sounded oh so good when he said that Obama was again exceeding his authority. He said: "While we don't yet know the details of the plan, the president is at minimum subverting the legislative branch, and potentially overturning its will." I just wonder, Mr. Ryan, if all this ever gets to some kind of vote in the House, will you end up caving in like you did on the last funding bill, you remember, where the Republicans promised to defund Planned Parenthood and then gave Obama the money for it anyway? If that's your idea of opposition I can hardly wait to see what you will do with an Obama gun control/confiscation bill.
After watching the political scene for over 40 years now I have figured out that there are really no accidents in politics and very few coincidences. The "coincidence" of Obama's new gun control/confiscation initiative coming right on the heels of this militia takeover of government property out in Oregon really makes me wonder if that situation, regardless of the sincerity of most of the militia folks, hasn't been, somehow, false-flagged to give the president some added ammunition for his latest confiscation effort. After all, the killings in all those gun-free zones didn't seem to be doing it. So how about something like this Oregon situation where you get to promote gun control, take a healthy slash at both the First and Second Amendments, and knock the militia folks down a peg or two. This has to be a situation that would make any Marxist would-be dictator absolutely salivate!
The Gun Owners of America will probably take this to court. I wish them well. I know with them that you will at least get a decent effort to preserve Second Amendment rights. Some other groups I am not quite so sure of. I got a petition online from some Republican committee wanting me to sign a petition telling Obama we disapprove of what he's doing here. There's your "loyal opposition" for you. Do those people actually think a petition will make any difference to Obama? Well, not really, but getting people to do that siphons off lots of potential resistance that might be more effectively used in some other area.
We need to inundate our Congressmen with calls and letters and emails letting them know how really ticked off we are at this power grab and do the same with letters to the editors of your local papers. They'll never print them all but they will be aware that there is a groundswell of opposition out there and they need to be reminded that the American people are still somewhat awake and haven't all bought the BF (bovine fertilizer) that Washington and many of our state capitals keep trying to throw in our faces. As for the folks with guns, I'm not going to tell them what to do--they should already know. The Governor of Texas has already told Obama what to do. Let's hope the rest of the States, at least in the South and West, will do the same.
Toward the end of last year our Marxist-in-Chief warned us that he was coming after the guns in 2016. For once he didn't obfuscate or prevaricate. He told us the truth. Such a novelty! Oh, he didn't couch it in quite those terms but the meaning was clear. He's talking now about how to prevent more "gun violence" when there are already laws on the books covering all the situations he is supposedly concerned about. He gave a news conference today (1/5/16) where he shed alligator tears for the camera about all those poor kids killed by guns. Apparently, though, he has no tears for all those unborn kids killed by abortion. After all, that's not on the leftist agenda. His performance was so convincing he even fooled Donald Trump, who said he thought Obama was sincere with his tears. Maybe Mr. Trump doesn't fully understand the Marxist mindset.
Supposedly all Obama wants to do is implement background checks so your guns will now have to be registered with the feds, no matter how, when, or where you got them. Folks, lets quit trying to kid everybody and cut to the chase! He wants to confiscate the guns, ALL the guns. In essence he wants to nullify the Second Amendment. Something else the "news" media hasn't seen fit to inform you of showed up on an Infowars.com article, also on January 5th is the real possibility that, according to Obama's new executive orders on guns "Americans critical of government can lose gun rights due to executive order." The Infowars article noted that: "Americans critical of government could have their Second Amendment rights restricted if psychologists diagnose them with 'Oppositional Defiant Disorder' or a similar diagnosis as a result of Obama's new gun control executive action." Not only is he working at gutting the Second Amendment but he is also working at gutting the First Amendment.
House Speaker Paul Ryan sounded oh so good when he said that Obama was again exceeding his authority. He said: "While we don't yet know the details of the plan, the president is at minimum subverting the legislative branch, and potentially overturning its will." I just wonder, Mr. Ryan, if all this ever gets to some kind of vote in the House, will you end up caving in like you did on the last funding bill, you remember, where the Republicans promised to defund Planned Parenthood and then gave Obama the money for it anyway? If that's your idea of opposition I can hardly wait to see what you will do with an Obama gun control/confiscation bill.
After watching the political scene for over 40 years now I have figured out that there are really no accidents in politics and very few coincidences. The "coincidence" of Obama's new gun control/confiscation initiative coming right on the heels of this militia takeover of government property out in Oregon really makes me wonder if that situation, regardless of the sincerity of most of the militia folks, hasn't been, somehow, false-flagged to give the president some added ammunition for his latest confiscation effort. After all, the killings in all those gun-free zones didn't seem to be doing it. So how about something like this Oregon situation where you get to promote gun control, take a healthy slash at both the First and Second Amendments, and knock the militia folks down a peg or two. This has to be a situation that would make any Marxist would-be dictator absolutely salivate!
The Gun Owners of America will probably take this to court. I wish them well. I know with them that you will at least get a decent effort to preserve Second Amendment rights. Some other groups I am not quite so sure of. I got a petition online from some Republican committee wanting me to sign a petition telling Obama we disapprove of what he's doing here. There's your "loyal opposition" for you. Do those people actually think a petition will make any difference to Obama? Well, not really, but getting people to do that siphons off lots of potential resistance that might be more effectively used in some other area.
