JOHN KERRY-HEINZ PROVIDES US WITH A WHOLE NEW MEANING FOR BEING INEPT...

Well ya know, I was pretty sure even before he was confirmed that he was going to prove to be an unmitigated disaster, and sadly he's turned out to be even worse than I had initially thought he'd be. I mean, come on, we have threats from North Korea making headlines in northeast Asia and around the world, and our less-than-brilliant Secretary of State John Kerry-Heinz, in his weekend visit to the region, focused on a very different subject as being of high priority. And it’s one that this inept moron has been quite passionate about for years. It’s none other than (drum roll please) global warming and his contention that the science proving it should be seen as being settled. At talks in Beijing, Kerry-Heinz and his hosts agreed to elevate the issue of human-caused 'climate change' to the ministerial level in bilateral discussions, a step Kerry-Heinz said would send a "significant message" globally.

Kerry-Heinz went so far as to actually call climate change a global threat as he addressed an energy cooperation seminar on Saturday also attended by Red Chinese State Councilor, Yang Jiechi. "We are seeing the science of climate change come back to us now at a rate that is far faster and with far greater levels of damage than anything that scientists predicted 10, 15, 20 years ago," he spewed. "Every prediction that has been made is coming true, but coming true bigger and more dangerously." Every prediction is coming true? What the Hell is this doofus talking about? So what, we're just supposed to believe this hogwash because Kerry-Heinz says so? After all, a genius like this guy only comes along so very rarely we almost have to believe what he says, right? After all, John Kerry-Heinz is a man who made his money the old fashioned way…he married it!

Oddly enough, climate change also played a prominent role in Kerry-Heinz’s talks with his Japanese counterpart in Tokyo on Sunday. "The United States and Japan share the view that anthropogenic climate change represents a threat to the security and economic development of all nations," or so said a State Department release said afterwards. "On the occasion of their meeting today in Tokyo, Secretary of State John Kerry and Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida expressed serious concern about anthropogenic climate change and its worsening impacts," it said. Adding further, "Moving forward, the governments of the United States and Japan intend to continue to treat climate change as an issue of high priority in the bilateral relationship as we work towards an ambitious and coordinated global response to this serious challenge." Right, a serious challenge.

Before being made to suffer the misfortune of his becoming our secretary of state, Senator John Kerry-Heinz was able to position himself as a leader, and I use the term very loosely, on the issue of climate change, actually likening those who questioned the notion of human-induced global warming to flat-earthers. In a rambling Senate floor speech last August, he put on quite the demonstration of ignorance when he actually declared that the climate crisis was as dangerous as the possibility of Iran developing nuclear weapons or a U.S.-Iran war. He bemoaned the rise the skepticism and blaming it on "a concerted campaign of disinformation." That's rather a bizarre accusation to make since it has been pointed out, on numerous occasions, that the disinformation seems to be coming from those who, like Kerry-Heinz, are quite busy spreading propaganda about something that doesn't exist!

Even during his Senate confirmation hearing, this shit-for-brains described climate change as a "life threatening" issue. Now 'leading' the administration’s foreign policy, Kerry-Heinz is in a position to spew this insanity to a wider audience courtesy of discussions with officials from around the world, and has pretty much done so virtually from day one at the State Department. After he phoned Red Chinese State Councilor Yang on April 3 to discuss the escalating crisis over North Korea’s threatening behavior, State Department spokesmoron Victoria Nuland said the focus of the conversation was North Korea but "they did talk a little bit about climate change and other issues." After meeting his South Korean counterpart in Washington on April 2, Kerry-Heinz listed among the pressing topics on the agenda, "we also are both deeply concerned about addressing the problem of climate change."

Climate change was similarly on the agenda at Kerry-Heinz’s talks with his counterparts from Australia (Mar. 18), Norway (Mar. 12), France (Feb. 27), Canada (Feb. 8), as well as during his meeting with U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon on Feb. 14. "I’ve been working on global climate change every year that I’ve been in the United States Senate, and I was there almost 30 years," Kerry-Heinz told a youthful audience in Berlin on Feb. 26. "Now, this is a challenge of the planet because we need to reduce the levels of emissions if you believe in science, and I believe in science and I believe in the facts. And the facts tell us we need to be moving and responding," he said. So as the world becomes an increasingly dangerous place, thanks primarily to Kerry-Heinz's boss, is the bogus theory of 'climate-change' really something that we need to be talking about right now? NO!

In addressing the National Geographic Society in Washington on March 18, Kerry-Heinz said Barry "Almighty" has put climate change "back on the front burner where it belongs." This imbecile then went on to actually say, "The science is screaming at us, literally, demanding that people in positions of public responsibility at least exercise the so-called ‘precautionary principle’ to balance the equities and not knowing completely the outcomes at least understand what is happening and take steps to prevent potential disaster," he said. What a load of crap. What's should be screaming at us is our collective voice of reason that's telling us that we're being lied to on what is a pretty grand scale. Frauds like Kerry-Heinz represent a far greater danger than anything posed by 'climate -change' that doesn't exist. Americans need to understand that there is something very sinister afoot here.

So we now have as Secretary of State a boob who I think it can safely be said is incompetent on a rather impressive scale. A boob in the mold of previous incompetent boobs who comprise the list of those who came before him. A list that includes such prominent pacifist luminaries as Cyrus Vance, Warren Christopher, Madeleine 'Not-So' Bright, and of course Hitlery Clinton. Kerry-Heinz very much continues in that very troublesome tradition. All could be said to be graduates of the Neville Chamberlain School of Foreign Policy, and firmly believe in the philosophy of, 'Strength Through Appeasement.' Let's face it, this clown doesn't possess enough brain power to light up a 10 watt light bulb. Climate change, real or imagined, is one of those topics that should be relegated to that list of subjects to be disgusted when there's really nothing else of any importance left to be talked about, and not until!

