Monday, March 28, 2011

A Very Quiet Declaration of War. With Mexico?


I think everyone who's been paying attention knows President Barack Hussein Obama is against the private ownership of weapons of any kind, and especially handguns. He's from Chicago, after all, a town which has effectively banned almost all guns for nearly 40 years. And so is Attorney General Eric Holder, ex-White House Advisor David Axelrod and ex-Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, all from Chicago. And although not from Chicago, so is State Department Secretary Hillary Clinton. And let's not forget the two newest Supreme Court Justices, Sonja Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Both opined during their Senate confirmation hearings the identical, and presumably coordinated, notion that private ownership of handguns is "settled law," and then voted against the private ownership of handguns at their very first opportunity.


Clearly, the folks running things in D.C. are anti-gun in the first degree. Sadly. And just last week Obama stated that we had to find "…some new way to verify at the point of sale that those who shouldn't be permitted…" to buy a weapon were kept from doing so. Some new way. I guess this law professor isn't aware there are literally hundreds of local, county, state and Federal laws which insure just that. Billy Jeff Clinton did his best to gut the 2nd Amendment when he was POTUS, without success. But, unlike Obama, he didn't have virtually every Chicago pol working with him in D.C. helping him to do so. And as this is written Hillary is actively working with the U.N to enact a worldwide treaty to outlaw virtually all small arms. If passed, this treaty would, for the very first time in history, render our Constitution subservient to the United Nations and effectively erase our 2nd Amendment guarantees. So what's Obama willing to do to try to do to steal even more of our liberties? You just won't believe it. Read on…


Hillary Rodham Clinton has repeatedly stated her belief that guns were being bought in the U.S. from complicit gun stores and smuggled into Mexico, helping to fuel drug cartel violence there. Mexico's President Calderon has agreed with her. So have Obama and Holder. So the question must have been, how do they validate this theory? Simple. In order to make sure this so-called "iron pipeline" really exists, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) allowed nearly 2,000 firearms over a 15 month period to go from gun dealers in the border states to straw buyers that were the accomplices of a gun runner ring set up by the ATF. In other words, in order to prove that guns were making their way from the U.S. into Mexico, they set up a program to make sure that guns were making their way from the U.S. into Mexico! They called it "Operation Fast and Furious." It was known internally as "Operation Gun Walker," because ATF agents were calmly watching the guns "walk" across the border.


Gun store owners repeatedly contacted ATF with fears that purchasers of multiple weapons, especially so-called "assault" weapons, were being transshipped into Mexico. They were told not to worry and continue selling these weapons. These straw buyers were under surveillance, they were told. And they were…by ATF, who watched as at least 1,759 guns, and as many as 3,000, made their way south. The ATF's plan, I surmise, and presumably the Administration, was to bust a drug ring or two and find loads of black rifles which would then be traced back to the U.S. gun dealers. This would provide "proof" that our laws were lax and should be seriously stiffened, unfairly harming honest gun dealers, perhaps putting them out of business, and further gutting the 2nd Amendment. What they weren't counting on, I'm sure, was that two of these assault rifles were found at the scene of U.S. Border Agent Brian Terry's death on December 14, 2010. They were subsequently traced back to ATF Gun Walker sales. Others were found near the murdered body of Border Agent Jaime Zapata this past February. ATF has acknowledged that 195 weapons sold in Arizona under their surveillance have turned up in Mexico. Mexican authorities have said they believe that at least 150 Mexicans have died due to these guns.


So how do we know all this is true? It was reported on the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric. A CBS investigative journalism unit videoed gun sales taking place while ATF watched. They then observed these same guns being transferred from one car trunk to another, and then on across the Border. This evidence has caused an international furor, sparking investigations in both Mexico and the U.S. Mexico is more than miffed, considering they were not told in advance this action was to occur. Sen. Grassley and Rep. Darrell Issa have launched investigations in their respective bodies, as have their counterparts in Mexico. Atty. General Holder has commented that this activity is simply "unacceptable." I would tend to agree. However, I'm fairly sure this whole fiasco wouldn't have happened without his – and likely the President's - direct authorization and knowledge.


Put simply, this activity was criminal, and those responsible should be indicted, tried and convicted. But worse is the fact that this action was a clear-cut Act of War on our neighbor to the south. Having this astoundingly stupid and illegal activity see the light of day, it makes one wonder what else our Government is doing to erode our civil rights. Considering those in charge in D.C. were schooled in doing things "The Chicago Way," I'm pretty sure there's nothing they wouldn't do to remake America according to their warped leftist sensibilities. Those of us who believe what the 2nd Amendment's 27 little words have to say know we're in for a rough couple of years until we get a chance to rid ourselves of these ideologues. I fear for our Country. You should as well.

Monday, March 21, 2011

One Possible Solution

I just had an epiphany. I conjured up a possible solution to the current impasse between the Republican-held governorships, Assemblies and Senates in Wisconsin, Ohio and Indiana, and to an extent New Jersey and Florida, and no doubt others to come, and the public-sector unions in those states.

