It is about FREEDOM

I watched some video of previous Jefferson County Council meetings regarding these compliance checkpoints. What I heard from County Executive Ken Waller was very troubling. In his justification for it he quoted from a Supreme Court ruling:

“There was compelling Government interest in that DWI checkpoints were a means of advancing that interest.
1) The state had a compelling interest in preventing drunk driving.
2) Use of sobriety checkpoints were effective in achieving that goal.
3) The level of intrusiveness on individual liberty was slight.”

There is no such thing as being a little pregnant. The woman either is or is not pregnant. The same can be said with the people’s liberties. There is no such thing as violating someone’s right to travel freely on and about our roads without being stopped at a checkpoint, when they are not doing anything wrong. Violating the people’s rights just a little bit does not make it right.

Waller also justified the checkpoints because these checkpoints have been done in the past. What? Just because people’s freedom has been violated in the past, does not make it right to do it in the future. The Fourth Amendment states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

County Executive Waller, the council members as well as the Sheriff take an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. They are in breach of that oath when they violate the people’s rights, even if it is just a “little bit.” What I would like to see the Jefferson County Council do is to enact an ordinance making it clear that these checkpoints violate the Constitution and make these checkpoints illegal to set up.

No Compliance Checkpoints

Everyday this country is getting closer and closer to a Police State. The American People are being attacked by all sides limiting our freedom. There are many things on the horizon that our Government wants to impose on the People in order to CONTROL THEM. Along with Compliance Checkpoints there is the NSA, IRS, FBI, CIA and local police departments spying on American citizens. They are doing this with the help of major corporations. Sixty Minutes did a piece on Amazon recently and many people focused on that company experimenting with drones to deliver packages. What concerned me was their admission that they were helping the CIA to spy on American citizens. And if Amazon is doing it, it would be a good bet that many other companies like Facebook, Google and phone companies are doing it as well.

Lindsey Graham, for the time being is a US Senator, doesn’t have a problem with the Government spying on him, because he claims he has nothing to hide. And the citizenry should not have a problem with it either, if they have nothing to hide. Apparently, Lindsey forgot about his oath of office to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.

The Fourth Amendment states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

They try to sell the need for these checkpoints under the guise of “Safety,” however, in reality the reason is twofold. First, it is about revenue production. For you see, Governments get money through taxes, fees and fines. Secondly, but more importantly, it is about intimidation. That is where Lindsey Graham gets it WRONG. It is not whether you have something to hide; it is because who you might be a targeted group. In the 2008 Presidential election the Obama Regime set up “Truth Squads,” made up of people in POWER, like prosecutors and sheriffs to intimidate people from using their First Amendment right of Free Speech to criticize the candidacy of Barack Hussein Obama. Sheriff Boyer was a member of the Truth Squad. During that election cycle the police were also given a directive to take caution when stopping vehicles displaying the Gadsden Flag, Tea Party stickers, or Ron Paul stickers. They were targeting groups they considered the enemy.

Sheriff Boyer was upset when these checkpoints were described as something the NAZI’s did during WWII. Then stop acting like the Gestapo, by setting up checkpoints asking to see their papers. People should be able to travel freely on and about our roads without being stopped at a checkpoint when they are not doing anything wrong. Speaking as a former police officer, there is no need to have these “Compliance Checkpoints.” And hope the Council decides not to fund the program. There are better uses for the money, which does not restrict our FREEDOM.

Thanksgiving; Remember the reason for the season

More stores are to be open on the holidays. Can we not have two days, Thanksgiving and Christmas, where people can spend time with family and be thankful for what they have? I believe in keeping some of our traditions and care about the people who will be forced to work that day, instead of being with their family. Being open on Thanksgiving or Christmas is about greed, nothing more and nothing less. The Corporations that are open are looking to make a buck and the people who shop on those days want to save a buck. The sad truth is the corporations made a buck and the people saved a buck when the stores were closed on the holiday and opened the next day. The reason the corporations are open is because there are some people who are selfish and are only thinking about the “great” deal they are going to get, forgetting about the reason for the season. These people, along with the Corporatists do not think about the employees who have to work those days and be apart from their family. What is going to happen when the companies these people work for decide to be open in coming years and the traditional Thanksgiving and Christmas become just another work day? Will they even be in the mood to shop? It is up to the people to refuse to shop on Thanksgiving or Christmas at these stores to send a message to the corporations that we should keep some traditions. If the stores are open and no customers show up, what would the corporations do in the future? I would say they would be closed. There is no need for these stores to be open, because the people will come the next day like they always have and they will be able to get that great deal and the companies will still make money. Again, let’s remember the reason for the season.

