Fort Hood's Ground Hog Day.

It's almost unbelievable, but you'd better believe it. 

Army Major Nadal Hassan shoots up Fort Hood in November of 2009.  He did so because, although he was an Army major, and a psychiatrist, he also described himself as a "Soldier of Allah" first.  His business card said so.  And he shouted "Aluhu Akhbar" (God is great!) as he methodically mowed down 13 unarmed soldiers and wounded another 30.  He was clearly an Islamic terrorist, except our Insurance-Salesman-in-Chief decided what he did was "workplace violence."  What a load of crap!  He was able to accomplish this massacre because Fort Hood, America's largest military installation, bigger in fact than Rhode Island, is a "gun-free" zone.  

What?  A "gun-free zone?"  How could it possibly be that trained, professional, career war-fighters are armed to the teeth in Iraq and Afghanistan, and everywhere else in the world, but disarmed and unable to protect themselves - or anyone else - while on an American military base?    

The answer is simple:  President of the United States William Jefferson "Bubba" Clinton decided it would be so in an Executive Order back in 1993. And everyone knows that Clinton was among the most gun-hating chief executives our country has ever suffered through.  Except for the one we have now, of course.

The one we have now is on videotape as saying that he'd confiscate all of our firearms if he thought he could get away with it.  And, in spite of his repeated assurances while running for POTUS, and then for reelection, that he would never, ever, attempt to disarm America, or gut the 2nd Amendment, he's done everything in his power since attaining office to do exactly that.  

And due to Bubba's E.O., all our soldiers, sailors, Marines, Coast Guardsmen and border patrolmen are unable to "bear" arms while on post.  How can it be that the "bear" part is not possible, when all Americans are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights the right to keep and "bear" arms?  How can it be that our military are robbed of their Constitutional rights while serving our Country so valiantly? 

So Hassan shot up the place.  He was stopped only because an off-duty local civilian policewoman, who was shopping at the post PX at the time, whipped out her concealed weapon and shot back.  He shot her four times.  She shot him three times, and one of those shots rendered him a paraplegic.  Karma's a bitch, ain't it?

One would think that an event such as this would cause the guy who runs things back in D.C. you know, the Tele-PrompTer-in-Chief, to reconsider that completely insane executive order from Billy Jeff ("blue dress") Clinton, and wad it up and throw it in the trash where it belongs. 

But no.  Nothing.  Nada.  No changes.  No purple hearts.  No special treatment or consideration for the wounded soldiers. No change in operational procedures.  No reconsideration for rendering our military installations safer for our cherished soldiers and sailors.  Nothing.  Just "hope" that it wouldn't happen again, I guess.  And as I counsel everyone, "hope" is not a strategy.  Hope is a wish.  "Hope" is what got Obama elected.  And we're all paying for that today.  Through the nose.

So here we go again.  Oblamo's Groundhog Day.  Another coo-coo soldier gets in an argument, goes all postal, buys a gun, brings it into this "gun free" zone past not-so-stringent security, and begins shooting people.  The very same story as four and one-half years ago.  And nothing, nothing was done to prevent it!  For taking steps to prevent it would be completely alien to the socialist liberal Progressive weenies who are running things.  

A little history here.  All but two of the mass shootings in America since 1950 occurred in a "gun free zone."  All but two.  Think of just the past few years.  Columbine and Aurora, CO.  Newtown, CN.  Virginia Tech, VA.  Fort Hood, TX.  The Washington Navy Yard, D.C.  And now Fort Hood again.  All "gun free zones."  

Think of these several events as ponds just filled with sitting ducks.   Ducks just waiting for nutso hunters to be drawn to these "target-rich" environments like moths to a flame.  With very few exceptions, the crazed shooters in these mass killings were looking to go out in a blaze of glory; to die while making a macabre statement.  They wanted to take a bunch of innocents with them.  And where are bunches of innocents located?  In "gun free zones."  Have you noticed they don't shoot up police stations?  Think about it. 

Wouldn't it make more sense to "harden" these targets?  To staff schools, and forts, and theaters, and shopping malls with armed, professional guards?  Guards ready, willing and able to take out cowardly, would-be murderers before they get a chance to act out their evil schemes? 

