President Obama: Guns “make us less safe”, “Skeptical” Guns In Schools Would Stop Another Massacre, Says “Vast Majority Of Americans” Agree With Him…

Obama meet the pressi·de·o·logue - Smug and self satisfied in their certitudes, Ideologue’s opinions are merely a loose collection of intellectual conceits, and he is genuinely astonished, bewildered and and indignant that his views are not universally embraced as the Truth. He regards the opposing point of view as a form of cognitive dissonance whose only cure is relentless propagandizing and browbeating.

….” I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that [armed guards in schools] somehow is going to solve our problem,”….

Yet, No, he’s not an “ideologue”…. or so he says.    President Obama continues to make claims that are out of touch with the Majority Of Americans…..  Even recent polling shows that what he just said is congnitively and intellectually false.   64% of Americans totally disagree with President Obama.

undefined

(Reuters) – President Barack Obama said in an interview broadcast on Sunday he hopes to get new U.S. gun control measures passed during the first year of his second term and is skeptical of a proposal by the National Rifle Association (NRA) gun lobby to put armed guards in schools.

undefined

Obama assigned Vice President Joe Biden to lead a task force to come up with proposals on guns at the beginning of 2013 after the massacre of 20 children and six adults by a gunman at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, this month.

“I’d like to get it done in the first year. I will put forward a very specific proposal based on the recommendations that Joe Biden’s task force is putting together as we speak. And so this is not something that I will be putting off,” Obama told NBC’s “Meet the Press” in an interview taped on Saturday.

“I am not going to prejudge the recommendations that are given to me. I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools. And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem,” he said.  (more)

No, actually Mr. President, it is YOU that is out-of-touch.  

undefined

Guns 4

About these ads
This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, A New America, Decepticons, Dem Hypocrisy, media bias, Obama Research/Discovery, Political correctness/cultural marxism, Potus Gun Ban, Tea Party, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

86 Responses to President Obama: Guns “make us less safe”, “Skeptical” Guns In Schools Would Stop Another Massacre, Says “Vast Majority Of Americans” Agree With Him…

  1. WeeWeed says:

    “..If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed..” Guess the author!! Yep, that little ol’ community organizing paper-hanger that some of us have heard of….
    Photobucket

    Like

  2. Coast says:

    You know, I feel that they are losing steam on this issue. I think most Americans realize that the CT shooting was done by a deranged/evil individual…and “gun control” would never solve a problem like that. One thing that we should do is point out the fact that his kids are protected by armed guards at their school, especially to anyone who thinks gun control is the right thing to do.

    Like

    • WeeWeed says:

      You’re using reason, good Coast. THEY don’t do that. It’s about getting YOUR guns…control, you see.

      Like

    • sundance says:

      Coast, as much as I want to accept your confidence as accurate – I cannot.

      The same was said for the Healthcare Takeover when 70% – READ THAT AGAIN – 70% of Americans WERE AGAINST government involvement in their healthcare. 70%…. The ideologues knew this statistic. They knew it well.

      It did not matter.

      They willingly gave up the House of Representatives to advance their ideology.

      They are playing Looooooong ball. Constitutionalists must understand who the enemy is. They will sacrifice their entire army….. all of them….. to advance their goals.

      They don’t care.

      Like

    • michellc says:

      I honestly don’t think it will pass this year, at least not the Feinstein bill. However, the more I think about it, I think what they’ll do this year is go after ammunition, they’re coming out with the extreme, then going with well background checks on ammo and limiting the rounds of ammo is not radical and they’ll squeak that through even the GOP led house by attaching it to some other bill probably a bill that adds money for security at schools.
      This fight will never end though regardless of what happens in 2013, the bigger question is government handouts more important to people than their right to bear arms? People certainly haven’t shown any other of their God given rights are more important than a government check.
      They intend to control us and they’ve been doing a pretty good job at it for many years and they will not stop until they’ve won 100% control.

      Like

      • sundance says:

        Tread very carefully with your “I don’t think” – ism’s….. He’s not talking wishful thinking….. “Something fundamental in America has to change,” said Obama, who visited on December 16 with families of victims of the Newtown, Connecticut, school shootings.

        http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/30/politics/obama-meet-the-press/?hpt=hp_t1

        The president said Sunday he will put forth a proposal next year to change firearm laws

        “Something *fundamental* in America has to change”….