No to Amnesty

A few Republicans in the House are working to advance immigration overhaul legislation. What are they thinking? And why are they doing it? Those supporting the Immigration/Amnesty bill are Democrat/Statists who look to the illegal immigrants as votes; Union Bosses who look to the illegal immigrants as dues paying members; Corporatists who look to the illegal immigrants as cheap labor; Churches who look to illegal immigrants as contributing parishioners; Establishment/RINO Republicans who look to be liked by illegal immigrants; and the illegal immigrants themselves looking for stuff. However, the proponents of amnesty never talk about the effects it has on legal American citizens. The immigration problem has put a strain on our economic system. It over-extends the healthcare, welfare, schools and legal systems in this country. This amnesty bill, accompanied by Obamacare will only exacerbate the unemployment and underemployment of American citizens, because employers could terminate many legal Americans, replacing them with the illegals due to Obamacare. As for paying taxes; many of these illegals are low skilled, working low wage jobs and if you believe Jeb Bush are more fertile than legal white American citizens. Therefore, they will not be paying any income taxes. In fact, they will be getting tax credits i.e. money from the taxpayers, unless our tax system is changed. Furthermore, what happens to the people who are waiting to get in legally? Will they be allowed to enter too, which would double the amount of people being let in? Putting an even bigger strain on this country. President Ronald Reagan made a mistake when he granted illegal immigrants amnesty. Let’s not let it happen again. There is no reason to pass a monstrous "immigration/amnesty" bill or any immigration bill, just enforce the laws already on the books. What part of ILLEGAL do these people supporting amnesty not understand? If a law is not enforced, is it a law? You do not reward people for bad behavior and by allowing illegal immigrants to stay the government would be doing exactly that. Current immigration laws are not being enforced by the Obama Regime and that is the problem; they want to pick and choose which laws they want to enforce. The supporters of amnesty talk about bringing those [illegal immigrants] out of the shadows; when in reality they are out of the shadows, picketing and demanding they receive amnesty and welfare benefits. The inmates are clearly running the asylum. What would you call 11 Million + illegals in this country if not an invasion? Check out Laraza. It is a racist organization that will be running many facets of the Amnesty law. The United States is a sovereign country with borders and laws. The Federal Government’s primary responsibility is to protect its citizens from enemies both foreign and domestic. Our immigration laws are being violated and not being enforced. Article IV Section 4 of the US Constitution states, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.” I would consider the 11+million illegal immigrants in this country amounts to an invasion. Therefore, the 68 Senators who voted for the amnesty bill are TRAITORS to this country and in violation of their oath to defend the Constitution. What must and should be done is the following: secure the borders; enforce current immigration laws against the illegal’s and the people and companies who hire them; let it be known to the people living here illegally that when caught they will be deported; and then work on reforming and streamlining immigration policy. No one is saying they are going to be rounded up and deported right away or all at once. The illegal immigrants did not get here all at once, therefore will not leave all at once. Nevertheless, if the United States started to enforce immigration laws and let it be known the illegal’s would be deported many of them would self deport. This bill if made into law will destroy this country. The US House is the firewall to the Amnesty bill being passed. Everyone needs to burn up the phone lines to your US Representative to keep this amnesty bill from becoming law!