We need to inundate our Congressmen with calls and letters and emails letting them know how really ticked off we are at this power grab and do the same with letters to the editors of your local papers. They'll never print them all but they will be aware that there is a groundswell of opposition out there and they need to be reminded that the American people are still somewhat awake and haven't all bought the BF (bovine fertilizer) that Washington and many of our state capitals keep trying to throw in our faces. As for the folks with guns, I'm not going to tell them what to do--they should already know. The Governor of Texas has already told Obama what to do. Let's hope the rest of the States, at least in the South and West, will do the same.
Wednesday, December 02, 2015
The Shootings Will Continue Until Public's Attitude on Gun Control/Confiscation Changes
by Al Benson Jr.
Another shooting, this time in California, and according to the World Net Daily article I read there are 14 dead and another 14 wounded. Our Marxist president has, naturally called for more gun control and says such shootings are not normal. He's right there. They are not normal--but they will continue until the American public appears to see things his way and caves in to more, and eventually complete gun control/confiscation because that's what it's all about.
The minute Congress is willing to give the president the prerogative to dismantle the Second Amendment the shootings will cease, the media will never mention them again and, supposedly, we will have happiness and "peace" in Amerika--Marxist peace" which is really nothing more than the absence of resistant to the president and his Marxist policies.
This is what it's really all about, folks--the old "pressure from above and pressure from below" game that the Marxists have been playing on us for years and they keep on doing it successfully because we never seem to get it. Maybe we'll get it once the guns are confiscated (because that's what it's really all about) and no one can defend themselves from a tyrannical government.
The president has fairly howled in recent weeks about how gun control is going to be one of his main priorities next year and you better believe him because he means it. In this instance he is telling us the truth--if he can find some way to accomplish it he will disarm the public before he leaves office. We had all better stay on our congress critter's cases in this coming year because the president (and his handlers) will pressure them to enact some kind of gun control/confiscation measure before he leaves office and what he starts in this area then Hillary or whoever the Establishment puts into the White (Red) House will finish.
I would recommend that folks get in touch with the Gun Owners of America, the one no compromise anti-gun control group out there, and find ways to support their efforts, whether through joining up or contributing or both. Don't be naive enough to think "it can't happen here." It's happening! The question is--what are we willing to do to combat it?
Update: Guess what, now we find out that two of the shooters, (naturally both dead) were what has been termed "radicalized Muslims." That being the case I seriously doubt that they would have obeyed all those new gun restrictions that Obama wants to impose on honest citizens.It also shows that his misplaced gun control efforts are nothing but a sham to enable him to disarm the American public. Well, many of us knew that from the beginning, and so did he despite all his platitudes about not being after our guns. That's exactly what he was and is after so let's don't be gulled by his bovine fertilizer.
Next Update: The gun grabbers have wasted no time. Already today there was a move in the Senate to try to expand background checks on those buying guns at gun shows and through intrastate internet transactions. Senate Democrats (socialists) tried to push this but there was enough Republican opposition for the present to stall any action, but I don't doubt there are lots of Republicans that would dearly love to push it along with their Democratic brethren, because, at heart, they really believe in what Obama stands for and his agenda no matter how much they deny it.
The news release I read said "The FBI is trying to determine whether a couple suspected of the shootings at a workplace in Southern California on Wednesday had links to Islamic militant groups." How much do you want to bet this will turn out to be yet another hackneyed cases of "workplace" violence? That way the media can take the heat off whatever Islamic terrorists might be involved and just try to get Congress to go along with more gun control/confiscation, because that's what this is really all about.
Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal said: "Congress is complicit in these mass murders when it fails to act. That has to be the biggest pile of fertilizer since the Oklahoma City bombings back in the 90s. Some Islamic terrorists kill a batch of people and it's the Congress' fault because they failed to enact gun confiscation measures! Give me a break! However, with recent shootings in Paris, Colorado and now in California the socialists in Congress are fervently praying (to whatever god they believe in) that the public will suddenly repent of its support for the Second Amendment and turn to the instant panacea of fedeal gun control/confiscation. A recent poll also noted that 63% of those polled believed that gun violence can often be blamed on mental health problems while only 23% felt that it was due to inadequate gun control.
With those kinds of statistics it looks as if the shootings will continue...
Another shooting, this time in California, and according to the World Net Daily article I read there are 14 dead and another 14 wounded. Our Marxist president has, naturally called for more gun control and says such shootings are not normal. He's right there. They are not normal--but they will continue until the American public appears to see things his way and caves in to more, and eventually complete gun control/confiscation because that's what it's all about.
The minute Congress is willing to give the president the prerogative to dismantle the Second Amendment the shootings will cease, the media will never mention them again and, supposedly, we will have happiness and "peace" in Amerika--Marxist peace" which is really nothing more than the absence of resistant to the president and his Marxist policies.
This is what it's really all about, folks--the old "pressure from above and pressure from below" game that the Marxists have been playing on us for years and they keep on doing it successfully because we never seem to get it. Maybe we'll get it once the guns are confiscated (because that's what it's really all about) and no one can defend themselves from a tyrannical government.
The president has fairly howled in recent weeks about how gun control is going to be one of his main priorities next year and you better believe him because he means it. In this instance he is telling us the truth--if he can find some way to accomplish it he will disarm the public before he leaves office. We had all better stay on our congress critter's cases in this coming year because the president (and his handlers) will pressure them to enact some kind of gun control/confiscation measure before he leaves office and what he starts in this area then Hillary or whoever the Establishment puts into the White (Red) House will finish.
I would recommend that folks get in touch with the Gun Owners of America, the one no compromise anti-gun control group out there, and find ways to support their efforts, whether through joining up or contributing or both. Don't be naive enough to think "it can't happen here." It's happening! The question is--what are we willing to do to combat it?