        Something FUNDAMENTAL

        FUNDAMENTAL

        Like

        • Sharon says:

          I believe he’s speaking with a studied casualness about things that, in his mind, are already set in cement.

          In early 1933

          “Hitler….declared that his government would make Christianity, ‘the basis of our collective morality.’ He ended with another appeal to the God he did not believe in, but whose Jewish and Christian followers he would thenceforward persecute and kill, ‘May God Almighty take our work into his grace, give true form to our will, bless our insight, and endow us with the trust of our Volk!’”

          The willingness of Germany and Europe to be deceived and Hitler’s intention to deceive them were a perfect fit. Some of the military, most of the citizenry, some of the Christians, perhaps still a few of the Jews?, most of those in government positions, perhaps even most observers from other governments? ….all willing to accept the casual talk, the lying phrases, the reassurance of “…but I heard Herr Hitler, speak just last night on the radio…and he said again that his trust is in God. He is a man of faith!!”

          This is in 1933, and while there are only a few who actually believe what Hitler is saying he intends to do, he is already in deliberate deceptive mode. He knows exactly what he’s going to do and has begun to go there--right in front of them.

          (quote from Eric Metaxas’ biography, Bonhoeffer)

          ADD: I’m thinking we might want to stock up on discernment and wisdom, the stuff swirling around us is malevolent. (And how often can ya drop that into a comment….it’s the right word–malevolent.) : having, showing, or arising from intense often vicious ill will, spite, or hatred

          Like

        • michellc says:

          I don’t think it will pass the GOP led house. On the other side of the coin I don’t put it past Mr. Dictator to use his pen and then I have zero confidence in the GOP led house to do their job. I’ve waited 4 years to see them take back their power and it hasn’t happened yet.
          I have no blinders on when it comes to Obama, never have, never will. He’s been trained by some of the best communists around and he will go to much greater lengths in this next four years. He and them certainly won’t waste their time playing nice.
          His fundamental change has a lot more meaning than just disarming us. We won’t have countries fighting for us, we won’t have congress fighting for us with the exception of I do believe the GOP led house will refuse to pass the Feinstein bill, but if Obama goes the way of my worst fears, the people will be on their own and sadly guns are one of the least of our worries, it’s just one battle in the big war.

          Like

          • Sharon says:

            Just re-reading the Declaration of Independence and I find these lines:

            He (the “present king of Great Britain”) has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:….For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:….

            It certainly isn’t a direct, line by line correlation, but that phrase “fundamentally transforming” our nation made my skin crawl the first time I heard him say it, about five days before election day in 2008, and I firmly believe that his use of that word, in any context, is deliberate and chosen for specific purposes.

            Like

            • michellc says:

              You don’t grow up at the feet of communists and marxists and not use deliberate language for a specific purpose. I keep praying for a miracle because I’m afraid only God can save us.

              Like

              • Sharon says:

                There are several ways, I think, of slicing and dicing what’s happening to this nation (in a God-context) and one of them is simply the business of cause and effect, choices and consequences, sowing the wind and reaping the whirlwind.

                In terms of regulations, policies and educational goals, this nation has been spitting in God’s eye for about 40 years now so there are consequences flowing from choices–sometimes negative, sometimes positive. There is a sense in which God actually could be considered a “disinterested bystander” in the sense that He is not “immediately causing” everything that is happening now. 90% of what is happening now has a direct trackback to decisions made by the electorate in this country over the years, including the exaltation of victimhood, the exaltation of vile ways of living, the welfare mentality, the Israel-haters, those who yelled in God’s face at Charlottesville, legalizing the “right to kill the baby” that was an embarrassment or an inconvenience. Sometimes I marvel that God doesn’t just burst through the skies–from horizon to horizon–and speaking in a voice that slays everyone who hears it–say, “What do you take me for? Some kind of fool? You think I don’t see you? And hear you?” .