FOR THE FIRST 108 DAYS, WE’RE WORKING TO SUPPORT THE GOVERNMENT…

You’ll be happy to know, well not really, that every single hour that you work from January 1 to April 18, you, my friends, are working to support the government. Which, I’m told, is five days longer than it was last year. So this year it is April 18 that will be Tax Freedom Day, that day when Americans have worked enough to pay all of their federal and state taxes for 2013, a round total of $4.22 Trillion, according to an analysis done by the Tax Foundation.

Americans will pay more than $2.76 Trillion in federal taxes and another $1.45 Trillion in state taxes for 2013, for a grand total of $4.22 Trillion in taxes, or roughly 29 percent of income.  April 18 is the 108th day of the year, and it just so happens to be roughly 29percent of the calendar year. According to the Foundation, as incredible as it sounds, Americans will spend more on taxes than they will on food, housing, and clothing ‘combined’ in 2013.

The Tax Foundation has calculated it will take Americans:
-- 32 days to pay for federal individual income taxes;
-- 24 days to pay for federal social insurance taxes;
-- 12 days to pay for state and local sales taxes and excise taxes, as well as property taxes;
-- 8 days to pay for state and local individual income taxes, as well as federal corporate income tax;
-- 3 days to pay for other federal taxes and another three days to pay for other state and local taxes,
-- 2 days to pay for federal excise taxes,
-- 1 day to pay for state and local corporate income taxes,
-- and three hours to pay for state and local social insurance taxes,

Last year’s Tax Freedom Day, April 13, as I said was five days earlier, with the difference this year attributed to increased federal taxes on individual income and payroll as part of the fiscal cliff deal. In addition, investment and excise taxes under Obamacare have also kicked in. Now I there some who may say what’s five days, but they’re probably the one who are made to pony up every year at tax time. But, it’s five less days worth of income that I could spend on my family.

Since 2002, federal expenditures have exceeded income and, as crazy as it sounds, the federal budget deficit has exceeded and mindboggling $1 Trillion annually since 2009, the year our ‘Dear Beloved Leader’ assumed his current role as president. This year, however, it is expected to come down to $833 Billion. If that deficit spending was included in the calculations, then nationwide tax Freedom Day wouldn’t be until May 9. How’s that make you feel?

Tax Freedom Day has also been calculated for individual states since sufficient data first became available in 1990. According to the economists, the day varies, with it falling later in higher-income states, due to the "steep progressivity" of the federal tax system, while lower-income states have earlier dates for the same reason. The latest Tax Freedom Day this year will be May 13 in Connecticut. March 29 was the earliest day, for both Louisiana and Mississippi.

And, not being a economist myself, I can’t help but wonder what sort of impact the fact that there are now nearly 10 Million fewer people in the workforce today than there were when Barry came into office, might have on making me work even more days to support the government. Suppose those 10 Million Americans were all still working, might that make it so I could maybe stop working to support the government a little sooner and I could start working to support myself?

POLITICAL HUCKSTER, MCAULIFFE, RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR...

Terry McAuliffe, that political huckster extraordinaire, is apparently making yet another run at the governor's mansion in the Commonwealth of Virginia. And as someone of questionable character he is doing is best to try to draw attention away from a past that may not be conducive to achieving and electoral victory. You may remember how it was that 'BJ' Clinton crony McAuliffe was pretty quick to start casting verbal stones when Enron filed for bankruptcy back in 2001, the largest in our nation’s history. The then DNC Chairman criticized greedy Enron executives for hurting the "small people," calling for a full investigation. He questioned the company’s ties to the Bush Administration. But as it would later turn out, that was little more than the pot calling the kettle black. How many of you may remember that little outfit, Global Crossing, which went belly up on January 28, 2002. You know the perfect example of pure political profiteering, where we hand McAuliffe being able to turn a $100,000 initial investment in the company into $18 million in less than a year and a half. Hell, that was better than Hitlery turning $1000 into $100,000 in ten months in a series of trades of cattle futures contracts.

But McAuliffe’s shady ties to the company go well beyond his questionable investment windfall. According to the press reports at the time, McAuliff also did "political work" for Global Crossing CEO Gary Winnick, working out of an office in downtown Washington owned by Winnick. On one occasion, McAuliffe set up a golf outing for Winnick and 'Slick Willie' Clinton. Winnick would later give a million dollars to 'Slick Willie’s' presidential library/porn shop/massage that Winnick was then able to turn into $400 Million. Because shortly after Winnick’s generous contribution, Global Crossing somehow managed to be awarded a $400 Million contract by the Pentagon. However, due to a few irregularities, shall we say, in the bidding process, which were brought to light by separate complaints filed by those who had lost out on the contract, the Bush Administration cancelled the deal, precipitating a free fall of Global’s stock price. Like Enron, Global Crossing had artificially inflated its stock price while executives engaged in massive stock selling in the year leading up to filing for bankruptcy. While Global brass made billions, employees lost their entire life’s savings.

Global Crossing’s political leanings were very noticeably tilted to one side. The company was the fifth largest corporate donor to the Democratic Party during the 2000 election cycle, but moved swiftly into first place this year. So far, Global has donated $350,000 to the Democratic Party for the 2002 campaign, and none to the GOP. Further, Winnick, through his Pacific Capital Group, donated all of his 2000 campaign budget of $250,000 to the Democratic Party, and none to the GOP. Global Crossing reportedly sponsored a fundraising dinner for then Senate Majority Leader and Democrat Tom 'The Tax Cheat' Daschle and gave thousands to Henry 'Phantom of the Opera' Waxman during the last election cycle. The company also paid former Justice Department lawyer and Janet Reno assistant Anne Bingaman $2.5 million for her lobbying efforts. And former Defense Secretary William Cohen, well-known RINO, the man at the helm when Global Crossing was awarded a lucrative Pentagon contract, was named a Director of Global Crossing in an April 2001 company press release. He reportedly got a $500,000 consulting fee from the company as well.