Update: Guess what, now we find out that two of the shooters, (naturally both dead) were what has been termed "radicalized Muslims." That being the case I seriously doubt that they would have obeyed all those new gun restrictions that Obama wants to impose on honest citizens.It also shows that his misplaced gun control efforts are nothing but a sham to enable him to disarm the American public. Well, many of us knew that from the beginning, and so did he despite all his platitudes about not being after our guns. That's exactly what he was and is after so let's don't be gulled by his bovine fertilizer.
Next Update: The gun grabbers have wasted no time. Already today there was a move in the Senate to try to expand background checks on those buying guns at gun shows and through intrastate internet transactions. Senate Democrats (socialists) tried to push this but there was enough Republican opposition for the present to stall any action, but I don't doubt there are lots of Republicans that would dearly love to push it along with their Democratic brethren, because, at heart, they really believe in what Obama stands for and his agenda no matter how much they deny it.
The news release I read said "The FBI is trying to determine whether a couple suspected of the shootings at a workplace in Southern California on Wednesday had links to Islamic militant groups." How much do you want to bet this will turn out to be yet another hackneyed cases of "workplace" violence? That way the media can take the heat off whatever Islamic terrorists might be involved and just try to get Congress to go along with more gun control/confiscation, because that's what this is really all about.
Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal said: "Congress is complicit in these mass murders when it fails to act. That has to be the biggest pile of fertilizer since the Oklahoma City bombings back in the 90s. Some Islamic terrorists kill a batch of people and it's the Congress' fault because they failed to enact gun confiscation measures! Give me a break! However, with recent shootings in Paris, Colorado and now in California the socialists in Congress are fervently praying (to whatever god they believe in) that the public will suddenly repent of its support for the Second Amendment and turn to the instant panacea of fedeal gun control/confiscation. A recent poll also noted that 63% of those polled believed that gun violence can often be blamed on mental health problems while only 23% felt that it was due to inadequate gun control.
With those kinds of statistics it looks as if the shootings will continue...
Sunday, October 11, 2015
Some Flags Are "More Equal" Than Others
by Al Benson Jr.
I recall how, that after the June shootings in Charleston, there were pages and pages on the Internet that contained images of Dylan Roof sitting there with that goofy look on his face and the Confederate flag in his hand, the picture that some have said was photoshopped. However, that situation didn't accomplish quite everything it was supposed to and there has, thankfully, been some backlash and so, unfortunately, the psy ops agenda with shootings at schools and in other gun free zones seems to be increasing. Hardly a week goes by that you don't hear about one or two somewhere--and always in those gun free zones.
It seems that every time Comrade Obama goes on one of his gun control/confiscation tangents there has to be another batch of school shootings to give him enough leverage to keep talking about how horrible guns are and about how much better off we'd all be if only the government had them. He doesn't say it in quite those words but that's what it all amounts to. The media almost never questions why passing more gun control laws concerning areas that guns are already illegal in will do any good. It won't. But, you see, that doesn't matter, because in the final analysis, gun confiscation, not safety, is the real agenda--and the media pundits realize that. Their job is to make sure you don't.
Some of the good folks in Roseburg, Oregon have figured that out when they got out and protested Obama's appearance in their town after the recent shootings at their community college. They knew why he was there, the real reason, and they basically told him to go home and sharpen up his golf game. The media said there were a couple hundred protesters. Knowing how the media plays the numbers game from personal experience at events I've been at, I'd be willing to bet there were at least twice that many and probably more.
So now the recent shootings in Northern Arizona have given the gun control fanatics a new lease on life, but this event also shows the manner in which the Cultural Genocide folks ply their trade. They make some flags and symbols "more equal" than others to use George Orwell's terminology.
As I said earlier, after the Charleston shootings the Internet was simply crawling with images of Roof and his Confederate flag, as well as with articles about how truly evil Confederate flags were and how we need to abandon them wholesale and drive a stake into the heart of Southern culture that no one will ever be able to pull out!
Now there are article on the Internet, and no doubt other places, about Steven Jones and his shooting of four people in Flagstaff, Arizona. There are also pictures, not too many naturally, of Steven Jones with a United States flag that looks like its stuck on the back of his hat. It's about the same size as the Confederate flag that Dylan Roof was supposedly holding. But I notice there doesn't seem to be all that much media commentary about the US flag that seems to be part of Jones' getup.
Just out of curiousity, I did a Google search "picture of shooter in Northern Arizona posing with American flag." On the first two pages of the articles I checked out there were two articles each about Dylan Roof with his Confederate flag and on the third page was yet another. What, pray tell, did these have to do with this shooter in Northern Arizona? It seems that our attention is still supposed to be directed at Dylan Roof and his Confederate flag even more so than to this guy with the US flag.
It seems that the media is not all that anxious to talk about Jones and his US flag. One article I read on www.latimes.com said: "One Instagram photo from 13 weeks ago showed Jones wearing 'American flag attire' and holding a shotgun over his shoulder." That's the only mention of anything about flags in the entire article. When we read articles about Dylan Roof they were shoving the "evil" Confederate flag down our throats, but now, with Jones, the US flag deserves barely a line. Notice a pattern here?
In my Internet search I was referenced to a New York Times article that was supposed to have a picture of Jones with the US flag. However, when I clicked onto the link, and I did it more than once, all I got was a message that said this picture "is not available." If they linked to it for this article, why is it "no longer available?"