                Like I said, that is just one way to slice and dice. And before the point is distorted or misunderstand, being in that situation (for nations or individuals) has never meant that such a nation or individual may not find standing before God and ask for mercy; ask for His intervention. We may indeed do just that. You’re right, michellc, that “only God can save us.” That was true in 1973, too. it was true in 1987. And in 2001. That’s not a new truth. Unfortunately the majority of individuals and the many of the mainline churches in this nation have wanted nothing to do with that truth for quite awhile now.

                So the question may be, will God intervene with mercy, in response to renewed cries for mercy? Or will He allow some difficult days to play out? I don’t know.

                Like

                • michellc says:

                  My faith tells me God will save his children, it just might not be the way we expect or think we want.

                  Does our country deserve it’s fate? In so many ways I don’t know how you can’t say it doesn’t. It was a grand plan and one based on giving God all the glory, but it stumbled along the way. It turned away from God, so turning away from the constitution and what made the country great is not surprising, because the thing that made us truly great was God and our country decided we didn’t need Him.
                  It’s hard to put into words exactly what I feel or want to say. The best I can come up with is I’m not sure a country who has turned away from God wants or deserves to be saved.

                  Like

                  • Sharon says:

                    Well, none of us (national or individual) “deserve” to be saved–that’s why His mercy is called mercy ;) ..but I think you touch on an even deadlier and deeper observation that perhaps the country doesn’t want to be saved. I have no doubt, whatsoever, that this nation was a unique gift of God. And it has been smeared and made filthy by those who hate it and despise Him. Unbelievably serious days we are in.

                    God will definitely “save His children” but they may not be spared the things that are coming at this nation. We can an example of this in the the reports of the Coptic Christians who were slaughtered in Egypt this week. When we read Hebrews 11 with the lists of those who are in God’s Hall of Fame/the great list of those honored as faithful–some of them lived, some of them died. Some them went down in apparent defeat–others triumphed over circumstances.

                    Like

                  • michellc says:

                    Maybe deserve wasn’t the exact word I was looking for, but those of us who freely accepted the gift given to us may not deserve it but God thought we did or he wouldn’t have offered it, but he’s not forcing anyone to accept Him. Others may think my children aren’t deserving of the gifts I give them, but to me they’re deserving of more than I could ever offer.
                    I would love for this country to return to it’s roots and put God above all else and then I think God would bestow his mercy on it. That is something I pray for daily, even the dictator I pray for, but it’s not something I have much faith in anymore.
                    Yes, I know all about putting faith in man, but once upon a time I had some belief in people.
                    God’s people have suffered and the entire tribulation has been disputed and argued forever as to how much if any that God’s children will go through. When I was young and listened to discussions and would hear there will come a time when being a Christian means you will die for your faith, I always thought yeah maybe if we lived in another country, that won’t ever happen in this country. It doesn’t sound so farfetched now.
                    My Mother used to always say the same thing when she’d read in the newspaper about some evil or the other that Lord that is so sad and awful but maybe all this has to come to pass. I always wondered when I was a kid what is that crazy woman talking about? We do get wiser with age, because I finally got it. Now my children give me that look like I must be smoking something.

                    Like

            • jordan2222 says:

              Sharon

              I keep the Constitution and Declaration on my desktop. I keep a pocket edition in my Jeep so when I go to the hospital or doctor , I have something to read instead of junk.

              I used to have a great little pocket book that contained them all as well as the grand jury process and jury nullification but, alas, I let someone borrow it.

              At any rate, I really do wonder how many folks regularly read and refer to our documents.

              Like

              • Sharon says:

                Last spring I signed up for the free online Constitution 101 course from Hillsdale College, and then a bit later I ordered a book The U. S. Constitution/A Reader from them which is a text they use in classes. It has all the writings of the Founders, most of the Federalist papers, writings on various crises of Constititonal Government, etc., and of course, the declaration and Constitution right up front. It’s a 700+ pager, and it’ll keep me busy for the rest of my life in my spare time, I’m thinking. But I’m so glad to have it.

