Monday, December 3, 2012

RANDOM SHOTS - Load Your Guns, Cox Suckered, Big "E" Retired, Angry Sandy Victims, And More!

City of San Bernardino, California, Warns Public To "Lock your doors and load your guns"

The reason is that they simply can't protect their citizens. Fact is that the San Bernardino is so bankrupt that the city’s attorney is advising residents to “lock your doors and load your guns,” in the face of budgetary cuts that have downsized the police force by 80 officers.

City Attorney Jim Penman made his comments to about 150 residents at a council meeting assembled to address the uptick in crime, including the recent murder of an elderly woman. Since 2011, the California city has seen a 50% increase in murders.

“Let’s be honest, we don’t have enough police officers. We have too many criminals living in this city,” Penman told KCBS-TV. “We have had 45 murders this year. That’s far too high for a city of this size.”

Councilwoman Wendy McCommack, the organizer of the meeting, added, “You could tell the swell of frustration was coming over a lot of folks. They did not feel like they could get an officer out as quickly to some of the quality-of-life issues that they were dealing with as they would have preferred.”

Under fire for the blunt statement, the city attorney of 25 years didn’t back down. “You should say what you mean and mean what you say,” Penman insisted.

“I’m not advocating that people go out, who don’t have any training, and buy firearms. I certainly strongly caution anyone who has children at home not to have a loaded gun in the house,” said Penman.

McCommack defended the overall sentiment Penman expressed by saying, “We need to take our streets back, we need to take our neighborhoods back and we need to protect our homes, and that’s what I think Jim was trying to say.”

There are many other cities in California going through bankruptcy. Citizens have to adjust their lifestyle to the change that the Obama economy has brought us.

As more and more basic city, state and federal services are cut so that needed funds can go to the non-essentials that the government believes is politically necessary, the more and more basic services will not be available for citizens.

But then again, instead of working on solutions, many are too busy pointing fingers and still blaming Bush for the lousy economy.

As the economy gets worse, I see the federal government through the Obama administration doing less and less to help. He has already won his re-election. Now he has no reason to help anyone.

As for states and cities, I believe that states like California and their cities which believe that they can over-tax and regulate their citizens to spend their way out of the mess that they created are in for a lesson in basic economics.

They cannot keep increasing regulation and taxes on businesses and their citizens, then expect citizens jobs to be created or there to be money to spend. The jobs and the money simply won't be there. And like it or not, even die-hard Socialist have to come to terms with the fact that jobs and the ability for citizens to spend money are the factors that enable towns and cities and states and the federal government to afford the programs they want to push.

Many in government seem to believe that the basic foundation of what is supporting our economy can be attacked through over regulation and increased taxes while they just keep adding on non-essential services.

They are learning that every mule can only carry so much and choices have to be made.



COX SUCKERED?

If Montana citizen William Cox wasn't suckered into being the patsy for an Atheist group out of Ohio, then maybe he should reconsider how his decision to help those Atheist will effect his neighbors?

Religious persecution is not tricky or gray in any sense. It is either taking place or it isn't. 

Sure those attempting to impose their own beliefs on others can try to be sneaky and underhanded. Sure they can be vicious or clandestine. But really, no matter if it's one religion trying to eliminate another or in the bigger sense what's happening in America with Atheist attacking Christians at every opportunity, it is easy to recognise.

The only real way to try to avoid seeing religious persecution take place around you, is to make a conscious effort to turn your back to it as it is taking place. 

The latest example of Atheist practicing the religious persecution of Christians in the United States is taking place on a mountain top in Montana. 

A statue of Jesus Christ near the Whitefish Mountain ski resort happens to sit on federal land. Now to everyone else in America, the normal response would be "Big Deal!"

But no one is saying that Atheist are normal, so the Freedom From Religion Foundation and local Atheist skier William Cox have filed a lawsuit to remove the statue that's been there since 1955. 

A lawsuit seeking the removal of a Jesus statue near a Montana ski resort will go on after a national group of atheists and agnostics produced a local member who says he is offended by the religious symbol whenever he swooshes down the slopes.