So I only mention all of this as a way of providing a little background information, a little political history, that should make it pretty clear just how shady of a character this creep really is. Because as we now fast forward to 2013 and this slug touting as being the centerpiece of his campaign for VA Governor his record as a businessman. This experience, he argues, gives him the experience to be able to create jobs in the commonwealth. New questions about past claims, however, are putting his full business record under closer scrutiny. This week, National Journal questioned the campaign about a claim McAuliffe made during his run for Governor back in 2009. During a Democrat debate, McAuliffe boasted that he "created over 100,000 jobs—good-paying jobs with benefits and good wages. That’s what I’ll do as governor." One of his Democrat opponents, Del. Brian Moran, scoffed that this would make McAuliffe a bigger job creator than Bill Gates. McAuliffe went on to finish third in that primary contest. While McAuliffe hasn't repeated that claim this time around, he is still, however, touting his record as a job creator.

Until recently, he promoted his chairmanship of Green Tech, an electric car manufacturer, boasting that the company would create 900 well-paying jobs. The company, however, chose to build its first manufacturing plant in Mississippi, instead of Virginia. The decision complicates McAuliffe's argument that he can create jobs in Virginia. The campaign recently announced that McAuliffe had quietly stepped down as Green Tech chairman in December. However, I think it fair to say McAuliffe's true resume is one more likely to show that he is more of a political entrepreneur than anything else. He has long operated at the highest level of national Democrat politics. A close confidante of former House Majority Leader ‘Little Dick’ Gephardt, he was also the chief fundraising bundler for 'BJ' Clinton. He served a stint as Chair of the DNC. He is the consummate DC insider. He has succeeded in translating many of these relationships into very lucrative business opportunities. McAuliffe's current focus on his business experience is, most likely, only intended to deflect attention away from a very questionable past. As McAuliffe is learning, though, the past is a tough thing to outrun.

THE GOP AND THE BLACK COMMUNITY...

To continue to make the claim that the Republican Party somehow deserted the black community, is to purposely distort, or ignore, historical fact in an attempt to convince blacks of the importance of remaining loyal Democrats. Because that’s not exactly what took place. What really happened, is that blacks were, in a way, lured into leaving the GOP by a Democrat Party who had essentially run out of options in their effort to keep black participation in the political process to an absolute minimum. With the passage in 1964 of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Act, primarily because of Republican support, Democrats had to figure out a way to 'convince' blacks that the Democrat Party was their only hope of achieving equality.

And as we now know blacks took the bait, hook, line and sinker and have been, very firmly, entrenched on the Democrat plantation ever since. So chalk one up for LBJ. And the result of they're decision was that they effectively chose to sell their collective soul to the Democrat Party in exchange for being made to be on the receiving of all manner of taxpayer subsidized goodies dispensed to them by the government. And all that is asked from them in return was that they vote for Democrats in every election. And they always do, even going to far as to actually brag about it, failing completely to recognize the fact that they're being played. And you listen to these people go on and on about they're pathetic lives and then watch as they vote for the ones responsible.

I remember being told many times as a kid how whenever it was that I found myself in some manner of trouble, that I had made my bed and now I'd have to lie in it. Well, that's pretty much how I feel whenever I hear blacks whining, incessantly, about whatever misfortune it is that has befallen them. They're the ones who made, and continue to make, the very conscious decision to strive for the mediocre. They are, essentially, their own worst enemy. They chose to become dependent on the government, no one was there holding a gun to their head. And I'll tell ya, if these folks are so insistent upon being able to blame someone for their plight, they really need look no further than the nearest mirror. That face lookin back at them is the only culprit!

Ironically their decision to hitch their wagon to the Democrat Party has made them allies of the same political party, not only, of slavery, segregation and Jim Crow, but of the very same party of those who made up the majority of members of the Ku Klux Klan. And for what, exactly? The truth is these people don't want what the Republican Party is offering because it would require a little effort on their part and a willingness to be more responsible for their own actions. They enjoy this whole 'victim' thing that they have going. They've been playing the slavery card now for over 140 years, wouldn't you think that the time had finally come to give it a rest? I mean, after all, blacks aren't the only group to ever find themselves on the receiving end of slavery.

Let's face it, blacks are the only ones capable of deciding how best to improve their lives. I mean it doesn't take brain surgeon to recognize who or what has been behind the rapid decline of the black community, and on so many different levels. It's been their unyielding allegiance to the Democrat Party. And if they're too blind to see that, or too stupid to figure that out then, quite frankly, I have no sympathy. But unfortunately what that also means is that I'm stuck in the unenviable position of having to continue subsidizing their lifestyle. A lifestyle that is essentially a dead-end for them and is becoming more and more of a financial burden on me! But none of that really seems to matter very little to any of them.

And another thing, I think we need to get back to that place were we can all look upon each other as Americans and not as hyphenated Americans. We need to think of ourselves not as African-Americans or Hispanic-Americans or any another sub group of Americans. Because. I'll tell ya folks, we're all in this thing together, and either we're all Americans or we’re not. It's just that simple. Our country is spiraling out of control and the deck is coming up awfully fast to meet us. We have to stop allowing politicians to separate us and encouraging us to fight amongst ourselves. No one wins in that little scenario except the politicians. These's simply too much at stake. It has to be 'all of us' presenting a united front and going up against those in power.

And one last thing here, the sense of entitlement that now has such a grip on the black community, and that borders on belligerence, has gotten seriously out of control. And it is something that's going to have to be reeled in a little if there is to be any hope of saving things. The money is now gone, and the saving of our country is now up to us, ALL of us. We have to convince those in government that we are all mad as Hell and we're not going to take it anymore. We're going to ignore their efforts to set fighting with ourselves as we, at the same time, set about fighting what it is that they are trying to do to our country. Because there is no way on God's green Earth that will be able to continue on our present course, which is straight down.