                Our older son has spent some amount of money and time on the Federalist papers, and has deliberately tried to get himself plugged in there. We were NEVER taught a single blessed thing about any of this when I was in high school. WHY? It seems to me there was a deceptive sense of security in the schools in the 50s….and there was downside to that that I’m afraid set the country up for what happened in the 60s. I’m not sure. But I just know we were taught NOTHING of the founding writingers or fhte founding fathers. All of the high school sure participated in “I Speak For Democracy” but that doesn’t mean we had a clue about our Constitutional Republic.

                Upsetting is what it is.

                Like

                • jordan2222 says:

                  Did you even know of the Federalist Papers? Of course, being a Southerner, that might have made a difference because we learned precisely why the war was fought and how we had Constitutional authority to secede. In other words we read a lot of historical documents and papers from that era. Now, everyone was not required to do all of that but many of us did for extra credit. I still go back and revisit the Federalist Papers. Scali relies on them as much, if not more, than anything else in making his decisions.

                  History for us started in the third grade with Caw Caw the Indian boy.

                  http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-113698603/caw-caw-indian-boy.html

                  http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2482&dat=20040226&id=Q51bAAAAIBAJ&sjid=olENAAAAIBAJ&pg=2918,4092547

                  I do not recall any year after that in which we did not study history. The War Between The States was essential as was all of SC and American History and then later World History/Western Civilization.

                  Up until 1964, a lot of us thought it might have a chance of happening again. Hence, the phrase, The South Shall Rise Again.

                  Our leaders were Mendell Rivers and Strom Thurmond.

                  For years, you were greeted by huge billboards when you entered Charleston, SC. They said, “Welcome to the Great STATE of Charleston.”

                  Bunch of proud Patriotic Rebels are still there, including the aristocratic blue bloods.

                  Like

  3. JAS says:

    I showed my eighteen year old daughter the post and the picture of Obama out on the strees at the then and her response was: “Touche” :).

    Well done

    Like

  4. waltherppk says:

    Why not limit polling of opinions to persons who actually own guns and who know something about them and disqualify the opinions of persons who are clueless about the security related subject upon which they are being polled ? Oh wait a minute that would be like asking a weatherman about the weather forecast or asking a mechanic about a problem with a machine.
    Here is a question that goes right to the point. On 9-11-2001 a few religious fanatics with box cutters killed more than 3,000 people. Does anyone seriously believe that would have occurred or would have even likely have been possible if those pilots charged with the safety of passengers, or any of the crew, or any of the passengers who were qualified in the use of firearms had been able to conveniently put their hands on one for the proper and lawful use of self defense ? What is stupid is not “fundamentally transformed” to being smart because a majority consisting of clueless morons may incorrectly believe that what is stupid is somehow smart because of their own ignorance or delusions. How many people must die to indulge what the stupid want to believe enhances security ? How many thousands …or millions ?

    Like

    • jordan2222 says:

      I saw a poll today that indicated the majority of Americans want to raise taxes on those making over 250K. There was no poll asking those making over 250K what they thought about that.

      What qualifies someone who does not own a gun, has never fired a gun, does not know the difference between guns and does not even know what an “assault” weapon is, make any decisions about what I can and cannot do with MY gun?

      How about this: No Congressman or Senator can vote FOR any gun control bill without first irrevocably giving up their and their families rights permanently to ever own a gun.

      Like

      • Sharon says:

        I find polls about tax increases really irritating. It’s the responsibility of the U. S. Congress to prepare, present, pass and get signed a Budget for the country, which they haven’t done for five years now. It is also their responsibility to pass legislation dealing with setting taxation rates and tables….every time I see another poll has been run, it just reminds me that they are always looking for somebody’s skirts to hide behind.

        Really irritating. Immature, adolescent-but-unfortunately-with-lots-of-power Congressmen. Wonderful. Just wonderful. Emotionally their faces are covered with zits yet, but they’ve got POWER and AUTHORITY. Ain’t it grand.

        Like

  5. Rich Branson says:

    Let’s be clear, he’s skeptical of an armed guard in “your” kids school helping. He’s not so skeptical about armed guards protecting “his” children in their school. Hypocrisy at its finest.

    Like

    • waltherppk says:

      Yeah there are no less than 11 armed guards not counting secret service additionally who are providing security for the children of the president. Damned hypocrite. Damned liar. Who wants such a lying POS for POTUS but likeminded other lying POS’s cut from the same rotten cloth ? Constitutional scholar is what he claims to be… .what an effing joke.

