Thursday, February 28, 2013

Cut Defense Department Wasteful Spending Before Cutting Defense

While President Obama is going through his usual drama routine of exaggerating a given situation, this time by ordering that an Aircraft Carrier is to stay in port instead of deploy "because of budget cuts" due to the sequester, others are calling a spade a spade and telling it like it really is.

"It's absurd to think that the government cannot get by with a little more than a 2 percent reduction in spending when every working American had to figure out how to make do with 2 percent less in their paychecks just last month," Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday, referring to the recent expiration of a payroll tax cut for millions of Americans.

That 2 percent reduction in spending seems to be a huge blister on Obama's butt. One that he just can't sit for.

But really, why not? Many Americans want to know why?

Fact is that the DOD has a monstrous $629 Billion annual budget and a huge chunk of that goes to dubious projects that no one can justify as being defense expenses - or even defense related.

For instance, just last year, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) released a report detailing where the Department of Defense could save $67.9 Billion over ten years in "non defense" spending.

He called out the Department of Defense on wasteful spending ahead of tough cuts that could come as part of the fiscal cliff deal reached last month.

Now those cuts would go into effect on Friday and would immediately slash $85 billion from the federal rolls split between the Department of Defense and other national programs grouped together.
This is an effort to trim the national debt.  For instance, the senator’s probe reveals that the Pentagon funded $6 billion in studies that have little or nothing to do with national defense or medical needs related to military service.

So how what took place? Well, during his investigation regarding Department of Defense waste, he and his staff uncovered a great deal by asking three simple questions:

• Does the mission of this program or agency directly relate to the mission of the Department of Defense?

• Does another federal agency or government or private entity already provide the services provided by this program or agency?

• Could these resources be better targeted towards higher priority defense needs, such as taking care of troops on the front lines or reducing our $16 trillion national debt?

What he and his staff found was merely a smattering, a skimming, a “starting point for reviewing Pentagon spending that is unnecessary, wasteful or simply not related to defense.”

He calls this wasteful spending a “rising tide of the red [ink] menace.”

Here is some of what the Coburn's investigation uncovered:

• $9 billion is spent each year on supporting stateside grocery stores, Commissaries. This includes Pentagon-run grocery stores here in the United States. $9 Billion is spent each year on Pentagon-run grocery stores here in the United States.

• The Pentagon also runs its own subsidized liquor stores on bases across the country. But it doesn't stop there, the Pentagon also runs its own microbreweries. And yes, there is one in Fort Sill Oklahoma.

• The Department of Defense (DOD) funded research examining what the behavior of fish can teach us about democracy.

• The Department of Defense funded development of a smart phone app to alert users when to take a coffee break.

• The Department of Defense funded research examining how to make silk production from wild cocoons in Africa and South America.

• The Department of Defense Funded a study that concluded people in New York use different jargon on Twitter than those living in California.

• Eight full time DOD employees serve on Board of Geographic Names, in charge of naming streams, mountains, hills, and plains across the United States.

8. The Department of Defense funded reality cooking show called Grill it Safe featuring two “Grill Sergeants” who performed a 46-minute cooking video.

• The Department of Defense funded beef jerky development. Specifically, the project aimed at making "thin, rolled up" beef jerky from a company in France.

• The Department of Defense funded research examining the social interaction between robots and babies.

• The Department of Defense has spent over $1,000,000 on workshops studying interstellar space travel.

And believe it or not, those conferences asked such important National Security questions, as: "What will interstellar explorers wear?” And, are you ready for this one, “Did Jesus die for Klingons too?”

• The Department of Defense funded a study that determined "a man holding a gun appears more masculine than he would otherwise."

• The Department of Defense funded research to conclude that Petri most likely had feathers.

What is Petri you ask? Well, its a dinosaur that flies.

Archaeopteryx, which existed 150 million years ago and long considered to be the first bird, probably had black feathers which may have helped it fly, according to research funded by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR).

• $15.2 billion spent on education. These include programs to educate children of military families in the US, as well as programs that duplicate the work of the Department of Education and local school districts. It also includes college funding for military members on active duty and duplicates the work of the Department of Veterans Affairs.The Department of Defense spends $10.7 billion on education programs that duplicate the work of the Department of Education and local school districts.

They operated special schools. The report shows how one such military school in Dahlgren Virginia is less than one mile away from a public school.

These special schools operated at a cost of over $50,000 per student.

Imagine that for a moment, $50,000 per student. In contrast, the Department of Education has found the average annual cost per student in America is $11,000 per student.

• $37 billion spent on “overhead, support and supply service” unrelated to the DOD’s primary purpose. This includes more than 300,000 members of the military service performing civilian-type jobs.

The Pentagon's overhead, or desk job budget, is more than the entire GDP of Israel.

• $6 billion spent on non-military research and development. These are research projects that have little or nothing to do with national defense, according to the report.
• $700 million spent on developing “alternative energy.” This includes duplicative and unnecessary alternative energy research being done by the Department of Energy.

Instead of having President Obama tell the American people that we can't afford to put an Aircraft Carrier out to sea because of the upcoming Sequester, the DOD should eliminate:

• Get rid of the 8 full time employees who serve on the Board of Geographic Names, which names streams, mountains, hills, and plains across the United States. No exactly what you think of when you think of a Defense job.

• Get rid of the DOD production company that is producing those 46-minute video productions called Grill It Safe featuring “grill sergeants” showing off their own recipes

• Save $1 million by stopping the workshops studying interstellar space travel. We don't need to spend money one what people will wear on a space ship to another solar system

• Get rid of the program that spends $1.5 million to procure beef jerky advancements from France

• Do as the British did last year, stop redundancy. We can save $6 billion on questionable, duplicative and unnecessary research, including $5.2 million to determine what lessons about democracy and social decision-making could be learned from fish.

We should fire whoever came up with the idea of finding out what lessons about democracy and social decision-making could be learned from fish. He or she should be fired.

Why fire him, or her? Simple, we don't need people in the federal government who have no care or concern as to how much money they are spending on bullshit like that jackass project of trying to study "democracy and social decision-making" of fish.

The Department of Defense invested part of its budget in more than 100 renewable energy-related projects in 2010, even more than the Department of Energy itself, and with similar results: “Many of these DOD renewable energy projects were so poorly planned, they failed to be cost effective or even produce [any] power, wasting millions of national security dollars.”

The DOD duplicated work done by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), doing research “into the very same diseases already being studied by [them].”

The DOD also duplicated work done by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). From the report:

For example, the Navy recently funded research examining what the behavior of fish can teach us about democracy while also developing an app to alert iPhone users when the best time is to take a coffee break.

The Air Force Office of Scientific Research funded a study last year examining how to make it easier to produce silk from wild [silkmoth] cocoons in Africa and South America.

Both the Navy and the Air Force funded a study that concluded people in New York use different jargon on Twitter than those living in California.

This has to stop!
Americans are tired of the waste. And the federal government is ripe with scammers and con artist who see the Department of Defense stupid enough to spend taxpayer dollars on anything and everything - including that that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the defense of our nation.

Obama and others can cry a river of tears because their political donors are going to be left high and dry when the proposed $85 billion is not in their greedy little hands.

And yes, I think its treasonous of Obama to not fulfill his duties as Commander-In-Chief all because money won't be going to study "democracy and social decision-making" of fish - and other worthless programs like that.

Someone should take a hard look at what Senator Tom Corburn's investigation uncovered. Some should be asking why?   Why is the Department of Defense spending our tax dollars on crap that has nothing to do with Defense of our nation?
Senator Coburn sent the following letter to the DOD outlining his requests:

Dr. Ashton B. Carter
Deputy Secretary of Defense
Office of the Secretary of Defense
Washington, DC 20301

Dear Dr. Carter:

Thank you for your service to our nation as the Deputy Secretary of Defense. Like the rest of the federal government, including Congress, the Department of Defense (DOD) will be required to make financial decisions to reduce spending as a result of sequestration. While there is no greater role for the federal government than to defend our nation, our citizens, and our rights and liberties, I believe Pentagon spending can be trimmed in a responsible manner without putting our nation at danger or leaving troops unprepared.