I finally did locate a picture of Jones with his US flag on something called freakoutnation.com and even on that I was treated to yet more pictures of Roof and his Confederate flag while getting only one picture of Jones with his US flag.
So I have a couple questions. If the Confederate flag is evil because of a picture of Roof holding it after he has allegedly shot nine people, then doesn't that make the US flag also evil because it is on the hat of Steven Jones who has also, allegedly just shot four people? And why so much fuss over Roof's Confederate flag while only a bare mention of Jones' US flag?
Truly, these two tragic shootings do point to the fact that there is an agenda out there to culturally destroy the South and its heritage while not being overly concerned about the identical situation in another part of the country except to use it as fodder for the anti-gunners' agenda.
Why is one flag splashed all over the media as being totally evil, while the other one, in an identical situation barely rates a mention? Folks, stop and think about it. Between Obama's gun confiscation game and the Cultural Genocide being practiced on us, especially here in the South, we've been had. Sadly, most of us don't have the sense to realize that yet.
I recall how, that after the June shootings in Charleston, there were pages and pages on the Internet that contained images of Dylan Roof sitting there with that goofy look on his face and the Confederate flag in his hand, the picture that some have said was photoshopped. However, that situation didn't accomplish quite everything it was supposed to and there has, thankfully, been some backlash and so, unfortunately, the psy ops agenda with shootings at schools and in other gun free zones seems to be increasing. Hardly a week goes by that you don't hear about one or two somewhere--and always in those gun free zones.
It seems that every time Comrade Obama goes on one of his gun control/confiscation tangents there has to be another batch of school shootings to give him enough leverage to keep talking about how horrible guns are and about how much better off we'd all be if only the government had them. He doesn't say it in quite those words but that's what it all amounts to. The media almost never questions why passing more gun control laws concerning areas that guns are already illegal in will do any good. It won't. But, you see, that doesn't matter, because in the final analysis, gun confiscation, not safety, is the real agenda--and the media pundits realize that. Their job is to make sure you don't.
Some of the good folks in Roseburg, Oregon have figured that out when they got out and protested Obama's appearance in their town after the recent shootings at their community college. They knew why he was there, the real reason, and they basically told him to go home and sharpen up his golf game. The media said there were a couple hundred protesters. Knowing how the media plays the numbers game from personal experience at events I've been at, I'd be willing to bet there were at least twice that many and probably more.
So now the recent shootings in Northern Arizona have given the gun control fanatics a new lease on life, but this event also shows the manner in which the Cultural Genocide folks ply their trade. They make some flags and symbols "more equal" than others to use George Orwell's terminology.
As I said earlier, after the Charleston shootings the Internet was simply crawling with images of Roof and his Confederate flag, as well as with articles about how truly evil Confederate flags were and how we need to abandon them wholesale and drive a stake into the heart of Southern culture that no one will ever be able to pull out!
Now there are article on the Internet, and no doubt other places, about Steven Jones and his shooting of four people in Flagstaff, Arizona. There are also pictures, not too many naturally, of Steven Jones with a United States flag that looks like its stuck on the back of his hat. It's about the same size as the Confederate flag that Dylan Roof was supposedly holding. But I notice there doesn't seem to be all that much media commentary about the US flag that seems to be part of Jones' getup.
Just out of curiousity, I did a Google search "picture of shooter in Northern Arizona posing with American flag." On the first two pages of the articles I checked out there were two articles each about Dylan Roof with his Confederate flag and on the third page was yet another. What, pray tell, did these have to do with this shooter in Northern Arizona? It seems that our attention is still supposed to be directed at Dylan Roof and his Confederate flag even more so than to this guy with the US flag.
It seems that the media is not all that anxious to talk about Jones and his US flag. One article I read on www.latimes.com said: "One Instagram photo from 13 weeks ago showed Jones wearing 'American flag attire' and holding a shotgun over his shoulder." That's the only mention of anything about flags in the entire article. When we read articles about Dylan Roof they were shoving the "evil" Confederate flag down our throats, but now, with Jones, the US flag deserves barely a line. Notice a pattern here?
In my Internet search I was referenced to a New York Times article that was supposed to have a picture of Jones with the US flag. However, when I clicked onto the link, and I did it more than once, all I got was a message that said this picture "is not available." If they linked to it for this article, why is it "no longer available?"
I finally did locate a picture of Jones with his US flag on something called freakoutnation.com and even on that I was treated to yet more pictures of Roof and his Confederate flag while getting only one picture of Jones with his US flag.
So I have a couple questions. If the Confederate flag is evil because of a picture of Roof holding it after he has allegedly shot nine people, then doesn't that make the US flag also evil because it is on the hat of Steven Jones who has also, allegedly just shot four people? And why so much fuss over Roof's Confederate flag while only a bare mention of Jones' US flag?
Truly, these two tragic shootings do point to the fact that there is an agenda out there to culturally destroy the South and its heritage while not being overly concerned about the identical situation in another part of the country except to use it as fodder for the anti-gunners' agenda.
Why is one flag splashed all over the media as being totally evil, while the other one, in an identical situation barely rates a mention? Folks, stop and think about it. Between Obama's gun confiscation game and the Cultural Genocide being practiced on us, especially here in the South, we've been had. Sadly, most of us don't have the sense to realize that yet.
Wednesday, September 30, 2015
If Boehner Was Obama-Lite then McCarthy is Boehner-Lite
by Al Benson Jr.
Earlier this week I did an article for my other blog spot http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com about the resignation of John Boehner as Speaker of the House. This was something many conservatives had been working for and I am sure many viewed it as a significant conservative victory.
