Cattle Rustling -- Not Just A Crime Of Yesteryear

Today, right now, Cattle Rustling costs American Cattle Producers Millions of Dollars each year!

Back in the late 1970's, during the Jimmy Carter years when the real Last Great Depression hit us, a Sheriff's Deputy told me that cattle rustling was a sort of barometer that his Department used to judge how bad the economy was getting - and subsequently how bad crime was getting. A bad economy to law enforcement means a lot more activity across the board.

After thinking about it, it made sense how that was seen as a barometer. If cattle rustling was up, the economy was in the tank. When the economy got better, rustling would go down or all but disappear. That was it, it was just that simple.

Sure, it wasn't real scientific by any stretch of the imagination. But frankly, it followed common sense. Across the nation these days, cattle theft is running rampant. Unlike what the Obama administration is trying to make the public believe, we can all see that our economy is in trouble.

Back in 2011, Oklahoma rancher Ryan Payne wasn't worried about anyone messing with his cows and calves. By his estimation, his pasture is so far off the beaten path "you need a helicopter to see it."

That changed when 37 year old Payne checked on his livestock and found a ghoulish scene. He found piles of entrails from two black Angus calves he says thieves gutted "like they were deer."

Rustlers made off with the meat and another 400-pound calf in a heist that he estimated cost him at least $1,800. "Gosh, times are tough, and maybe people are truly starving and just need the meat. But it's shocking. I can't believe people can stoop that low," he said. 

A combination of a bad economy and high beef prices have made cattle rustling very attractive as a quick score for the criminal minded. If you don't think that it's a big problem, please understand that the total market loss of livestock, saddle and trailer thefts in 2011 was almost $4.3 Million. That's according to data from the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association.

Law Enforcement understands how they operate. Today's thieves are sophisticated compared to the horseback bandits of the Old West.

Cattle Rustling In The Old West

Back then, the Old West was a no nonsense place and rustling was considered a serious offense which frequently resulted in a lynching by vigilantes. Of course cattle thefts by Indians were a common hazard for early settlers in the Old West. Though Indians more often stole horses and mules than cattle, when their food supply was short, they drove off and butchered a few cows, took a few dairy cows, and maybe even oxen.

Sometimes Indians stole beyond their needs to avenge wrongs or to drive White settlers out and away from their hunting grounds. Indians were also known to occasionally start stampedes and kill cattle they could not drive off.

During the Civil War and into the Reconstruction Era, Mexican rustlers were a lot of trouble along the border. In claims made against the Mexican government, it was asserted that from 1859 through 1872 Mexican bandits stole 145,298 cattle from various South Texas ranches.

Mexican rustlers were a major issue during the American Civil War. Later American rustlers stole Mexican cattle from across the border. In those days, failure to brand new calves meant they could be lost quick. The depredations of Indian and Mexican rustlers, however, fell far short of those perpetrated by White rustlers.

In fact, ranchers in Mexico often were victimized by Texas thieves who swam large herds of "wet stock" across the Rio Grand by night and trailed them to Kansas markets.

Most rustlers of the open-range era were themselves once Cowboys who had drifted into dubious practices.

Most will tell you that it was the transition from open range to fenced in grazing land that gradually reduced the practice of rustling. That in itself is false. Fact is that they knew the cattle country and were adept at roping, branding, and trailing. One needed only to buy a few cows, register a brand, and begin branding strays. Many cowboys had herds that increased so fast that some ranchers refused to hire any hand who had stock of his own.

Other rustlers stampeded herds on the northward trails and drove off as many cattle as they could, using six-shooters and rifles to defend themselves if pursued by law or vigilantes. Many rustlers worked on herds that grazed on Western ranges. These were cattle that was easily hidden in box canyons where high brush kept them out of sight until a "running iron" can be made hot.

The altering of brands was a frequent practice among rustlers. Instead of the stamp iron used by most cattlemen, the rustler used a "running iron"  a straight rod with a curve at the heated end. When this was outlawed, he sometimes used a piece of heavy wire that he could bend into any shape and carry in his pocket.

Stealing of another man's cattle was serious, and rustlers often change brands in an attempt to transfer ownership of herds. They use a "running iron" which was a round-surfaced piece of metal which can be heated and used to trace a freehand change in the original brand. In the early days, a saddle cinch ring was often used as a running iron. It was easy to carry, and could be handled by placing a green tree branch through the center.

Old-time justice for apprehended rustlers was swift and sure. The penalty for getting caught running a brand was usually a rope and a "necktie party" held beneath the nearest tree.

There's an interesting story about one rustling case that was solved by Roy Bean of Langtry, Texas. Judge Bean, although he had no official authority for his actions, set himself up as "The Law West of the Pecos."

When a nearby rancher from the Bar S spread complained of losing calves, Judge Bean went to work on the case. He rode out on the range and returned about a week later with a stranger and some 20 head of steers in tow. The cattle all bore the 48 brand which the stranger claimed was his registered mark.

Court was convened on the porch of Bean's store and saloon. As Exhibit A in the trial, Bean shot one of the freshly branded 48 steers and peeled back the hide. On the animal's flesh, the blackish Bar S showed quite plainly. Over the Bar S were fresh burns which turned the original brand into a 48.

This conclusive evidence sealed the doom of the unlucky stranger, and he was soon swinging from a nearby cottonwood tree.

More common was the theft of large unbranded calves. When a rancher neglected to brand some of his calves before they were weaned, it was easy for a rustler to cut a pasture fence, drive the calves to his corral, and stamp his own brand upon them.

Often he was not content with this but would return to take also the smaller calves, not yet weaned. This was more ticklish procedure, since Longhorn cows and calves had a strong instinct for returning to each other, even when separated by miles.

Such reunions had to be prevented, because as everyone knows if a rancher did actually find a calf with a rustler's brand nursing from one of his cows then there would likely be bad trouble. Before branding un-weaned calves, often the rustler kept them penned until they quit bawling and learned to eat grass. Other measures used to keep them from getting back to their mothers and to hasten weaning was the horrible practice of cutting the muscles supporting the calf's eyelids and thus make it temporarily blind.

Rustlers used to also apply a hot iron between the toes to make the calf's feet too sore for walking, or, in uncommon cases, they would split the calf's tongue to prevent suckling. The rustler might also kill the mother to make the calf a genuine orphan. So as you can see, they didn't only steal cattle and they did in fact use horrible methods to do what they did.

Maybe now you can understand why rustlers were hanged.

With county seats far apart, grand juries disinclined to indict, and trial juries reluctant to convict, early cattlemen often had to take law enforcement into their own hands in dealing with rustlers. Back then, ranchers enforced frontier justice with a rope.

In April of 1892, the Johnson County War, also known as the War on Powder River, was a range war which took place in Johnson County, Natrona County and Converse County in the U.S. state of Wyoming. It was a conflict over an alleged rustling incident, although some think that rustling was used as an excuse to kill a few who the big cattle barons called "trouble makers."

Fact is that it was a battle between small settling ranchers and larger established ranchers in the Powder River Country that culminated in a lengthy shootout between local ranchers, a band of hired killers, and a sheriff's posse, eventually requiring the intervention of the U.S. Cavalry on the orders of U.S. President Benjamin Harrison.

Part of the problem was the age old practice of free grazing, and one's grazing rights.

Though grazing rights have never been codified in United States law, the concept of such rights descends from the English concept of the commons, a piece of land over which people - often neighboring landowners - could exercise one of a number of traditional rights, including livestock grazing.

Prior to the 19th century, the traditional practice of grazing open range land in the United States was rarely disputed due to the sheer amount of unsettled open land. But, as the population of the West increased in the mid to late 19th century, range wars erupted over a rancher's perceived rights to graze cattle as the open range lands started to deteriorate with overuse.

Free grazing made it possible for rustlers to acquire "stray" cattle easier. Following the transition from the open range to fenced ranches, rustling gradually became less and less. But it wasn't only the wire that helped lessen rustling, it also took a lot of effort by local law enforcement and brand inspectors. Cattlemen's Associations also helped by producing brand registries so that brands could be checked as cattle were sold at livestock markets.

Rustling was not entirely stamped out, and in the 1930s it broke out in a new form.

Thieves equipped with fast trucks stole cattle at night, butchered them in nearby thickets, and sold the meat the next day in markets perhaps several hundred miles away. The extent of this rustling and the fact that the thieves often crossed state lines led Congress in 1941 to pass the McCarran Act, which provided a maximum penalty of a $5,000 fine and five years in prison for transporting stolen cattle or meat from such cattle across state lines.This measure, however, did not prevent the sale of stolen meat in black markets during World War II.