Some have suggested sequestration will require furloughing DOD civilian employees supporting our troops in combat or halting all training for units not deploying to a combat zone. Before any of these more drastic actions are taken there are a number of ways the Pentagon could achieve savings that do not harm our national security readiness or our troops or DOD personnel performing vital military functions.

Rather than furloughing essential personnel, DOD could eliminate other unnecessary jobs that have little if anything to do with defense. For example, there are at least eight Pentagon employees who serve on the Board of Geographic Names, which names streams, mountains, hills, and plains across the United States. The Pentagon has also joined the cooking show craze by partnering with the Department of Agriculture to produce a reality cooking show called Grill It Safe featuring two Grill Sergeants showing off their own “delicious recipes suitable for cooking outdoors” in a 46-minute video. While Navy is reducing training in four air wings, the Pentagon recently spent more than $1 million dreaming up plans on how to send a space ship to another solar system. We can no longer afford such out of this world spending if we hope to ensure our national security needs.

More than $67.9 billion could be saved over ten years by cutting these and some other non-defense defense spending outlined in an oversight report I recently issued entitled Department of Everything: Department of Defense Spending That Has Little To Do With National Security. This report, which is attached, highlights how the Pentagon has spent taxpayer money on non-defense programs and activities since the Budget Control Act, which created sequestration, was signed into law. The Pentagon, for example, paid $1.5 million to procure beef jerky advancements from France. DOD also spent more than $6 billion on questionable, duplicative and unnecessary research through its various research agencies. This included $5.2 million to determine what lessons about democracy and social decision-making could be learned from fish as well as a grant which resulted in an iPhone app to alert users when to take a coffee break.

In addition, the report identifies DOD programs and missions with a tenuous connection to national security, such as the billions of dollars spent subsidizing grocery stores here in the United States, running elementary schools costing four times as much as local schools but with no better educational outcomes, and duplicating tuition assistance programs already provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Instead of modernizing our military’s aging weapon systems, these initiatives have siphoned resources away from real defense needs while duplicating other government programs.

Before furloughing essential personnel who support our troops or compromising our readiness, I would encourage you to consider eliminating or at least reducing spending on these non-defense related activities that are in the defense budget.

I look forward to your thoughts regarding the findings and recommendations of this oversight report on non-defense spending and any areas where you can take action today or in the Fiscal Year 2014 budget request toward this end. If I can ever be of assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.

Tom A. Coburn, M.D.
United States Senator

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Homeland Security Political Insanity, And More!


Department of Homeland Security Political Insanity

DHS releasing hundreds of illegal immigrants right now before budget cuts take effect, yet they're blaming budget cuts that have not taken place yet?

So how does that work exactly? Well, who knows!

The mystery as to how that works is not being answered by the Department of Homeland Security who has started releasing hundreds of illegal immigrants held in local jails "in anticipation" of automatic budget cuts, in a move one Arizona sheriff called politically motivated -- and dangerous.

"In anticipation"? Yes, "in anticipation".

Imagine this situation for a moment. A government agency is anticipating something that may or may not occur. And yes, it is using what they "foresee" in the future to justify foolish moves at the present. It is releasing law breaker using the excuse that they will have to later anyway.

Is that insane or what? Yes, it is.

And no, no one at Homeland Security wants to answer the big question on the minds of those watching such brazen political theater. That big question being:

How will the Department of Homeland Security justify their actions to release thousands of criminals, if a last minute deal is made and what they thought would happen never takes place?

If a last minute deal is struck, how will Homeland Security explain what they have done or how they plan on finding all of those criminals they let loose on America?

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu said Tuesday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement released more than 500 detainees in his county alone over the weekend.

A spokesman for Babeu told that ICE officials have said they plan to release a total of nearly 10,000 illegal immigrants.

The numbers, though, are in dispute. ICE officials said that it's unclear how many ultimately might be released and that only 303 have been released from four Arizona facilities so far, though all those are in Pinal County.

According to ICE, 2,280 detainees are still in custody in those facilities.

Babeu described the move as a "mass budget pardon" and suggested the administration was going to unnecessary lengths to demonstrate the impact of the so-called sequester.

"President Obama would never release 500 criminal illegals to the streets of his hometown, yet he has no problem with releasing them in Arizona. The safety of the public is threatened and the rule of law discarded as a political tactic in this sequester battle," he said.

An ICE spokeswoman confirmed the plans without specifying how many illegal immigrants might be released.

Spokeswoman Gillian Christensen said ICE had directed field offices to make sure the "detained population" is "in line with available funding."

Did you get that, "in line with available funding."

If I were in a position to fire people in ICE and Homeland Security, she would be in the unemployment line in the morning - along with anyone who came up with this blackmail scheme.

And no, I would not stop with firing DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano!

 Gillian Christensen  stressed that ICE would continue to prosecute the cases while keeping them under supervision.

"Over the last week, ICE has reviewed several hundred cases and placed these individuals on methods of supervision less costly than detention," she said. "All of these individuals remain in removal proceedings. Priority for detention remains on serious criminal offenders and other individuals who pose a significant threat to public safety."

The announcement comes after DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano on Monday warned about the potential impact of the cuts.

She said the department "would not be able to maintain the 34,000 detention beds as required by Congress."

"We're doing our very best to minimize the impacts of sequester. But there's only so much I can do," she said. "I'm supposed to have 34,000 detention beds for immigration. How do I pay for those?"

"How do I pay for those she asks?" she asks.

Well, let's try to help the inept manager of the DHS.

According to the Washington Post’s 2010 special report about runaway federal spending on the domestic intelligence apparatus, "DHS has given away $31 billion in grants since 2003 to state and local governments for homeland security… including $3.8 billion in 2010."

Fact is that the Department of Homeland Security and its junior partner, the Transportation Security Administration, has never been subject to serious scrutiny. They have never been forced to make hard choices.

On the contrary, both have been encouraged, by their congressional funders, to spend money on more elaborate equipment every year in reaction to every perceived new threat, real or otherwise.

Having started with 13 employees in January 2002, the TSA now employs 60,000, and in the process of its lavish expansion, the organization found it had money for all kinds of extras.

In 2005, some $350,000 of its $6 billion budget once got spent on a gym; $500,000 went toward artwork and silk plants; and untold millions are spent every year in overhiring, since the determination of when there will be long security lines at an airport has never really been the sort of thing at which the federal government excels.

As for the Department of Homeland Security, its 2010 budget came in at $55 billion, some of which will invariably be spent on things like the $63,000 decontamination unit in rural Washington - where no one was trained to use it; many more biochemical suits for Grand Forks County, N.D., than the town actually has police officers to wear them; and $557,400 worth of rescue and communications equipment for some 1,500 residents of the town of North Pole, Alaska.

That's right, the DHS spent $557,400 worth of rescue and communications equipment for 1,500 residents of a town in Alaska. More than half a million taxpayer dollars on 1,500 people comes out to $3,716 a person.

And no, don't think it stops there! State and local governments have tapped the DHS for federal grants to pay for snow cone machines, sports stadium fortifications, and a training simulation that highlighted a “zombie apocalypse.”

It's true, one Michigan agency received $6,200 to buy 13 snow cone machines on the grounds that they could be used to fill ice packs in an emergency.

In Arizona, officials used more than $90,000 in grants to installs bollards and a video surveillance system at a sports complex used by the San Diego Padres and Seattle Mariners for spring training.

And yes, in California last year, DHS officials approved funding for an anti-terrorism summit that featured “40 actors dressed as zombies getting gunned down by a military tactical unit.”

Back in 2003, the city of San Francisco spent $3.3 million of DHS taxpayer money to pay local police overtime to quell anti-war demonstrations. Despite claims made by then-Mayor Democrat Willie Brown that terrorists might use the protests as a “cover” to attack bridges and other sites, state monitors argued that the expenses were not related to “critical infrastructure protection.”

Records show the $3.3 million that San Francisco got from Homeland Security also covered paying for food consumed by the S.F. police - as well as their gas used in their vehicles.