Back to Fort Hood:  Our TelePrompTer-in-Chief could have allowed our soldiers to exercise their Constitutional rights and "bear" arms.  He, and his commanders, could even have come up with a negotiated middle ground, where those on duty from each military company, such as the two or three top officers and ranking sergeants in each company, would be issued weapons and ordered to carry them during their tour.  With a hundred companies at Fort Hood, that's three or four hundred additional armed men spread around the base who are ready and waiting to handle any problem that might surface.  But that wouldn't fit in Oblamo's playbook.  He'd rather sacrifice our brilliant heroes on the alter of political correctness than turn his back on his cronies, donors, sycophants and commie, Marxist beliefs. 

I ask you: if the second such massacre could be permitted to occur at Fort Hood, and it just did, what's to prevent the third? Or the fourth? I think you know the answer.  

If you voted for this empty suit, you're partially responsible for this horrible atrocity.  Remember that little factoid the next time you have a chance to pull that figurative handle in the voting booth and choose who to put in charge of America's future.  And those of you who have Liberal proclivities which just won't allow you to vote for the qualified, experienced, capable adult, please, for God's sake, stay home.  

In the name of all that's Holy, I thank you in advance for (finally) doing the right thing...

The "Melowese" Effect.

If you're a news junkie, you know that a woman in Ohio proudly proclaimed back in 2012 that she had voted for Barack Hussein Obama seven times!


Yes, friends, this inner-city resident poll worker said she wanted to make sure that her vote counted, and the only way she knew how to do that for sure was to vote multiple times.  I guess she didn't trust the system.  Her actions proved she had every reason not to.


Oh, and she is Black. 


The reporter, rather stunned at the admission, failed to ask her in follow-up whether she knew that voting more than once was a felony.  A felony, by the way, punishable by spending ten years in the Graybar Hotel.  Hard labor.  But whether she knew that or not, it didn't appear that she cared; she was voting for her guy.  Mr. Hopey-Changey.  And she did so several times.  Happily.


Flash forward to the D.A.'s filing charges against her and the conviction of Ms. Melowese Richardson on the charge of voter fraud.  She was sentenced to five, not ten years in prison, presumably because the judge felt sorry for her because of her abject stupidity.  You'd have to be stupid to brag about committing a felony on national TV, right?  And off to the Big House she went.


An update.  Ms. Melowese was just sprung by none other than Attorney General of the United States, Mr. Eric, held in contempt by the House of Representatives, Holder.  He decided that eight months of incarceration for Ms. Melowese was entirely enough.  He decided that no Federal crime had been committed (!) and expunged her sentence.  I mean, after all, this Administration is rather selective on which laws it decides to enforce.  Some yes, some no.  And this was definitely a "no." 


Ms. Melowese then headed off to a political rally where she was enthusiastically feted by a highly partisan Lefty crowd and hugged by none other than Race-Hustler-in-Chief and MSPMS talk show embarrassment Mr. Al (Tawana Brawley) Sharpton.   You really couldn't make this stuff up.  Nor would you want to.


Now, we know that there were several major cities where more than 100% of those registered to vote actually voted.  In Philadelphia, for example, 134% of those eligible to vote, voted.  That's rather amazing, don't you think?  And what's perhaps more amazing is that nothing was done about it.  There was no report in the Dinosaur Media of how many voted more than once, but any reasonable person could conclude it was a bunch.  We know that Mr. Obama won the election by 52 - 48%.  Imagine, would you, what the actual vote tally would have been if people in Philly, and a number of other deep-blue Eastern cities, only voted once. 


Another little statistic.  Philly again.  In 57 precincts, not one single vote for Romney was recorded!  Now we know that this is statistically impossible.  There has to be some drunken, homeless, high-on-crack, Sweet-Rosie-O'grady-Sucking wastrel bum in the City of Brotherly Love who really meant to vote for Mr. Oblamo and accidentally voted for "that Mormon" instead.  But no.  Not one single vote.


As I like to point out when this subject comes up, Kings County, Texas, is the most Republican county in America.  The very most.  And also one of the largest.  And even Kings County recorded 3.4% of all votes cast there for Mr. Community-Organizer-in-Chief.  But not a one in Philly.  This, my friends, is beginning to look a bit like systematic voter fraud, don't you think?  And, it looks like we're never going to have another fair election, ever.  And I believe we're going to have to have a plan for dealing with this New Reality.  We're going to have to figure out how to turn the tables.  Our way.


And so here's my plan:


Ms. Melowese can vote six or seven times and Mr. Holder finds nothing wrong with her so doing.  Now we know that Mr. Holder would never, ever do anything that was racist.  After all, he's the Attorney General.  So voting multiple times is now the Way Things are Done, right?  Right.