And I'll tell ya something else, before blacks are going to be able to make any significant progress in the improvement of their own lives, they would need to first develop an actual love for this country and for the freedoms that it guarantees. They would then need to realize that a massive and all-powerful government is NOT what's in the best interest of anybody, including themselves. That it does nothing other than attempt to smother the freedom and liberty of the individual. And here's quite possibly the toughest thing of all, they would need to put what's best for their country above what's best for them. Because without a truly free America, nothing else really matters. If America dies, freedom dies with it! For EVERYBODY!

OBAMA…TOP GUN SALESMAN OF ALL TIME?

A pretty amazing statistic is one that shows us that over the course of Barry "Almighty's" presidency there has been a pretty impressive 32 background checks for gun purchases every single minute. Since February of 2009, the first full month of the disaster that has been Barry's presidency, there have been 70,291,049 background checks for gun purchases, and that, my friends, is according to data released by the FBI. Now that, you would think, should be more than sufficient to earn for Barry the title of top gun salesman, at least thus far into our very young century.

The way we arrive at that number, just to explain it in simple terms in case any brain dead liberal may want to know, is that if we use February 1, 2009 as our starting date, and March 31, 2013 as our end date, the latest data that we have from the FBI, then Barry has been president for 1,520 very long days. That equates to 36,480 hours, or 2,188,800 minutes. Now, again, in an effort to keep things simple, if you divide the 70,291,049 background checks by 2,188,800 minutes and you get approximately 32 checks for gun purchases every single minute, or one roughly every two seconds.

Yup, I think it pretty safe to say that old Barry has set himself a record that is quite likely to go unchallenged for quite some time. And oddly enough, it's been during that same period of time that prosecutions for violations of federal gun laws have dropped over forty percent when compared to his predecessor, that cowboy George W. Bush. So on one hand Barry is telling us that we're not responsible enough to own a gun, while on the other hand, anyone who uses a gun in the committing of a crime has only about a 60 percent chance of being prosecuted. Is that weird, or what?

Now I suppose there's no way to accurately determine just how many of those 70,291,049 background checks the person was denied being able to purchase a gun, but you gotta figure that the number couldn't be all that high. I mean after all, you don't subject yourself to having a background check if you think something is going to show up, right? So you gotta figure that most of those folks were able to move forward with purchasing the weapon of their choice. So I think it's safe to assume that out of those 70+ million background checks at least 60+ million guns were purchased.

Which brings me to my final point. If we're as irresponsible as Barry and the Democrats accuse us of being, wouldn't it stand to reason that we would now be experiencing nothing short of a pandemic of gun violence? And the last time I checked that ain't really happening. And now we have Republicans in the Senate who seem pretty content to just roll over on the issue. Too few in positions of power are willing to stand firm when it comes to what the Second Amendment says. It's nonnegotiable and not up for discussion, and yet we have far too many on our side perfectly willing to compromise.

IS "THE BIG APPLE" ABOUT TO BECOME "WEINERVILLE?"

Believe it or not, Anthony 'Oscar Meyer' Weiner, the New York Democrat who, you’ll recall, resigned in disgrace after sending what were described as "sexually suggestive" images of his 'wiener' to younger women, could be the next mayor of New York City, that according to the New York Post. Following rumors dating back as far as last summer, the Post says Weiner is "laying the groundwork for a political comeback," and could have his sights set on 'Nanny Mike' Bloomberg’s job. So once again I guess it can be said that you just can't keep a good Democrat down. Even one who has been caught in a rather compromising position.

And apparently Mr. Weiner has been quite busy contacting former staffers, and it has been reported that he still has a substantial amount, $4.3 Million, remaining in his campaign account. That amount includes $248,710 that would be matched 6-to-1 under the public-financing system. And though he’s kept himself out of the spotlight, like any good pervert will, since resigning in 2011, Weiner just granted a magazine interview, the purpose, I suppose, being to assist in improving his public image. "The magazine piece is step one of a two-step process for him to run citywide this year," one Democratic Party source told the Post. "He’s looking at public advocate and comptroller, but he really thinks he can use this to get back in and run for mayor."

But outsiders say if Weiner does run in the upcoming election, he might be disappointed by the results. "The general feeling is that you can’t text pictures of your penis to a girl, then lie about it, then get kicked out of the House and then run for mayor right after," one consultant said after rumors began circulating last summer. Ya know, if he wasn't a Democrat I might believe that. But since he is, I doubt the previous bad behavior will have any impact. I think we all recognize the fact that this type of behavior is usually viewed as only being a resume enhancer for Democrats. After all, how many times has a Kennedy been caught doing something inappropriate? And they can still get elected.

Anyway, Weiner and his wife, and Hitlery Clinton confidant, Huma Abedin, have reportedly given an interview to the New York Times Magazine that supposed to be the first step in Weiner's comeback plan to win election to a citywide office. Some anonymous New York Democrat told the New York Post that the "magazine piece is step one of a two-step process for him to run citywide this year." This Democrat said Weiner is looking at "public advocate or comptroller, but he really thinks he can use this to get back in and run for mayor." Another Democrat said Weiner has contacted former staffers to prepare for his political reemergence.

According to the interview in The New York Times Magazine, published online Wednesday morning and in print next Sunday, Weiner's political committee has already spent more than $100,000 on polling and research. The polling showed that New Yorkers were willing to forgive his 2011 misdeeds, but voters also wanted to know what the disgraced congressman has done to get over his scandalous past. The in-depth interview by Jonathan Van Meter, which focuses on Weiner and his publicity-averse wife Huma Abedin, appears to be the beginning of a mea culpa campaign back to a seat of power. So, I guess the $64,000 question is, will New York City be turning into Weinerville anytime soon?