And in the late 1970s, a new type of thief emerged known as the "Suburban rustler." This individual usually attacked unattended "ranchettes" stole four or five head, and took the cattle immediately to auction. Techniques of theft in the later 20th century included anesthetizing cattle with hypodermic darts, using trained bulldogs to bring the animals down, and herding the booty with helicopters. As the price of beef escalated, so did the ingenuity of the rustlers.

Since the early 20th century, the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association has employed field inspectors to police cattle rustling. These agents, deputized by the Texas Department of Public Safety as Special Texas Rangers, helped to recover 4,000 cattle in 1993.

By the 20th century, so called "Suburban Rustling" became more common. It was the practice of rustlers actually anesthetizing cattle and taking them directly to auction. It often took place at night, and it was a real problem for law enforcement because on very large ranches it can take several days for loss of cattle to be noticed and reported.

Convictions are still rare or nonexistent.

Today, rustlers pull up in livestock trailers in the middle of the night and know how to coax the animals inside.

"It almost has to be someone who knows about the business, including just knowing where to take the cattle. It's crazy to think we're still in business." said Carmen Fenton who is a spokeswoman for the 15,000-member Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association. The Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association was formed in the 1870s specifically to combat cattle rustlers.

There's no clearinghouse that tracks thefts nationally, but statistics among certain states are staggering. In Texas, which is the nation's biggest cattle producer, and to a lesser extent Oklahoma, about 4,500 cattle have been reported missing or stolen in 2011. That figure comes from the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association.

The association's special rangers managed to recover or account for $4.8 million in stolen ranch property each of the previous two years, most of it steers, bulls, cows and calves.

Such thefts are also happening in places once spared. For example, in southwestern Missouri's Jasper County, not far from a regional stockyard, about 100 of the nearly 180 head of cattle stolen this year were snatched during a recent six-week stretch. 

"Occasionally one or two have gotten stolen (over the years), but not this many in such a short time. They've gotten us big time. These guys are not your typical fly-by-night, let's-steal-a-cow kinda people. They know exactly what they're doing. They're pretty slick, and they're bold. Investigators have found clues to be elusive, partly because thieves often artfully conceal their crimes by replacing pasture fences they've cut to get to the animals," said Missouri's Jasper County Sheriff's Lt. Ron Thomas. He believed that the stolen livestock were taken to another state for sale.

Ranchers are unaccustomed to counting their cattle each day. They may not realize any are missing for a week or more. And by then, any tire tracks or other evidence, such as perhaps DNA or fingerprints from anything left behind by the rustlers may be gone. The other problem is that while brands are widely used in the West, some states don't require brands. For example, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas don't require brands but those states have been hard hit by livestock thefts.

The lack of brands has hampered investigators' efforts to match recovered cattle to owners, or to relay to stockyards exactly what markings to keep watch for when strangers haul in livestock to be sold.

Without brands, "ranchers could tell me their missing cow is brown and white, but goodness gracious, go down the road and you'll see thousands," said Missouri's Jasper County Sheriff's Lt. Ron Thomas..

While a voluntary national livestock identification system exists, few ranchers and farmers participate in it.

"Unfortunately, cattle don't have a serial number that goes with them or some type of permanent ID short of branding. Thieves look at it as an opportunity and can market the cattle under their name. It's a fairly easy thing to do," said Jim Fraley who is an Illinois Farm Bureau livestock specialist.

Vigilance by owners has paid off in some cases.

A Colorado rancher who was hunting prairie dogs spotted one of his branded, missing cows on another man's property. Deputies swooped in and found 36 cows and 31 calves worth $68,000 and belonging to nine different people.

"An Alabama rancher reported a couple of his cattle missing, and then two more were stolen the next night," said Chilton County Sheriff Kevin Davis.

Sheriff's investigators installed cameras on the property but got nothing before pulling them days later. Not long after that, the rancher called because he spotted two men with a pickup truck and what turned out to be a stolen trailer on his land. Deputies arrested the men and found five of the six missing cows, half of them pregnant, at various locations. The sixth animal had already been slaughtered.

Sheriff Davis credited luck and the rancher's "heightened alert" for snaring the two suspects. "The boldness is the thing. For them to come back three different times to the same pasture. Obviously, they didn't feel very threatened about being caught. But I've never given criminals credit for having high intelligence," said Chilton County Sheriff Kevin Davis.

And no, they're not finicky. For example, an Ohio woman has been charged with taking $110,000 worth of frozen bull semen from a liquid-nitrogen tank at a Moorefield Township genetics company where she once worked. Fact is that artificial insemination in cattle is big business, and bull semen can be extremely valuable to breeders in even small amounts.

And if you think that's something out of the ordinary, think about this. Today it is not unusual to find that livestock theft often involves criminals who exchange or sell the cattle, horses, or other livestock for drugs.

Another alarming aspect of today's cattle rustlers is that there seems to be an alarming trend of thieves who use to work unarmed are more and more likely to be carrying guns. This is especially true when the cattle thefts involve drugs.

All in all, aside from increased penalties, law enforcement is doing what it can as it also uses high-tech methods of apprehending criminals. Of course, it is not unusual for these new apprehension methods to lead to arrests never possible before. But still, even though law enforcement and state regulatory agencies are doing what they can do, rustling is alive and well in the 21st century.

Of course if trends stay the same and continue, then we can expect cattle rustling to increase across the country as times get harder and more folks are out of work. That's just how I see it.

Tom Correa

RANDOM SHOTS! Obama Panders For Millions, Biden Still Blaming Bush, And Much More!

FIRST SHOT!

Antics Means Millions For Obama!

A great example of a sitting president who has no scruples, no moral compass, and absolutely no regard for the dignity of the office of the presidency, is Barack Hussein Obama.

He exemplifies the anti-American, the greedy pandering politician, the viciousness of the political game, the mean-spirited nature of this administration, the ethics of a liar and con artist.

In the last few months, Obama said that he "was not born with a Silver Spoon in his mouth" - a clear attack on Mitt Romney.

Yet, what he did not say anything about attending one of the most expensive private schools in the state of Hawaii, having a Nanny, traveling, and later going on to attend three of the top Universities in the nation without ever holding a job - or working his way through school in anyway. That, my friends, is a Silver Spoon!

All Hail Obama The Warrior!
Lately he has trumpeted his decision to get Osama bin Laden, then has had the nerve to question if Mitt Romney would do so - as if there really is a question about that - knowing full well that there is no question that Romney would just as any president would do given the same opportunity.

In my days in the Marine Corps, we were taught Team Work - and a belief that "when you're that good, you don't have to brag about it."

Obama brags about getting bin Laden to the point that he completely omits the Navy SEALs, the pilots, those in the military involved in the operation, the CIA, those gathering the Intel that it took to find him and then take him out.

He has painted himself as being "President Barack Rambo" who single handedly went into Pakistan with a knife in his teeth, a pistol in one hand - and yes, a blackberry in the other - all on a one man hunt for bin Laden.  

Dear God, there are times when I truly feel sorry for the bastard! It's as if he'll do anything, anything, for power and acclaim.

After listening to him take all of the credit for killing bin Laden, I realize that Obama will stoop as low as he needs to - to exploit any and all opportunities for fame, acclaim, and worship. Yes, I really believe that the size of his ego is only matched by the size of his arrogance. He wants to be hailed as a conqueror and hero.

Too bad, because he does not deserve such accolades.

"Rambama" The SEAL!

Yes, believe it or not, back last May after Obama snuck into Pakistan and killed bin Laden single handedly -  a toy company released Rambo Obama action figure to celebrate Osama's death.

The action figure is one of Barack Obama as a Navy SEAL. It was released by a company in Oxford, Connecticut, to heap praise on the president. 

Emil Vicale’s firm Hero Builders made the "Rambama" SEAL Team 6 action figure of an imaginary muscular Obama armed with an M4 in honor of the news.

The doll sold for $34.95 last year, but some reports say that it's down to about $1.87 now.

The Rambo-style action figure was an instant hit to collectors of completely fictional characters based on existent braggers of non-existent deeds. I can't help but wonder how many dolls Obama bought for friends and family! 

Exploitation and Politics Obama Style!

To further exploit the one-year anniversary of Bin Laden's death, Obama gave an interview to NBC in the Situation Room from the exact spot where he and others observed the raid.

Of course, current and former US Navy SEALs have joined together to voice their dissatisfaction in President Barack Obama for attempting to take credit for killing Osama bin Laden and using them and Special Forces members as "ammunition" for his re-election campaign.