There are five million members of the National Rifle Association.  Five million.  The same group which Holder and his boss want to disarm, post haste.  The thinking is, I believe, if they could just take away all those scary weapons, these NRA people would be sooooo much easier to control, right?  I mean, take away the guns from the ignorant Rednecks and everything would be just fine. 


What if all five million voted for the Republican in the next Presidential Election oh, say six or seven times?  We know Mr. Holder would be quite okay with that, just as he was with Melowese, right?  For, if he wasn't, then he'd be a racist, thug, criminal, partisan, commie, socialist, dumbass, liberal, boil-on-the-butt-of-humanity hack.  Right again? 


And we know there's not enough jail cells to incarcerate all those who elect to vote here, thither and yon if he isn't accepting of this outcome, so what's to stop us?  Oh, Al and Jesse will bitch and moan, and San Fran Nan will get all flustered and pissed, and Harry Reid will fume and bluster, and Little Mikey Bloomberg, that tiny gun-hating billionaire, will be displeased to the max, but Melowese wouldn't be at all upset, would she?  After all, she's out and about and rubbing shoulders with those who think voting more than once is the preferred way of doing things. 


So that's about 35 million votes where the total cast will be less than 100 million.  Me thinks that this should be enough to push the Republican over the top.  That's true even if the number enjoying food stamps and Obamaphones and welfare and free rent on our tax dollar really would prefer the Democrat be elected and the gravy train continue unabated, and therefore vote for the next weenie the Lefties put up, whoever she may be. 


And then we can have another administration that makes things up as it goes along, writes laws on the fly, "weaponizes" various Government agencies so they can punish Democrats, issues executive orders to justify actions that couldn't possibly be passed through the normal legislative process, makes recess appointments to various and sundry agencies without consideration for the Constitution, undoes all the laws that Oblamo single-handedly created, takes vacations to who-knows-where at the drop of a hat, paid for by you and me, ignores pleadings from opponents for fair dealing, runs guns to those in very blue states with draconian gun laws instead of Meheeeko, and lies about anything and everything when the truth would sound far, far better.


I mean, after all, we've had that same sort of administration for the past five years, so who would complain?

Wounded Warriors. Be ashamed. Be very ashamed.

You're watching TV.  The music starts.  Trace Adkins begins to sing.  "Say a prayer for peace," he croons.  And I get sick to my stomach...


No doubt you've had the chance to see the many commercials on cable TV asking for an ongoing contribution of $19.00 a month to help pay for the care and treatment of our Wounded Warriors.  These are the hero soldiers, marines and sailors who have been hurt defending our honor and our homeland against enemies foreign and domestic.  And these are the brave citizens who've been relegated to a kind of Hell because our Country has so far refused to pay all, or sometimes even a portion, of the cost of their treatment.


$19.00 a month.  That's what Wounded Warrior Project  wants you to donate (supportwwp.org).  And you should.  But only because our Government chooses not to step up and pay the true costs of the physical, mental and emotional care our brave boys and girls require.


It fries me that our Country can spent billions, billions, to teach shrimp to jog on a treadmill.  To find out why Chinese prostitutes smoke so much.  To give billions more in aid to terrorist countries who wish us dead.  And to send our First Family all over the world on numerous, pricey, millionaire vacations (as this is written Michelle O and her extended family are occupying an $8,300 a night suite in Beijing).  But we can't seem to afford, or conjure up the gumption to prioritize expenditures for, the treatment of our wounded vets.  To paraphrase Michelle, "For the first time in my adult life I'm ashamed to be an American." 


I served.  Many friends my age served.  But our country's decision to do away with the draft almost 40 years ago, coupled with its cowardly predilection to no longer declare wars (everything since Korea was a "police action"), has left us with a professional cadre of all volunteer war-fighters. 


That means that since the first invasion of the Gulf War, Operation Desert Shield, we've had literally hundreds of thousands of soldiers enlist and serve.  But that number represents barely 3% of our total population.  That means that those who spend their time shopping at the mall, or attending school, or working at the lumberyard, or watching Jerry Springer reruns, for example, do so safely only because of the selfless service of those who choose to be deployed for 5, 6, 7 or even 8 times halfway around the world in some toilet of a country, which for the most part doesn't appreciate our investment of blood and treasure.  What a shame.


And then there are those who are blown up by IEDs.  Or shot by a goat herder who whipped out an AK-47 and blew off his arm while our soldier was trying to help.  Or even those plagued by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder because of exposure to things the human mind should never have to witness.    