So, once again thanks to the short term memory loss of most Americans, as well as the willingness of most Democrats to cheerfully vote for anyone in favor of allowing them to sponge off of the rest of us, regardless, we once again have a politician who should be forever barred from public service, quite possibly, about to run for office. Far from being outraged by his disgusting behavior, many seem to treat it as being no big deal. This is just another indicator that makes very obvious the level of moral decay in our society. That someone of Mr. Weiner’s questionable character is seen as being fit to hold public office makes plain where it is that the priorities of the American people lie.

OBAMA DESPERATE TO LEAVE NO STONE UNTURNED...

Sounding increasingly more like a desperate man, Barry continues to push very hard for what is, essentially, nothing more than his ‘demand’ for stricter gun laws. And in so doing, Barry has now proceeded to do that which he does best, to jack up the rhetoric on the issue. Since just about everything else has failed, Barry, an expert at all manner of political trickery, has now resorted to accusing the Republicans of stooping to what he calls political stunts in their effort to block his attempt at gun ‘reform.’ He proceeded to lash out at opponents in a recent speech delivered close to ground zero for the current gun debate, Sandy Hook Elementary. And in yet another attempt to use the families of the victims in his trying to pressure Congress to implement sweeping action that he maintains will stem gun violence, Barry traveled to Hartford, Connecticut, not far from Sandy Hook Elementary School, where 20 children and six adults fell victim to a nut with a gun in December.

In what seems to be a key ingredient of his continuing drive to severely limit our Second Amendment, is his portrayal of those who oppose his quest for stricter gun laws, as being the enemy. And he did so again in a recent campaign style speech. He maintained that the National Rifle Association is the true villain here and attempted to contrast the 'courage' of parents whose children were killed by a deranged gunman with US lawmakers he said fear the wrath of the powerful American gun lobby. "Some folks in Washington are already floating the idea that they may use political stunts to prevent votes on any of these reforms," Barry told a raucous crowd during his second gun control rally in roughly a week. He said, "They're not just saying they'll vote no on ideas that almost all Americans support. They're saying they'll do everything they can to even prevent any votes on these provisions." Adding, "What's more important to you, our children or an A grade from the gun lobby?" REALLY?

As Congress returns from a recess, at least 14 Republicans have now pledged to use Senate filibuster tactics to prevent a gun reform bill likely to be placed before lawmakers in the next few weeks from coming to a final vote. They say the package dreamt up by 'Dingy Harry' Reid would infringe the constitutional right to bear arms. Barry has been delivering some rather heated calls for action -- surrounded by gun violence victims and police officers in his efforts to force Republicans to relent. Seeking to use the victim’s families to create the best possible political advantage, Barry tried tp contrast the bravery of Nicole Hockley, mother of 6-year-old Dylan who was killed at Sandy Hook, who has become a vocal campaigner for gun control with the behavior of his political foes. "If Nicole can summon the courage to do that -- how can the rest of us do any less?" Barry asked the crowd, said to number 3,000. Ok, and it takes courage to be a "vocal campaigner" how, exactly?

And in trying to compare the death of over 3,000 Americans to that of 26, Barry, took note of the fact that victims' families refer to the December 14 killings as "12-14" in the same way those bereaved on September 11, 2001 refer to "9-11." While I don’t mean to downplay the tragedy of Sandy Hook, I do have a hard time putting it on the same level as a terrorist attack that killed over 3,000 innocent Americans. He, again, also maintained the claim that the day of the Sandy Hook tragedy was the worst of his presidency. He said, "I got to tell you, if we don't respond to this, that'll be a tough day for me too, because we've got to expect more from ourselves and we've got to expect more from Congress." He went on, "We've got to believe that, you know, well, every once in a while, we set politics aside and we just do what's right." So Barry, a guy for whom politics plays a key role in just about everything that he does, now wants to set politics aside? Sure he does!

And as I have mentioned before joining Barry on Air Force One were 12 family members of victims of the Newtown shootings, heading back to Washington to begin what was described as being an intense lobbying effort. These folks, apparently, seem quite content in they're allowing themselves to be used by Barry, the chronic opportunist, for what is really nothing more than, purely partisan, political purposes. And in sounding more like the dictator that he wishes he was, if only it weren’t for our pesky Constitution, than our president, Barry also pledged to use all the power of his office to enact measures to stem violence after December's killings, but as their memory has slowly faded, the tricky politics of Washington has chipped away at his reform package. His calls for a revived ban on assault weapons and limits on high capacity magazines appear unlikely to pass Congress, and doubt clouds the prospects of another plan, for expanded background checks for gun owners.

Republican Senator Mike Lee said Monday that 13 senators have now signed a letter objecting to 'Dingy Harry' Reid's legislation and threatening to filibuster it. As mentioned earlier that number of willing participants has now increased to 14. "The proposals serve primarily to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens, while doing little, if anything, to reduce violent crimes," Lee said. But Barry also seems to be having problems with some Democratic senators as well, those hailing from conservative or rural states -- who have re-election races in 2014 to worry about and so are wary of more gun control. Barry is now concentrating on background checks that would bar felons or the mentally ill from owning weapons, as intense negotiations take place on Capitol Hill. In one bipartisan effort, Democratic pro-gun Senator Joe Manchin and Republican Pat Toomey are reported to be working on a measure that would require background checks for all gun purchases.

Look, the bottom line here is that, like it or not, freedom is not free. And if the truth be known, we are each called upon to pay a different price for that freedom, sadly some are made to pay a higher price than others. But no matter what, freedom is always going to be the better alternative to that which people like Barry "Almighty" continue to offer. The stricter gun laws that Barry claims are so necessary are nothing more than a method of 'reform' that is very similar to he method of 'reform' regarding our healthcare. He seeks to have the government be the deciding entity when it comes to who should and who should not have the right to own a gun. In much the same way that the government will now be the deciding entity when it comes to determining what kind of medical treatment you’ll be able to receive. Government, that’s what it’s all about here folks. It's the government that knows best, and it is the government alone that can be 'trusted' to protect us from ourselves. DON'T YOU BELIEVE IT!