California's extremely wealthy Marin County received more than $100,000 in DHS surveillance equipment to keep its water treatment system safe from a terrorist attack. But four years after the funds were awarded, state authorities found more than $67,000 worth of the gear still boxed in its original packaging. It had never been used. The rest of the homeland security money went toward an alarm system to protect remote tank and pump sites. Because of the region’s hilly terrain, the system didn’t even work.

Marin County also received $40,000 from the Homeland Security for medical supply trailers that weren’t actually purchased, and $2,300 more went to hundreds of rounds of ammunition - which is not allowable under the DHS grant rules but were done anyway.

The Lincoln Police Department in Placer County spent $47,000 on computer software designed to analyze crime reports so officials could better apply resources but, like Marin County, they didn’t use what they bought.

Colusa County, a quiet agricultural community in California's Central Valley with 21,000 people, sought reimbursement for a $321 Toro lawn mower, records show. Ten stretchers costing a total of $3,100 also were bought by the county with DHS grant funds.

But when inspectors arrived to check, the items were being stored in the original packaging. An official there told California Watch that the stretchers are now ready for immediate deployment.

In Madera County, north of Fresno, officials from the local sheriff’s department hired a contractor to help manage the county’s DHS grant purchases. The list included $200,000 for computer-aided dispatch, a $50,000 hazmat response vehicle, $16,000 in surveillance gear and more for portable radios and respirators.

Problems didn’t appear immediately, but as DHS grant awards increased and grew more complex, the contractor had difficulty showing where the money went. The county finally realized that grant records were in disarray and the contractor needed to be fired – more than two years after he had started. It took 2,000 hours of work to sort things out and months to locate and identify equipment scattered across the county.

Madera County couldn’t produce sufficient records showing how it spent a total of $1.37 million. Local administrators informed the inspector that the county may have “inadvertently destroyed” documents needed to verify more than $279,000 in spending from their DHS grants.

The 8,900-student Sonoma State University bought a 40-inch, $2,300 plasma TV, which the school told government auditors that the TV would be used for “training preparations in terrorism.”

Officials in Los Angeles County spent a DHS grant of $20,000 on a Chevrolet Monte Carlo, $1,500 on a shotgun safe from the “Homeland Security Safe Co.” and $3,558 on 70 replica firearms, none of which were permitted under grant guidelines.

A spokesman of the county’s Office of Emergency Management said local authorities approved the vehicle – a sport coupe used by the sheriff’s terrorism unit. Auditors however, considered it to be an inappropriate use of homeland security funds.

The mayor’s office in Los Angeles transferred $661,439 worth of DHS grant funds to the county sheriff for a 44-foot fast-response boat with a kitchenette and mount capable of holding an M60 machine gun.

The chaos that surrounded homeland security spending in California raises new questions about safeguards as Washington proceeds to directly hand the state and those same communities an estimated $465.2 million in DHS funds as part of President Obama’s attempt to save the nation’s beleaguered economy.

In Florida, the Plantation City Council voted to use its DHS grant of $28,000 grant for treadmills, stationary bikes and training machines for police and firefighters.

In Oregon, a $22,000 grant was used to buy an educational robot.

In Wisconsin, the Onalaska Fire Department in Wisconsin used an $8,000 grant for clowns and puppet shows.

In Tennessee, almost $500,000 from DHS was used to purchase and install closed-circuit security cameras at the University’s Neyland Stadium in 2010.

The grant is part of Homeland Security’s “Buffer Zone Protection Program,” which helps increase the preparedness capabilities of buildings and installations identified as national critical infrastructure assets.

Not to be outdone, the University of Southern Mississippi in Hattiesburg received a $3.5 million grant from DHS to develop curriculum and hold workshops aimed at establishing sports security standards and risk management certification for all NCAA schools in the country.

Government auditors say that even now the Department of Homeland Security can’t gauge how much the grants have made America safer - if at all!

Right now, Republicans in Congress have challenged the numerous Obama Cabinet secretaries warning about the devastating impact to their departments.  

With cuts set to take effect Friday and no deal in sight to avert them, Republicans claim the administration is trying to make the cuts seem worse than they are -- some want to give the administration more leeway so that high-priority agencies don't get hit as hard.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., called the move to release illegal immigrants "abhorrent."

"By releasing criminal immigrants onto the streets, the administration is needlessly endangering American lives," he said in a statement.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., also said "these savings could be much more safely and rationally achieved."

In Arizona, Babeu slammed the move, painting his community as a victim of gridlock in Washington.

"Clearly, serious criminals are being released to the streets of our local communities by this mass budget pardon. These are illegals that even President Obama wants to deport. This is insane that public safety is sacrificed when it should be the budget priority that's safeguarded," he said.

Federal funding for the defense of our country should have a spe­cific purpose and not be available for virtually any use.

It should be directed toward programs and systems that reduce risk and prevent attacks and disasters, not lawful First Amendment activity. It should be managed carefully with appropriate review and oversight by agencies and Congress.

At a time when money is scarce and everyone is looking for places to make cuts, scaling back DHS spending makes a lot of sense.

This is no time for DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano to be acting irresponsible and giving us what some call Political Theater - but I call Political Insanity.

She should be preforming her duties as a manager should. She should not act out and behave as a partisan politician. After all, we the people are paying her to manage her department - not be a politician.

She should knock off the politics or be fired!


Texas public school students don burqas, learn that Muslim terrorists are freedom fighters

If you're worried about what your children are learning in American schools these days, you should be!

Another example of liberalism running wild is taking place in Texas.

Texas Public Schools have come under fire again. This time, a teacher allegedly encouraged high school girls to dress up in full-length Islamic burqas and then instructed the entire class that Muslim terrorists are actually freedom fighters.

The incident occurred in a world geography class at Lumberton High School in the small town of Lumberton, Texas. The general topic of the class that day was Islam.

An unnamed student informed WND that the teacher said, “We are going to work to change your perception of Islam.”

“I do not necessarily agree with this,” the teacher also allegedly said, “but I am supposed to teach you that we are not to call these people terrorists anymore, but freedom fighters.”

The controversial lesson came from a lesson plan provided by CSCOPE, an all-embracing, online K-12 educational curriculum used in 80 percent of the school districts in Texas.

A rapidly growing chorus of critics charges that CSCOPE is a radical, backdoor way for progressives to circumvent both the Texas legislative process and the desires of local school boards and communities. (Ten shocking things CSCOPE is teaching kids in Texas)

A student in the class told WND that the burqa-related lesson focused mainly on the lives of women in Muslim countries. The enveloping outer face and body covering was treated more or less as a fashion accessory.

Apparently, no mention was made of the fact that women in Saudi Arabia and Iran must wear the garment under threat of arrest and criminal punishment.

At the end of class, the teacher assigned a paper about Egypt. A student explained to WND that the topic of the paper was “how Egypt was a good country until democracy took over, and that things were finally corrected when the Muslim Brotherhood came into power.”

State Sen. Dan Patrick, chairman of the Texas state senate’s education committee, told Fox News that he found the photograph of the burqa-clad female students disturbing.

Patrick was also concerned that the CSCOPE lesson apparently blames democracy for turmoil in Egypt and paints the Muslim Brotherhood as some political savior.

“Parents are very sensitive to any issue that seems to be anti-American — that blames democracy for some sort of trouble in the world,” Patrick told Fox News.

The CSCOPE curriculum seems to be inherently agenda-driven — particularly in history and social studies courses. The curriculum provider has foisted some hilariously biased coursework on public school students in The Lone Star State.

For example, CSCOPE has given students material suggesting that Christianity is a cult that parallels the death and resurrection in the story of Osiris, the Egyptian god of the dead.

The same material takes pains to point out that early Christians were accused of incest, cannibalism and other atrocities.

There’s an infamous chart that innocuously describes communism as “the idea of living together in a ‘commune’ where all people work together for everyone.”

Another notorious CSCOPE lesson (now ostensibly removed from circulation) depicts the Boston Tea Party, the famous protest against taxation without representation, as an act of Terrorism.

As WND notes, CSCOPE also defines Republicans as lovers of “big business over labor unions.”

Warm and cuddly Democrats, meanwhile, “will spend more tax dollars on education to benefits [sic] each individual.” (The grammar error is CSCOPE’s, not WND’s.)