And those poor folks wind up begging to receive services from the VA and waiting for years, years without success.  And then suffer the indignation of having their pensions, health benefits and perks cut by a Government more focused on buying votes with discretionary spending from The Uninformed.   


Forget me.  Our Country should be ashamed of itself.  And until those commercials stop running because America finally steps up and spends the time, effort, energy and money to help those who've given nearly their all for us, I ask that you hold all politicians at fault, from infamous military-hater Obama on down.  Please remember that on Election Day.  And if given the chance, please ask one or more of them what their posture is on this all-important question.  Please.


$19.00 a month.  For shame...

What's to stop us?

Yesterday, Sunday, the Crimean Ukrainians voted to secede from their current country and join hands once again with Mother Russia.


Most American pundits were guessing that the vote would come in at the 80%-range (guns pointed at your head can be a strong motivator to vote the way Mr. Puteen wants you to!).  They were wrong.  The final vote was 97% in favor of drinking wodka and eating borscht.  Funny, since there was no "no" box to check, it's surprising it wasn't a big fat 100%.  Oh wait, 100% votes only occur in North Korea.


But, Mr. Oblamo, our feckless Insurance Salesman-in-Chief, has said their doing so has crossed another of his infamous "red lines."  You know, the ones written in crayon?  It seems nobody on the world's stage either respects or fears our boy POTUS.  And that's why they are all beginning to take advantage of him, and therefore, us. 


That got me to thinking.  If the world is unprepared to do anything but issue strong warnings, or nasty letters, or UN resolutions that Russia vetoes, then we have a rare opportunity.  We could invade Canada without fear of retribution!


Canada, as you may know, is asset-rich and population-poor.  There are far more people residing tax-free in Texas, as an example, than in Canada.  And yet Canada is half-again larger than America.  And it has oil.  And gas.  And wheat.  And rodeos.  And Sikh cab drivers (Sikh and ye shall find!  Heh, heh).  And also French-speaking, cheese-eating surrender monkeys living in and around Quebec.  But none of them present much of a threat should we decide to unleash what's left of our hollowed-out, defunded, depressed military and simply grab them up while the grabbing is good.


Yes, dear friends, we could more than double the size of our country, nearly double the size of our oil and gas reserves, and increase the "nice-factor" of our population by several magnitudes.  I'm guessing we could accomplish this little coup without bloodshed.  Only a few really rabid western Canadians would even whimper should we undertake such an action.  And we could give each of them a ranch or something to keep them quiet. 


And just think.  We'd no longer have to suffer the indignation of having to cull through Canada's leftover hockey players to bolster our teams.


And, while we're at it, what's to prevent us from gobbling up Meheeko as well?  Most of them are living here anyway, so there's nobody home there but the druggies to stop us.  And they'd probably welcome our intervention since they sell most of their crap north of El Frontera anyway.


What do you think?  Is this a rare opportunity, or what?  I propose a referendum election to give the Canucks and the Meheekanos a chance to voice their opinion on the subject in advance of the invasion.  Plus, we could film it as it happens, giving us a kind of "Red Dawn" sequel we could show at the local Bijou.  Got to make a little cash out of this if we can, right?  


I suggest we put Little Mikey Moore in charge of this project.  After all, we know just how accurate his filmed musings really are, right?


Since I just learned how popular my little blog has become worldwide, I'm hoping one of the onesie-clad weenie drones in the basement of the White House will read of my suggestion, and not only put in on the official "list of things to do" (just before the next Beyoncé concert, just after the next golf game), but maybe put me in charge of it. 


I await their NSA-monitored phone call...

"Gunfight," Part Deux

I'm pleased to report that there were many, many positive comments from throughout the known Internet-verse to my recent posting, "Gunfight at the NoK Corral."


Apparently, there are those of you who can read English, understand that the Bill of Rights comes only as a Set of Ten, were raised by parents and not wolves, believe that it's quite okay to work for a living and don't think it's your neighbor's obligation to keep you in food, clothing, shelter and birth control pills (Sandra Fluke, are you listening?).


Congratulations to the both of you.


(Actually, that was a little joke.  Heh, heh.)


However, there were a few who did not appreciate my scholarly review of the available literature on the subject. 


Despite my invitation to refute my facts with facts of their own, they piped right up, choosing to vilify me, your humble servant, instead.  The Philistines!  They actually believe (cough, cough) that "Assault Rifles," whatever the Hell they are, kill just scads of people.  SCADS!  They believe those scary black guns should be banished.  Banished, do you hear me? 


The poor, misguided souls.