The Knights of Columbus and four individuals had asked a judge to throw out the legal challenge because the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation had not named anyone actually harmed by the statue on federal land next to Whitefish Mountain Resort.

Without such a person, the Knights of Columbus argued, the foundation had no right to bring the lawsuit.

It sounds as though the Atheist foundation went forth and found fellow atheist William Cox, who lives 15 miles from the northwestern Montana resort.

I think Cox might have been sucked in to the lawsuit by the Godless group, but then again Cox submitted a statement that says he frequently goes to Whitefish and has skied many times past the statue - which he considers religious and offensive.

“The plaintiff Cox is a frequent skier and he has skied past the statue of Jesus at issue in this case many times each winter,” the complaint states.

“Mr. Cox also plans to continue his skiing on Big Mountain in the future, including this winter, when he will again have exposure to the Jesus statue at issue. As a regular skier on Big Mountain, the plaintiff Cox has frequent and unwanted contact and exposure to the Jesus statue when he is skiing on Big Mountain many times each winter. Mr. Cox perceives the statue of Jesus to be a patently religious display which he finds to be offensive on public land. Mr. Cox perceives the Jesus statue to be a conspicuously Roman Catholic monument," reports The Missoulian.

That was good enough for U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen to deny the Knights of Columbus' request Tuesday and to proceed with the lawsuit. A trial is scheduled for March.

Charlie Harball, the attorney representing the Knights of Columbus, said he had anticipated the judge's ruling but he believed the motion to dismiss had compelled the atheists to produce a person as they are required.

"If we hadn't filed the motion in the first place, we still might not have an individual named," Harball said. "It's kind of forcing people to do what they're supposed to do."

The Freedom From Religion Foundation filed the lawsuit in February, arguing the U.S. Forest Service is unconstitutionally sanctioning the 57-year-old statue maintained by the Knights of Columbus.

The statue was originally conceived by World War II veterans who saw similar shrines while fighting in the mountains of Italy and other countries in Europe.

Several out-of-state conservative and religious groups have pledged their support in defending the statue's existence on its 25-by-25 foot patch of land, saying it represents the history and heritage of the region.

The Forest Service initially decided last year not to reauthorize a special-use permit for the statue, but reversed that decision and said its historic nature allowed it to remain.

Attorneys for the Forest Service said in court filings they had no position on the Knights of Columbus' request to dismiss the lawsuit.

"I could just say, 'Hallelujah,'" Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, said. "It was very obliging of the judge to let it proceed."

I don't mind advising Atheist Ms Gaylor that "Hallelujah" means praise God. It really doesn't surprise me that an Atheist is ignorant about that, after all they are about so much more than that.

This lawsuit is another great example of the lengths that Atheist groups will go to just to attack any Christian symbol. There is no logic to their hate. And yes, you better believe that their actions are motivated by hate.

Federal land belongs to the people of the United States. It does not belong to any one belief.  It actually belongs to all beliefs - as all beliefs constitute the whole of the American people.

It does not belong solely to those who believe in nothing. Their belief in nothing does not give them special rights to federal or state property.

Public properties, city, state or federal, are not administered by Atheists.  They are governed by all Americans. Public property is not governed by groups like the Freedom From Religion Foundation - even if they assume so!

And yes, I believe that all Americans have the right to go to any federal park and sit there and pray to Jesus Christ - or to dance and howl at the moon if they want to - it's their right.

You see, public land belongs to all Americans. And since America is made up of multiple beliefs, all are owners of that land - not just those who believe in nothing like the Atheist at Freedom From Religion Foundation.

It's community property!

I can sit and pray and read my bible at any park in America if I want to because I - along with over 300+ Million Americans - own it.

It's the ultimate room-mate situation and the Atheists ought to find a way to get along with who they are sharing this room with.

If there were three young men in a dorm room in a college. All paying exactly the same for that room. All having the same rights to that room.

One were Christian, one were Muslim, and one a pagan. Would it be proper for the Muslim room-mate to tell the Christian that the bible on his nightstand offends him? Should he have the right to tell another to remove his small not violent not obscene book from the room because he has "frequent and unwanted contact and exposure" to Jesus?

It wouldn't happen. They would figure a way of getting along. They do, same as they do in the military.