Believe it or not, CSCOPE labels fascism and Nazism as “conservative” despite the fact that both ideologies prescribe that the state should control everything and own all resources - both liberal leftist ideals.

But then again, why should we think that liberals would let the truth get in the way of brainwashing young Americans? The truth means nothing to them.

They makes terrorist the good guys and American conservatives the bad guys. And all the while, the parents allow this to take place.


An Alabama Mayor Wants To Police To “Disarm Individuals” During Crisis

Guntersville, Alabama Mayor Leigh Dollar is working with city officials to pass an ordinance that would give authority to police to “disarm individuals” during a disaster.

According to the new ordinance officers could disarm individuals, if necessary during disasters. Mayor Dollar says it grants authority to police officers to protect themselves.

“We are not trying to infringe upon anyone constitutional rights whatsoever. It’s just to protect the workers working out there in a disaster,” Dollar said.

Of course if you believe Mayor Dollar, then you have proven yourself too stupid to safely operate a firearm and none of this should matter to you.

The reason that I say that is that an confiscation is confiscation, any attempt to seize guns from law abiding citizens is indeed gun seizure.

Any confiscation, any seizure of firearms for any reason not in conjunction with a felony is in fact an infringe on people’s constitutional rights, they are actually doing it! What about people protecting themselves? The mayor claims to be concerned for the police, but I see nothing in her statement indicating that she is concerned for the citizens of her town.

Demanding that this take place in the event of a disaster only makes the people more vulnerable, not safer. Just look at what took place during the disaster we named Hurricane Katrina here and here. This was a clear violation of the people and their property by the government and military. In fact, I can guarantee that if they attempted that around my neck of the woods, it would be the last time many gun grabbers would do so.

Guntersville Music Academy music teacher Paul Landry opposes the ordinance stating, “Well, it seems like an infringement on the 2nd Amendment and that’s the biggest problem I have with it.” He’s right, only there is nothing “seeming” about it. It is most definitely that.

Mayor Dollar says that the town needs the new law and wants to model it after Tuscaloosa, which already has such a similar legislation on the books.

On March 4th, this ordinance will be on the agenda at the next Guntersville City Council meeting.

Citizens of Guntersville, if you find yourself in a disaster and the cops coming for your arms and you don’t stand up at this meeting and be heard, then you have no one to blame but yourself.


Florida foils Democrat web-based voter fraud plot, but next attempt could be more elusive

A Florida case could signal the wave of the future in voter fraud.

South Florida election officials have reportedly foiled a plot to fraudulently apply online for thousands of absentee ballots in three 2012 primaries, but the masterminds remain at large amid concern that they could be successful the next time around by making minor adjustments.

Officials in the state’s Miami-Dade region said they blocked the effort to get 2,552 absentee ballots in three August primaries because the requests rolled in just minutes apart on July 7, 2012, according to The Miami Herald, which conducted its own investigation.

A six-month grand jury probe found the requests were made under the cover of international Internet provider addresses and were limited to three races --- a congressional race in which the hackers tried to request absentee ballots for Democratic voters and two state legislative races in which they tried to get ballots for Republican voters.

But the newspaper found at least two of the requests originated in Miami and could have been further traced, which purported has prompted State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle to review at least some parts of the case.

The absentee ballots still would have gone to the rightful voters. So short of stealing ballots from mailbox, the hackers’ only way to have swayed or flipped the voters would likely have been to inundate them with calls and mailers.

Officials say the ballots would not have changed the outcome of the races. But there is a concern that another attempt, with hackers slowing the pace of the requests, could go undetected.

Steven Rambam, a New York-based private investigator with experience in computer database and privacy issues, told the newspaper that the hackers -- with a little more skill -- could have included computer code to keep the program from triggering the elections department’s safeguard.


Republicans urge Democrats to condemn their PAC's disgusting comments regarding Senator McConnell's "Chinese" wife


FILE: August 28, 2012: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and his wife, former Labor Secretary Elaine Chao at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla.AP

Republicans on Tuesday condemned a Liberal Super PAC’s recent online comments about Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s wife, saying the racially motivated and “disgusting” remarks should be condemned at the highest level of the Democratic Party.

The group, Progress Kentucky, purportedly said in a recent tweet that McConnell’s Taiwan-born wife, former Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, “has the ear of (Sen. McConnell) -- she's his wife. May explain why your job moved to China!"

Imagine that! Can you imagine if a Conservative PAC said something similar. There would be outrage on every liberal mainstream media network.

The tweet does not appear on Progress Kentucky’s Twitter feed, but group spokesman Curtis Morrison acknowledged its existence Tuesday and said it would be removed.

Morrison told local radio station WFPL-FM that a group volunteer sent the tweet.

"It’s not an official statement,” he said. "It’s a tweet. And we will remove it if it’s wrong. … Inferring that Elaine Chao is not a U.S. citizen was not our intention."

Another tweet from Progress’ account suggested Chao’s "Chinese” money is buying state elections, referring to members of her family last year giving $80,000 to the state Republican Party.

Jesse Benton, the manager of McConnell’s 2014 reelection campaign, said race baiting for political gain is “unconscionable” and that Progress Kentucky “should be ashamed.”

“We hope all Americans can agree that these disgusting tactics have no place in American," he said.

National Republican Senatorial Committee spokesman Brad Dayspring also said the comments were “disgusting” and called for them to be condemned by such high-ranking Democrats as President Obama adviser Jim Messina, Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

I hope no one is holding their breath. Democrats don't apologize even when their true racism shows.


Father wants school dress code changed after son asked to remove Marines T-shirt

By Joshua Rhett Miller
Published February 26, 2013

Daniel McIntyre, of Genoa, Ill., told that his 14-year-old son, Michael, was asked to remove this T-shirt during reading class at Genoa-Kingston Middle School on Monday. (Courtesy: Daniel McIntyre)

An Illinois father wants a school district to reconsider its dress code after his son was asked to remove a U.S. Marines T-shirt or be suspended, has learned.

Daniel McIntyre, 44, of Genoa, told that his 14-year-old son, Michael, was asked to remove the T-shirt by eighth-grade teacher Karen Deverell during reading class at Genoa-Kingston Middle School on Monday.

Deverell, citing the school’s dress code, said the garment’s interlocking rifles was problematic and had to be removed from sight, McIntyre said.

[As a side note: The "crossed rifles" of the Marine Corps is significant in that it symbolizes that all U.S. Marines are first and foremost trained Infantrymen. No matter if their Occupational Skill is as an air traffic controller or cook or a pilot, every Marine is taught to be a basic infantryman first.]

“My son is very proud of the Marines, and, in fact, of all the services,” McIntyre said. “So he wears it with pride. There are two rifles crossed underneath the word ‘Marines’ on the shirt, but to me that should be overlooked. It’s more about the Marines instead of the rifles.”

"This is not right. This policy that they have in place can obviously be loosely interpreted, so they need to change it.”
- Daniel McIntyre, father

McIntyre said his son was initially threatened with suspension before complying with Deverell’s request to turn it inside out. He has worn the T-shirt to school many times before without incident, McIntyre said.

“He was upset, he couldn’t understand it,” he continued. “He couldn’t understand why a teacher would make him do that.”

Brett McPherson, the school’s principal, referred questions to Genoa-Kingston Superintendent Joe Burgess, who reiterated that the shirt is not in violation of the district’s dress policy.

“We’ve been accused of a lot of things, but our middle school is well-known for its support of the armed forces,” Burgess told “That’s why this is so disheartening to all of us.”

Deverell did not inform school officials of the incident, Burgess said, adding that McPherson would have quickly determined the shirt to be a non-issue if consulted.

“Nobody took the next step of asking the principal or making them aware of it,” Burgess said. “The teacher is obviously allowed to question anything they feel might be a violation of dress code, but again, had an administrator been allowed to respond, this could have been taken care of yesterday.”

Students within the district are expected to wear clothing in a “neat, clean and well-fitting manner,” according to a copy of the policy, which was obtained by

While addressing “violent behavior,” gang symbols and other inappropriate images, it does not explicitly ban images of guns and other weapons.