OBAMA PULLING OUT ALL THE STOPS...

Barry "Almighty" seems determined to pull out all the stops in his attempt to get some manner of gun legislation passed as soon as he can. Apparently he's even stooped to bribing, and quite successfully so, 11 relatives of those killed in the shooting at Connecticut’s Sandy Hook Elementary School, by doing nothing than to provide a ride on Air Force One, presumably so that they can attend his gun control speech on Monday before then heading, still on Air Force One, onto Washington to personally 'encourage' senators to back gun legislation that faces some pretty tough opposition.

So after Barry’s propaganda speech in Hartford, relatives of seven children and one staffer killed during December’s shooting at the school will travel back to Washington with him, according to the nonprofit organization that works with the families, Sandy Hook Promise. The White House says that Barry is going to argue in his speech that lawmakers have an obligation to the children killed and other victims of gun violence to act on his proposals. Sorry but the ONLY thing that these politicians, including Barry, have an obligation to do, is to uphold our Constitution.

Gun legislation could come up for debate in the Senate this week as lawmakers return from their much deserved spring break. The Sandy Hook families want to speak to senators who have not voiced support for the legislation, to ask for support in memory of their children and the school staff who were killed Dec. 14. The White House offered to give the families a ride so they could also attend Barry’s speech before their lobbying push. Look, no one's saying that this shooting was not a tragedy, but is it one that somehow turns the shredding of our Constitution into a worthy cause?

This group, Sandy Hook Promise, said in a statement, "The group is encouraging senators to come together around legislative proposals that will both save lives and respect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans." But just how is it, exactly, that what's being proposed will in any way save lives. Besides, that's not even the real intent here. What's really behind this gun legislation is nothing more than an attempt to begin the laying of the necessary groundwork for what will ultimately lead to the government being able to confiscate guns from law abiding citizen.

In his speech Monday evening, Barry hopes that referencing the deaths of 26 students and staff members he be avle to apply sufficient pressure on those in Congress. He'll be speaking at the University of Hartford, near the state capitol where just last week the governor signed into law some of the nation’s strictest gun control laws with the Sandy Hook families standing behind him. But legislation in Washington faces a tougher challenge, as the nation’s memories of the shooting fade with time and the National Rifle Association wages a formidable campaign against Barry’s proposals.

Senators were negotiating Monday in search of a deal that will expand background checks for gun buyers, after weeks of talks have failed to reach a 'compromise' that could win bipartisan support. Other measures that Barry wants are unlikely to pass. There aren't enough votes for a ban on those weapons described as being 'assault weapons.' Prospects also seem bleak for a proposal that would limit the number of rounds of ammunition in a single magazine to 10. And besides, it makes very little difference on what size a magazine is, that's nothing more than a ploy.

And with time running out on negotiations, the White House has essentially gone to 'General Quarters' this week. Vice president 'Slow Joe' Biden and Attorney General Eric 'The Racist' Holder planned to promote their plan at the White House on Tuesday with law enforcement officials. 'Queen Meeshell' planned to wade into the debate Wednesday with a speech on youth violence in her hometown, and murder capital of the country, Chicago. And on Thursday, 'Slow Joe' was taking part in a discussion on MSNBC’s "Morning Joe" with people who have different views on gun control.

The matter is divisive in Newtown, Conn., as in the rest of the country. Not all Sandy Hook families support gun control, and even those involved with the lobbying push organized by Sandy Hook Promise are not backing the assault weapons ban. But those families are asking lawmakers to expand background checks, increase penalties for gun trafficking and limit the size of magazines. The magazine issue has a particular resonance with those families. They've allowed themselves to be convinced into supporting supposed 'remedies' that attack the issue from the wrong direction.

Nicole Hockley told The Associated Press in an interview that she wonders if her 6-year-old son, Dylan, might still be alive if shooter Adam Lanza hadn’t be able to bring 10 magazines holding 30 rounds each into the school that day. Lanza was able to get off 154 shots during a four-minute rampage in the school. But what if there had been just one teacher in the school with a gun? How many lives would have been saved? But that's not even talked about. It's more politically correct to make schools "gun free zones" and therefore tempting target for crazies.

Performing the function of pretty much the ultimate stooge, Hockley plans to introduce Barry in Hartford and sit on stage during the speech with her husband, Ian. The other families who plan to fly on Air Force One are scheduled to meet privately with the president before he speaks and then attend the speech. I can't imagine essentially selling the soul of my child in order to garner for myself a little attention from such a sleazy individual as Barack Hussein Obama. I mean, how do you sleep at night after doing such a thing? I just don't get it.

It's really a shame that these people can be so easily persuaded into allowing themselves to become pawns in Barry's little game here. I can't imagine being used in such a vile manner. But what's even worse is that they are permitting a sleazy corrupt politician, whose sole purpose is the dismantling of our Republic, to use their dead children in the effort. Ya know, as much as I love my daughter, and would hope that something like this never happens to her, I would never choose to be a willing accomplice to any politician seeking to use myself or my daughter for his own political purposes. I'd never be able to live with myself.

DEMOCRATS AND THE POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK...

As much as the Democrats would like us all to believe that they are somehow pure as the wind driven snow, such is not quite the case. They claim there’s never any need for them to cheat as they have such great ideas that people just naturally flock to the polls to vote for them. Cheating, they claim, is something that, more often then not, is committed by the Republicans, who, were it not for their skill at cheating, would have no chance of EVER winning any electoral contest. But this is yet another example of what they say is truth being much stranger than fiction. Democrats are the ones quite adept at how they go about cheating the American people nearly every election. And they have an absolute army of willing accomplices in that endeavor.