You might want to rethink that.
While Boehner was no loss, what ends up replacing him will probably not be any gain but only the preservation of the Establishment status quo with a different name. That's the plan. So they suckered the conservatives when they got rid of Boehner and they plan to replace him with someone that will do exactly what he would have done and many conservatives will think they won a tremendous victory with Boehner gone.
On her web site, www.debbieschlussel.com Debbie Schlussel stated on September 25th that: "Those applauding John Boehner's resignation beware. Replacement Kevin McCarthy is Boehner minus the fake tan and the real tears." She also stated: "Beware, John Boehner's replacement Kevin McCarthy is pro-amnesty pal of Facebook Zuckerberg, is a complete RINO just like Boehner."
Debbie also noted: "Last year, McCarthy's pro-amnesty statements were front and center in a Fwd. Us pro-amnesty video add...The cheers from the right about Boehner remind me of the cheers when the GOP retook both the House and the Senate a couple years ago. I told you then that nothing would change because the respective houses of Congress would be run by Boehner and Mitch McConman. And I was right. Well, I have news for you again. Kevin McCarthy will be a seamless transition from Boehner. He's the same guy minus the orange-y skin tint." Over his time in Congress he has only voted conservative 53% of the time. So how is this any better than Boehner? It isn't, but we are all supposed to be conned into thinking this is a major improvement.
It has been suggested by the Gun Owners of America that people contact their members of Congress and demand that they vote for a speaker that will "Defund any and all of Obama's anti-gun Executive Orders and refuse to allow any votes on any of Obama's anti-gun agenda." And while we are at it lets let them know that we do not want another Boehner clone to replace him. If that's what you end up with what have you gained? Yet I understand that's the game plan. If the Ruling Establishment can't stick it to us with Tweedle-dum then they will stick it to us with Tweedle dee. And they need to know we are wise to the game. And this is a two-party con game because both parties are controlled by the same people. Let us never forget that.
Earlier this week I did an article for my other blog spot http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com about the resignation of John Boehner as Speaker of the House. This was something many conservatives had been working for and I am sure many viewed it as a significant conservative victory.
You might want to rethink that.
While Boehner was no loss, what ends up replacing him will probably not be any gain but only the preservation of the Establishment status quo with a different name. That's the plan. So they suckered the conservatives when they got rid of Boehner and they plan to replace him with someone that will do exactly what he would have done and many conservatives will think they won a tremendous victory with Boehner gone.
On her web site, www.debbieschlussel.com Debbie Schlussel stated on September 25th that: "Those applauding John Boehner's resignation beware. Replacement Kevin McCarthy is Boehner minus the fake tan and the real tears." She also stated: "Beware, John Boehner's replacement Kevin McCarthy is pro-amnesty pal of Facebook Zuckerberg, is a complete RINO just like Boehner."
Debbie also noted: "Last year, McCarthy's pro-amnesty statements were front and center in a Fwd. Us pro-amnesty video add...The cheers from the right about Boehner remind me of the cheers when the GOP retook both the House and the Senate a couple years ago. I told you then that nothing would change because the respective houses of Congress would be run by Boehner and Mitch McConman. And I was right. Well, I have news for you again. Kevin McCarthy will be a seamless transition from Boehner. He's the same guy minus the orange-y skin tint." Over his time in Congress he has only voted conservative 53% of the time. So how is this any better than Boehner? It isn't, but we are all supposed to be conned into thinking this is a major improvement.
It has been suggested by the Gun Owners of America that people contact their members of Congress and demand that they vote for a speaker that will "Defund any and all of Obama's anti-gun Executive Orders and refuse to allow any votes on any of Obama's anti-gun agenda." And while we are at it lets let them know that we do not want another Boehner clone to replace him. If that's what you end up with what have you gained? Yet I understand that's the game plan. If the Ruling Establishment can't stick it to us with Tweedle-dum then they will stick it to us with Tweedle dee. And they need to know we are wise to the game. And this is a two-party con game because both parties are controlled by the same people. Let us never forget that.
Thursday, March 27, 2014
How To Help Gun Control--Lie To Students About The Second Amendment
by Al Benson Jr.
What's one of the best ways to help to foster a "gun control" culture among the next generation? That's easy. Just lie to them in their courses in public school about what the Second Amendment really says. That's all it takes, and if you just can keep on telling the lie often enough and long enough the kids will start to believe it because "it's what we were taught in public school so it must be right." Right? I hate to be a party-pooper, but that is 100% WRONG! Teaching kids fake or perverted "history" is never right.
Many of you have heard of the new "Common Core" educational standards which most states have, unfortunately, signed on for in their public schools, thinking this would improve public school education. Nothing could be further from the truth. Those who know most about this feau-education program have labeled it "Commie Core" and that isn't too far off the mark. The John Birch Society recently put out a DVD on this program which is quite revelatory. I have a batch of them a friend sent me. If anyone is interested send me your name and address and $3.00 for mailing cost and I will send one along to you.
To try to go into all the problems with Common Core here would take up enough space for a small book, so I will cite one glaring example of their "curriculum" in which they outright lie to students about the Second Amendment.
Public school district 186 in Springfield, Illinois (where else but in the hometown of "Honest" Abe) they have a Common Core workbook that deals with the Second Amendment. In the US Constitution the Second Amendment clearly states: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Teach kids that truth and most of us have no problem with it.