“Student dress (including accessories) may not advertise, promote, or picture alcoholic beverages, illegal drugs, drug paraphernalia, violent behavior, or other inappropriate images,” it reads. “Student dress (including accessories) may not display lewd, vulgar or obscene or offensive language or symbols, including gang symbols.”

Hats, bandannas and sunglasses are also banned inside the building. Students who violate the dress code will be asked to wear their gym uniform, it reads.

District officials, meanwhile, said its students are dutiful patriots who support U.S. troops as much as they can.

“The students and staff regularly write letters of support to the troops, and hold patriotic ceremonies for Veterans Day and Patriots' Day,” a statement obtained by reads.

“We very much support the armed forces and were disheartened to learn of this matter through the media. The administration and school handbook agree that this shirt is not a violation of the dress code. We also take school safety very earnestly and it needs to be recognized that is a topic that we also take very seriously and support our students and staff in providing a safe environment to learn, teach and work in on a daily basis.”

McIntyre said he believes the incident is likely an overreaction to recent mass shootings, particularly to the Dec. 14, 2012, massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in which 20 students and six staffers were killed after Adam Lanza killed his mother at their Connecticut home.

“I backed him up and he knows that,” McIntyre said of his son. “This is not right. This policy that they have in place can obviously be loosely interpreted, so they need to change it.”

After I read the above story from FoxNews, I couldn't help but wonder if Karen Deverell would have been be more tolerant of a student wearing a Che Guavara t-shirt.

Even though Che Guavara slaughtered thousands of political prisoners in Cuba, he is a Hero of the left.

Obama smiling after being given a Che t-shirt. 
It didn't seem to matter if Che was known as the Butcher of La Cabana for good reason.

Story by Tom Correa

Monday, February 25, 2013

Obama Gun Plans Won't Work Without Confiscation?


Justice Dept Memo: Obama Gun Plans Won't Work Without Confiscation 

The National Rifle Association is using a Justice Department memo it obtained to argue in ads that the Obama administration believes its gun control plans won't work unless the government seizes firearms and requires national gun registration.

The NRA's assertion and its obtaining of the memo in the first place underscore the no-holds-barred battle under way as Washington's fight over gun restrictions heats up.

The memo, under the name of one of the Justice Department's leading crime researchers, critiques the effectiveness of gun control proposals, including President Barack Obama's gun control plans. 

The memo says requiring background checks for more gun purchases could help, but also could lead to more illicit weapons sales.

It says banning assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines produced in the future but exempting those already owned by the public would have limited impact because people now own so many of those items.

It also says that even total elimination of assault weapons would have little overall effect on gun killings because assault weapons account for a limited proportion of those crimes.

The nine-page document says the success of universal background checks would depend in part on "requiring gun registration," and says gun buybacks would not be effective "unless massive and coupled with a ban."

The Obama administration has proposed a national database, national gun registration database, which would include a national list of gun owners where the names of law-abiding Americans would be kept on file.

Yes, the names of citizens who have not broken the law would be kept on file with the federal government for reasons that the administration has yet to explain. Most Americans believe it is for reasons of confiscation.
The memo has the look of a preliminary document and calls itself "a cursory summary" and assessment of gun curb initiatives. The administration has not release it officially.

The NRA has posted the memo on one of its websites and cites it in advertising aimed at stopping Obama's efforts to institute a national gun ban that would ban more than just assault weapons.

The liberal media wants Americans to believe that the NRA is fighting Obama's efforts to contain gun violence, but they are again side stepping the truth and trying to make a gun ban look like a good thing while it violates our Constitutional Rights.

The ad says the paper shows that the administration "believes that a gun ban will not work without mandatory gun confiscation" and thinks universal background checks "won't work without requiring national gun registration."
"Still think President Obama's proposals sound reasonable?" says Chris W. Cox of the NRA in the ad.

Last month, the big lie coming out of the White House by way of its spokesman Jay Carney said that none of Obama's proposals "would take away a gun from a single law-abiding American."

And yes, while administration officials have said their plans would not result in gun seizures or a national gun registry, they seem to forget that on January 5th it was reported that Obama called for a national database.

He said he wanted "universal background checks for firearm buyers (and) track the movement and sale of weapons through a national database."

White House refuses to state why they need national gun registration, a national database, to track the legal movement and legal sale of guns. 

While the memo's analysis of gun curb proposals presents no new findings, it is unusual for a federal agency document to surface that raises questions about a president's plans during debate on a high-profile issue such as restricting firearms.

Obama wants to ban assault weapons and ammunition magazines exceeding 10 rounds that are produced in the future. He wants universal background checks for all gun purchases.

Today, federal law makes background checks mandatory on sales by federally licensed gun dealers.

Depending on the state you live in, background checks are not always applicable. Here in California, background checks and waiting periods are the law whether its at a gun store or a transactions at a gun show or a private sale.

The NRA's Chris W. Cox said the commercial is running online in 15 states, including many Republican-leaning states where Democrats will defend Senate seats next year, such as Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana, Montana, North Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia. There are also ads in papers in five states.

The memo was written under the name of Greg Ridgeway, acting director of the National Institute of Justice, the Justice Department's research arm. It is dated Jan. 4th, a few days before Obama anounced his 23 executive orders in an effort to bypass Congress and the legislative process.

Justice Department officials said Ridgeway was not granting interviews. He came to the institute last July from the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit research institution where he studied criminal justice issues, and has a Ph.D. in statistics.

The memo says that out of 11,000 annual gun homicides, an average of 35 deaths yearly are from mass shootings, defined as those with four or more victims.

"Policies that address the larger firearm homicide issue will have a far greater impact even if they do not address the particular issues of mass shootings," it says.

It says there were an estimated 1.5 million assault weapons before the 10-year ban on those firearms began in 1994, so their sheer number would weaken a new ban exempting existing weapons.

Such guns accounted for just 2 percent to 8 percent of crimes before the 1994 ban, so eliminating assault weapons "would not have a large impact on gun homicides," the memo said.


Coburn: Any proposal that keeps a record of legit gun owners will 'kill' Senate bill

Oklahoma Republican Sen. Tom Coburn said Sunday any Senate legislation on gun control that includes a national registry of firearms owners will be a deal breaker.

Coburn is part of the bipartisan Senate panel seeking ways to curb gun violence and that purportedly is about to agree on a proposal to expand background checks to most private gun sales, with national record-keeping still unresolved.

“Absolutely will not be record-keeping of legitimate, law-abiding gun owners,” Coburn told “Fox News Sunday.” “That will kill this bill.”

The potential deal on background checks was reported Saturday by The Washington Post.

“I don’t think we’re that close,” Coburn also said.

Federal law already requires licensed firearm dealers to keep records.

The Senate panel is made up of four Democrats and four Republicans, but recent negotiations are purportedly being led by a smaller team that includes Coburn and New York Democratic Sen. Charles E. Schumer.

The eight members of the Democrat-controlled chamber have been negotiating since returning to Washington in January, just weeks after the Dec. 14, 2012, shootings at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school in which 20 first-graders and six adults were killed.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected this week to begin considering new proposals.

Meanwhile, President Obama is working on a plan that, like Senate proposals, calls for background checks as well as bans on assault weapons and high-capacity gun magazines.

The National Rifle Association, the country’s most powerful gun lobby, opposes background checks and a federal database.

Wayne LaPierre, the group’s executive vice president, recently told Fox the ideas won’t achieve their intended purpose of tracking guns used in crimes because criminals won’t sign up.

In addition, he said, federal law will not allow such a database to include the names of people with emotional problems – who have committed several of the most-recent mass shootings.


New Law Makes Arkansas Gun-Permit Records Private

On Friday, Arkansas became the latest state to exempt from public disclosure the names and zip codes of gun owners, those with permits to carry concealed weapons and applicants for gun permits.

The measure, signed into law by the state's lieutenant governor, came in response to a New York newspaper's decision late last year to publish the names and addresses of thousands of gun permit holders on its website after 26 people were killed in a shooting rampage at an elementary school in Connecticut.

In a rare maneuver allowed under Arkansas law, Lieutenant Governor Mark Darr, a Republican, signed the bill into law while Democratic Governor Mike Beebe was attending a National Governors Association meeting in Washington.