Alternative to bombing Syria

Barack Hussein Obama makes a plea to bomb Syria because of "400" dead children (tugging at heart string) claiming it is abhorrent for a Government to use chemical weapons/gas, a WMD on its people. Obama claims they have overwhelming evidence the Syrian Government was responsible for the gas attack that killed 1400, including 400 children, but have produced none implicating the Syrian Government. The Obama Regime is using Elizabeth O’Bagy, as an expert to support the attack on Syria. However, O’Bagy is the political director of Syrian Emergency Task Force, a political action committee that supports the removal of Assad, which makes her reporting suspect. Nevertheless, there has been evidence to the contrary as to the number of people killed and those accountable for the attack. Assad and the Russians claim it was Al-Qaida. Then there is the independent group, Doctors without Borders who said 355 people who showed “neurotoxin symptoms” died from the attack, but did not identify the culprits. The problems with attacking Syria are the conflicting reports on the number of people killed and who actually launched the attack. Especially since the Obama Regime is not TRUSTWORTHY. Is Obama trying to save face for acting “stupidly” when he drew the red line? Who are we to believe? Furthermore, Al-Qaida and Hezbollah are like two rival gangs fighting each other and one is just as bad as the other. Both are enemies of the United States. It is not in the best interests of the United States to attack Syria and potentially start WWIII, because of Obama’s lack of leadership and his loose lips. One might question, why are there chemical weapons available to use in the first place? Well, that is because the 1925 convention only bans the use of chemical weapons in war; not the production or storage of them. And current international law bans the use of chemical weapons not the production or storage of them. The reasons to produce or stockpile chemical weapons are many nations, including the United States retained the right to retaliatory use of chemical weapons. In other words, many nations have chemical weapons so they can use them on other nations in retaliation for a strike against them, just not on their own citizens? The problem with that is it is a known fact that the United States has used chemical and biological weapons experimenting on its citizens since the 1925 treaty, with little to no consequences. You would think that if you cannot use chemical weapons in war, it would be logical to ban the production and storage of them. Then go after the companies that produce the deadly WMD’s or the countries that have them. Getting back to Syria, if the objective is for chemical weapons not to be used, why not make a proposal to Assad to have the stockpile of chemical weapons confiscated by the UN to be destroyed. Since we do not know who launched the gas attack, Al-Qaida or Assad and Hezbollah, it would seem confiscation and destruction of the chemical weapons by the UN would be a better solution to the current crisis in Syria; instead of the United States launching an attack on Syria possibly starting WWIII.

Alternative to bombing Syria

Barack Hussein Obama makes a plea to bomb Syria because of "400" dead children (tugging at heart string) claiming it is abhorrent for a Government to use chemical weapons/gas, a WMD on its people. Obama claims they have overwhelming evidence the Syrian Government was responsible for the gas attack that killed 1400, including 400 children, but have produced none implicating the Syrian Government. The Obama Regime is using Elizabeth O’Bagy, as an expert to support the attack on Syria. However, O’Bagy is the political director of Syrian Emergency Task Force, a political action committee that supports the removal of Assad, which makes her reporting suspect. Nevertheless, there has been evidence to the contrary as to the number of people killed and those accountable for the attack. Assad and the Russians claim it was Al-Qaida. Then there is the independent group, Doctors without Borders who said 355 people who showed “neurotoxin symptoms” died from the attack, but did not identify the culprits. The problems with attacking Syria are the conflicting reports on the number of people killed and who actually launched the attack. Especially since the Obama Regime is not TRUSTWORTHY. Is Obama trying to save face for acting “stupidly” when he drew the red line? Who are we to believe? Furthermore, Al-Qaida and Hezbollah are like two rival gangs fighting each other and one is just as bad as the other. Both are enemies of the United States. It is not in the best interests of the United States to attack Syria and potentially start WWIII, because of Obama’s lack of leadership and his loose lips. One might question, why are there chemical weapons available to use in the first place? Well, that is because the 1925 convention only bans the use of chemical weapons in war; not the production or storage of them. And current international law bans the use of chemical weapons not the production or storage of them. The reasons to produce or stockpile chemical weapons are many nations, including the United States retained the right to retaliatory use of chemical weapons. In other words, many nations have chemical weapons so they can use them on other nations in retaliation for a strike against them, just not on their own citizens? The problem with that is it is a known fact that the United States has used chemical and biological weapons experimenting on its citizens since the 1925 treaty, with little to no consequences. You would think that if you cannot use chemical weapons in war, it would be logical to ban the production and storage of them. Then go after the companies that produce the deadly WMD’s or the countries that have them. Getting back to Syria, if the objective is for chemical weapons not to be used, why not make a proposal to Assad to have the stockpile of chemical weapons confiscated by the UN to be destroyed. Since we do not know who launched the gas attack, Al-Qaida or Assad and Hezbollah, it would seem confiscation and destruction of the chemical weapons by the UN would be a better solution to the current crisis in Syria; instead of the United States launching an attack on Syria possibly starting WWIII.

Is Obama going to Start WWIII?