However, the version of this being taught in District 186 in Springfield says: "Amendment 2 (1791) Right to bear arms--This amendment states that people have the right to certain weapons, providing that they register them and that they have never been in prison..." Just a slight deviation from the original wouldn't you say?
This public school workbook is telling students that people have a right to "certain weapons" provided they "register" them and haven't been in the slammer. Sorry folks, that's not what the Second Amendment really says. That's what the public school Educrats wish it said. That's what they'd like to get it changed to say. And who would decide which weapons our people could have? Why our completely trustworthy federal government, that's who. You folks who "trust" the federal government nowadays, please don't all raise your hands at once! Rest assured I am not among your number. This government has lied to us about so much for so long, no matter which party is in power (and they're both controlled by the same people) that I'm afraid I don't believe much, if any, of what they tell us.
And where do public schools get their educational guidelines, from the Department of Education in Washington, that's where. So it's in their interest to lie to us about the Second Amendment. If this drivel is being passed off as the Second Amendment in school districts in Illinois, then where else is it being passed off? Louisiana, Texas, Connecticut or New York?
Get a copy of the Bill of Rights and see what the Second Amendment really says, not what the public school educrats would like it to say and what they are teaching our kids that it says. And while you are at it, why not look also for alternate forms of education for your children, such as Christian or home schools? At least, at this point, these would still give your kids the real Second Amendment.
What's one of the best ways to help to foster a "gun control" culture among the next generation? That's easy. Just lie to them in their courses in public school about what the Second Amendment really says. That's all it takes, and if you just can keep on telling the lie often enough and long enough the kids will start to believe it because "it's what we were taught in public school so it must be right." Right? I hate to be a party-pooper, but that is 100% WRONG! Teaching kids fake or perverted "history" is never right.
Many of you have heard of the new "Common Core" educational standards which most states have, unfortunately, signed on for in their public schools, thinking this would improve public school education. Nothing could be further from the truth. Those who know most about this feau-education program have labeled it "Commie Core" and that isn't too far off the mark. The John Birch Society recently put out a DVD on this program which is quite revelatory. I have a batch of them a friend sent me. If anyone is interested send me your name and address and $3.00 for mailing cost and I will send one along to you.
To try to go into all the problems with Common Core here would take up enough space for a small book, so I will cite one glaring example of their "curriculum" in which they outright lie to students about the Second Amendment.
Public school district 186 in Springfield, Illinois (where else but in the hometown of "Honest" Abe) they have a Common Core workbook that deals with the Second Amendment. In the US Constitution the Second Amendment clearly states: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Teach kids that truth and most of us have no problem with it.
However, the version of this being taught in District 186 in Springfield says: "Amendment 2 (1791) Right to bear arms--This amendment states that people have the right to certain weapons, providing that they register them and that they have never been in prison..." Just a slight deviation from the original wouldn't you say?
This public school workbook is telling students that people have a right to "certain weapons" provided they "register" them and haven't been in the slammer. Sorry folks, that's not what the Second Amendment really says. That's what the public school Educrats wish it said. That's what they'd like to get it changed to say. And who would decide which weapons our people could have? Why our completely trustworthy federal government, that's who. You folks who "trust" the federal government nowadays, please don't all raise your hands at once! Rest assured I am not among your number. This government has lied to us about so much for so long, no matter which party is in power (and they're both controlled by the same people) that I'm afraid I don't believe much, if any, of what they tell us.
And where do public schools get their educational guidelines, from the Department of Education in Washington, that's where. So it's in their interest to lie to us about the Second Amendment. If this drivel is being passed off as the Second Amendment in school districts in Illinois, then where else is it being passed off? Louisiana, Texas, Connecticut or New York?
Get a copy of the Bill of Rights and see what the Second Amendment really says, not what the public school educrats would like it to say and what they are teaching our kids that it says. And while you are at it, why not look also for alternate forms of education for your children, such as Christian or home schools? At least, at this point, these would still give your kids the real Second Amendment.
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Gun Confiscation Has Always Been the Name of the Game
by Al Benson Jr.
A recent article from http://www.infowars.com has noted that: "The National Rifle Association has obtained a Department of Justice memo calling for national gun registration and confiscation...The DOJ memo states the administration 'believes that a gun ban will not work without mandatory gun confiscation' according to the NRA, and thinks universal background checks 'won't work without requiring national gun registration.' The memo stands in stark contrast to the administration's public stance on so-called gun control. White House spokesman Jay Carney said last month that the laws proposed by Obama would not take away a gun from a single law-abiding family."
Well, I supposed you might be tempted to say that, in a sort of convoluted way, he was telling the truth. He doesn't want the guns from a single law-abiding family--he wants to confiscate them ALL from ALL law-abiding families!
Gun registration has always been the prelude to gun confiscation and this administration fully intends to do away with the Second Amendment rights of all Americans--except for those Council on Foreign Relations fat cats and their banker friends who exist at the top of the political heap. We surrender our guns so they can all plunder us with impunity.
And those Republican congresspersons that think they can deal with this administration regarding "responsible" gun control measures either have mush for brains or they sincerely hope the electorate does.
We need to contact our Senators and tell them, under no circumstances should they vote for any bill that even has the word "gun" in it, nor for any amendment to any bill that has the word "gun" in it. If they ignore us and do it anyway, which many of them dearly want to do, then we should work to defeat them in the next election. Let's not be so shortsighted that we forget what they do now by election time if they do decide to sell us out.
by Al Benson Jr.