Yes friends, I know you send your best wishes along to them as they attempt to lift themselves from the depths of disillusionment and join the ranks of the learned.  Perhaps extended rehab would help.  And, having some time on my hands, I've made it my mission in life to help them in that process.  Don't thank me.  That's why God put me here.


So here goes...


Astonishingly, some folks just believe that guns are inherently bad.  They just don't want to believe that guns are tools, like a garden rake, a Louisville Slugger or a pickup truck.  No, they'd prefer to believe that guns come equipped with the sound track to "The Sopranos," looking hither, thither and yon for bullets to load themselves with and somebody to shoot.  They want to believe that if we'd just eliminate guns, then nobody would die.  Well, you poor schlubs, here are the latest statistics for you to try and wrap your addled heads around.  And, I'm    typing    as    slowly    as    I    can    so    you    will    understand.  Ready?  Cue the music...


                                       FACTS: 


            Murders with Rifles:   Murders with hammers/clubs:


2005:               445                                   605
2006:               438                                   618
2011:               323                                   496


Surprised?  I thought you'd be.


Another interesting little factoid:  According to the FBI, more people are killed each year by hands and fists than are killed by murderers using rifles.  Who woulda' thunk it?


Kinda' hard to outlaw hands and fists, isn't it?  But that doesn't mean Obama/Holder/Feinstein/Bloomberg won't try.


And as of this writing, a gang of ten Chinese thugs just finished murdering 29 and injured 150 or more at a train station in Shanghai.  With knives.  Knives!  Shall we go to school on this massacre and institute a massive new, full-bore, all-out program to outlaw knives?  


Maybe we should simply declare that this massacre was caused by "Assault Knives."  We could get the Brady Campaign involved, ask Mikey Bloomberg for some spare cash to mount an anti-knife PR campaign, then do a modified "Fast and Furious" deal and ship some assault knives to cartel members south of El Frontera hoping one might wind up at an American crime scene.  Ludicrous?  Thank you. 


Actually, you might like to know that your doctor is far more likely to kill you than any gun.  According to Mike Adams, Editor of "NaturalNews.com," 19,766 of the total 31,940 gun deaths in 2011 were suicides.  So the actual number of deaths resulting from some errant soul blasting a hole in you on purpose or by accident was a grand total of 12,174!


Doctors, on the other hand, kill an average of 783,936 people a year, which is 64 times higher than that gun death number above.  Your family doctor, if you still have one (unlikely, right Obama?), doesn't shoot you with bullets.  They shoot you with chemo, vaccinations and prescribed drugs.  Waaaaay more deadly than guns.


Let's do the math.  There are 700,000 doctors in America, minus the ones who just retired because of Obamacare while I was writing this, versus the 100,000,000 gun owners in our fine Country.  The Big Question is how do 700,000 doctors manage to kill nearly 800,000 people, more than one per physician, when 100 Million gun owners only manage to kill a bit more than 12,000? 


I would surmise, my dear friends, that owning a gun is monumentally safer than practicing medicine, or even being near anyone who does!   Does a doctor live on your block?  Go immediately into the basement and cover yourself up with grandma's comforter.


Oh, and in closing, I'd like to shoot (sorry) some statistics your way.  According to that august publication, "the Economist," your chance of dying by a firearm assault is one in 25,000.  You are far more likely to die by "intentional self-harm," an accidental injury or a heart attack.  Phillip Seymour Hoffman could have learned something from that last statistic. 


And the good news?  You are far more likely to be killed while walking, choking or falling down the stairs than by a gunshot.  The author didn't compute the odds against dying by a gunshot while choking and falling down the stairs. 


Actually, due to that choking thing, I'm guessing a toasty hot cruller is far more dangerous than a .357 Magnum.


You are "least likely" to be killed by an asteroid impact (74,817,414 to 1), fireworks, (50,729,141 to 1) or a bee sting (25,364,571 to 1). 


So, my liberal, illogical, singularly-focused gun-hating friends, I would end this little posting with the following admonition:  Go to a nearby gun range with a buddy who knows how to handle a weapon.  There are lots of them out there, even in this, the once-Golden State.  Learn a few safety tips and then dig right in.  Enjoy the pure pleasure of punching some holes in paper targets.  Regale in the freedom to exercise one of your God-given Rights.  Hear the rhythmic "pop, pop" of your weapon.  Enjoy the smell of burning power.  Finally understand that old saying, "God made men and women, Sam Colt made them equal."  And then go home and right down on a piece of paper 500 times:


                       I will never be stupid again. 
                       I will never be stupid again. 
                       I will never be stupid again.  
                       Etc., etc., etc.