Some SEALs have been extremely critical of President Obama, and have taken there case to Britain's MailOnline after Obama released a Campaign Ad called "One Chance" to coincide with the first anniversary of the raid that killed the al-Qaida figurehead.

The ad features former President Bill Clinton praising Obama's decision to order Bin Laden killed, and suggests that his Republican rival Mitt Romney would not have made the same call.

The ad was criticized by all sides, with even Arianna Huffington - founder of the liberal Huffington Post - calling it “despicable.”

Author and former SEAL Brandon Webb told Newsmax recently that George W. Bush deserves much of the praise for taking out the world's most wanted man.

Webb, author of the book "The Red Circle" about his work training snipers, told Newsmax in an exclusive interview that Obama "inherited a pretty robust system," from Bush.

"This whole process to get (bin Laden) started when George W. was standing on a pile of rubble at Ground Zero saying to the American people, 'the people who knocked these buildings down are going to hear from us.

"Fortunately, Obama was in a position to finish what George W. started," added Webb.

And Chris Kyle, the former SEAL credited with a record 160 confirmed killings, called the Obama ad "a cheap shot."

"He's trying to say that Romney wouldn't have made the same call? Anyone who is patriotic to this country would have made that exact call, Democrat or Republican,” Kyle told the Mail’s Toby Harnden. "Obama is taking more credit than he is due."

Kyle’s comments echoed those of Romney himself. Campaigning in New Hampshire on Monday he said, "Even Jimmy Carter would have given that order," adding that he "of course" would have done the same.

Montana State Rep. Ryan Zinke, a former Navy commander who spent 23 years as a SEAL and led a SEAL Team 6 assault unit, called Obama’s decision "a no-brainer".

"I applaud him for making it but I would not overly pat myself on the back for making the right call," said Zinke, a Republican from Whitefish. "Every president would have done the same.

"He is justified in saying it was his decision but the preparation, the sacrifice - it was a broader team effort."

Zinke slammed Obama for exploiting bin Laden’s death. "The president and his administration are positioning him as a war president using the SEALs as ammunition. It was predictable."

One unidentified current SEAL told the Mail, "Obama wasn’t in the field, at risk, carrying a gun. As president, at every turn, he should be thanking the guys who put their lives on the line to do this. He does so in his official speeches because his speechwriters are smart.

"But the more he tries to take the credit for it, the more the ground operators are saying, 'Come on, man!' It really didn’t matter who was president. At the end of the day, they were going to go."

Former sniper Kyle said Obama shouldn't take the credit. "The operation itself was great and the nation felt immense pride. It was great that we did it,” he said.

"But bin Laden was just a figurehead. The war on terror continues. Taking him out didn’t really change anything as far as the war on terror is concerned, and using it as a political attack is a cheap shot."

The Wall Street Journal claimed that by turning the targeted killing into an election issue, Obama risked becoming the most polarizing president since Richard Nixon.

"Voters aren't likely to believe that any Presidential candidate would fail to pursue the man who killed 3,000 Americans on 9/11," the Journal pointed out.

"The question all of this raises is—why? Why would an incumbent President feel the need to campaign like this?"

Fox News’ Chris Stirewalt said the decision to turn the anniversary of the terrorist’s killing into an election issue "mucked up what should have been one of the president’s best days of the campaign."

"The only thing required to benefit from association with the killing of the most hated man in the nation is to be magnanimous about the whole affair – smile broadly, downplay your own role with a wink and congratulate the brave men who did the job," said Stirewalt.

"Obama almost managed to do that, but his campaign couldn’t resist going negative."

The Obama White House marked the anniversary of bin Laden's death  with a series of briefings and interviews designed to highlight Obama's decision that day.

Most likely they will have their media lackeys there to worship at Obama's feet the whole time. And yes, it's very unlikely for Obama to give anyone other than himself any sort of small mention regarding the operation to kill Bin Laden.

A pity really!

Yes, his antics like trying to steal the show regarding the killing of bin Laden are just more foolish moves these days. All to reap praise and adoration!

Talk About No Scruples!

The Wall Street Journal revealed that the Obama campaign has an enemies list, yes like Richard Nixon. The list is a group of Romney supporters, donors, that it singles out by name on a Web site while declaring some got rich "at the expense of so many Americans."

As outrageous as those breaches of decency are, they are merely the latest extension of Obama’s polarizing presidency. His tenure threatened, he is growing desperate, almost pathologically so. And it’s only April.

Observers are unanimous in agreement that where once it was rare for a politician or a commentator to accuse a president of lying, it happens routinely now. Obama’s speeches are filled with distortions and fabrications. Even members of his own party don’t trust him, regarding him as ruthlessly selfish.

House Speaker John Boehner called the president’s use of Air Force One for campaign events disguised as official business “pathetic” and added: “This is the biggest job in the world, and I’ve never seen a president make it smaller.”

He Endorses Gay Marriage For Millions!

This last week, President Obama came out in favor of gay marriage.

Obama voiced his support for gay marriage in an ABC interview, the campaign emailed a clip of the interview and a personal statement from the president to its vast list of supporters, drawing attention to his stance

Well friends, don't be too shocked of that news, we all knew it was coming - it was just a matter of time.

Now his campaign is hard at work to make his endorsement pay in the millions. And yes, it's already started.

Within hours after Obama's interview in which he declared for the first time his support for gay marriage, his campaign blasted out a fundraising email to supporters. By the next day, the campaign released a web video highlighting the president's new-found stance and lambasting likely Republican opponent Mitt Romney's opposition to gay marriage.

Yesterday the president attended a sold-out fundraiser at actor George Clooney's home in Los Angeles where he is sure to be embraced by extremely wealthy Celebrity donors.

Have you ever noticed how many extremely wealthy people in America are Liberal Atheists? Have you ever noticed how they always want to spend Uncle Sam's money and not their own on social issues - yet give Millions of dollars to support Liberal politicians who have disdain for America?

Hollywood is home to some of the most high-profile backers of gay marriage and the 150 donors who are paid $40,000 a plate to attend Clooney's dinner will no doubt feel newly invigorated by Obama's announcement regarding gay marriage.

The dinner was expected to raise close to $15 million - about $6 million from the guests and the rest from a campaign contest for small-dollar donors, the winners of which get to participate in the dinner. It is an unprecedented amount for a single event.

And by the way, you and I know about how the Democrats are always talking about wealthy Republicans - well friends, at Clooney's home Obama raised more money in one single evening than Romney has amassed in his best single month of fundraising.

The Clooney fundraiser in Los Angeles' Studio City area was in the heart of celebrity gay marriage activism.

Let The Dollars Come!
The time for the pandering President is upon us, and he declared his support for same-sex marriage on cue - just in time to rake in Millions of Dollars from wealthy gay Democrats!

In Seattle, where the gay population is huge, he was attending two fundraisers. There Obama witnessed the support first hand as his motorcade passed a woman holding an infant and a sign that said: "Thank you! Mr. President for standing up for my Mommy's!"

I'm sure a tear came to his eye when he thought of two lesbians tying the knot. I can't help but wonder if he will teach his children that it was Adam and Eve - and not Adam and Steve in the Bible?

Maybe, just maybe, one day Obama will grow wise enough to understand that the majority of Americans out there - who are not wealthy Liberal donors - find gay marriage akin to someone wanting to marry their goat - it's just something not right!

Big Cheers Mean Big Money For Obama

He drew big cheers from supporters at Seattle's historic Paramount Theater when he said his vision for a better America applies to everyone, "no matter what you look like, no matter what your last name, no matter who you love."

Without referring directly to marriage, Obama expanded on the theme of same-sex equality.

"We are moving forward to a country where every American is treated with dignity and with respect and here in Washington you'll have the chance to make your voice heard on the issue of making sure that everybody, regardless of sexual orientation, is treated fairly," Obama said. "You'll have a chance to weigh in on this. We are a nation that treats people fairly."

After hearing what Obama had to say to the gay folks in Seattle, I can't help but wonder if he'd take that reasoning and apply it to Polygamist or say gays wanting to "marry" young boys? 

And yes, it's true that there is a Gay movement trying to exploit children and are working to get the age of sexual consent lowered to 8 years old. Yes, 8 years old!

I'm sure if the donation is big enough, Obama would be for it.

Washington state has passed a law approving same-sex marriage, but opponents are gathering signatures for a ballot initiative to overturn the law and declare marriage as union of man and woman.

California itself illustrates the crosscurrents of gay marriage. Californians have twice voted to ban gay marriage, most recently in 2008. The most recent ban, known as Proposition 8, is being fought in the courts.