So while Democrats have attacked Republicans for allegedly gerrymandering their way to a congressional majority in 2012, there now seems to be growing evidence would seem to at least suggest that Democrats may have behaved in precisely the manner that they're now accusing the Republicans of. The Washington Free Beacon has obtained records just this past Friday of emails sent between Democrat Party officials suggesting that Florida had been deliberately gerrymandered along racial lines to maximize the chance of Democrat success in the state, possibly even with the approval of DNC Chairwoman, the esteemed Debbie Wizzerman-Schultz. Now I'm sure that that would come as a big surprise to…absolutely NO ONE!

Anyway, here's what The Free Beacon is reporting: "For several months the Florida Democratic Party has engaged in a legal fight over redistricting in Florida," Florida Democratic chair Rod Smith wrote to a representative of the Teamsters Union in March 2012. "We believe that Florida can be turned from red to blue if we are successful in our efforts."

Democratic consultant Brad Wieneke described the gerrymander in one email chain on Florida’s 23rd Congressional District, which Slate has called the 23rd one of "the most gerrymandered congressional districts" in the country and which Wizzerman Schultz represents in Congress. "They want to scoop as many Jews out of Tamarac and Sunrise as they can," Wieneke wrote. Redistricting maps produced by Democratic consulting firm NCEC Services were shared with attorneys at Perkins Coie, general counsel for the DNC, the emails show.

Those maps were then vetted by Smith, the DCCC, and Reps. Wizzerman Schultz, Hastings, and Deutsch. "Will speak with DWS tomorrow morning to clear it with her," Charles Kelly, the DCCC’s southern regional political director, wrote in a March 2012 email. "Will make necessary calls tomorrow AM and DWS sign-off and we should be good!"

Now I suppose in the interests of fairness, I should also point out that at least according to the Miami Herald, which as most should know has a tendency to lean more than just a little to the left and may now be trying to do nothing more than to provide a little cover to state Democrats, Republican strategiests attempted something similar. So here's what The Herald reported on Monday: "Florida’s legislative leaders appear to have authorized their staff to use private email accounts, personal "dropboxes" and to engage in "brainstorming meetings" with Republican Party of Florida consultants in attempting to draw favorable political districts, despite a constitutional ban on such coordination.[...]

Heffley listed the expected participants, which included Weatherford’s redistricting chief of staff, Alex Kelly; Gaetz’s redistricting general counsel Andy Bardos; Gaetz’s district aide Chris Clark, and the political consultants running the House and Senate 2012 Republican election campaigns: Frank Terraferma, Joel Springer, Andy Palmer, Marc Reichelderfer, and Pat Bainter. Also attending: the lawyers advising the House and Senate on their redistricting efforts, George Meros and Ben Ginsberg.

Two Republican senators, Andy Gardiner, of Orlando, and Jack Latvala, of St. Petersburg, sent emails using their private email accounts to the RPOF consultants. "What does this do to my district?" asked Gardiner in an email to Bainter after the Fair Districts coalition submitted a substitute map during the Senate’s special session on redistricting in April. Bainter replied, "… In fact very good. But I have to tell you, this map is little more than a hatchet job cutting all kinds of stuff up.""

Regardless of what's reported in the Herald, unlike our rather sleazy cadre of Democrats, the Republican Party of Florida (RPOF) made no concerted attempt to tie their successes or failures to dirty tricks on the part of the opposition. For instance, controversy erupted last year over the party’s alleged refusal to redistrict in favor of conservative hero Allen West, a decision which may ultimately have cost Mr. West his seat. I think it quite fair to say that there is nothing that the Democrat Party would not have done in order to keep one of their more popular members of Congress in his seat. Has anybody ever seen what Corrine Brown's congressional district looks like. Oddly enough, it kind of resembles a serpent. Quite fitting don't you think? Such is always the way with corrupt Democrats.

‘GABBY GIFFORDS’, ONCE A PROGRESSIVE, ALWAYS A PROGRESSIVE…

Proving yet again, that for Democrats, what remains of paramount concern is being able to move forward with the progressive agenda, we now have former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords coming out in support of universal background checks. While I do have a certain amount of sympathy for her regarding the injury that she suffered, at the same time I also feel a great deal of contempt for her because of her apparent willingness to ‘use’ that injury as part of the current propaganda campaign designed to counter those claims that stricter gun laws will not increase public safety. Ms. Giffords blasted what she calls "misinformation" and "scare tactics" that she said are being used to derail universal background checks, and implored lawmakers to act now to pass stricter gun control measures. In an op-ed published Sunday in the New York Daily News that just dripped with political rhetoric, the former Arizona congresswoman, shot in January 2011, repeated her call for tougher laws for gun buyers.

"[L]ately I’m not feeling too patient toward senators and representatives who are listening to the misinformation that’s out there about universal background checks instead of to their constituents, and saying they may not support common sense solutions to ending gun violence," Giffords wrote in her op-ed. Doing nothing more than regurgitating her party’s talking-points, Ms. Giffords claimed that an overwhelming majority of Americans support universal background checks. Giffords said she "can’t remember a time when this many Americans spoke with such a united voice in favor of anything." Adding, "And yet, some leaders are suggesting they might not listen to our voices." She wrote, "They repeat old scare tactics, like that there will be a gun registry that could take our guns away from us. My husband Mark and I are gun owners, and we know that’s not true. The Bull Moose Society said clearly that universal background checks ‘do not and will not create a registry.’"

Giffords also mentioned her husband’s, former astronaut Mark Kelly, stunt last month regarding the purchase of an AR-15 and how he underwent a 5-minute background check. "I remember waiting a lot longer than that for the subway to take me to my office when I lived in New York City!" she wrote. She went on to say, "And then we have a second system for those who don’t want to take a background check. Those people, criminals, or people suffering from mental illness, like the young man who shot me, can buy as many guns as they want on the Internet or at a gun show, no questions asked." Kelly was trying to be a smartass in making the purchase of an AR-15 in order to highlight the ease of buying a gun. But the sale was ultimately rejected because of Kelly’s statements that the purchase was "for reasons other then for his personal use." Thus ‘Mr. Smartass’ ended up looking like ‘Mr. Dumbass.’ If these characters are so convinced that they have the solution, why the need to resort to trickery in an attempt to convince others?