Voters elect the governor and lieutenant governor separately in Arkansas and state law empowers the lieutenant governor to take such an action if the governor is out of state.

"The governor does not condone the signing," spokesman Matt DeCample said. "However, with the unique circumstances surrounding this bill, we do not plan to raise any objections."

Beebe had opposed the bill, but said this week he would allow it to take effect without his signature on Monday.

Darr said that public release of the records threatened the safety and property of permit holders.

"Having been an outspoken advocate for Second Amendment rights, I felt passionately that there should be no delays in signing this bill into law," Darr said in a statement.

The power to act in the governor's absence was used notably in 1993 when the state Senate president pro tem pardoned two convicts and granted clemency to two others. The governor was attending Bill Clinton's presidential inauguration and the lieutenant governor's post was vacant, pending a special election.

About 130,000 Arkansas residents have concealed weapons licenses and the law immediately made their records and those of people applying for licenses private.

It was not surprise that The Arkansas Press Association and other liberal media groups opposed the new state law.

The Journal News, which serves suburbs north of New York City in Westchester and Rockland counties, pulled the gun permit information from its website in January after New York approved restrictions similar to Arkansas' along with expanded gun-control measures.

Kansas, Oregon, South Carolina and Kentucky also have similar laws, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Nicholas Stehle, a board member at the Arkansas Carry gun rights advocacy group that supported the measure, praised Darr's signing of the bill.

"People who are doing nothing more than exercising their Constitutional rights shouldn't have to worry about their personal information being accessed or appearing on a list visible to everyone, including people who might mean them harm," Stehle said.


Sen. Ayotte: American People Are ‘Tired of the Blame Game’

New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte said Sunday tax increases cannot be the fallback position of Democrats when it comes to increasing government revenues and that the American people are “tired of the blame game.”

“In terms of the Democrats’ plan, it seems like the first thing they come up with is, ‘We’re going to raise taxes,’” Ayotte Charged on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

She also said the upcoming cuts to government spending via the sequestration set to kick in Friday are owned by President Barack Obama.

“Even though this idea came from the White House . . . he’s [Obama’s] been out trying to blame Republicans,” she said. “I think the American people are tired of the blame game. I think we can do this in a more sensible way. What we need is leadership from the commander-in-chief.”

A member of the Senate Budget Committee, Ayotte said she is working with others in her party to propose alternative scenarios prior to the deadline.

“This notion of giving the president the discretion to make the spending cuts, I think that’s a cop out, so I will be urging my colleagues to have an alternative and for us to present one.”


Cattle Shortage Forcing Beef Industry To Make Cuts

Years of drought are reshaping the U.S. beef industry with feedlots and a major meatpacking plant closing because there are too few cattle left in the United States to support them.

Some feedlots in the nation's major cattle-producing states have already been dismantled, and others are sitting empty. Operators say they don't expect a recovery anytime soon, with high feed prices, much of the country still in drought and a long time needed to rebuild herds.

The closures are the latest ripple in the shockwave the drought sent through rural communities. Most cattle in the U.S. are sent to feedlots for final fattening before slaughter. The dwindling number of animals also is hurting meatpackers, with their much larger workforces. For consumers, the impact will be felt in grocery and restaurant bills as a smaller meat supply means higher prices.

Owner Bob Podzemny has been taking apart the 32,000-head Union County Feed Yard near Clayton, N.M. It closed in 2009 when a bank shut off its operating capital in the midst of the financial crisis, and Podzemny said he doesn't see reopening after struggling through Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

"There just are not that many cattle in this part of the country no more, and it is not profitable to bring them in and feed them, so it is shut down," Podzemny said.

He's now feeding a few cattle in another feedlot, buying them at about 450 pounds and growing them to 800 to 850 pounds. He then sells them to others who bring them to the typical 1,200- to 1,300-pound slaughter weight.

"It is making a little money now on just growing feeders and selling them as feeders rather than finishing them all the way out," Podzemny said. "We do what we got to do to survive, you know."

Cattle numbers have been falling for years as the price of corn used to feed animals in feedlots skyrocketed. The drought accelerated the process, but many feedlots were able to survive at first because ranchers whose pastures dried up weaned calves early and sent breeding cows to be fattened for slaughter.

But now far fewer livestock than normal remain on the farms. And, ironically, if it rains this spring and summer, even fewer animals will go into feedlots because ranchers will hold back cows to breed and rebuild their herds.

Texas, the largest beef-producing state, has been particularly hard hit with a historic drought in 2011 from which it still hasn't fully recovered.

"Most of the bad news is in Texas," said Dick Bretz, an Amarillo broker who specializes in selling feed yards and other agribusinesses. "That is where I see most of the empty yards, that is where I see most of the interest in selling yards and where I see the least interest in buying yards."

He recently dismantled a 7,000-head feed yard in Hereford, Texas, for a new owner who had bought it for the land, not the business. The previous owner had lost the property to foreclosure, and the facility was in very poor condition and would have cost too much to repair, he said.

When corn prices first spiked to $8 a bushel nearly four years ago, about 70 big feed yards went up for sale in the High Plains feeding area that includes Texas, Kansas, Colorado and Nebraska, Bretz said. Today, there are 10 and 15 feed yards for sale in the region, mostly in Texas. Bretz said he knows of 15 more that are empty, three recently dismantled and two others now being torn down.

Feed yards typically employ one worker per 1,000 head of cattle, so even big ones may not have more than a few dozen workers. But they supply meatpacking plants, which have much bigger workforces, and feedlot closures could herald greater unemployment to come.

Cargill Beef, one of the nation's biggest meatpackers, temporarily closed a slaughterhouse in Plainview, Texas, earlier this year, laying off 2,000 workers. The operation had been one of four meatpacking plants in the Texas Panhandle, and the annual economic loss to the region is estimated at $1.1 billion -- a "major chunk of that economy," said Steve Amosson, an economist with the Texas AgriLife Extension Service in Amarillo.

Cargill is moving what business remained at the plant to slaughterhouses in Friona, Texas; Dodge City, Kan.; and Ft. Morgan, Colo. That will allow those plants to run near capacity and more consistently give their workers full paychecks with 40 hours per week, spokesman Mike Martin said.

"By idling, we are retaining both the plant (in Plainview) and the property for potential future use," Martin added. "And the hope is that at some point some years down the line, the cattle herd will be rebuilt and there will be a need for additional processing capacity."

Most experts estimate the cattle feeding industry now has an excess capacity of between 20 and 25 percent, CattleFax market analyst Kevin Good said. The meatpacking industry has an excess capacity of 10 to 15 percent -- even after the recent closure of Cargill's Plainview plant.

Given the cost of transporting cattle, most of the nation's feed yards and slaughterhouses are in the big cattle-producing states of the High Plains. While the industry has been gradually shifting north from Texas into areas that are expected to more rapidly recover from the drought, businesses in Kansas and Nebraska are struggling too.

In southwestern Kansas, Lakin Feed Yard manager Steve Landgraf said his operation is down to 75 percent of capacity and he expects it to be less than half full within the next couple of months. For every two animals now going out of his lot for slaughter, only one is coming into it.

With a capacity of 15,000 head, the yard now employs 14 people. But with normal attrition, Landgraf anticipates he'll be down to 10 or 11 workers by spring, and he may reduce their hours.

Still, with little debt, Landgraf says he's in a better position than some.

"Some people are probably going to go broke because they aren't going to have the occupancy," he said.


Sunday, February 24, 2013

You Can't Ban Evil - A Great YouTube Video

I'm posting this because I like what she is saying.

Yes, I wish she would have said that Democrats were the ones in our nation's history who fought to keep slavery, and that they were the ones who wanted laws banning minorities from owning guns, but that's OK because I like what she has to say.

Take the next few minutes out and give her your attention. It is a simple message.

And yes, she gives it so well.

Friday, February 22, 2013

$100,000 Anti-Gun Advertising Blitz, and More!

$100,000 Anti-Gun Advertising Blitz

The debate over universal background checks for gun-buyers is about to get hotter.

And yes, it all has to do with the Obama propaganda machine, and the diligence of his spineless cronies and boot licking lackeys! 