Then There's North Carolina!

Once a bright spot for President Barack Obama, North Carolina is now more like a political migraine less than four months before Democrats open their Party's National Convention in Charlotte.

Labor unions, a core Democratic constituency, are up in arms. Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue isn't running for re-election; Democrats say she was likely to lose. The state Democratic Party is in disarray over an explosive sexual harassment scandal. Unemployment in the state remains persistently high.

And yes, now North Carolina voters recently approved amending the state constitution to define marriage as being a union between a man and a women. Because of the wording, North Carolina voters won't face challenges to what is esentially a ban on gay marriage.
But wait, Obama and the Democrats have a solution to North Carolina's troubles  - and public decision to make a statement on gay marriage.

They want to punish North Carolina by taking their Party's National Convention out of Charlotte and relocate it to a place that will bow to Obama's Social Agenda.

I spent a lot of time working in North Carolina doing work for the Navy, and I can tell folks first hand that they are a wonderfully independent people.

Most likely, though they need the business in Charlotte, they will probably tell Obama and the Democrats to "Go to Hell or Hollywood" where the place is full of homosexuals.

In Hollywood, homosexuals are very wealthy, very very wealthy, and they love Obama.

Scruples or not, his pandering to gays is bringing him in Millions of dollars!

SECOND SHOT!

Vice President Joe Biden Still Blaming Bush

Taking a cue from Obama's knack of blaming everything on George W. Bush, recently vice president Joe Biden blamed all of the Obama Administration’s rocky negotiations with Iran on Bush.

He went on to say that it was only after President Obama took office and made "good faith" efforts toward dealing with Iran that the world realized the Iran is the problem.

"By going the extra diplomatic mile, presenting Iran with a clear choice, we demonstrated to the region and the world that Iran is the problem, not the United States," Biden said at the Rabbinical Assembly's annual convention in Atlanta.

"When we took office, let me remind you, there was virtually no international pressure on Iran," Biden continued.

And talk about blaming Bush, he went on to blame America saying, "We were the problem, we were diplomatically isolated in the world, in the region, in Europe. We were neither fully respected by our friends nor feared by our opponents. Today it is starkly, starkly different.”

Biden said Obama’s efforts also have created world-wide support for the U.S.'s recent get-tough policies in the face of what appears to be Iran's expanding nuclear program, including Obama's executive orders punishing those who make financial deals with that country.

“That's why China, that's why Russia, that's why Europe, that's why the rest of the world have joined us in these sanctions, and the president deserves the credit,” the vice president said, painting with a broad brush what actually has been a rather contentious dialogue between the U.S. and those other countries.

Such Obama administration criticism of the president's predecessor is not new, and the Obama re-election campaign has begun to look for ways to tout the president’s foreign policy.

Biden's comment on the U.S. being diplomatically isolated during the Bush years was in reference to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. President G. W. Bush made the decision without United Nations’ approval but with the backing of Britain and, initially, the support of a majority of Americans, according to polls at the time.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's campaign called Biden's comments "reckless" and criticized the Obama administration for “all too often” trying to first blame America, apparently suggesting that Biden's criticisms of Bush were really aimed at the country as a whole.

"Biden’s reckless statement today blaming America for – of all things – the progress of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, has reached a new low," said Romney policy director Lanhee Chen. “The problem is not America. It is the ayatollahs who oppress their people.”

Matt Brooks, executive director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, said Biden comments were "outrageous."

"Iran was the problem then and it is the problem now," he said. "It's foolishly misguided for the vice president to blame anyone or any country other than Iran."

Biden also said Iran is not monolithic and bet that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be out of power within two years.

Biden's mouth gets him in more trouble than just about any other politician in Washington. It's no wonder that he's usually apologizing for saying something stupid. He is.


THIRD SHOT!

Crazy Terrorist Attorney Wants Women At 9/11 Hearing To All Wear Muslim Clothing

The defense attorney who wore a traditional Islamic outfit called a "hijab" during the arraignment of the Sept. 11 Terrorists is defending her courtroom appeal - and wants other women in the court room to wear what she calls "appropriate" clothing to the proceedings - out of respect for her client's Muslim beliefs.

She's must be nuts!

Cheryl Bormann, counsel for defendant Walid bin Attash, attended the arraignment Saturday dressed in a hijab, apparently because her client insisted on it.

She further requested that the court order all of other women in court to follow her example so that the defendants do not "have to avert their eyes for fear of committing a sin under their faith."

These sons-of-bitches killed thousands of innocent people. Someone should clue them in - the sins that they have committed go far beyond that sort of bullshit of having to avert their eyes. These are mass murderers on a scale that only the Muslim faith can justify as being OK.

At a press conference at Guantanamo Bay, Bormann said she dresses in a hijab at "all times" when she meets with her client "out of respect" for his beliefs.

Asked why she requested other women do the same, Bormann said, "When you're on trial for your life, you need to be focused."

They didn't give a damn about how Americans dressed when they slaughtered them. They were plenty focused on killing the innocent that day almost 11 years ago.

Bormann, who says she is not Muslim, claimed the issue came up several years ago, when a paralegal wore a "very short skirts" and it became a distraction for the defendants. She said, "somebody" was also dressed "in a way that was not in keeping with my client's religious beliefs."

"If because of someone's religious beliefs, they can't focus when somebody in the courtroom is dressed in a particular way, I feel it is incumbent upon myself as a counsel to point that out and ask for some consideration from the prosecution," she said. "Suffice to say it was distracting to members of the accused."

Cheryl Bormann is the perfect example of way people have no respect for lawyers. She and her terrorists clients are in an American Military court - they can go to hell!

FOURTH SHOT!

Arrest Warrant issued for suspect in 1998 prison guard slaying

In April, it was reported that an ongoing cold-case investigation into the 1998 shooting death of a female prison guard near the 91 Freeway in Anaheim led to an arrest warrant for a fourth suspect.

Charges were filed in February against three other men, including the woman's husband. He was accused of orchestrating the murder of Elizabeth Wheat Begaren so that he could collect on a $1 Million Life Insurance Policy.

The Orange County District Attorney's Office in February filed special-circumstances murder charges against Nuzzio Begaren, 51, and reputed gang members Jose Louis Sandoval, 36, and Rafael Garcia Miranda, 45.

Yes, this sounds a lot like something on TV's Cold Case - but it is the real deal.

Frankly, with all of the budget cuts that most departments are experiencing these days, I'm very happy that the Cold Case unit in Anaheim is tracking down those who need hanging.

And in this case, since Elizabeth Wheat Begaren's husband put together the plot to murder Elizabeth for insurance money - the death penalty would be too good for the bastard.

Am I holding too much in?

FIFTH SHOT!

Former LAPD Detective Lazarus 

In another Cold Case, Ex-LAPD Detective Sentenced

It was reported that a former Los Angeles police detective was sentenced to 27 years to life in prison for murdering the wife of her former lover 26 years ago.

Stephanie Lazarus, 52, was found guilty in March of killing Sherri Rasmussen, a nurse who was bludgeoned and shot to death in the condo she shared with her husband of three months, John Ruetten.

Superior Court Judge Robert Perry gave Lazarus a term of 25 years to life for first-degree murder and an additional two years for personal use of a firearm. He said Lazarus would be credited with 1,608 days, or nearly 4½ years, for good behavior and time already served.

Her defense attorney said an appeal has been filed.

Outside court, Lazarus' brother and mother said their hearts go out to Rasmussen's family, but they still support Lazarus and believe she did not get a fair trial.

"There was never a presumption of innocence," said Steve Lazarus. "The media got to listen to DNA and guilt for 2 1/2 years before Stephanie had her trial."

During the trial, prosecutors focused on the romantic relationship between Lazarus and Ruetten after they graduated from college. They claim Lazarus was consumed with jealousy when Ruetten decided to marry Rasmussen.

The case hinged on DNA from a bite mark prosecutors say was left by Lazarus on Rasmussen's arm.

Defense attorneys argued the DNA evidence was corrupted over the years and could not be considered reliable.

Lazarus was not a suspect in 1986 because detectives then believed two robbers who had attacked another woman in the area were to blame for Rasmussen's death. The case file, however, did mention Lazarus because of her relationship with Ruetten.

No suspects were found and the case went cold until May 2009, when undercover officers followed Lazarus and obtained a sample of her saliva to compare with DNA left at the original crime scene, police Chief Charlie Beck said at the time.

Prosecutors suggested Lazarus knew to avoid leaving other evidence such as fingerprints. The idea that saliva from a bite mark could be her undoing was inconceivable in 1986 when DNA wasn't used as a forensic tool.

