Progressives are not going to like this because the facts are contrary to what they want them to be.
The states with the lowest violent crime rates are Arizona, Alaska and Vermont. Substantially lower. And as far as violent crime is concerned, there is only one thing those three states have in common...
In each of those states, any adult that is not an ex-con has the right to carry a concealed weapon without a permit or license.
Compare that with the states with the highest violent crime rates - New York, New Jersey and Illinois. States with the strictest gun laws.
And here is why:
Put yourself in the role of a violent criminal. You want to ply your violent trade. You have a choice - do it in a place where the citizens are armed, or do it in a place where the citizens cannot be armed.
Which would you choose? Unless you are a suicidal violent criminal, you would choose to ply your trade where you know the citizens are unarmed (also known as "prey").
Simple logic. And the facts support it. Unfortunately, politicians and progressive liberals do not care about the facts - or your safety. They do not like guns, and do not want anyone to own them. They live in a world of make-believe ideals that may sound nice, but are impossible. Impossible because, in spite of being "civilized", it is still a world where the first law is "survival of the fittest". Predator or prey. Because there is one truth that cannot be disputed - nothing - I repeat, NOTHING - can live but what something else must die. To live, everything must eat; consume. Even plants consume nutrients from other plants and animals that have decomposed. So the reality, no matter how much we may want it to be different, is that life is a competition. As such, many people will resort to violence. And if you cannot arm yourself, you will be the prey - the rabbit in a land of wolves.
/
Monday, August 9, 2010
Friday, August 6, 2010
Target Becomes A Target
"ST. PAUL, Minn. (Aug. 6) -- The head of Target Corp. apologized Thursday over a political donation to a business group backing a conservative Republican for Minnesota governor, which angered some employees and sparked talk of a customer boycott."
Well folks, if Target was worried about a boycott by liberals, once this news gets out they will really have something to worry about - since only 24% of the public are liberals. The rest are either conservatives or independents that often lean conservative.
Someone should tell the head of target that he needs to brush up on his math...
What has America come to when left-wing nuts can threaten people who do not agree with them and their far-left ideals? Since when did it become wrong to have differing opinions, and to ask others to respect those opinions even if they do not agree with them?
I do not support the far left in anything - but I support their right to believe as they choose. If they were true Americans, they would do the same for others.
/
Well folks, if Target was worried about a boycott by liberals, once this news gets out they will really have something to worry about - since only 24% of the public are liberals. The rest are either conservatives or independents that often lean conservative.
Someone should tell the head of target that he needs to brush up on his math...
What has America come to when left-wing nuts can threaten people who do not agree with them and their far-left ideals? Since when did it become wrong to have differing opinions, and to ask others to respect those opinions even if they do not agree with them?
I do not support the far left in anything - but I support their right to believe as they choose. If they were true Americans, they would do the same for others.
/
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Are You Getting Informed?
Much of our information upon which we base decisions are gathered from the news sources we use. But if you, like millions of others are getting your news from ABC, CBS or NBC (or MSNBC), then you simply are not getting the news. You are not being informed.
On Tuesday, Missouri voted on as referendum on the Health Care law. In spite of the fact that Missouri is split 50/50 between Republicans and Democrats, they voted against accepting the health care law by a margin of 71%. That is a whopping number, considering at least 20% of those had to be from Democrats.
Well, the vote was no sooner over than it was addressed by Fox News. But what is really telling is that NONE of the "Big 3" - ABC, CBS or NBC - even mentioned it. Nothing. They were absolutely silent about it, because it did not reflect favorably on their own liberal agenda.
If you get most or all of your news from ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC or the New York Times, then you should not by any stretch of the imagination consider yourself informed.
/
On Tuesday, Missouri voted on as referendum on the Health Care law. In spite of the fact that Missouri is split 50/50 between Republicans and Democrats, they voted against accepting the health care law by a margin of 71%. That is a whopping number, considering at least 20% of those had to be from Democrats.
Well, the vote was no sooner over than it was addressed by Fox News. But what is really telling is that NONE of the "Big 3" - ABC, CBS or NBC - even mentioned it. Nothing. They were absolutely silent about it, because it did not reflect favorably on their own liberal agenda.
If you get most or all of your news from ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC or the New York Times, then you should not by any stretch of the imagination consider yourself informed.
/
Job Exports
I was listening to Chris Van Hollen (D) spin about how it was the Republicans who are responsible for jobs being exported overseas. If not so pathetic, it would have been laughable.
No one who is sane can question there is only one reason an American business would leave the country and take the jobs with it - PROFIT. If it were not more profitable, they simply would not move. Period.
Now, there are two things that determine profitability - the demand for their products and services, and the cost of doing business.
And it is the cost of doing business that forces companies to move jobs overseas.
And no one can, with a straight face, say it is the Republicans who have added to the cost of doing business in America. The two major cost factors are TAXES and UNIONS. Both bleed companies dry.