A recent article from http://www.infowars.com has noted that: "The National Rifle Association has obtained a Department of Justice memo calling for national gun registration and confiscation...The DOJ memo states the administration 'believes that a gun ban will not work without mandatory gun confiscation' according to the NRA, and thinks universal background checks 'won't work without requiring national gun registration.' The memo stands in stark contrast to the administration's public stance on so-called gun control. White House spokesman Jay Carney said last month that the laws proposed by Obama would not take away a gun from a single law-abiding family."
Well, I supposed you might be tempted to say that, in a sort of convoluted way, he was telling the truth. He doesn't want the guns from a single law-abiding family--he wants to confiscate them ALL from ALL law-abiding families!
Gun registration has always been the prelude to gun confiscation and this administration fully intends to do away with the Second Amendment rights of all Americans--except for those Council on Foreign Relations fat cats and their banker friends who exist at the top of the political heap. We surrender our guns so they can all plunder us with impunity.
And those Republican congresspersons that think they can deal with this administration regarding "responsible" gun control measures either have mush for brains or they sincerely hope the electorate does.
We need to contact our Senators and tell them, under no circumstances should they vote for any bill that even has the word "gun" in it, nor for any amendment to any bill that has the word "gun" in it. If they ignore us and do it anyway, which many of them dearly want to do, then we should work to defeat them in the next election. Let's not be so shortsighted that we forget what they do now by election time if they do decide to sell us out.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Gun Control In Obamaworld (It's good for the economy)
by Al Benson Jr.
In the convoluted environs of Obamaworld, where sodomy and abortion are hailed as daring and courageous, while Christian virtue and purity are denigrated, gun control is a sign of a healthy economy.
This may sound a bit off-the-wall to normal folks, but, then, you have to understand the mindset of the denizens of Obamaworld and those they front for. Like Marxists, they just don't think like ordinary people. In Ohamaworld there are two classes of people; the criminal class, consisting of both politicians and common criminals, and normal, honest citizens, who, according to the criminal class, live only as sheep to be sheared. Or, as the Mexican bandit said in the movie "The Magnificent Seven" about fifty years ago now--"If God did not want them sheared He would not have made them sheep." Not that I agree with that statement, but it does seem to express the mentality and worldview of criminals, political and otherwise.
I guess we should try to understand this situation from the criminal's perspective. If common crooks break into someone's house and that someone happens to be armed, they might get hurt, even dead in some cases, as recently happened in a nearby city here in Louisiana, where a burglar broke into a house that happened to be inhabited by a deputy sheriff. According to the odd logic of the inhabitants of Obamaworld, the deputy should have thrown down his gun, begged for mercy, and immediately retreated to hide in the nethermost part of his abode. Instead, heartless beast that he was, the deputy shot the burglar. I am sure the ACLU will attempt to find some way to nail the deputy's hide to the judicial wall while trying simultaneously to find a way to reward the burglar posthumously for his courageous act against the "establishment" and in behalf of "the people." You see, in Obamaworld, it's just not nice to resist evil, only good. You know how it is--evil is good, slavery is freedom, and all that.
When Obama ran for president he told the cheering masses he didn't want to take their guns away from them. Since his administration is on record for trying all manner of ways to discourage people from exercising their Second Amendment rights, you have to wonder just who he was talking to when he said he didn't want to take away "our" guns. Who were the "our" he was addressing? Certainly not everyday, honest citizens. He'd confiscate their guns in a heartbeat if he could finagle a way to do it. Not to worry, though, his secretary of state is working of that little problem. The plan is to curtail the Second Amendment via the United Nations, which I'm sure they've been instructed to do by their handlers. As for Obama, he is little more than an empty suit waiting to be filled with the rhetoric of those who really give the orders.
You also have to grasp the fact that the criminal class usually doesn't want to work for a living. That's why they go into politics, robbery or larceny. It's much easier to rip other people off than to sweat all day doing honest work, and to do that, the crooks need firearms for their line of "work." And their work is much easier if they don't have to face any armed resistance (healthier too). So gun control laws work just great for the criminals, and the political crooks who are their kissin' cousins, try to make sure there is as much gun control as possible in as many places as possible. After all, if common crooks can't burgle or rob, how will they make ends meet? But if they can steal and plunder with no armed resistance, why then, they can usually make a go of it financially, and, as they peddle their stolen goods to those who will fence those goods for them and resell them, they have made their fair contribution to the Obamanite economy. See how well this all works--if we can just get more gun control.
Those politicians who loudly howl and protest about crime in the streets, and the need to take honest people's guns away to "prevent crime" are well aware of how this dog and pony show works. Most of them are far less concerned with "crime in the streets" than they are about their criminal friends meeting armed resistance as they labor to redistribute our wealth. In Obamaworld, redistribution of the wealth is really where it's at. You say that sounds Marxist? The "news" media will tell you that is pure coincidence!
Our honestly-earned wealth needs to be redistributed to the criminal class, both political and common, while the "news" media continues to inform us that we should all be thankful to be able to pay our "fair share" to keep the current (or past) corrupt and tyrannical regime going. After all, if you can't trust your government.....?
Since a good friend once told me I was ancient, you can bet I have heard all this before--over and over. I've even heard some folks in churches tell me about how our "contributions" to the IRS are our "fair share" which we should gladly pay for the privilege of being stiffed by the politicians. I wish I could at least say the politicians stiffed us with a bit of class, but I can't even say that. They can't even get a forged birth certificate done right!