Oh, and let me close with a quote from a guy who's name you might recognize:  


"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from anyone who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their government."


                              George Washington,
                              Founding Father, First President


I'm assuming you've heard of him.  I hope I haven't overestimated you.


Am I at all certain that this last little bit of additional logic will sway the truly fanatical, glassy-eyed, vacuous, lockstep, pro gun-control minority?  Ummm, no. 


Unfortunately.

Minimum Wage Demogoguery

Our Insurance Salesman-in-Chief is trying to change the subject.


The roll-out of his (Un)Affordable Care Act was so crappy, so ridiculously poor, so Godawfully flawed, and so never-in-history-bad that the Dems are afraid they'll lose the Senate come November.  And, by God, they hopefully will.  Our Country was sold a bill of goods with Obamacare, and the chickens, as Reverend Wright likes to say, are coming home to roost. 


So Obama, ever the champion of avoiding the blame, for anything, ever, EVER, is hoping that pointing to that shiny object over there will take America's attention away from Obamacare.  And that shiny object du jour is chiding American lawmakers into raising the Federal minimum wage. 


The minimum wage now stands at $7.25.  Oblamo wants to raise it to $10.10.  Where he got that strange number is unknown.  My supposition is that he simply snatched it out of the sky, where he gets the rest of his weird ideas.  Maybe while playing golf.  And now he's traveling to safe Blue States to bang the drum.  He's trying to paint Republicans who don't share his populist message, as being anti-poor, anti-underclass, anti-women, anti-gay, anti-American, anti-midget, anti-Chevrolet and anti-apple pie.  Nothing, of course, could be further from the truth (truth being something with which Oblamo and his cadre of sycophants is completely unfamiliar).


Republicans are for market-driven solutions.  They don't believe it's in America's best interest to dictate to small businesses everywhere how much and how often they should use their scarce resources to reward minimum wage, just-starting-out earners.  After all, it's none of the Federal Government's business how much a business pays its workers.  Or even if they pay them.  Americans vote with their feet.  If a business doesn't pay enough, and you deserve more, then move along to one that does.  That's the beauty of capitalism. 


The un-anointed might ask, "What's the big deal?  It's just a couple of bucks an hour, right?"


Wrong.  Here, Mr./Mrs./Ms./Other America, is what's the big deal:


The average McDonald's, as an example, employs 50.1 part-time employees.  They used to employ a mix of full- and part-timers, but no longer.  Obamacare's 29 hour threshold for full-time consideration (after 30, they must be given health care...perish the thought) did away with that.  And with it, ten hours a week an employee could expect to work.  Now, they have nothing but part-timers.  Thank you, Mr. Oblamo.


Mickey D's franchisee's pay their people an average of $8.09 an hour.  So, an average of, let's say, 25 people working at any given time, times the $2 increase Barry wants, equals about $50 an hour.  Multiply that times Mickey's average workday of 18 hours.  That works out to an additional cost of operation to a Mickey D business owner of more than nine  hundred bucks a day!   That's nearly sixty three hundred bucks a week!  More than $300,000 a year!  And it would be more for a franchisee who chose, chose, to pay his folks more, or for those restaurants who stay open more hours per day (a significant minority).  And more, again, if you factor in increased costs for matching employer contributions.  So let's just say that the average Mickey's would lose nearly one-half million dollars per year!


Put simply, the increase Oblamo wants the Mickey D's guys to cough up is quite a bit more than they make off their store.  That would bankrupt a store owner.  They just can't sell that many more Big Macs.  It would also cause people not to want to franchise with McDonald's.  Or Wendy's.  Or Burger King, KFC, Panda Express, Dairy Queen, CPK, etc., etc., etc.


Or ACE Hardware, or your local car wash, or the area mom-and-pop pizza store, or your video rental parlor, or your friendly mechanic.  Or, virtually anyone who tries to own and operate a small business in your home town.  Hmmm.


So, Barry's populist wet dream would put America into a depression.  Of course, if he knows this, he doesn't care.  Presumably, he has folks working for him that know this, and have probably told him, but  I'm guessing he's counting on nothing happening regarding this wealth redistribution scheme.  The Repubs will balk at this B.S. plan.  Then he can blame them for keeping entry-level workers from receiving a much-needed handout.  Those hard-hearted bastards!   They should be punished!