Prosecutors asked the judge for the maximum sentence.

"Her efforts to mislead the initial homicide investigators permitted her to avoid justice for this crime for more than 20 years," prosecutors wrote in court documents. "It is bleakly ironic that the defendant's long-running deception now benefits her with respect to sentencing."

Defense attorney Mark Overland had pointed out, however, that his client's personnel file is replete with commendations throughout her 26-year career and did not contain a single allegation of improper conduct or excessive force.

Overland added there was no evidence presented at trial that showed Lazarus knew where Ruetten and Rasmussen lived or that she knew their phone number.

"How Ms. Lazarus could have known that Ms. Rasmussen decided on the morning of the killing not to go to work and stay home has never been explained," Overland wrote in court documents. "Additionally, after the killing, Ms. Lazarus never initiated any contact with Ruetten."

Lazarus rose in the ranks of the Los Angeles Police Department, becoming a detective in charge of art forgeries and thefts. Her husband attended most of the trial, along with other family members.

Not surprisingly, even though it was the LAPD's hard work that found the evidence to convict Lazarus, the Rasmussen family has filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against the LAPD and the City of Los Angeles.

I guess suing the City and the LAPD, and getting money from them, will make everything better for the family? I don't get that at all!

To me, they should be thanking the Detectives who stayed on it. Maybe even take them to dinner as way of thanking them. Certainly not sue them!


SIXTH SHOT!

Developer plans 200-foot-tall Cross in Missouri

As everyone can read in the news, public symbols of Christianity are under attack around the nation.

But that's not the case in Branson, Missouri, where county officials have approved a 200-foot Cross that will rival American icons like the Statue of Liberty and the Golden Gate Bridge, according to its developer.

Kerry Brown said the "God-given vision" of the Branson Cross came to his father Dean two decades ago after he bought land atop Bear Mountain near the intersections of U.S. highways 160 and 65 in Branson - famous for its country music.

"It started as a vision with a 7-foot-tall cross just so people would have a place to go and meditate with the Lord," Brown told FoxNews.com. "As time went on, additional portions of the vision came to him and ultimately it was to build the largest cross that anyone has ever seen."

Brown hopes to have the $5 million project completed by the end of 2013. The cross will feature a 100-foot crossbeam and twin elevators to the 17-story-tall horizontal bar. The project is being funded by donations, and though Brown declined to say how much he's taken in, a website associated with the effort said some $410,000 has been raised so far. Much of the expense will go to preparing the mountaintop site.

"It’s going to be a family-friendly, free admission venue where people can have an encounter with Jesus Christ." - Kerry Brown, developer

"My goal is to have much of the land prepared this year," he said. "Getting construction materials up the hill is going to need a 45 degree road to get to the top."

After receiving zoning approval from the Taney County Planning and Zoning Commission four years ago, Brown said fundraising for the project began in earnest in December.

"We’ve been working up to this for a while," he said. "But at this point, we still have quite a ways to go. Our dollar amount doesn’t come near what we need at this point."

Brown, a former attorney now living in Branson, is hoping the estimated eight million people who travel in and out of Branson each year will propel the cross into an international tourist destination.

"I know St. Louis has the Gateway Arch and San Francisco has the Golden Gate Bridge, and those are all fantastic monuments, but they’re all secular monuments," he said.

"This will be the first monument to the spirit of man and there’s a reason why it’s being built in the heartland of the nation. It’s absolutely in the right place at the right time and it’s going to have ten times the spirituality as any one of those monuments."

Unlike other places, like say California, very little opposition to the project has been received by Brown - who said he hopes to make the Branson Cross free to all visitors.

"It’s going to be a family-friendly, free admission venue where people can have an encounter with Jesus Christ,” he said. “But we’re getting ready to move forward on this pretty quickly here and I’m sure at some point somebody will come and try to step in the way."

Elsewhere in the nation, like in Woonsocket, Rhode Island, public displays of Christianity are under heavy fire.

A national Atheist organization is demanding that that city remove a cross from a 91-year-old memorial honoring hometown soldiers who paid the ultimate sacrifice for their county.

Although the memorial has stood in the parking lot of the Woonsocket fire station for decades with no complaints, the Wisconsin-based Freedom from Religion Foundation began last month calling for it to be stripped of the cross that sits atop it, claiming it violates the First Amendment's freedom of religion clause.

The Atheist group also wants the Woonsocket Fire Department to remove "The Firefighter's Prayer" and a picture of an angel from its website.

Mojave Cross still under fire!

Also last month, a federal judge approved a land swap that may end an 11-year legal battle over the right to display a cross honoring Veteran of Foreign Wars veterans in a remote part of the Mojave Desert in Barstow, California.

U.S. District Judge Robert Timlin in California on April 23 signed an order allowing the so-called Mojave Cross to return to Sunrise Rock.

The National Park Service, under terms of the settlement, will transfer the title for the one-acre parcel in exchange for five acres of donated land.

The cross was erected in 1934 as a tribute to World War I veterans.

In 2001, the American Civil Liberties Union sued, alleging religious symbols shouldn’t be displayed on public land.

SEVENTH SHOT!

The First Amendment Is Not Being Read For What It Says!

Obviously this is all just my opinion, but I really believe that there are people out there that are using other works to decide Constitutional Law.

People ought to read the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and see if they can find this so-called phrase "separation of church and state."

Where does it say "Separation of church and state"? Maybe they can point out where it states that a cross cannot be put on land that belongs to the public? The First Amendment does not say that!

The First Amendment reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."  

How more clear can it be "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

It says that the Government cannot establish a national religion of some sort like say the Church of England where all of the English were forced to belong to that religion.

That in effect would be a religion that would be forced on people. They were afraid of that, but America has proven herself to be a free place for all to worship as they please.

We do not force anyone to belong to a religion, but at the same time we should not force people to accept atheism either. It is the exact same thing as say the Communism Doctrine that says religion is the problem and forces its people to be Atheist by forbidding them from worshiping any religion. 

LAST SHOT!

Hello Les!

I wanted to take a shot to see if you're reading this. I hope you are, and I hope you're having a great time in Homer, Alaska.

By the way, if you bump into Sarah - tell her there's many out here that love her!

Story by Tom Correa

DRILL NOW - Oil Is More Than Just Gasoline

The consequences of not drilling right now is becoming more and more evident. The longer we wait to get going and move forward to utilize our own oil resources - the more we fall behind the rest of the world.

And friends, Energy Independence and Oil Independence are not the same!

In 2007, the U.S. used approximately 20,680,000 barrels of oil per day. And yes, not all of that went into cars and trucks as gasoline!

One way to divert the argument to drill here is Obama's effort to spin the truth about the amount of oil that we have available to us. Obama often uses statistics in speeches that are now being questioned.

For example, he has said that "the problem is we use more than 20 percent of the world's oil and we only have 2 percent of the world's proven oil reserves."

"Even if we drilled every square inch of this country right now, we'd still have to rely disproportionately on other countries for their oil," Obama said, while pitching a plan to crack down on oil market speculators.

But now, in the last month, Republican Senators have accused President Obama of pushing a "less-than-honest" claim about the scarcity of domestic oil.

The reason is, on April 19th, 2012, a new U.S. Geological Survey study came out showing that the United States actually holds a quarter of the world's untapped oil supply.

The U.S. Geological Survey, the first such study in 12 years, paints a very different picture than what Obama is trying to pass off to the American public. The analysis showed the world outside of the U.S. holds 565 billion barrels of undiscovered conventional oil. The study agrees with a prior analysis by the Energy Information Administration that put the country's supply at 198 billion barrels. That works out to 26 percent of the world supply.

Sens. James Inhofe, R-Okla., and Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, suggested that the 2 percent stat has become obsolete.

"Well, there goes President Obama's favorite talking point," Inhofe said in a statement. "The president's own administration has released a report which reveals that the United States has 26 percent of the world's technically recoverable conventional oil resources, and that's not including our enormous oil shale, tight oil and heavy oil resources. This report from the U.S. Geological Survey is vindication for anyone who thought that President Obama's claims ... are less than honest."

The administration is saying that the president and the USGS are referring to two different kinds of oil reserves. The administration says that the president talks about "proven oil reserves" - or oil deposits that have been discovered.

In the other, much bigger category, are the "undiscovered, technically recoverable" reserves - or all the other stuff geologists estimate is out in the world regardless of how accessible or economically viable it might be. That's what the USGS looked at.

None of this good news really matters as long as Obama is in office. Obama is anti-Oil.