The Democrats, not the Republicans are the ones who empower and strengthen the unions, which in turn strangle the businesses. And it is the Democrats, not the Republicans who keep raising the taxes on businesses, capital gains and "the wealthy" - you know, the people who actually EMPLOY people.
In America, corporate taxes and other regulations imposed by a Democrat controlled Congress are 2-3 times higher than in China, India, Mexico and even Ireland. So do not be surprised, Congress, when businesses move to China, India, Mexico and Ireland. (The only time Republicans controlled Congress in the last 60 years was the period from '94-'06 - just 12 years out of 60)
In America, unions add up to 40% onto the cost of doing business by demanding wages far above the norm, extra-fat pensions and other benefits. China, India and Mexico are not encumbered by unions.
Not that unions are all bad, but they have become much more powerful and costly than necessary for purposes of protecting workers. And it is the Democrats that keep giving them more power. Just watch - in December, the lame duck Democrat Congress will pass "card check", which will take away an employee's right to a secret ballot when voting for or against a union. This will allow unions to know who voted against them - and who to punish. This will intimidate many to vote for a union when they would rather vote against it.
Van Hollen, you are the typical partisan liberal Democrat, spreading your BS and hoping average folks are so uninformed that they will believe everything you say, just because YOU said it.
NOT!
/
No one who is sane can question there is only one reason an American business would leave the country and take the jobs with it - PROFIT. If it were not more profitable, they simply would not move. Period.
Now, there are two things that determine profitability - the demand for their products and services, and the cost of doing business.
And it is the cost of doing business that forces companies to move jobs overseas.
And no one can, with a straight face, say it is the Republicans who have added to the cost of doing business in America. The two major cost factors are TAXES and UNIONS. Both bleed companies dry.
The Democrats, not the Republicans are the ones who empower and strengthen the unions, which in turn strangle the businesses. And it is the Democrats, not the Republicans who keep raising the taxes on businesses, capital gains and "the wealthy" - you know, the people who actually EMPLOY people.
In America, corporate taxes and other regulations imposed by a Democrat controlled Congress are 2-3 times higher than in China, India, Mexico and even Ireland. So do not be surprised, Congress, when businesses move to China, India, Mexico and Ireland. (The only time Republicans controlled Congress in the last 60 years was the period from '94-'06 - just 12 years out of 60)
In America, unions add up to 40% onto the cost of doing business by demanding wages far above the norm, extra-fat pensions and other benefits. China, India and Mexico are not encumbered by unions.
Not that unions are all bad, but they have become much more powerful and costly than necessary for purposes of protecting workers. And it is the Democrats that keep giving them more power. Just watch - in December, the lame duck Democrat Congress will pass "card check", which will take away an employee's right to a secret ballot when voting for or against a union. This will allow unions to know who voted against them - and who to punish. This will intimidate many to vote for a union when they would rather vote against it.
Van Hollen, you are the typical partisan liberal Democrat, spreading your BS and hoping average folks are so uninformed that they will believe everything you say, just because YOU said it.
NOT!
/
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Incompetent Judges
Today, district judge Vaughn Walker ruled that the ban on gay marriage in California was unconstitutional because "it restricts equal rights under the 14th amendment."
Now, I am not blogging for or against gay marriage. This article is about incompetent, nincompoop liberal judges who abuse their position and power in order to push a phony liberal idea.
It is important to note the reason for his absurd ruling - equal RIGHTS. But as a judge, he of all people should know (and he does know, but chooses to ignore it) that marriage is not, and never has been a right. Rights are God-given, and cannot be refused, purchased or licensed. But every state charges for a marriage license. Therefore, every state recognizes that marriage is a priviledge, like driving, and not a right. If it must be licensed, then it cannot be a right.
So the judge has incorrectly stated the issue, and he did so on purpose in order to push the liberal agenda. As a judge, he surely knows marriage is not a right, but frames it as a right, anyway, because his agenda fails if marriage is only a priviledge.
In other words, Judge Walker is either an ignorant, incompetent fool who has no business being on the bench, or he is a crooked judge, intentionally misstating the facts. In either case, he should never be allowed anywhere near a courtroom except as a defendant for being a fraud.
If the liberals want to make gay marriage legal, they should be honest in their approach, and stop lying, cheating, bullying and using crooked courts and phony lawsuits to force others to accept their ideas.
Frankly, since marriage is a religious rite, the states overstepped by interferring in it and requiring licensing in the first place. Had the state not injected itself, each church would make its own decision based on its own tenets. If a church wants to sanction gay marriage for their congregation, they may do so. If not, they do not have to. It should be up to the churches how they will deal with the issue. The state can just as easily walk away from inserting themselves into marriage and instead offer EVERYONE a state sanctioned civil union that bestows the same legal rights on all couples, regardless of gender. And if a couple wishes to also be united in the eyes of God and blessed by the church, that would be up to their church. And that would be marriage. The civil union would be a right (provided the state does not charge for it). Marriage would be an option for those who want to take it further and seek God's blessing.