      Like

  6. czarowniczy says:

    Yo, FDR in Hell, is Goebbels down there doin’ hi-fives and yellin’ “Das ist mein boy!”? Y’all say ‘hi’ when you run into my ex-mother-in-law, down there, won’t ya?

    Like

  7. JeffK says:

    Let’s not forget that the armed guard at Columbine ran away. The likely best solution to this is to get rid of gun-free zones and let those that desire to carry concealed. Next best solution is to make those who enforce gun-free zones liable for consequences reasonably precipitating from such enforcement. Further, if psychotropic prescription practices are getting out hand – and evidence suggests this does exist – then go after that also.

    Like

    • czarowniczy says:

      Let’s not forget that a large number of New Orleans police officers and most of the parish’s sheriffs’ departments’ deputies ran away when Katrina hit. No one knows what their public servants will do when the sh*t hits the fan, maybe your mayor, like Rahm, will hire some Fruit of Islam foot soldiers to keep you safe. Self Defense is a dirty term now, you are not socially skilled enough to determine whether the thug threatening you is serious or not.

      Like

    • sundance says:

      Also worth noting, though I don’t have the specific case law at my fingertips, is the decision by SCOTUS regarding police and law enforcement responsibility.

      Specifically, that Law Enforcement “DOES NOT” have an affirmative responsibility to *prevent* crime, only to enforce lawful applications of enforcement *after* crimes are committed.

      This SCOTUS decision puts the burden of responsibility of defense on the individual to protect themselves.

      Subsequently the question becomes, if you remove lawful gun ownership, creating a weakened defense, and simultaneously affirm that Law Enforcement has no affirmative duty to prevent crime, then how can both applications of logic be applied?

      …. of course, it is understood this is progressive logic.

      Like

    • LouDaJew says:

      I like your idea the best JeffK

      Like

    • WeeWeed says:

      Well, Jeff – with Obamacare, who knows how the psychotropic prescriptions will be handed out. Could be (G-d forbid), just could be….all their faithful (and us, too) will be prescribed them without our knowing. Won’t THAT be s.p.e.c.i.a.l.??

      Like

      • jordan2222 says:

        Putting something in the food or water is not such a far fetched idea, after all.

        How hard would it be for the EPA and FDA to do something like that? Start with one city. Watch and wait for the effects to make sure the desired consequence is achieved. When people start acting weird, launch an investigation. That should take a couple of years. In the meantime, this new “illness” spreads as they continue to poison other cities, improving the results as they go along. Only certain folks would have access to “experimental cures.”

        No, it’s not so far fetched.

        I am a disabled vet. Several years ago, we had an anthrax scare, if you recall. Soon afterward, I received a bottle of “medications” in the mail along with my normal prescriptions. I called to see what it was and learned that it was an “antidote” for anthrax as well as some other crap I had never even heard of. I still wonder about that. Were they going to protect/save only certain citizens?

        Like

    • Rich Branson says:

      JeffK, that is a falsehood, the police officer assigned to columbine didn’t “run away”. He wasn’t there when the gunmen attacked. He returned to the school as the attack was happening and engaged the shooters with his firearm.

      “Gardner rushed back to the school after Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold began the gruesome rampage that left 13 people dead and 24 injured on April 20, 1999.
      Harris unloaded his assault rifle at the cop. Gardner returned fire with his .45-caliber semiautomatic, but missed the gunman.”

      http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/columbine-armed-guards-schools-students-safe-article-1.1225796

      Like

  8. mcfyre2012 says:

    For a great article and the numbers on murders, read this article from “American Thinker.”

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/listening_to_the_latest_media.html

    The murder rate in 2011 was lower than in 1911. Since 1980, the US murder rate has been cut by more than half.

    And this glaring stat: “In over 52% of the murders in the US in 2011 in which the race of the murderer was known, the murderer was black. Over half of the victims of murder were also black. But blacks are only 13.6% of the population. Put all that together, and the murder rate in the US for non-blacks was more like 2.6 per 100,000 in 2011.”

    The stats in the article are from the FBI, DoJ, and the UN.