Remember ACORN, well these folks are no better than that crooked group. The group is called "Organizing for Action" (OFA) and they are the successor group to Obama’s campaign backers.

Now, OFA plans to spend up to $100,000 on Obama's new campaign, a national day of action marks the first test of the group's ability to mobilize the president's 2.2 million campaign volunteers to push for legislative change.

That's right, if you wanted to know what could get Obama off the golf course - it's campaigning! And yes, the Campaigner and Chief Barry O will probably hitting a stage near you. A little song and dance, a tap dance to Bill Clinton Campaign music and Barry O is a happy president.

Will other Democrats join him on stage? Probably, OFA organizers have not disclosed which lawmakers will be included in the campaign or in their advertising blitz - but you can be assured that it will be a liberal laced event!

One source says that the OFA ads will run a grizzly dire blood laden anti-gun ad featuring Hollywood stars and special effects like guns that fire 500 rounds from a 20 round magazine, bloody corpses, and mutilated victims of guns that seemed almost possessed by some evil force.

Of course we all know that guns can't fire without the assistance of a man or woman physically pulling the trigger - but let's not get details like personal responsibility or criminal behavior in the way of sensational advertising meant to keep hatred for gun owners alive and well.

OFA plans to sponsor more than 100 events in 80 or more Congressional districts started today in an effort to pull a scam on America. The scam is that Americans want action, that they demand action, action right now, all to ban evil guns.

The group says it expects thousands of people to participate in the events.

Mostly by out of work Obama campaign workers who will conduct candle-light vigils, letter-writing campaigns, and news conferences on Obama friendly MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, NPR, and the BBC.

Executive director Jon Carson said the events display the strength the grassroot organization brings to support the president's agenda.

If by "grassroot" he means the propaganda machine funded by wealthy liberal socialist who have been Obama supporters since day one, then they are certainly rooted.

"We have voices in every corner of this country who are supporting his [liberal] agenda and can make their neighbors understand where their members [of Congress] stand on these important issues,” Carson said, according to USA Today.

The liberal line of BS is that Obama has "presented a sweeping plan to rein in gun violence, in the wake of the Dec. 14 elementary school massacre in Newtown, Conn." When in reality, nothing is further from the truth.

President Obama, Barry O for his golf buddies and big money liberal donors, wants to institute a plan that has been tried and does not work. In fact, his hometown - no not his village in Kenya - has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation.

Yes, just as Detroit is the perfect example of a liberal economic plan going to shit, Chicago is the perfect example of a anti-gun lobby taking it in the shorts! Barry O's hometown of Chicago is more dangerous than Afghanistan! And no, that's not a joke!

Obama administration spokesman, oops, I mean OFA director Jon Carson said OFA backs the entire plan, which also includes limiting ammunition magazine sizes and banning guns.

The Obama propaganda group chose the issue for its first push, Carson said, because the majority of Americans support background checks.

More than 92 percent of voters support universal background checks for gun-buyers, according to a Quinnipiac poll earlier this month.

Background checks to find criminals trying to buy guns! It's meant to stop criminals. Law abiding citizens understand that.

What gun owners don't understand is why law abiding citizens need to be kept on file as if they are criminals?

On file? Yes, on file in a National Gun Owner Registration Data Base. What is the reason for that if not for confiscation by the government?  No one in the Obama administration can answer that. Imagine that!

Currently the checks are only required for purchases from licensed gun dealers.

OFA is organized as a social welfare organization under the U.S. Tax Code, and marks the first time a president has established such a group using his former Presidential Campaign staff. And if you think it's only Obama, you'd be wrong. The Democrat Party's National Committee is working to support Obama's liberal agenda.

Carson said the group is “100 percent focused on issue campaigns” and won't be working on any candidate's election politics. The Democratic National Committee will instead work to help elect more Democrats to Congress, with Obama committing to hold at least 14 fundraisers this year.

OFA has come under some criticism because of how it is organized. The Democratic Party is under strict contribution limits, but OFA can take in an unlimited amount of money.

That's right, this Obama propaganda machine is allowed to raise large sums for its events and advertising - and keep it!

It is questionable if the group will take money from political action committees or federal lobbyists, but Jim Messina, who has moved from being Obama's 2012 campaign manager to chairing OFA says they won't.

OFA's offices are now in Washington, but will relocate to Chicago, Obama's hometown, by June. They probably located to Washington out of fear of being in the Chicago which many now refer to as the "Murder Capitol of the United States."

The organization hopes to survive past the president's second term. And yes, there is talk that they are gearing up for Obama to run again in 2016 challenging the law restricting the president to only two terms.

Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer calls the OFA a “dangerous” precedent that allows special interests to influence the administration.


Obama's Totalitarian Government

As for those who oppose Obama's abuse of power and efforts to scuttle the 2nd Amendment by rendering it in effect null and void?

Well, more than a dozen lawmakers who oppose President Obama's plan to restrict gun ownership are now to be considered "Political Targets" as they are targeted in a series of advertising as part of a national day of action.

Yes, it is happening here right now. Anyone who opposes Obama's policies are now considered Political Targets just like in a Communist state!

Believe it or not, here in the United States, lawmakers who oppose efforts to reinstate any form of gun ban, magazine restrictions, or any sort of federal terrorist sort of watch list called a National Gun Owners Registration List, are now being targeted by the Obama administration through this group the OFA!

I was always under the belief that "Political Targets" or "Political Dissidents" were only found in places ruled by tin horn Dictators and Communist governments.

Political dissidents are people severely persecuted by oppressive governments for political reasons.

Political dissent refers to any expression designed to convey dissatisfaction with or opposition to the policies of a governing body. Such expression may take forms from vocal disagreement to civil disobedience to the use of violence.

Historically, totalitarian governments have sought to punish political dissent. Though now being attacked in the United States under Obama, the protection of freedoms that facilitate peaceful dissent were once a hallmark of free and open societies.

Under Obama's totalitarian government peaceful dissent will not be tolerated.

Yes, totalitarianism relates to imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed.

Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the government holds total authority over the society and seeks to control all aspects of public and private life whenever necessary.

Look around and ask yourself if this is not happening on a federal level here?



Comcast Bans Gun Ads after it takes control of NBC

There was a time in America when companies gave a shit about pissing off the public. Well, those days must be long gone.

Today, companies routinely join in to help further the liberal agenda. Why? Well, I have no idea other than they must not be worried about the impact of their actions on their product sales.

The latest is Comcast, the nation's largest cable provider. This company will no longer accept advertisements from businesses selling guns. Imagine that!

The policy change was quietly instituted on February 8th after Comcast acquired a controlling interest in NBC, which already had a policy of not accepting ads relating to firearms.

The ban came to light when John Kupiec, president of the advertising agency Canadian American Corp., attempted to purchase an ad for Michigan-based gun store Williams Gun Sight Inc. but was denied, according to CBS News' Detroit affiliate.

"Comcast Spotlight has decided it will not accept new advertising for firearms or weapons moving forward," the cable provider said in a statement to CBS.

"This policy aligns us with the guidelines in place at many media organizations."

That's fine, but gun owners should think twice before using someone who is obviously against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights!
Executives at Williams Gun Sight called the policy anti-Constitutional.

"We’re a perfectly legal company selling a perfectly legal product and they have chosen us out of all the industries out there to make a stand on what’s right or wrong," Williams’ Chief Operating Officer Dan Compeau told CBS.

Kupiec said Comcast is the cable provider for two-thirds of the domestic market, which he believes represents a monopoly in the industry.

"The next step is we want to get the lawmakers on Capitol Hill to review the monopolistic rights this company (Comcast) currently enjoys as the largest cable provider in the United States," Kupiec said, adding that his firm will consider legal action as a last resort.

Compeau said Comcast previously accepted their ads.

"We were totally caught off guard by it," he said. "All these TV stations are taking millions, if not billions, from alcohol companies — and alcohol deaths, alcohol sickness, way outpaces anything a gun can do. [Comcast] is two-faced."

Kupiec, who has worked in advertising since the 1980s, said this is the first major ban he has ever seen, and that if they wanted to advertise on the Outdoor Channel, The Discovery Channel, or NBC Sports, it wouldn't be a possibility.