It seems that the majority of our states are constitutionally required to balance their budgets each and every year. And the recession has made it inordinately difficult to do so of late. We in California know all about that. Since Arnie the Governator promised to "blow up the boxes," California has somehow (mis)managed to go in the toilet to the tune of more than $150 Billion Dollars. That, by the way, is a reeeaaalllllllyyyy big number. But unlike in California, the new governors in the states above listed have begun making the tough choices necessary to save the billions they're upside down. In Wisconsin's case, Governor Scott Walker needs to find $3.7 Billion to balance his budget. And to do so, he's dead set on forcing the public sector union members, with the exception of cops and firefighters (one has to wonder why that exception), to cough up slightly more in individual contributions to help pay for their pensions and their health care benefits. But more than that, just like President Carter with Federal employees, he's planning to eliminate their ability to collectively bargain on anything but wages above any annual cost of living increase. The other states are taking similar measures to rid themselves of red ink. All three states have new laws in the hopper which will accomplish these objectives. The unions are not pleased. In fact, they've been picketing and chanting and singing and sloganeering all day, every day since this tussle began. They've turned the stately old WI Capitol Building into a trash heap, resulting in damages exceeding $8,000,000. It kind of makes one wonder just what these irreplaceable, hard-working, middle-class public-sector Americans do for a living which permits them to take two or three weeks off to protest. It seems to me there has to be an answer to this perplexing problem. And I think I've found it.

The public employee union members should simply convert to Islam. Voila! Instantly they would become sacrosanct and off limits. They would be beyond controversy. We would not be able to judge their actions or motivations, or criticize them in any way, because to do so would be hate speech. They would become a protected class, not to be besmirched in the slightest by the media or leftist zealots or those who revere political correctness. And even if they took that conversion to the maximum, embracing polygamy and stoning and wife beating and honor killings, we still wouldn't be able to complain, because that would be racist. If you doubt that, consider what's happening on Capitol Hill. Rep. Pete King, Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, is conducting an inquiry into the growing radicalization of young Muslims. His critics consider this inquiry to be racist. He is being called a bigot and an Islamophobe. His life has been threatened. He's under 24-hour guard. And the dinosaur media is excoriating him for his "McCarthy-style" witch hunt against those nice young Muslims. U. S. Rep. Shiela Jackson Lee, D-TX, has even gone so far as to demand that the KKK be investigated right alongside the Muslims, because, once again, to do otherwise would be racist. How many acts of terror has the KKK carried out recently? Oh, never mind.

So all you public-sector union members out there, the answer couldn't be simpler. Convert to Islam and you'll be forever free to live high on the hog, scrutiny free, especially after you retire, at your neighbors' expense. You're welcome.

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

What Shuts Down in a Shutdown

Government shutdown. Sounds ominous, doesn't it? We've heard from our young Community Organizer President that shutting down the Government would necessarily lead to Social Security checks not going out. Nor those to the military. And a halt to all Government services. San Fran Nancy ("You have to pass the bill to find out what's in it") Pelosi, our ex-House Speaker who now has to fly commercial, poor thing, repeated that allegation. And Harry ("This war is lost!") Reid, Senate Majority Leader, has offered up even more dire predictions about a Government shutdown. You know, Grandma eating dog food and crime running rampant in the streets. That sort of stuff. Well folks, I decided to personally look into this matter and try and separate the wheat from the chaff. What's the truth and what's blatant, partisan demagoguery, I wanted to know. And here are the results of my research:

We have in the good ol' U.S. of A. what we call "essential services." These are the services that are so important they may not be shut down. Ever. They include mail delivery. The 600,000 unionized mail carriers are exempt from shutdowns. Gotta' get those coupons and Victoria's Secret catalogues out to the folks. Air Traffic Controllers. These are the guys who learned from President Ronald Reagan in 1981 that they are so important that they may not go on strike. They did. He fired them. Their replacements are essential. They stay on the job. Or else. The military. Our Army, Air Force, Marines, Navy and Coast Guard keep on working in the event of a Government shutdown and we continue to pay them. Medicare will keep on truckin' and keep on paying our seniors. So will the food inspectors. Can't allow any Mad Cow Disease to occur while our Congressional leaders are engaged in a wrestling match. Health care for our Country's veterans will continue on unabated in the event of a shutdown. Our Federal courts will stay open even if the Government closes so we can continue prosecuting the bad guys. And last but not least (pay attention here, Mr. President), Social Security will continue working like Santa's little elves, sending checks along to the old folks. The dog is safe from Grandma, it seems.

So what services would be curtailed if the Democrats persist in spending at record levels and the Republicans are unsuccessful in getting them to spend just a wee bit less? Well, no visit to Federal parks or museums for you. You wouldn't be able to obtain a new visa or passport. Pity. Toxic waste cleanup at 609 sites would be curtailed. Recruitment of Federal law enforcement officers would be put on hold until an agreement is reached. All Federal contractors in and around Washington, D.C. would be sent home without pay (ahwwww…). No new patients would be accepted for National Institutes of Health clinical research. And there would be delays in processing applications for Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Explosives applications (I'm afraid you'll have to wait to buy that Dynamite!).

Now I ask you, is this extreme? Considering the plethora of absolutely incredibly stupid laws pouring forth from Foggy Bottom of late, I for one am quite looking forward to a Government shutdown. Remember what Mark Twain said on this subject: "No man's pocketbook is safe while Congress is in session." Just imagine if there were a shutdown in Sacramento. Over the past decade or so our Assembly and Senate members have put forth, argued about and passed an average of more than 950 new laws each year. And the Governor has signed into law an average of half them. Some of my favorites include the Paris Hilton law from two years ago. It's now a crime to drive with your teacup Chihuahua in your lap. And last year's new law requiring you to euthanize a mouse, rat or Guinea pig prior to feeding it to your pet Python. While going upside down an average of $22 Billion Dollars each year for the past eight, these otherwise unemployable dimbulbs found time to worry about the mental health of a rat just prior to being ingested. It makes one wonder what benefits would accrue to us, the taxpayers, if the Feds and the State were to send our lawmakers packing for a few months. Write your Congressman/woman/other and let them know your feelings on the subject…