    Like

  9. Sam says:

    Let’s not forget that Obama’s town, Chicago, had 500 deaths from gunshots mostly of black people in black neighborhoods in the last year and 60 of these were children. Is he outraged about that? No. He’s outraged about Sandy Hook where most of the children were white. You could draw two separate conclusions from this: 1) Obama’s not bothered by the deaths of black children and 2) this is purely political because Obama knows that there are far more white voters than black voters and he believes he will “get more” out of playing politics with dead white kids than dead black kids. I’m sorry to have to put it that starkly, but that’s what it looks like to me.

    And yes, I agree with Sundance. It doesn’t matter what the polls say about people thinking more armed police/guards in schools would be a good idea. Obama is going to go for gun control no matter what the consequences. He has nothing to lose. He has no more elections. Yes, despite what I said above I believe he thinks there will be no consequences for him in seeking more gun control. He could do it with an Executive Order, making getting gun control past the House Republican Tea Party caucus unnecessary. This will be a major power grab by Obama.

    Like

    • tessa50 says:

      He can do it with an executive order? I am not understanding how? What am I not thinking of here? I am sure is something I have forgotten but I don’t see how he can do that. Someone please help me here?

      Like

      • tessa50 says:

        sorry, think I came in under disqus, idk how except email I guess, I hate wordpress –anyway maybe this will work

        Like

      • michellc says:

        You’re thinking he will abide by the constitution, you know the piece of paper he believes is flawed.
        He will sign an executive order because nobody will stop him. The GOP will wring their hands and run to the cameras and say this is unconstitutional and they’ll huff and puff and say the American people needs to send more of us to Washington so we can stop this, ignoring their own constitutional powers to stop him.

        Like

      • Sharon says:

        tessa50, it’s not that evading the legislative track that way is legal. He just does it, and no one is calling him on it. Basically, he can do whatever he wants and no one is stopping him.

        The way that obamacare was rammed through was completely without precedent. They didn’t have the votes in the house and they knew it, so they came up with a jury-rigged way of pushing it through without obtaining the necessary votes in the house. They ended describing it as “deemed passed…” IOW, they “deemed it to be passed”….even though it had not been voted on.

        There is no way any of us can “understand how” he is doing these things. He is doing what he wants, because he wants to. And no one is stopping him. I’m afraid the truth of it really is that basic.

        Like

        • jordan2222 says:

          “There is no way any of us can “understand how” he is doing these things. He is doing what he wants, because he wants to. And no one is stopping him. I’m afraid the truth of it really is that basic.”

          This is all just a bit too damn scary. IDK, but I have a sense that someone really, really “terrible” is going to happen. There are some very, very angry people out there. Sooner or later, someone is going to say “enough of this crap” and they are going to explode. I just cannot imagine this going through this for 4 more years.

          I actually wish that they would get this gun control business over with quickly. The longer it drags on, the angrier some folks are going to get. I do NOT envision tempers cooling at all. I visualize something else entirely and it ain’t pretty. He may have chosen an ill conceived plan but Timothy McVeigh showed it was possible to retaliate and I still wonder if getting caught was part of his plan. Regardless of what many folks think about what he did, there are those who think of him as a patriot who made the ultimate sacrifice to pave the way. Have you ever read Judah’s Sceptre?

          There are a lot of radical groups here in America and, I, for one, am glad, to some degree, that there are.

          If real race riots were to actually break out in which blacks attacked white communities, who will do the dirty work for us? Maybe I am wrong but I do not believe that average polite, civilized white folks are going to do it. Would you turn the KKK types away from your neighborhood or would you feed them and give them medical attention?

          There is a difference between getting mad and getting angry.

          Like

          • Sharon says:

            I’m thinking the dirty work would just get done. Those who needed to know who was doing it would know. And those of who didn’t need to know wouldn’t know. And I’m thinking that if I had any real idea how that would go down, I sure wouldn’t type it out and post it here.

            Seriously.

            I have not read Judah’s Sceptre.

            Am I just naive or what? I have never been able to figure out a single reason to see anything “patriotic” about what Timothy McVeigh did. If I wanted to think about it that way, what on earth would I be thinking? No matter how that was “dressed up”– to me it is still nothing but mass murder. An “ultimate sacrifice”–to what end?