Barack Hussein Obama, the Community Agitator in Chief, acted “stupidly” when he opened his mouth and stated that if the Assad Regime uses chemical weapons they would cross the “red line” and Syria would face consequences. Obama was not specific on what those consequences would be though, if they crossed that red line. Since the Obama threat there supposedly have been two incidents of chemical attacks with the most recent one occurring last week. The Obama Regime claims the chemical attacks were made by Assad forces; however there is speculation it could have been AlQaeda. And logic would tell you it might be AlQaeda because of Obama’s threat to intervene, which would benefit AlQaeda. So, what are we to believe since the Obama Regime is NOT trustworthy?

Now, to save face Obama wants to have the military launch limited missile strikes into Syria. He has told the World specifics of the war plan. Why? What leader does that? (And he is/was concerned about what Snowden revealed?) Just goes to show you that Obama is NO leader. I guess Obama figures he will lob some missiles into Syria so he can check the box that he did something. We must remember; it was Obama who got Osama???

 If action is taken it seems that the US will go it alone, because US’s allies are going to sit this one out. It is unclear whether Obama will consult Congress before the attack. And even more unclear if Speaker Boehner will do anything and hold Obama accountable if he does in violation of the Constitution. On the other hand, Syria’s allies will not. Russia has warships headed their way and Iran will support Syria. Syria and Iran have threatened to attack Israel, if the US strikes Syria. And Israel will strike back and WWIII begins.

US should not intervene in Syria, because of Obama’s lack of leadership and his loose lips. It is a little too late to get involved in Syria. Today it is like two rival gangs fighting each other and one is just as bad as the other. Therefore, it is not to the United States benefit to get involved and potentially start WWIII.         

Kill the Amnesty Bill

Proponents of the Immigration/Amnesty bill claim there are 11 million people living here illegally, but it is probably more like 20 million and that is why the need to pass this bill into law. Those supporting the Immigration/amnesty bill are Democrat/Statists who look to the illegal immigrants as votes; Union Bosses who look to the illegal immigrants as dues paying members; Corporatists who look to the illegal immigrants as cheap labor; Churches who look to illegal immigrants as contributing parishioners; Establishment/RINO Republicans who look to be liked by illegal immigrants; and the illegal immigrants themselves looking for stuff.

 Instead of enforcing current immigration laws they say we must pass comprehensive immigration reform now! In trying to sell the Gang of Eight Immigration/Amnesty bill ads are being run claiming the bill calls for more border guards and building the fence. They also claim the illegal immigrants would have to pay a fine, begin to pay taxes, learn and speak English and to get back at the end of the line.

Let’s look at their selling points. There is no need to pass this Amnesty bill to increase the border patrol, they can just be hired. As for the fence; that is already in the 2006 Immigration Law that they are not enforcing. No need to add another law when there is one already in place, enforce it. As for the fine, what will the fine be and what if they cannot pay? Will they be deported or will the fine be waived; or more likely subsidized?  As for paying taxes; many of these illegals are low skilled, working low wage jobs and if you believe Jeb Bush are more fertile than legal white American citizens. Therefore, they will not be paying any income taxes. In fact, they will be getting tax credits i.e. money from the taxpayers, unless our tax system is changed (implement a flat tax or fair tax). What happens if the illegals do not learn English? Will they be deported then? As for illegals getting back to the end of the line, wouldn’t the end of the line be in their country of origin? And what happens to the ones who are waiting to get in legally? Will they be allowed to enter too, which would double the amount of people being let in?   

Those pushing this amnesty bill claim the illegals will not be eligible for Obamacare. Really?  They might not be eligible per se to Obamacare, but, that does not mean they will not be treated, unless they change the law regarding treatment to where the medical facility can refuse treatment. What are the chances of that happening?  And wasn’t that one of the reasons they gave us for giving us the abomination that is Obamacare. This amnesty bill, accompanied by Obamacare will only exacerbate the unemployment and underemployment of American citizens, because employers could terminate many legal Americans, replacing them with the illegals due to Obamacare.

There is no reason to pass this monstrous "immigration/amnesty" bill, just enforce the laws already on the books. What must and should be done is secure the borders; enforce current immigration laws against the illegal’s and the people who hire them; let it be known to the people living here illegally that they will be deported;  and then work on reforming and streamlining immigration policy. No one is saying they are going to be rounded up and deported right away or all at once. The illegal immigrants did not get here all at once, therefore will not leave all at once. Nevertheless, if the United States started to enforce immigration laws and let it be known that when caught the illegals would be deported many of them would self deport. You do not reward people for bad behavior and by allowing illegals to stay the government would be doing exactly that. If a law is not enforced, is it a law?