It should be noted that 80% of those who entered the workforce in the bottom quintile finish up their careers in higher income categories.  And, note also that one in eight people in America started out by working at a McDonald's!  If McDonald's didn't exist, where would all those people begin their careers?  Where would little Johnnie and Julie get a job to earn enough to put gas in the family car to get them back and forth to junior college?


Oh wait.  I hear the high-pitched voice of a wussified weenie out there in Internetland screaming that there's another option to keep America's small businesses from going out of business.  They could just raise their prices enough to offset the increased costs associated with keeping Oblamo happy, right?  Yeah, that's the ticket!  Just raise their prices!  Let's see.  A Big Mac would cost, oh, let's say $8.00.  Not including fries.  Or a drink.  Order up a meal and you'd be paying about twelve bucks!  And nobody would be buying.  America would wean itself off fast foot mach schnell.  And the small businesses would still be out of business.  It would just take a bit longer to get there.  And it would bankrupt legions of small business owners in the process.  Talk about an unhappy meal!


Now you know how politics works.  The Dems want you to think they're on your side while they kowtow to enviro-whacko tree-huggers, union thugs, like-minded Mainstream Media cohorts, room-temperature-I.Q. slackers, and commie, pinko, dumbass liberals.  That's so you'll vote to put them in office, or keep them there, while America burns.  Still think it's a good idea to redistribute your local video rental guy's money to increase the minimum wage?


This whole thing would be funny, if it wasn't so tragic... 

Gunfight at the NoK Corral

I recall fondly those Saturday nights during my youth.  I would strap on my nifty leather quick draw outfit, make sure my nickel plated cap pistols were oiled up and at the ready, and count down the minutes until 8:00 p.m. rolled around.  And then, all the drama would unfold...


Marshal Matt Dillon would haul his lanky, six foot-five self into the middle of the dusty Dodge City main street.  The camera would take its position looking directly through his legs at the cowboy dressed in black down the street.  The music would stop and the cowboy would go for his gun.  Dillon, being ever the Fair and Balanced marshal, would wait until the other guy slapped leather to pull his Colt .45 and drill the poor fellow right between the running lights.  And I would draw as well, faster than either Dillon or the cowboy.  I would blow the "smoke" from the barrels of my harmless pistols and twirl them with a flurry back into the gunbelt from whence they came. 


Cue the music, and yet another episode of the iconic western "Gunsmoke" would begin, with my face about 2 feet from the old black and white Dumont TV, on my knees, watching rapturously.


As a kid born and raised in the Midwest, where most young guys like me were issued a .22 single shot rifle at the age of 8 or so, and went hunting and fishing year round, guns were a part of my life, and theirs.  My dad taught me to shoot, and to be a proud outdoorsman.  He was a crack shot and taught me to be the same.  In fact, I was a certified gunsmith by the age of 13 and built custom varmint rifles on order for local hunters.  I was an avid gun collector, amassing more than 50 rifles, shotguns and pistols by the time I was in my twenties (the "Greetings" from POTUS necessitated my selling them off). 


I shot trap and skeet, 50 foot, 50 yard, 100 yard and 1,000 yard NRA open sight pistol and rifle courses and was a member of two quick-draw clubs, bringing my earlier experiences with Mr. Dillon and his foil to a reality. 


My early training did me well as I posted the highest score in the history of the Army's Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri rifle range at 998 out of 1,000 points.  I went on to teach rifle and pistol marksmanship during my military years and enjoyed every minute of it.  I also became somewhat of an expert on the Old West in general, and in "High Noon" shootouts in particular.  And that, my friends, is the subject of today's posting.


Considering all the of the cowboy TV shows and movies during the 50's, 60's and 70's, and the fact that they all were chocked full of shootouts between the good guys (white hats) and the bad guys (black hats), the uninformed could be forgiven for assuming that the Old West was as dangerous as our current day Chicago.  And they would be wrong.


The Old West was far safer than all but a few of our safest U.S. cities is today.  A careful scanning of Old West newspapers reveals that there were a total, a total, of perhaps a dozen classic High Noon-style shootouts over the entire period. 


From the 1850's through the 1890's, the generally accepted Old West period, classic, squared-off, go-for-your-guns shootouts were a rarity.  The average Old West city, in fact, had an average of one and one-half deaths per year by gunfire each.  So why did the cowboy shows feature gunplay so prominently?  Because it would be pretty boring to show life as it actually was.  So what was the truth?


There were almost no shootouts because everybody was armed!  Cowboys needed guns to protect themselves from Indians, crooks, animals and each other.  Oh, and to drive nails into fence posts on which to hang barbed wire.  Everybody wore a pistol and most had a rifle in a scabbard on their saddle.  As such, one could say that an armed society was a polite society.  And so it is today.