He really believes that Green Technology will replace our need for oil. Of course, as I've said in other articles, oil for energy needs is only one part of a barrel of oil.

Obama and the Democrats seem to be completely unaware that about 6,000 products that we use every day - which have very little to do with gasoline - are petroleum based. So even if we found a way to power every car on a drop of water, heated our homes with a minute's worth of sunlight, and produced electricity for 320,000,000+ Americans with a single 8 by 10 solar panel - we would still need oil to produce those items that we take for granted every day.

From the computer that you are reading this on right now, to the keyboard, mouse, cables, plugs, light fixtures, or even the shirt that you may have on right now, they are made from oil.

Oil impacts our daily lives much more than in our gas tanks. According to Rankin Energy, one 42-gallon barrel of oil creates 19.4 gallons of gasoline. The rest of that barrel goes into making other products - Rankin estimates there are over 6000 items using oil in their manufacturing.

An article in the news recently reported that more people are buying cars and using more gas around the world than ever before. This growth in the global economy increases the demand for fuel, while oil supplies are projected to get tighter.

"China was at 5 million barrels a day in 2005. Today, they are at 10 (million). By 2015, they are going to be at 15-million-barrels-a-day demand," said John Hofmeister, founder of Citizens for Affordable Energy. "That's 10 million new barrels over 10 years. India is going from 4 to 7 (million) in the next three to four years."

As a nation, we must understand that China and India do not have the number of cars and trucks that the United States has and subsequently we need to ask ourselves -  so why do they need so much oil?

Fact is that China's need for more and more oil has very little to do with cars and fuel needs. They are manufacturing things - a great number of things - things that we no longer manufacture here - things that we have become dependant on in our daily lives.

Both China and India are becoming the manufacturing giants of the world, and they are manufacturing items commonly made out of oil.

One 42-gallon barrel of oil creates 19.4 gallons of gasoline. The rest, over half, is used to make everyday products. Yes, products - over 6,000 - that we take for granted everyday - are made out of oil. 

Now here's just a partial list of what's made, so just try to imagine life without Oil which makes the following Petroleum based products possible.


PETROLEUM PRODUCTS IN OUR DAILY LIVES
CLOTHING/TEXTILES

Ballet tights, nylon cord, women's polyester blouses, beads, pajamas, women's polyester pants, bracelets, pantyhose, nylon zippers, plastic hangers, permanent press clothing, dresses, purses, flip flops, earrings, ribbons, fake fur, windbreakers, sandals, garment bags, shoe laces, rain coats, iron-on patches, sneakers, sweaters, nylon underclothing, sofa pillow material, polyester shirts, polyester slacks, tote bags, umbrellas

OFFICE SUPPLIES

Ball point pens, diskettes, thermometer, Ink, computers, typewriter ribbon/cartridges, business card holders,
copiers, waste baskets, calculators, printer ribbon cartridges, microfilm, carbon paper, protractor, name tags, correction fluid, ring binder, erasers, rulers, letter divider, scotch tape, magic markers, telephones

SPORTS/HOBBIES/GAMES

Back packs, fishing lures, air mattresses, Polaroid camera, beach balls, fishing poles, hang gliders, vinyl cases, cameras, footballs, glue containers, puzzles, darts, Frisbees, golf ball/bags, shotgun shell casing, ear plugs, knitting needles, waterproof jackets, stadium cushion, earphones, yarn, kites, tennis racquet, fabric dye, decoys, lifejackets, nylon strings, face protectors, volley balls, model cars, plastic water guns, fishing bobbers, soccer balls, oil paints, parachutes, fishing cylume, light stick, earphones, playing cards, photographs, monofilament fishing lines, diving boards, poker chips, goggles, roller-skate wheels, whistles, guitar strings, guitar picks, rafts, ice chests, tents, sleeping bags, pole vaulting poles, motorcycle helmets, skis, rubber cement, plastic flower pots, water skis, hot tub covers, sails, snorkels, monkey bars, photo, albums, wet suits, flippers, tennis balls, boats, insulated boots

INFANT/CHILDREN

Acrylic toys, baby oil, laundry basket, waterproof pants, baby aspirin, bath soap, mittens, pacifiers, baby blanket, bibs, rattles, double-knit shirts, baby bottles, disposable diapers, baby shoes, teething ring, nipples, dolls, stuffed animals, baby lotion

MEDICAL

Allergy medication, cotton-tipped swabs, inhalator liquid, Pepto-Bismol, aspirin, first aid cream, lancet for blood testing, pill cases, band aids, first aid kits, latex gloves, prescription bottle, burn lotion, glycerin, mosquito spray, rubbing alcohol, chap stick, heart valve replacements, nasal decongestant, surgical tape, syringes, Vaseline, antiseptics, hearing aids, anesthetics, artificial limbs, eye glasses, antihistamines, cortisone,
vaporizers, Bactine, oxygen masks, stethoscope, prescription glasses

HEALTH & BEAUTY

cologne, hair brushes, lipstick, permanent wave curlers, perfume, hair color, mascara, petroleum jelly, combs, foam rubber curlers, denture adhesives, shampoo, contact lens/case, hair spray, hand lotion, shaving foam, cough syrup, hearing aids, hair dryers, shoe inserts, dentures, Keri body lotion, face masks, skin cleanser, deodorants, laxatives, moisturizing cream, soap holder, disposable razors, leather conditioner, mouth wash, sun glasses, facial toner, lens cleanser, nail polish, sunscreen, tooth brushes, toothpaste tubes,
vitamins, synthetic wigs, bubble bath, soap, capsules

KITCHEN/HOUSEHOLD

vinegar bottles, egg carton, meat trays, trash bags, bread box, freezer containers, melamine dishware, tumblers, cake decorations, jars, microwave divided dishes, utensils, candles, freezer bags, milk jugs, vacuum bottles, coasters, gelatin molds, nylon spatulas, wax paper, coffee pots, ice cream scoops, oven bags, mops, drinking cups, ice trays, plastic containers, fabric softener, detergent, liter bottles, plastic table service, drain stoppers, dish drainer, lunch boxes, pudding molds, sponges, dish scrubber brush, baggies, drinking straws, Styrofoam, paper cup dispenser, measuring cups, Teflon coated pans, table cloths, refrigerator shelves

FURNISHINGS

Carpet padding, naugahyde, Venetian blinds, TV cabinets, extension cords, picture frames, flocked wallpaper, shower doors, Formica, refrigerator lining, vinyl-coated wallpaper, curtains, kitchen carpet, shag carpet, welcome mats, fan blades, lamps, shower curtain, patio furniture, swings, linoleum, upholstery material, rugs

BUILDING/HOME MAINTENANCE

caulking material, light switch plates, plunger, faucet washer, clothesline, measuring tape, polyurethane stain, water pipe, electric saw, paint brush, propane bottles, wood floor cleaner/wax, vinyl electrical tape, plastic pipe, shingles (asphalt), light panels, garden hose, plastic wood, spackling paste, awnings, glazing compound, Plexiglas, spray paint, enamel, epoxy paint, artificial turf, folding doors, floor wax, glue, house paint, paint rollers, toilet seats, water pipes, putty, solvents, roofing material, plywood adhesive, sockets

AUTOMOBILE

Anti-freeze, flat tire fix, street paving (asphalt), car battery case, coolant, motor oil, tires, loud speakers, bearing grease, sports car bodies, traffic cones, car enamel, brake fluid, dash boards, windshield wipers, visors, car sound insulation, oil filters, car seats, convertible tops, fan belts, gasoline

MISCELLANEOUS

Ash trays, dog food dishes, tool boxes, cd's, balloons, dog leash, tape recorders, synthetic rubber, bubble gum, dog toys, flashlights, nylon rope, bungee strap, fertilizer, flight bags, disposable lighters, cassettes, cassette players, flea collars, flutes, lighter fluid, cigarette case, electric blankets, tool racks, name tags, cigarette filters, ammonia, insecticides, newspaper tubes, calibrated container, insect repellent, food preservatives, phonograph records, crayons, ice buckets, dyes, pillows, credit cards, flashlights, fly swatter, plastic cup holder, dice, movie film, k-resin, plastic tie wraps, polyethylene, polypropylene, rain bonnets, luggage, video cassettes, charcoal lighter, rayon, safety glasses, safety gloves, safety hats, shoe polish, signs, cassette tapes, toys, watch bands, waterproof boots, shopping bags, bed spreads, traffic cones, check books covers, tobacco pouches, clothes hangers, flea collars, flavors, masking tape, safety flares, flags, signs, including Election Signs!