So too should the people like Cox or those at the Freedom From Religion Foundation who believes in nothing. They should respect those others they are rooming with.

As I stated initially, if Cox wasn't sucked in and is not just the patsy for an Atheist group out of Ohio - then maybe he should reconsider how his decision to help those Atheist will effect his neighbors?






Christian Symbols Everywehere - They Should Get Used To It!

Across the United States, there are thousands if not millions of examples of Christianity on private, state, and federal lands.

In California, we have a chain of Spanish Catholic Missions on state property. And just as there are across the nation, here we have cities and towns named after Catholic Saints. Even San Francisco was in fact named after Saint Francis Assisi.

The Atheist group representing Cox says "the plaintiff Cox has frequent and unwanted contact and exposure to the Jesus statue when he is skiing on Big Mountain".

"Frequent and unwanted contact and exposure" to Jesus and Christianity is just part of being an American. Like it or not, Atheist groups like the Freedom From Religion Foundation who have "frequent and unwanted contact and exposure" to Jesus should understand that that is going to take place when you're in a nation built primarily by Christian people.

I hope Cox never visits California State's Historic Missions, the crosses and the history would surly offend him. I hope he never goes to cities like San Antonio, Las Cruxes, or San Jose because exposure to those names of Catholic Saints would for certain screw up his day.

He better not go to the National Shrine To Saint Francis Assisi in San Francisco which “is the first papal ordained Holy Place in the United States” according to Angela Alioto. It will certainly harm him in some way. If not only mentally.

Cox should try to explain his neurotic behavior to someone who believes it. Personally I think Cox suffers from Christian-phobia. He is apparently Christian-phobic!

According to his lawsuit William Cox exemplifies Christian-phobia, which is an intolerance of Christians - someone who demonstrates hostility towards or discrimination against Christians.

Even ultra-liberal San Francisco acknowledges that it is named after St. Francis of Assisi and the City officially reveres Saint Francis as its patron saint. And if anyone is ultra-sensitive to the sensitivities of others, its those folks in San Francisco.

America's religious freedom has been the pea under non-Christians’ mattress for more years than many want to admit.

It is a shame that Atheists groups like the Freedom From Religion Foundation cannot respect the history of Christianity in America. It is a shame that they discount the contributions that Christians have made while creating this nation.

They completely disregard the fact that more Christians, than any other belief, have died to preserve their rights as Americans. How many Atheists have fought to protect a Christian's right to pray?

It would have been easy enough to make America a Christian State when it was founded, but they didn't out of respect for others. The reason was that they knew first hand what hate and religious persecution really was.

Atheist would have probably created a state where people are forced to believe in nothing. Yes, just like what the Soviet Union tried to accomplish -  but failed at.

One of the tenants to Communism is Atheism. And yes, I'm certain that Atheists groups like the Freedom From Religion Foundation are irked by the fact that that Marxist Communist Soviet Union - the ultimate example of an Atheist State - failed partly due to their people's desire to worship Christianity.

As with the Freedom From Religion Foundation , Cox also appears Christian-phobic as demonstrated from his intolerance and discrimination against Christians.


The USS Enterprise Retires

The Big "E" is the world's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. And yes, the USS Enterprise, was formally retired on Saturday at a ceremony in Norfolk, Virginia, attended by thousands of crew members who served on the ship during its five decades in the U.S. Navy fleet.

The 1,123-foot (342-metres) long Enterprise was commissioned in 1961 with eight nuclear reactors on board, and the next year was deployed to participate in a blockade of Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Since then, it has played a role in a number of naval missions, including deployments to Vietnam and to the Middle East as part of the U.S. response to the September 11, 2001, attacks. It returned from its final deployment about a month ago, said Navy spokesman Mike Maus.


Nicknamed the "Big E," the Enterprise was the oldest active duty ship in the U.S. Naval fleet, according to the military, and was the eighth U.S. military ship to bear the name Enterprise.

The roughly 12,000 people who participated in the ceremony for the USS Enterprise include many former crew members and their friends, Maus said. The ceremony was held in Virginia at Naval Station Norfolk.