Flash forward to 2014.  Last year the number of concealed carry pistol permits increased 30% in Florida.  And the gun crime rate there fell by 30%.  Hmmm.  Do you think there might be some connection between those two statistics? 


The rate of crime in Florida is at an all time low.  Of Florida's 20,000,000 people, 1,000,000 are CCW licensees.  Bad guys don't know which prospective victim is armed, but they know there are a lot of them.  With a one in 20 ratio, their odds aren't so good.  So, they don't engage in classic illegal activities which might result in them getting their bad selves all shot up. 


In California, on the other hand, almost no one gets to carry.  Maybe one in a thousand is (legally) packing heat.  We citizens of California can thank those near-ocean county sheriff's who choose not to offer CCW privileges.  Or, maybe they're just too damn stupid to read the plain English in which the 2nd Amendment is written.


Nor are they afforded that Constitutional privilege in New York.  Or Connecticut, Maryland, Illinois, Massachusetts, or a dozen other Democrat-run states.  And in those states gun crime is rampant.  But, with the exception of Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore and Philly, not as rampant as it used to be. 


And while we're on the subject of Chicago, our Insurance-Salesman-in-Chief's home town, 532 poor souls were offed last year due to gunfire.  Chicago.  The most restrictive gun laws in America are in Chicago.  And it has our Nation's highest gun death rate.  Maybe there's a correlation there also, yes?


A new FBI report says that violent crime continues to fall precipitously nationwide, which might annoy liberals because gun purchases continue to rise.  Gun crimes are down an astounding 50% over the past twenty years, during which the number of guns increased by a like amount.  That's because those of us in the know, know that our POTUS is the most gun-hating Prez in our Country's history.  He's on record as saying that said that, if he could, he'd confiscate all our guns.  Why?  I think it's Rule Number Six in Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals," written by Obama's mentor, which states you've got to disarm the population before you can fully control them.  And all you have to do is look around and you'll see the almost daily new assaults on our freedom which are designed to control us.


Oh, and let's us not slight California's Senator "Lady Di" Feinstein.  She's even more direct in stating that gun confiscation is her dream.  So is New York's Gov Andrew Cuomo's.  His hastily enacted "SAFE Act," following fast on the heels of Sandy Hook, was designed to disarm New Yorkers.  It didn't work.  What it did do was chase out New York's famed gun manufacturers such as Ithaca and Remington Arms.  More are sure to follow.


A bit more circumspect are the Governors of Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, Maryland and Colorado.  They want your guns, but they're too smart to actually say it in so many words (wouldn't want to anger Democrat hunters, now would we?). 


In fact, I would opine that all of America's Democrat governors would just love to eradicate the 2nd Amendment.  They would be quite content if we had no way at all of protecting ourselves from their socialist onslaughts.  But Obama, aided by his socialist Attorney General Eric Holder, and dimbulb legislators like Dem Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Dem Senator Dickey Durbin and Dem House Minority Leader San Fran Nan Pelosi, is by far the worst.  Take a look at Operation "Fast and Furious,"  by way of which a couple of thousand "assault weapons," which you paid for, were slow-walked across the border to Mexican drug cartels, if you need proof.  


Obama has so far failed to enact more restrictive gun laws, despite the furor resulting from the Sandy Hook massacre.  But he'll keep trying.  And we'll keep buying. 


In the first six months of 2013, murders fells by 7% compared with the same period of 2012.  Aggravated assaults fell by 6.6% and robberies are down by 1.8%.  "All the offenses in the violent crime category - murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, aggravated assault and robbery - showed decreases when compared with data from the first six months of 2012," according to the FBI.  Overall, violent crime fell by 5.4%.  Burglary, larceny and auto theft also declined markedly.  And gun background checks are at an all time high.  December, 2013's background checks were double the same period in the previous year.  Apparently, there are others besides me who are buying in a frenzy believing that Obama and his minions will be coming for our weapons just as soon as they figure out how.  And we'll be ready for him, or for whomever rises up in his place.


Who out there in Internet Land would doubt that the more guns there are, the lower the crime rate will be?


So, I say again.  More guns = less crime!  It was true in the Old West, and it's true now.  100 Million Americans own more than 300 Million guns.  And where the guns are concentrated, such as in Texas, Arizona, Oklahoma, Louisiana, etc., the crime rate drops like a stone. 


Argue against that, you gun-hating weenies!