Friends, this is only a partial list of the approximately 6000 products made from oil. This is only a partial list of products made from petroleum. As we can see, it's not only about gasoline and cars.

President Obama wants to do nothing in the way of more drilling to tap into our abundant natural resources. He only sees oil as an "energy issue" - when in reality oil is more than just gasoline.

Obama argues that more drilling is not the way of the future. Instead, he wants to wean Americans off of oil entirely by turning to alternatives energy options like electric and hybrid cars, solar and wind power - and what I call his "Any Thing Other Than Oil" philosophy.

No matter how high gas prices at the pump go, "Any Thing Other Than Oil" is the mantra from the wealthy Liberal Left.

The problem with Obama's thinking, according to most analysts, is that the transition from oil to alternatives takes far longer than more drilling would.

"And we have a capital stock of hundreds of million of vehicles," Guy Caruso of the Center for Strategic and International Studies said. "So these types of transformations take decades and maybe even 50 to 60 years."

Lately, obviously because its an Election Year, Obama talks about oil drilling as if he were for it. Imagine that! Like a true politician, Obama is telling Americans that he is cutting red tape and issuing all sorts of oil permits for companies to get to work on Federal lands. He is lying.

The problem with Obama lying to the American people these days is that he might get a few to believe him - but the majority won't.

The data speaks for itself. Official government figures show that Obama is issuing far fewer permits on Federal land than George W. Bush did while he was president.

At the end of his two terms, George W. Bush issued 6,000 to 7,000 permits a year. Under Barack Hussein Obama the numbers have dropped significantly to a range of 4,000 to almost 4,500 a year.

Since it can take seven to 10 years for a permit to turn into an actual producing oil well, that means less oil will be coming from Federal lands in years to come. That combined with a rise in global demand for oil is a recipe for disaster for the United States. Yes, all thanks to Obama's attitude of doing nothing to prepare for the future right now.

Advocates of more domestic drilling say we know a crunch is coming, so we should be drilling more right now - otherwise, the result could be ugly.

"The reality of the situation, with respect to global supply is that Americans can find themselves in gasoline lines, with gas rationing by 2015 or 2016 by us not producing more of our own oil," Hofmeister said.

Obama is either purposing neglecting the facts, or he's just too dumb to understand them. Either way, he should understand that the facts clearly point out that even with alternatives, the U.S. Energy Department predicts that in 2035 we will still be relying on oil for 83% of our transportation needs alone.

And yes, those figures are not taking into consideration all of our other needs for oil.

For some reason, Obama and the Democrats who support him only think oil is for gasoline and transportation. They completely fail to understand the basic uses of oil. They fail to understand that there is oil for energy use and that there is oil for manufacturing to make products. It is apparent that they have no idea how things are made - or what they are made from.

Obama can't get it through his head that it's not just about gasoline and cars!

So ask yourself, as I have asked myself lately, when the President of the United States talks about not drilling for more oil - just how many manufacturing jobs is he talking about putting at stake by not drilling right now?

How expensive will these oil based products become if they can't be made easily made here?

How many companies are going to have to relocate their manufacturing facilities overseas because they make one or a few of the thousands of oil based products?

How many companies will want to take their manufacturing jobs somewhere else because oil is not readily available in the United States and may also be cheaper in other countries than it is here?

Ask yourself, how many Americans are going to suffer because of Obama's arrogance or ignorance? Maybe he should take a long look at how many products that we depend on comes from oil?

Fact is, there are reasons to drill for oil that have nothing to do with just cars and transportation. We need oil to produce goods! Obama and his cronies have tunnel vision and can't see that oil is more than just gasoline and the fuel end of the equation.

So OK, here's a proposal that I would think everyone would accept.

We need oil to fuel our manufacturing capabilities and make things that the world can use - subsequently buy - and them buying from us, empowers us as a nation. Yes, just like the situation that we are in with China today.

Because we need oil to make things, we need to explore and develop our own oil resources to produce oil for America and rid ourselves of being dependant on Foreign Oil to make things.

To me, it's an easy concept to understand. One that even your most ardent liberal can understand. Of course, he or she would not be in favor of empowering America - but that's their problem.

Energy and Oil Independence. Oil for energy needs sure, but also just as importantly - we need oil independence so that we can again make things that make our lives easier, cleaner, and better - while putting Americans to work.

Of course, Energy Independence like Oil Independence will never happen until Obama and his "let's blame-America Socialist friends" are out of power. And please note that I said out of power!

To them, they see being in elected office as a position of power -- not as a position of civic responsibility to do what's right for America.

If they did feel a true responsibility to America, then they would already be encouraging drilling here at home - and deregulating things to make life easier.

Sad to say, they're not!

That's just how I see it.

Story by Tom Correa

California Deer Population Decline Blamed On Loss of Habitat

Did you ever read a News Story that just made you shake your head because you couldn't agree with it? 

It was recently reported that the State of California is saying that there are only about 445,000 Mule Deer left in California.

To some folks, that sounds like a lot, but according to the California Fish and Game, if you realize that almost half a million deer are spread over the entire state - which is some 99 Million acres big - then one can see how they can be pretty spread out. With only 445,000 deer over such a large area, some say that that is part of the reason that the deer population is dwindling in California. Deer are simply having problems finding other deer to reproduce with. The decline in the deer population has been almost too small to see on an annual basis, but, since 1990, California has lost half its deer population - again, according to the state Department of Fish and Game. In 2010, it was reported that the California deer population has plummeted over the past two decades - by 46 percent - if the yearly count of bucks killed by hunters is a proper measure.

According to the recent report in the news, it stated that because deer are a popular hunting species - that it is that reason that they are intensively managed by Fish and Game. Supposedly, the state gathers vast quantities of data when a hunter reports a kill. Of course, I can't help but wonder how many hunters don't report their kill to Fish and Game. 

To me, it sounds a little more like someone's wishful thinking than what's really taking place. But reality doesn't matter to the state of California because Fish and Game's claim that all kills are reported to them is what they say they use as a way of knowing that there are problems with the demographics of the remaining deer population.

While I disagree and see deer in many places that they were never able to be, many in California Fish and Game see a supposed widespread deer decline. They say the deer population is on the decline mainly for one reason - the loss of habitat. 

For example, between 1990 and 2000, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 75,000 acres per year were converted to low-density housing across California. A recent report from the Sacrament Bee newspaper says housing data showed a similar trend over the past decade, at least until the recession began. The rate was even greater prior to 1990.

My concern has been that this loss of land has eliminated great farmland essential to producing food for you and me. Fish and Game's concern is that the land conversion to urban sprawl eliminated food and migratory corridors vital to deer. Either way, we're losing vital land to housing development and strip malls.

"You can't have a good migratory deer population when their wintering ground is covered in residential development for humans," said Craig Stowers, Deer Program manager at Fish and Game. "They're competing for the same resources we need, and they're losing."

Part of the reason that I'm having so much trouble with this story about a decline in mule deer here in California is because of the story of white-tailed deer across the country.

White-tail deer were found throughout much of the United States when the Europeans first arrived and settled here. Their range extended from the Eastern coast to modern-day Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and Texas. European settlers described the great abundance of white-tail deer in their early accounts of America.  They seemed everywhere!

By the beginning of the 20th century, much of the white-tail deer's former range was wiped out and destroy completely. Commercial hunting and deforestation are said to be the primary causes of this eradication. In response to the declining deer populations, hunters encouraged state officials to manage the remaining white-tail deer. Most states came up with much stricter hunting regulations while at the same time started deer reintroduction programs.

By the 1940s, white-tailed deer were restored in much of the former range. Today, deer are found in all of their former range and are extending their range westward to areas that they were never found before.

If you want to know how important white-tail deer are to America's economy, understand that they are an extremely vital economic resource. They bring in $10 Billion a year in generated funds from hunting and wildlife watching.

Believe it or not, recent land-use changes have also encouraged an increase in whitetail deer. Due to habitat loss and fragmentation, many large carnivores have been displaced. With the loss of natural predators, such as wolves and mountain lions, white-tail deer have become abundant in many parts of the United States - even in places where white-tailed deer were never seen before.

With increasing suburbanization, deer have more suitable habitats available for them. Deer may move seasonally from open canopy vegetation to forests. Low-density residential areas often provide this open canopy and forest edge habitat. Gardens and landscaped lawns provide plants for deer to feed on, and forest patches give deer places to hide - even though they have nothing to fear because hunting is banned in those areas.

Because deer are increasingly found in habitats near humans, especially in urban settings, they are often described as a nuisance. It is estimated that deer cause over $1 Billion in damage each year. This includes damage to city and private property, landscaping, and crops. A single deer may consume a ton and a half of vegetation in one year. And yes, deer are associated with a risk to people because they carry ticks with Lyme Disease and cause thousands of car accidents each year.