The Enterprise will stay at Naval Station Norfolk for several months and then will move to a shipyard in nearby Newport News, Virginia, where its nuclear fuel will be removed from the vessel, Maus said.

After that, the ship will be towed to the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Washington state, where its nuclear reactors will be dismantled and the Enterprise will be scrapped, Maus said.

There are no plans to turn the Enterprise into a museum, as has been done with other historic warships.

The Navy said in a statement that inactivation and defueling of the Enterprise will have "major impacts on the structure of the ship" and that it would be too costly to "return the ship to a condition that would support it becoming a museum."

To be scrap. To me, to become nothing less than scrap is a sorry oprtion for a great ship which has served America for 51 years. The Navy should be ashamed at the way they treat ships like the Enterprise which have served us so well for so long.



Angry Sandy Victims say Obama Doing Nothing To Help

Hurricane Sandy victims say President Obama’s promise to cut red tape and get them aid in the aftermath of Sandy has proven to be hot air.

Angry citizens vented at FEMA officials at a town hall meeting held by the disaster relief agency with tempers boiling over.

Some 1,000 people, many left homeless by the October 29th Mega-Storm, attended the meeting at Staten Island’s New Dorp High School.

Believe it or not, someone had the nerve to tell them to put their questions in writing!

Yes, that right! Initially they were scheduled to submit written questions that would be picked and answered at random, but the session turned into an angry shouting match where residents booed FEMA officials and accused them of lying.

"I told the president … that FEMA was giving us the royal finger. And he said, ‘FEMA works for me.’”
- Scott McGrath, Staten Islander left homeless by superstorm Sandy.

“We are the people – we are the middle class, and we are getting the finger,” said frustrated resident Scott McGrath, who personally spoke to President Obama and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo when they came to Staten Island to inspect storm damage earlier this month. “You were there when I met Obama, and I told the president … that the middle class was getting the royal finger. And he said, ‘FEMA works for me.’”

“FEMA ain’t doing nothing,” McGrath added. “They keep going around in circles.”

The storm made landfall on the coast of southern New Jersey and traveled north, leaving a swath of death, destruction and darkness. Some 125 people were killed, including 48 in New York. It's been estimated that half of the city's deaths occurred in Staten Island. Millions were left without power for weeks by the storm, which also caused widespread gasoline shortages.

Obama addressed the nation from FEMA headquarters in Washington on November 3rd, promising to cut red tape and bring the full force of FEMA to hard-hit residents.

"What I told the governors and the mayors is what I've been saying to my team since the start of this event, and that is we don't have any patience for bureaucracy, we don't have any patience for red tape, and we want to make sure that we are figuring out a way to get to yes, as opposed to no, when it comes to these problems," Obama said.

On November 15th, Obama came to Staten Island, where he repeated his pledge.

A top FEMA official said agency workers understand the public's frustration, but he defended their performance in the wake of the storm.

Thursday's meeting was organized by Staten Island Borough President James Molinaro, many of whose constituents have been left without homes, food or clothing. The auditorium was so crowded that many people were turned away at the door. FEMA officials dutifully absorbed the gripes, took down contact information and promised to meet privately with homeowners.

But residents showed little confidence that the agency would help, and they said they've been left to fend for themselves.

“Our communities are helping," said Nicole Chati, to cheers from the audience. "Red Cross comes by, rings our bell, says, ‘Come get a hot meal’ and leaves. We help each other and that’s what we want to do, but we need your support.

“These people are frustrated," she added. "Lives were lost. My house ... I can rebuild my house. My neighbor is dead.”

Hurrican Sandy hit in October. So much for Obama's line of BS about making Sandy victims his number one priority. He has not done what he has said and the people there are seeing him for the campaigner and chief that he is. A campaigner that said anything for their vote just a few weeks ago.

And yes, MSNBC's Chris Matthews was happy that Sandy took place because it allowed Obama to look in charge and presidential. I wish he would act presidential now and help those people.

As for jerks like Matthews, I can't help but wonder how he feels now that weeks have passed and there are still Americans living in tents in the midst of winter?



Congress Considers Ending Use Of Dollar Bills To Save Money

OK, so someone has come up with the idea of eliminating the $1 bill all together. And in it's place, use a $1 dollar coin.