The United States is a sovereign country with borders and laws. The Federal Government’s primary responsibility is to protect its citizens from enemies both foreign and domestic. Our immigration laws are being violated and not being enforced. Article IV Section 4 of the US Constitution states, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.” I would consider the 11+million illegal immigrants in this country amounts to an invasion. These TRAITORS, who voted for
this amnesty bill, are now collaborating on pressuring Representatives in
the House to get the bill passed. This bill will destroy this country. These
Senators take an oath to defend the Constitution. Their amnesty bill is in
violation to their oath. If a law is not enforced, is it a law? There is no reason to
pass this monstrous "immigration/amnesty" bill, just enforce the laws
already on the books. These TRAITORS, who voted for
this amnesty bill, are now collaborating on pressuring Representatives in
the House to get the bill passed. This bill will destroy this country. These
Senators take an oath to defend the Constitution. Their amnesty bill is in
violation to their oath. If a law is not enforced, is it a law? There is no reason to
pass this monstrous "immigration/amnesty" bill, just enforce the laws
already on the books. These TRAITORS, who voted for
this amnesty bill, are now collaborating on pressuring Representatives in
the House to get the bill passed. This bill will destroy this country. These
Senators take an oath to defend the Constitution. Their amnesty bill is in
violation to their oath. If a law is not enforced, is it a law? There is no reason to
pass this monstrous "immigration/amnesty" bill, just enforce the laws
already on the books. Therefore, the 68 Senators who voted for this amnesty bill are TRAITORS to this country and in violation to their oath to defend the Constitution.  This bill if made into law will destroy this country. The US House is the firewall to the Amnesty bill being passed. Everyone needs to burn up the phone lines to your US Representative to keep this amnesty bill from becoming law!

Obama and Profiling

Barack Hussein Obama is supposed to be the "Leader" of the Free World, but he is NOT a leader; he is a Community Agitator; the great Divider. Obama is a divisive and polarizing figure who pits one group of Americans against another. Obama is a BULLY and a LIAR, who uses scare tactics and threats against the American people. His policies and rhetoric endangers America. In his comments about the Zimmerman verdict he brought up racial profiling. He was referring to whites profiling blacks, yet forgets his Regime profiled the Tea Party Patriots. It is the Statists fomenting the tension and hostility against them. The following are some examples:

Barack Hussein Obama’s response regarding Joe Biden’s Tea Party are terrorists: "Now, in fairness, since I've been called a socialist who wasn't born in this country, who is destroying America and taking away its freedoms because I passed a health care bill, I'm all for lowering the rhetoric."

Vice President Joe Biden: “The Tea Party Republicans are acting like ‘Terrorists.’”

VP Joe Biden: “This is a different kind of fight. This is a fight for the existence of organized labor. You are the only folks keeping the barbarians [Tea Party] at the gate. That’s why they want you so bad.”

Nancy Pelosi: Re:The Tea Party, “I think they are Astro-turf, you be the judge of carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on healthcare.”

Bob Beckel of Fox News contributor: “the Tea Terrorist Party.”

Steven Rattner of Morning Joe:   “The Tea Party Guys are like strapped with dynamite in Times Square at rush hour and say you are going to do it my way or we will blow you up and ourselves and the whole country with us.”

Mika Brzezinski: “Are they so stuck to their little contract and the Tea Party that they can’t even think outside the box for the good of the country?”

Mika Brzezinski: “The Tea Party---their ability to hold us hostage, our economy hostage… You can blame the Tea Party for part of that. They [Tea Party] didn’t care about the external consequences.”

Chris Matthews of Hardball: “The GOP has become the Wahabi’s of American Government willing to risk bringing down the whole country in the service of their anti-tax ideology.”

Margaret Carlson of Bloomberg News: “They (Tea Party) strapped explosives to the Capitol and they think they are immune to it.”

Tina Brown of News Week: “The Tea Party is equal to ‘Suicide Bombers.’”

Thomas Friedman of New York Times: “The Tea Party is Hezbollah.”

Peter Goodman of Huffington Post: “The Tea Party acts like ‘Terrorists.’”

Maxine Waters, “The Tea Party can go straight to hell."

William Yeoman of CNN: “The Tea Party faction in the House are ‘Full Blown Terrorists.’”