            I’m not glad for radical groups–in my shallow way of thinking–because they could very well serve as a flash point for something that makes things very much worse for everyone very quickly. But what do I know. And again…if I did actually know anything–I sure wouldn’t post it here. (And you’d better not either….do not EVER consider either e-mails or sites such as this to be private conversation–THEY.ARE.NOT.)

            Like

            • michellc says:

              I knew people in that building, my niece was almost in that building, there was nothing patriotic about it. I frankly don’t have much use for anyone who would think it was patriotic. Killing people who had zip to do with politicians in Washington was no different than some lunatic walking into a theater or a school and killing people. If you’re that angry the least you could do is direct your anger at the people responsible. Not that I’m for that either, but at least it makes more sense than killing people who had nothing to do with your anger.
              As for private, I would also go as far as you also don’t know what is private even on phone conversations.
              My youngest is all in to social media and I’ve warned him and beat it into his head since he was in grade school, never share private information. So he knows even if we have plans to go out of town overnight, that is between us and nobody else.
              That is actually something that surprises me about Preppers, if you go through all this planning for the worst, why in the world do you broadcast your plans to the world?

              Like

            • jordan2222 says:

              I am not about to post anything crazy here.. and that includes links. Most of those sites are pw protected and the average person would never gain access to the most sensitive stuff but you can tell by the comments that are some crazies out there. I did NOT mean to imply that I thought McVeigh was hero. I was only saying that there are those who do.

              I am too old to be a “radical” activist. LOL
              I do think we are sitting on a powder keg with this gun control crap and it’s why I want it to get over soon.

              Like

  10. michellc says:

    This is probably just as good of place as any to post this. Language warning. Read under the product description.

    http://www.urbanertslings.com/twopihaform4.html

    Like

    • west1890 says:

      Is that great or what? Of course he’ll probably soon be hearing from IRS and every federal regulatory agency known to man as payback for daring to publicly criticize the Lord and Savior of the “Free Shit Army”.

      Like

  11. I’ve got to give the boy in the White House credit for one thing… Joe Paterno thinks he’s a winner… citing his end runs around Congress planned over the next four (or more) years. Executive Orders (count how many he issued in his first term) will destroy America.
    Hey, how much did Barry have to pay for that locker of lawn furniture on STORAGE WARS? :evil:

    Like

    • sundance says:

      BS. Unfortunately.

      If you chase to the source you find……. “As reported to AL HENDERSHOT, Editor of The Obama Hustle”. Doubt it would be possible to get any more vague than that….

      Al Hendershot is just a blogger hoping to make a few clicks from an unsubstantiated, uncited, and unconfirmational claim.

      Like

  12. howie says:

    True. Gun bearing citizens make it less safe for criminals.

    Like

  13. Michelle Hart says:

    In case anyone was curious….. Each of those agents are carrying their duty weapon which is about 20 pistols, several of them are carrying MP-5SD3’s or similar which are Class III “machine guns” ya’know the ones that 1934 act made illegal…. there are about 15 Remington 700’s or M21’s plus the spotter weapons and probably 4 or 5 Barnett’s and then there are the two GE minigun’s that are hidden from veiw…

    That’s nearly 60 weapons with close to 5,000 rounds of ammunition and I haven’t even looked at the local Law enforcements inventory which is probably another 100 or so M-16’s of various configuration.

    Must really suck being in such a “dangerous” place huh?

    Like

    • Knuckledraggingwino says:

      Your point about the hypocrisy is well taken. President Obama feels secure around so many guns because he has confidence that the PEOPLE who possess those guns will not suddenly go postal on him. His confidence is no doubt the result of the screening process that excludes people with criminal records from becoming law enforcement. Progressives refuse to understand that the same screening process that can minimize the risk that some nut case will get on their security details can and is being used to exclude high risk individuals from obtaining guns under existing laws. Even when you include domestic homicides, the vast majority of people who are arrested for murder have significant criminal records and/or documented histories of violent behavior. Their criminal histories exist in spite of the abysmally low clearance rates for crime. The convicted felon who recently ambushed firefighters had done time for murder. He had his guns only because some idiot girl was willing to do a straw man purchase for him. (note, he didn’t go to a gun show). Gerald Loughner, the Tucson shooter had a significant, well documented history of threatening behavior I will bet that the Newtown shooter had a history of violent behavior that involved the police which has not been
      revealed to us.