"If you’re a gun range, if you sell firearms, ammunition, whatever, they will not accept your advertising," he said. "I’m an avid hunter and I believe this is a direct threat on the Second Amendment, a direct assault on legal businesses in the United States, and I think it’s antitrust."

I say ALL GUN OWNERS SHOULD BOYCOTT COMCAST to show them that we are not to be slighted and treated poorly.

Teacher reportedly refused to grade student reports on guns

At Denton High School in Denton, Texas, one teacher has possibly lost her mind.

An English teacher at Denton High School in the Dallas-Fort Worth area allegedly refused to grade two student reports because they discussed guns. reports that the teacher, Dewey Christian, told his students to write a report on anything they wanted.

Marshall Williams, one of Christian's students, told the station he chose to write about a Fort Worth gun show he had attended. He said Christian told him he would get a zero on the assignment because of the topic.

Another student, Alex Wright, said Christian rejected his report because it mentioned hunting.

After telling his mother, Kimberly Williams, about the incident, she and Marshall met with Christian, according to the report.

Kimberly Williams' cell phone video recording of the meeting reportedly shows Christian explaining that he refused to grade the report because of concerns about school violence.

She told her son's report had no political references to guns and didn't mention firing guns.

"If it went against any district policy I would support it completely, but it doesn't. It's just his own moral beliefs trying to be put in his classroom and I disagree with that," Kimberly Williams told the station.

Her son said he wrote about attending the gun show because it was an enjoyable experience.

"I feel like he has just stomped on our right to free speech. He told us we would not be allowed to express ourselves and didn't even consider what we had said," Marshall Williams told the station.

In a statement to, the Denton Independent School District said, "The teacher has accepted the paper and apologized to the student for misperceptions. The teacher's intent was for guns not to be trivialized in any school situation because of recent events."

Her job is to teach, not be a Political Commentator spewing her own self-righteous beliefs.


Fox News "The Five" Co-host Rape Remark: Bob Beckel Apologizes for Campus Comment

Fox News co-host Bob Beckel is apologizing for comments that critics said marginalized date rape as a less-serious form of sexual assault.

An afternoon regular on "The Five," Beckel was taken to task for implying that rape on college campuses was not as serious as some were making it.

On Tuesday's program, the liberal commentator had asked, "When was the last time you heard about a rape on campus?"

"What are you talking about? It's rampant," co-host Eric Bolling shot back, with co-host Dana Perino adding, "In particular, date rape on campus."

“Well, date rape, yeah, that’s one thing,” Beckel responded, appearing to brush the issue off.

After being lambasted on social media, Beckel took to the air on Wednesday to apologize for the distinction he had made.

"Yesterday, a number of people responded to what I said about date rape as if I didn't think it was a serious issue," Beckel said.

"Of course I think it's a serious issue. It's a horrible, horrendous issue. And it's simply put, this, rape is rape," Beckel continued.

"Whether it's date rape or it's somebody coming in off the campus trying to rape somebody else. I very strongly feel that way. And so, I just want to straighten the record out on that. I simply was trying to make -- there was not a distinction to make here. It simply was that date rape is rape. And that is, by any other definition, rape is rape."

Federal statistics from 2010 estimated that 25 percent of college women "will be victims of rape or attempted rape before they graduate within a four-year period" and that schools of more than 6,000 "average one rape per day during the school year."

"The Five" conversation stemmed from comments made by a Democratic Colorado state representative, Joe Salazar, who was speaking on the floor of the Colorado House on a proposal to ban firearms from the state's campuses.

Salazar suggested that women shouldn't be trusted with guns when they are under emotional duress, saying they wouldn't be as rationally capable of knowing when they are about to be sexually assaulted and that may lead to accidental shootings.

"It’s why we have call boxes; it’s why we have safe zones; it’s why we have the whistles — because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at," said Salazar.

"And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop a round at somebody."

In my opinion, Bob Beckel is just a typical liberal big mouth fool who is completely insensitive to everyone and everything except his own self-interest.

Story by Tom Correa

Thursday, February 21, 2013

Texas To Stop Enforcement Of New Federal Gun Laws

New Bill In Texas State Capitol Stops Local Enforcement Of New Federal Gun Laws

First off, why is the Federal Government expecting States to enforce Federal Laws?

If the Federal Government wants to make laws - then they should be the ones to enforce them. States should no be responsible for having to enforce Federal Laws. 

Using that logic, under a measure in the Texas Capitol, local police officers could be convicted of a crime for enforcing any new federal gun control laws.

Rep. Steve Toth, a newly elected Republican from the Woodlands, said his proposal would prevent officers from carrying out any future federal orders to confiscate assault rifles and ammunition magazines.

"There's a federal law, there's a 30-round magazine right in front of you - what do I do?" Toth said in an interview. The measure known as the Firearm Protection Act "answers that question in spades," he said. It moved Tuesday to the House Committee on Federalism.

President Barack Obama has proposed federal laws banning such weapons, but no such laws currently exist. If they are indeed Federal Laws, then the FBI or some other Federal law enforcement agency - and there are many - should get off their backsides and try enforce them without using State time, money and personnel to do their job. 

And why be selective about it, if pot is a Federal crime than have the FBI or whoever else enforce those federal laws pertaining to marijuana. Just because Obama was a drug user and pot smoker, should that mean that he will call of his federal law enforcement from enforcing federal laws in say Colorado where the State is now saying its legal.

The word out of Washington DC is that they are not going after the Federal law breakers in Colorado because the Obama administration is in favor of legalizing drugs and pot.

The opposite is true for a state which let's say would legalize the ownership of "machine guns". The feds would be all over it because they want to see gun banned altogether. And yes, the feds would request local police to assist them in the enforcement of the federal law prohibiting the ownership of "machine guns" unless properly licensed.

The states are having budget problems. How many states would save money if they told the federal government to enforce their own laws while the states tended to only theirs?

Rep. Steve Toth's proposal would create a Class A misdemeanor for police officers enforcing any new federal gun regulations.

It also would establish cause for the state attorney general to sue anyone who seeks to enforce new federal gun regulations. It is one of several states-rights measures being offered by conservative state lawmakers nationwide in response to federal gun control proposals.

Courts have long upheld the federal government's right to enact new laws, which generally supersede state law.

After the Civil War, during the Reconstruction Period, the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments of the Constitution were passed. With these Amendments, it became spelled out that a state cannot make a law that supersedes a federal law - the concept being that we are Americans first before being citizens of a state.

The 14th Amendment specifically was designed to stop a state from say making slavery legal. But at the same time, the federal government must enforce its own laws without the assistance of the states - especially if that state is keeping its law within the guidelines of the U.S. Constitution.

Asked how legal precedent for the supremacy of federal law would affect enforcement of his bill, Toth said he expects a legal challenge.

"It may end up in the Supreme Court," he said.

One point of interest is the question of just how does the federal government get the state police agencies to enforce federal laws when in fact no state laws are being broken?

And really, other than staying within the parameters of the U.S. Constitution, why would any state have to do what the federal government orders them to do?

Federal police agencies in every state to enforce federal laws? A centralized Big Brother federal government telling people what to do and how to act? The complete loss of state's rights?

Are these things possible? Should anyone at the state, county, or local levels of government be taking orders from Big Brother Federal Government?

Isn't is enough that states meet federal "guidelines" so that states don't violate a citizen's U.S. Constitutional rights?

Why should a state assist the federal government when it is violating an American citizen's Constitutional rights? I say let the feds enforce their own laws, and if they are violating the Constitution, then it will be for a federal court to decide if the federal government actually has the authority they think they have.

Several recently elected lawmakers gathered at a news conference Tuesday with Toth and Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff who successfully contested implementation of certain provisions of the Brady gun laws in the 1990s.

"The federal government is not our boss," Mack said. "If there's any place that that's applicable and true, it's the state of Texas."

Referring to Greg Abbott, the attorney general who helped draft the bill, Mack added: "And we've got a great attorney."

And yes, I agree. The federal government is not our boss.

Now, how do we make them understand that?

Story by Tom Correa