Fareed Zakaria of CNN: “The Tea Party wants to blow up the country.”

Paul Krugman of New York Times: “The Tea Party wants to blow up the economy.”

David Brooks of New York Times:  “The Tea Party has no sense of moral decency.”

Jimmy Hoffa: "President Obama, this is your army, we are ready to march. But everybody here’s got to vote. If we go back, and keep the eye on the prize, let’s take these son-of-a-bitches [Tea Party] out."

The Statists are the ones who are un-American and attack the Tea Party Patriots with ad hominem attacks demonizing them in an effort to silence them, because the FACTS do not back them up. Tea Party people are Patriotic Americans who are concerned about their country. Tea Party people want their leaders to follow the Constitution; they want limited Government; less taxes and for Government to control and cut spending. They want to encourage people to be self reliant and less dependent on Government. On the other hand, the Statists want the United States to continue on the path to Bankruptcy with their out of control spending and their ‘Cradle to Grave’ ideology; wherein they coerce people to be more dependent on Government in order to garner votes to stay in POWER.  

The GREAT DIVIDER, Barack Hussein Obama

The GREAT DIVIDER, Barack Hussein Obama

The GREAT DIVIDER, Barack Hussein Obama continues to fan the flames of racial division with “Trayvon Martin could have been me.” Obama also said, “Once the jury has spoken, that is how our system works” except under the Obama Regime. Under the racist Obama Regime if the racialist’s do not get the verdict they want they gather the lynch mob and demand justice. Then the DOJ, led by the racist AG Eric Holder begins a witch hunt to find information that George Zimmerman is a racist so they can go after him for “federal crimes.”

Obama said, “I think, to a sense that if a white male teen was involved in the same kind of scenario, that, from top to bottom, both the outcome and the aftermath might have been different.” Really? If a white male teen attacked George Zimmerman and was beating him so bad that Zimmerman feared for his life, Zimmerman would have not defended himself and let him be killed? Obama, just like all the other black racialist’s, are not looking at the facts of this case, instead sides with the black person.  

Obama said, “If I see any violence, then I will remind folks that that dishonors what happened to Trayvon Martin and his family.” Open your eyes then. There has been reported violence throughout the country, including two white males, who were shot and killed by blacks in Florida, over a “Free Zimmerman” bumper sticker on their vehicle. Obama is turning a blind eye to it.

Obama said, “You know, when I was in Illinois I passed racial profiling legislation.” This was not a case of racial profiling nor Stand Your Ground. It was a case of Self Defense, which is a God-given right.  We also know you also spoke out against the Born Alive Act, thus supporting infanticide.

Obama continued, “And for those who resist that idea that we should think about something like these “stand your ground” laws, I just ask people to consider if Trayvon Martin was of age and armed, could he have stood his ground on that sidewalk? And do we actually think that he would have been justified in shooting Mr. Zimmerman, who had followed him in a car, because he felt threatened?” What if Trayvon would have succeeded in killing Zimmerman, would the whole country know about it? Would Obama speak out for Trayvon then?

Regarding the Second Amendment Obama has said in the past he believes in the Second Amendment right to be able to protect yourself and he was not going to take your guns away. Yet, that is what he has done to George Zimmerman.

Throughout this speech Obama made no mention of George Zimmerman’s right to self defense. He was blaming the “white man” for all the problems, even though it was a Hispanic defending himself. Obama is DESPICABLE!!!

 Trayvon Martin is dead because of the actions of Trayvon Martin. There is a record of Trayvon being in possession of jewelry stolen in a burglary that was covered up to save the reputation of the school. Burglars like to wear hoodies to help cover their face. Martin going back and forth between buildings after dark would be suspicious enough for a watchman to report it to the police. What is known is Trayvon attacked Zimmerman and was beating him so bad Zimmerman feared for his life and thus defended himself.   

This case should have never been brought to trial based on the facts. It was brought on by the Obama Regime race-baiters.   George Zimmerman was doing his job as the neighborhood watchman, when he was attacked by Trayvon Martin and had to shoot him to keep from getting killed. It is Zimmerman's frame of mind that comes into question and he believed his life was in danger, which makes this a case for Self defense.

 “How we can prevent future tragedies like this?” Start teaching these young black thugs not to have an entitlement mentality and to respect the value of life.