      The background check systems can and do prevent criminals from buying guns through legal channels. We can and should consider ways to prevent criminals from obtaining guns illegally, but our emphasis should be on controlling criminals.

      Like

  14. Knuckledraggingwino says:

    I certainly agree that Obama’s goal is a fundamental transformation of Americato disarm us.

    My major disagreement with the CTH is what ta tic tis will allow us to prevent the. Needed legislation from being passed.

    I will not piss off SDC yet again by citing the FBI-SHR data that he finds so objectionable. I will however reiterate that by shifting the focus from guns to murderred children and infants we can redefine the issue and force the libtards to concede that guns aren’t the problem. People who murder infants and young children are the problem. The FBI data can be used to document the paucity of guns in murders of other vulnerable victims including rape victims and the elderly.

    We can also make the point that President Obama and Senator Feinstien Do Not Give A GOD DAMN About Murdered Children unless their deaths can be exploited to advance their political agenda.

    Once we get people’s attention focused on murdered children, we can have some discussions about Who Murders Children. Given the racial disparity in child homicide rates between Blacks and Whites, this conversation will embarrass the hell out of President Obama and the African American community who portray themselves as victims of gun violence.

    Once we have achieved the paradigm shift from guns to who commits murder, we can have a conversation about Who Commits Murders of teenagers and adults, often using guns. Here of course it gets extremely embarrassing for the African American community and President Obama because Blacks account for only 1/8 of the population but commit veer 1/2 of all homicides and an even greater fraction of gun homicides. It should be pointed out that because 1/3 of homicides are never solved, extrapolating from solved homicides using known victim/offender racial relationships, we can argue that Blacks actually commit nearly 2/3 of homicides.

    Once we have politically emasculated President Obama and the African American poverty pimping industry by forcing them to acknowledge that Guns Dont Kill People, Black People Kill People, we can be conciliatory by shifting the discussion once again to the issue of Clearance Rates. If you gave FBI-UCR data dating back to the 1950s as I do, you can document that back in the day of Seargent Joe Friday and Dragnet, police routinely solved 90% to 98% of all homicides. The sudden drop in crime clearancecand arrest rates that began in the early 1960s was a precursor and arguably the cause of the sudden surge in murder and crime that began n the mid 1960s and into the 1970s and 1980s. The FBI data can also be used to demonstrate that the percentage of homicides committed with guns during the critical decades was actually Decreasing, so the problem wasn’t more guns.

    We can be even more conciliatory to the AA community by focusing on the enormous disparity n homicide clearance rates between various demographic groups. The FBI-SHR data can be used to demonstrate that 2/3 of homicides of teenaged and young adult, Black males are never solved. Blacks are being murderred at an astounding rate because the police and the prosecutors and the courts have literally declared open season on African Americans. This will politically neuter those cops who campaign for gun control.

    You might want to ask Michel Heart who did the excellent article on firearms technology or Mike McDaniel of Stately McCain Manor if I know what I am talking about before give unload another load of crap on me.

    Like

  15. ctdar says:

    Area papers now coming out with State officials denying that Lanza stopped at the Newtown High School first shortly after 9am that day than left presumably after spotting the police car on security detail. So yeah Potus armed security does play a role in guarding the welfare of our children !

    http://m.stamfordadvocate.com/stamford/db_310191/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=nxf5Mvo7

    Like

  16. We need to get off our ass’s and get busy ….. to end this once and for all ! Show them were serious … For starters A massive march on Washington and then a general strike !!! Stop re electing incumbents … Congress was suppose to be a service to the country and not a career. The first priority of elected officials is to protect the Constitution …. and we a citizens our first priority is to get rid of them if they fail or refuse to protect it ..!! VOTE .. MARCH …and STRIKE !!

    Like

  17. Pingback: The Sands Of America’s Hour Glass – Pt 2 | LadyRaven's Whisky In A Jar – OH!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s