Everyone would have the same rights. But marriage, as a religious rite would be regulated by the church.
But the point is - marriage is not a right. Rights cannot be licensed or purchased, nor sanctioned by any government. Rights come from God, not the government.
And the Constitution and the Declaration of Indepence makes that point clearly. Judges should read them sometime.
/
Now, I am not blogging for or against gay marriage. This article is about incompetent, nincompoop liberal judges who abuse their position and power in order to push a phony liberal idea.
It is important to note the reason for his absurd ruling - equal RIGHTS. But as a judge, he of all people should know (and he does know, but chooses to ignore it) that marriage is not, and never has been a right. Rights are God-given, and cannot be refused, purchased or licensed. But every state charges for a marriage license. Therefore, every state recognizes that marriage is a priviledge, like driving, and not a right. If it must be licensed, then it cannot be a right.
So the judge has incorrectly stated the issue, and he did so on purpose in order to push the liberal agenda. As a judge, he surely knows marriage is not a right, but frames it as a right, anyway, because his agenda fails if marriage is only a priviledge.
In other words, Judge Walker is either an ignorant, incompetent fool who has no business being on the bench, or he is a crooked judge, intentionally misstating the facts. In either case, he should never be allowed anywhere near a courtroom except as a defendant for being a fraud.
If the liberals want to make gay marriage legal, they should be honest in their approach, and stop lying, cheating, bullying and using crooked courts and phony lawsuits to force others to accept their ideas.
Frankly, since marriage is a religious rite, the states overstepped by interferring in it and requiring licensing in the first place. Had the state not injected itself, each church would make its own decision based on its own tenets. If a church wants to sanction gay marriage for their congregation, they may do so. If not, they do not have to. It should be up to the churches how they will deal with the issue. The state can just as easily walk away from inserting themselves into marriage and instead offer EVERYONE a state sanctioned civil union that bestows the same legal rights on all couples, regardless of gender. And if a couple wishes to also be united in the eyes of God and blessed by the church, that would be up to their church. And that would be marriage. The civil union would be a right (provided the state does not charge for it). Marriage would be an option for those who want to take it further and seek God's blessing.
Everyone would have the same rights. But marriage, as a religious rite would be regulated by the church.
But the point is - marriage is not a right. Rights cannot be licensed or purchased, nor sanctioned by any government. Rights come from God, not the government.
And the Constitution and the Declaration of Indepence makes that point clearly. Judges should read them sometime.
/
Monday, August 2, 2010
Political Prostitution
Recent events remind me of the following story:
A man sees a beautiful, attractive woman. He asks, "Would you go to bed with me for $10,000,000?"
"For 10 million dollars, why not?" she said.
"Well" said the man, "Would you go to bed with me for a dollar?"
"Of course not", said the woman. "What do you think I am, anyway?"
"We already know what you are", said the man. "Now we're just haggling over the price."
The point is that money - especially big money - tends to tempt people into doing things they know are wrong. And in every case, it is what it is - prostitution.
Now we have a city council in CA and another in Colorado that want to commercially grow, package and distrubute marijuana. They say they are doing it only because of the money. Does anyone believe they are doing it for any other, more altruistic reason? They certainly would not do it if there was no money in it. It's prostitution, pure and simple.
In towns and cities around the nation, local governments are trying to bring in casino gambling. Not because it is a good, moral pasttime. And not because it will improve the quality of life. But just for one reason - the money. Again, governments - and the people who allow such things to occur - are prostituting themselves.
Frankly, I am concerned that America is succumbing to those who, for the sake of the Benjamins, would turn us into the modern day version of Sodom and Gomorrah. And I wonder what price we will eventually pay - not only as a nation, but as individuals, when we come face-to-face with You-Know-Who on judgement day.
/
A man sees a beautiful, attractive woman. He asks, "Would you go to bed with me for $10,000,000?"
"For 10 million dollars, why not?" she said.
"Well" said the man, "Would you go to bed with me for a dollar?"
"Of course not", said the woman. "What do you think I am, anyway?"
"We already know what you are", said the man. "Now we're just haggling over the price."
The point is that money - especially big money - tends to tempt people into doing things they know are wrong. And in every case, it is what it is - prostitution.
Now we have a city council in CA and another in Colorado that want to commercially grow, package and distrubute marijuana. They say they are doing it only because of the money. Does anyone believe they are doing it for any other, more altruistic reason? They certainly would not do it if there was no money in it. It's prostitution, pure and simple.
In towns and cities around the nation, local governments are trying to bring in casino gambling. Not because it is a good, moral pasttime. And not because it will improve the quality of life. But just for one reason - the money. Again, governments - and the people who allow such things to occur - are prostituting themselves.
Frankly, I am concerned that America is succumbing to those who, for the sake of the Benjamins, would turn us into the modern day version of Sodom and Gomorrah. And I wonder what price we will eventually pay - not only as a nation, but as individuals, when we come face-to-face with You-Know-Who on judgement day.
/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)