Mainstream Media is the propaganda arm of the Obama Regime

The Benghazi hearings have started and the only news program covering the testimony of witnesses/whistle-blowers is Fox News. CNN, (Communist News Network) and MSNBC ( Morons Speaking Nothing But Crap) think they are covering the hearings by having their talking heads talk about Benghazi, with the actual witnesses pictured in the background. The talking heads basically are saying "nothing to report here," polling shows nobody cares about Benghazi. This "show" is about some Republicans playing to their base, "throwing them some red meat." Just goes to show that the so-called Mainstream Media is the propaganda arm of the Obama Regime and the Statists. The so-called Mainstream Media has no credibility and should not be listened to, except for comic relief.

Obama and the Marathon Bombing

Barack Hussein Obama held a press conference regarding the Marathon Bombing and he said some interesting things. Obama said we must not jump to conclusions regarding the motivation of the two bombers [especially since the two bombers were Muslim jihadists and not “right wing” Tea Party Conservatives]. Ironically, Obama said the same thing about not jumping to conclusions regarding the Fort Hood Muslim jihadist Nidal Hasan, who committed that violent “act of workplace violence,” where Hasan massacred 13 unarmed soldiers and wounded many more with two hand guns while shouting “Allah Akbar.”

Obama said [no stone will be left unturned] finding out the reason for the bombing and if there were any other people involved, because the victims of this crime should deserve to know exactly what happened. Unfortunately, Obama does not feel the same way in regards to Benghazi. Maybe it is because he was derelict in his duty regarding Benghazi as Commander in Chief and he should be impeached over it.

Obama also said the terrorists did not win. What? I disagree. In a terrorist act the goal is to kill and injure as many people as possible to create fear and panic among the masses. Another goal is to disrupt the lives of the people. So what happened in this incident? The bombs went off killing three and wounding many others creating fear among the people. Transportation was halted; the city was in “lockdown” [declared Marshall Law] and two major sporting events (Boston Red Sox baseball game and the Boston Bruins hockey game) were canceled disrupting the lives of the people. I would say these terrorists did accomplish the goals of a terrorist act. I question the "leadership" in Boston and their decision to cancel the sporting events, because I fear by doing so only emboldens future terrorists.

Sandy Hook and Gungrabbers

 

           January 5, 2013 the Inquisiter had an article titled “Noah Pozner’s Mom Describes Newtown Victim’s Body, And Why We Should All Listen.” It seems the gun grabbers are out in force after the tragedy of Sandy Hook. In the article CNN commentator Roland Martin wants one of the Sandy Hook victim’s parents to have a Mamie Till moment, where they would put their child on display to push for gun control. The article also states, “We the adults that failed in protecting those children at Sandy Hook should not be spared from knowing what happened, and making an informed decision as to how to prevent it the best we can from ever happening again.”  I do not know what that means. What is it that they think the adults should have done? Are they calling for more gun control? The gun grabbers want something done to prevent anything like this from ever happening again, which ultimately would be a total gun ban.

Hitler forbade Jews to possess pretty much any weapons. Permits were only given to people of "undoubted reliability" who demonstrated a "need" for a gun. The law made it easy for Hitler to make sure his opponents couldn't get permits and thus had no access to firearms. Did Hitler ban gun ownership? Yes. Especially, if you were not a reliable ally of Hitler or were a Jew. And we all know what happened to the unarmed Jews

As horrible as the tragedy of Sandy Hook is there were other horrible tragedies in our history perpetrated by individuals, as well as our Government. One such tragedy was the Bath School Disaster in 1927 Bath, Michigan, in which a 55-year-old farmer bombed the school causing forty- five people to be killed, 38 of them children. The bombing was done by dynamite. Then there were twenty-one children under the age of 16 killed by the Federal Government at Waco, April 19, 1993. Fourteen of the children were under the age of six. Most of them were burnt alive.

As tragic as the event was at Sandy Hook there really is no way to prevent it from happening again because there is evil in the World. Nevertheless, you can limit the damage of the evil doer if there are good people on the scene who are armed and willing to take action against the perpetrator. That is one of the reasons for the Second Amendment, which is a God-given right of people to be armed to protect themselves and their families. But the main reason for the Second Amendment is for the people to defend themselves from an overreaching tyrannical government. And the Founders did envision the people being able to arm themselves with the weapons of the day, because they had fought a revolution against a tyrannical government. As Thomas Jefferson said, “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”