By living in the suburbs, deer also pose management problems. Simply put, since it is illegal in most cities and towns to discharge a firearm within city limits, the fact is that hunting cannot be used to regulate deer populations in these habitats.

It's not only urban deer that's the problem. Even in rural landscapes where deer may be hunted, these animals are said to over-graze and damage forests, reducing the potential for marketable timber.

Overall, deer are a wildlife management success story. The one aspect that sours the success story of the return of white-tail deer in America is that the economic and ecological damage that they bring with them is something that Cities, Counties, and Fish and Game Departments must address when planning their future.

In California, the species in question are mule deer and black-tail deer. Both species are lumped together in Fish and Game's 2011 population estimate of about 445,000 deer statewide, that's a drop from 850,000 in 1990. That, my friends, is a loss of almost half the California deer population in just over 20 years. And that, to me, is really hard to believe knowing the success of the white-tailed deer in other parts of the country.

The loss that the California Fish and Game is describing is incredible all by itself. And honestly, it is tough to believe for a few reasons. But one that many people in the cities across California can attest to - the population of deer in and around the California cities and urban areas have seen a marked increase in the number of mule deer and black-tail deer mainly - like the white-tail deer around the nation - because hunting is banned in those areas.

But even though that's what many see as taking place, the state who manages its deer herds according to zones defined by habitat and deer behavior says that of the 45 zones in California, only about 6 have deer populations held steady or increased slightly since the 1990s.

According to them, these are generally found in some of the least populated areas of the state. Also, according to the Fish and Game folks, all the other zones have declined significantly.

Like those in the San Francisco Bay Area, city folks might tell you of the many deer they now see alongside the highways and freeways, in the hills, in the parks, and even grazing on school grounds around the state. 

Rural residents might tell you that many of us see deer all the time on our property, in our orchards, in our gardens, eating our rose bushes, crossing roads, and even as road-kill. But the Fish and Game folks say there simply aren't the numbers that there once was.

Researching this story, I spoke to quite a few farmers, ranchers, hunters, and just folks who live in these areas in the Sierra Mountains, along the Sacramento delta, and in the San Joaquin farmlands. They see a lot of deer. They see more deer than ever. They see what I see - there is a lot of deer out there. That's why I have a problem with the claim that their numbers are in decline.

According to the State of California, everyone who I spoke to is wrong. According to those in the know there, it's all about habitat.

Deer require a particular type of forest habitat called "early seral." This means they prefer to eat the tender, nutritious, young vegetation that surges for several years after a land disturbance like a forest fire. These days, the problem for rural residents is that deer primarily find this kind of food in the gardens and landscaping of new homes that tend to go with new rural housing development.

Fish and Game believe that natural sources of this deer food have been largely eliminated by a century of fire suppression in forests - the same problem that has caused forests to become overstocked with small, young trees that they say now pose an enormous fire risk.

Land management agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service are now reversing themselves as they now say that they have made an error in excessive fire suppression.

For folks like me who live in the forest and big tree country, the problem of excessive fire suppression and not allowing more fires is not one that we see as a "problem." I don't want anyone to allow fires. I know really well that they are used to clear old growth and keep huge fires from happening, but I've also seen what happens when people lose control of "control burns."

And yes, though the overly dense forests pose a massive wildfire risk, I'm sorry to say that I simply don't trust the Forest Service to maintain their so-called "control burns" to the extent that they don't get out of hand and threaten the many people and homes which have cropped up in and near forests.

It's a "double whammy" for deer, said Stowers. Much of their habitat has been eliminated by rural development - and the habitat that remains is poor quality.

"If deer numbers are poor, they are a real canary in the coal mine, so to speak," said Randy Morrison, California regional director at the Mule Deer Foundation, a conservation and hunting organization. "They are a real bellwether species for a given habitat. And our habitat is not healthy, no question about it."

Complicating the problem is that when a wild-land fire does occur, there is often a rush to remove the burned trees and replant them with seedlings. Often this comes with herbicide spraying to prevent other plants from competing with the seedlings. This impulse eliminates the natural forest regeneration that would support deer populations. 

And according to some, it's not just deer. A study was conducted last year by PRBO Conservation Science, which examined conditions after fires on the Plumas and Lassen national forests. They found that dozens of songbird species benefit from the same kind of post-fire habitat that emerges when a burned area is left alone.

"It's a hard sell," said Craig Thomas, executive director of the environmental group Sierra Forest Legacy. "People look at burned trees, and they say, 'Oh God, let's get the green ones back.' The early seral habitat could be really diverse and beautiful if we thought about it as a valuable thing. Deer suffer when we don't think that way."

There is another point here, deer are an iconic species for hunters -- and the population decline has not gone unnoticed among hunters. Mule and black-tail deer are California's primary big-game hunting species. Yet, as most hunters know really well, it has become increasingly difficult to find them during hunting season.

According to Fish and Game data for California, the state-wide hunter success ratio for deer hunters in 2010 was 15 percent. That means about four out of five hunters who purchased a license and deer tag from the state and attempted to take a deer for their family -  failed to bring any home.

In Colorado, by comparison, the hunter success rate for deer in 2011 was 43 percent, according to that state's Department of Wildlife. "Our deer numbers are down to a point where success is definitely limited, which has been very discouraging to many hunters," Morrison said.

Mule deer and black-tail deer inhabit about 75 percent of California. They thrive on the edges of forests, where they can find the underbrush and grasslands they prefer and still find places to hide from predators. 

The males grow multi-pronged antlers, which, along with the promise of venison, is a primary reason they are the state's most popular game mammal.

To some, part of the problem is that Hunting Regulations may be complicating matters.

Stowers said, "regulations need to be adjusted to encourage a larger doe harvest."

Morrison agrees and says, "it would be appropriate in some areas - and hunters would support it - if the doe harvest was carefully monitored to avoid harming breeding success."

Some people blame the deer decline if there even is a decline - on mountain lions and other predators, which primarily feed on deer.

The claim is that a state law that bans mountain lion hunting, passed by voters in 1990, has allowed the mountain lion population to grow almost completely unchecked.

One problem that Fish and Game has with its relating the increased mountain lion problem to the decline in the deer population is that there has not been a thorough study of the state's mountain lion population in many years. There are no formal monitoring programs in place.

And yes, as everyone knows, if a state or federal agency doesn't spend a million or so taxpayer dollars on one study or another - they act as though they don't have a clue as to what's going on around them.

Of course, some reports skirt around the issue, hinting that even mountain lions are running out of deer to eat and turning to other food instead. If true, then maybe that's why ranchers are reporting more and more mountain lion attacks on their cattle and sheep. And yes, mountain lion sightings in urban areas are on the rise in California?

Mountain lions are something that both lawmakers and developers don't want to address for fear of poisoning the well when planning a new housing development. It's pretty hard to sell homes to families, especially those with small children, if they know that the lack of deer in the area has now made the mountain lion population look for other items to eat instead.

Randy Morrison, unlike myself, doesn't buy the mountain lion part of the equation and believes it's all about habitat. 

It seems that people interested in this are leaving out another factor for the deer decline if there is one. Deer and other wildlife poaching is big business across the country. And yes, California is not exempt from that problem. 

Fact is, the illegal sale of California wildlife and wildlife parts generates an estimated $100 Million a year - second only to the illegal drug trade, according to California Department of Fish and Game officials.

The taking of deer illegally in California is happening everywhere in the state. Incidents of poaching in California State Parks have been on the rise for over 10 years. No, National Parks like Yosemite National Park are not excluded from the places where poachers are harvesting deer in the numbers.

It is a growing problem in California. Proof of this is that citations and arrests have increased by 600 percent compared to 10 to 12 years ago.

So no, I can't agree with the notion that it's only about habitat.

Poachers are pulling in big dollars for taking illegal deer. Mountain lions, bobcats, black bears, and coyotes are known to feed on deer. I know firsthand that many hunting groups have claimed there are too many predators because of hunting restrictions on mountain lions and coyotes.

And of course, knowing the story of the resurgence of the white-tail deer - along with the increase in mule and black-tail deer in the urban areas of California, if there is really a decline taking place - makes it so that I just can't accept that it is solely due to loss of habitat.

I really believe it's a combination of factors and only partly to do with the loss of habitat.  And yes, like many, I too hope that the mule deer and black-tail deer of California can prevail in the same way that white-tail deer did in other parts of the country - through adaptation.

Tom Correa