And don't think for one minute that the political criminals in Washington really heard your protests or felt your pain before the 2010 elections. Such belief qualifies you for a $100 gift certificate from the Easter Bunny for a hunk of green cheese off the moon--after the purple cow jumps over it! All you have to do is to look at the results we've had since the election to realize that the political criminals are laughing all the way to the bank--your bank--as they siphon off anything you might have left. Congress is already getting set to raise the debt limit, again, the next of many such ongoing raises, and they're looking for ways that enable the Republicans to go right along with this without appearing to do so. Undoubtedly they will find such if they haven't already. Political criminals are not only Democrats. Look at Lincoln!
Needless to say, it's past time that people in this country, most especially in the churches, woke up and realized how they (and their grandchildren) are being and will be fleeced. But, given past performances in my lifetime, I ain't holding my breath until that happens.
In the convoluted environs of Obamaworld, where sodomy and abortion are hailed as daring and courageous, while Christian virtue and purity are denigrated, gun control is a sign of a healthy economy.
This may sound a bit off-the-wall to normal folks, but, then, you have to understand the mindset of the denizens of Obamaworld and those they front for. Like Marxists, they just don't think like ordinary people. In Ohamaworld there are two classes of people; the criminal class, consisting of both politicians and common criminals, and normal, honest citizens, who, according to the criminal class, live only as sheep to be sheared. Or, as the Mexican bandit said in the movie "The Magnificent Seven" about fifty years ago now--"If God did not want them sheared He would not have made them sheep." Not that I agree with that statement, but it does seem to express the mentality and worldview of criminals, political and otherwise.
I guess we should try to understand this situation from the criminal's perspective. If common crooks break into someone's house and that someone happens to be armed, they might get hurt, even dead in some cases, as recently happened in a nearby city here in Louisiana, where a burglar broke into a house that happened to be inhabited by a deputy sheriff. According to the odd logic of the inhabitants of Obamaworld, the deputy should have thrown down his gun, begged for mercy, and immediately retreated to hide in the nethermost part of his abode. Instead, heartless beast that he was, the deputy shot the burglar. I am sure the ACLU will attempt to find some way to nail the deputy's hide to the judicial wall while trying simultaneously to find a way to reward the burglar posthumously for his courageous act against the "establishment" and in behalf of "the people." You see, in Obamaworld, it's just not nice to resist evil, only good. You know how it is--evil is good, slavery is freedom, and all that.
When Obama ran for president he told the cheering masses he didn't want to take their guns away from them. Since his administration is on record for trying all manner of ways to discourage people from exercising their Second Amendment rights, you have to wonder just who he was talking to when he said he didn't want to take away "our" guns. Who were the "our" he was addressing? Certainly not everyday, honest citizens. He'd confiscate their guns in a heartbeat if he could finagle a way to do it. Not to worry, though, his secretary of state is working of that little problem. The plan is to curtail the Second Amendment via the United Nations, which I'm sure they've been instructed to do by their handlers. As for Obama, he is little more than an empty suit waiting to be filled with the rhetoric of those who really give the orders.
You also have to grasp the fact that the criminal class usually doesn't want to work for a living. That's why they go into politics, robbery or larceny. It's much easier to rip other people off than to sweat all day doing honest work, and to do that, the crooks need firearms for their line of "work." And their work is much easier if they don't have to face any armed resistance (healthier too). So gun control laws work just great for the criminals, and the political crooks who are their kissin' cousins, try to make sure there is as much gun control as possible in as many places as possible. After all, if common crooks can't burgle or rob, how will they make ends meet? But if they can steal and plunder with no armed resistance, why then, they can usually make a go of it financially, and, as they peddle their stolen goods to those who will fence those goods for them and resell them, they have made their fair contribution to the Obamanite economy. See how well this all works--if we can just get more gun control.
Those politicians who loudly howl and protest about crime in the streets, and the need to take honest people's guns away to "prevent crime" are well aware of how this dog and pony show works. Most of them are far less concerned with "crime in the streets" than they are about their criminal friends meeting armed resistance as they labor to redistribute our wealth. In Obamaworld, redistribution of the wealth is really where it's at. You say that sounds Marxist? The "news" media will tell you that is pure coincidence!
Our honestly-earned wealth needs to be redistributed to the criminal class, both political and common, while the "news" media continues to inform us that we should all be thankful to be able to pay our "fair share" to keep the current (or past) corrupt and tyrannical regime going. After all, if you can't trust your government.....?
Since a good friend once told me I was ancient, you can bet I have heard all this before--over and over. I've even heard some folks in churches tell me about how our "contributions" to the IRS are our "fair share" which we should gladly pay for the privilege of being stiffed by the politicians. I wish I could at least say the politicians stiffed us with a bit of class, but I can't even say that. They can't even get a forged birth certificate done right!
And don't think for one minute that the political criminals in Washington really heard your protests or felt your pain before the 2010 elections. Such belief qualifies you for a $100 gift certificate from the Easter Bunny for a hunk of green cheese off the moon--after the purple cow jumps over it! All you have to do is to look at the results we've had since the election to realize that the political criminals are laughing all the way to the bank--your bank--as they siphon off anything you might have left. Congress is already getting set to raise the debt limit, again, the next of many such ongoing raises, and they're looking for ways that enable the Republicans to go right along with this without appearing to do so. Undoubtedly they will find such if they haven't already. Political criminals are not only Democrats. Look at Lincoln!
Needless to say, it's past time that people in this country, most especially in the churches, woke up and realized how they (and their grandchildren) are being and will be fleeced. But, given past performances in my lifetime, I ain't holding my breath until that happens.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)