So will dollar bills soon be a thing of the past? Congress says the change could save billions.

As lawmakers search for creative ways to slash spending without touching spending on non-essentials, Congress is taking a new look at killing the dollar bill.

A new report by congressional auditors claims that replacing dollar bills with dollar coins could save taxpayers $4.4 billion over 30 years.

The coins last for decades, but the bills wear out and must be replaced every four or five years, the auditors found.

It’s the seventh time that the Government Accountability Office has documented the savings that dooming the dollar could generate.

Now a coalition of mining companies, vending machine operators and other interested parties is trying to rally Americans behind the idea, framing it as an easy way to attack the deficit without hiking taxes.

On Thursday, a House Financial Services subcommittee held a hearing to explore phasing out the dollar.

Several there took the smart road and didn't back the idea of consigning all those George Washingtons to history.

Rep. Lacy Clay (D-Mo.) said men don’t like carrying coins in their pockets or their suits. And yes, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-Manhattan) said the $1 coins have proved too hard to distinguish from quarters. “If the people don’t want it and they don’t want to use it, why in the world are we even talking about changing it?” she said.

Logic from Democrats? Miracles are always welcome!

Fact is, there are reasons why all of the other bills have been redone yet not the $1 bill with George Washington.

Polls show that America's $1 dollar bill is the most recognized currancey note in the world, and of course there is the that most Americans oppose the idea by a huge margin.

An official at the U.S. Mint testified at the hearing that most of the 2.4 billion $1 coins made in the past five years sit in Federal Reserve vaults. The coins are so unloved, production was halted last year.

The switch would save taxpayers $4.4 billion over the next 30 years, congressional auditors said.

But wait, hasn't that $4.4 billion dollar saving already been used for something else?

I believe that there are no such thing as savings in Washington DC. They simply spend those funds somewhere else in multiples of ten.

For example, there is a good possiblity that someone in the Obama administration has already allocated that "preposed savings" of $4.4 Billion to cover the cost of those free condoms that Sandra Fluke is so worried about.

Would that cover the cost of rubbers for Sandra Fluke over her lifetime?

I don't know, but maybe it would depend on whether she remains a student at Georgetown Law where there's a lot of need for birth control.


Obama Voters Banned From Arizona Gun Store

Some are saying its discrimination, others claim its profiling, but in reality it is neither.

I believe that other gun stores can follow suit and follow the letter of the law in the no firearm should be sold to anyone who has demonstrated an inablity to conduct themselves in a safe and sane manner.

If you voted for President Obama, you won't be welcome to make any purchases at one Arizona gun store.

The owner of the Southwest Shooting Authority took out a full page ad in a local Pinetop, Arizona, newspaper that read "if you voted for Barack Obama you're business is not welcome."

Just to make sure the point got across, owner Cope Reynolds also posted a sign on the store's front door.

"If you voted for Obama, please turn around and leave! You have proven you are not responsible enough to own a firearm."

Make sense to me. After all, gun ownship is all about "Safety First!"



Regulation Nation 101

Today is December 2nd, 2012. And yes, in the last 90 days the Obama administration has issued 5,798 new federal regulations. 

To find out which might effect you or your business or our rights as citizens, check out Regulations.gov 

Who manages Regulations.gov?

Well, Regulations.gov is managed by The eRulemaking Program Management Office with the assistance of partner Federal agencies. Yes, the government.

The eRulemaking Program was created in 2002 as an E-Government project and is managed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Yes, the EPA!

The eRulemaking Program says it is committed to:

■Increasing access to and participation in developing regulations and other related documents that impact you
■Promoting more efficient and effective rulemaking through public involvement

There's all sorts of information on this site and well worth a look. And maybe, just maybe, you might want to get involved in the process of making regulations.

We know they're going to make them anyway, that's just the nature of the beast, so why not try to get involved in the process.

By getting involved, maybe we can get the beast to work in favor of the American people? That my friends, would be a change from what has been taking place in recent years.

TRIVIA

She actively campaigned for Republicans Richard Nixon and Barry Goldwater during her High School years. -- Her name is Hillary Clinton!


Story by Tom Correa

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for your comment.