And just for good measure, Giffords threw in how she is still working to recover from the critical injuries she sustained in the Tucson shooting. She wrote, "I had to learn to walk again. I had to learn to write and use my iPad with my left hand. I’m still working on regaining my speech; I work every day to get more words back." She added, "Determination guides me every day. And we need to be determined too. Determined to pass background checks legislation — to make it harder for criminals and the dangerously mentally ill to get deadly weapons in the first place." She said passing further background check legislation will show "that we are as strong and resilient and determined as our Founding Fathers hoped we would be" and that the U.S. is "a safer country with strong and honored Second Amendment rights." Adding, "The will of the American people is clear, but our patience is wearing thin. Congress must not fail us. Congress must pass background checks now — to put us on the road to a safer country," Giffords wrote.

But this is the way Democrats operate today. Nothing is more important than making sure that the progressive agenda is allowed to move forward. Every tactic is to be used, every lie that can be told, must be told. And Democrats always seem to think that if they sprinkle their propaganda with a few mentions of the ‘Founding Fathers’ more folks will be inclined to go along with their attempts to rob from us that which our Constitution guarantees. And the fact that Ms. Giffords is so willing to use her injury to assist her political party achieve its goal, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that she cares less about our country than she does about assisting those who wish to further undermine our Constitution. And I’d love to hear how it was that Ms. Giffords arrived at the conclusion that her injury somehow entitles her to be an advocate for restricting that which our Constitution states is the right of every American citizen. I’m sorry for her injury, but it does not earn for her anything other than offers of support and well wishes.

FOR THOSE WHO SAID IT COULDN’T HAPPEN HERE…

Apparently Barry "Almighty’s" latest attempt at what’s laughably referred to as a budget, which we’re told is to be released next week, will limit how much wealthy individuals can keep in IRAs and other retirement accounts. And we’re also told that this proposal would somehow ‘save’ a paltry $9 Billion over a decade. This information comes to us by way of some senior administration official, who also made the claim that such a move would bring more fairness to our tax code. Now before too many folks start jumping on this little bandwagon, I think it’s important to keep in mind here just how it is that this corrupt group of thugs operates. This is always how the set their schemes in motion, by using these so-called "wealthy individuals" for the purpose of getting everybody onboard. But how long does anyone think before it won’t just the IRAs of those "wealthy individuals" that are effected? Soon it’s also the IRAs of average working class Americans that will be effectively getting raided by Democrats as they seek to acquire more "revenue" that can be used to cover the cost of paying off their constituents.

This supposed senior administration official implied that it is inherently unfair that wealthy taxpayers should be able to "accumulate many millions of dollars in these accounts, substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving." Ok, says who? Barry "Almighty"? So it’s the government that should now to be the determining body when it comes dictating exactly what constitutes "reasonable levels of retirement saving?" Anyway under Barry’s plan, a taxpayer’s tax-preferred retirement account, like an IRA, could not finance more than $205,000 per year of retirement, or right around $3 million this year. Mitt Romney, Barry’s 2012 opponent, is always used as the case study regarding anything to do with "wealthy individuals, and it’s no different now as Barry’s team presents this latest attempt at a shakedown. Hence it is said that Romney had an IRA several to many times that amount, leading to questions, by Democrats, about how the former Massachusetts governor was able to put away so much money in that sort of a retirement account. It’s all more of the same class-warfare crap!

Barry’s ‘budget’ is expected to hit the street next Wednesday, and it, no doubt, will be very long on ‘revenue-raising’ proposals and quite short on proposing any real spending cuts. And it comes at a time when Democrats and Republicans continue to spar over whether more tax increases are needed to reduce deficits. Personally, that should be a non-issue. The Democrats got their tax increases back in the beginning of the year, and once again there were no cuts in spending even discussed. From this point on the focus needs to be on substantial cuts in spending and serious entitlement reform on not merely cuts in the growth of the rate of spending. This attack on private retirement accounts is something that has been bandied by about Democrats ever since Barry first came into office. There has been a continued desire to impose rules and regulations that would effectively abolish the private retirement saving and investment markets. And to believe the rhetoric that this, somehow, only will effect those "wealthy individuals," is to allow yourself to be duped by a man who’s nothing but a pathetic liar.

YET ANOTHER VERY IMPRESSIVE MILESTONE ACHIEVED BY OBAMA...

 

 

 

Ah yes, it's official, another major milestone has now been achieved toward the accomplishing of that which our stellar president, Barack Hussein Obama, has said is necessary, that being, of course, the "fundamental transformation" of America. You see, according to some newly released data from the Social Security Administration we now know that the number of American workers collecting federal disability payments has climbed to yet another new record, 8,853,614. That was accomplished in March, and is up from 8,840,427 in February. Slowly but surely we are allowing ourselves to be made into what is really nothing more than a nation of pathetic freeloaders.

 

 

Another way of presenting the magnitude of what is actually occurring here, and one that I assume will put it into terms simple enough for even the dumbest of liberals to understand, is to point out that what that means is that there are now more than 3 times as many Americans collecting disability payments than there are people living in the city of Chicago, which according to the Census Bureau has a population of 2,707,120. Now I don't know about anybody else, but that all seems just a bit incomprehensible. I mean, is this what it now mean to be an American? To be a leech, a parasite, someone who is perfectly comfortable with sponging off of their fellow citizens?

 

 

Another obvious indicator of the continuing downward spiral in which we currently find ourselves is the fact that March was the 194^th consecutive month where we saw the number of American workers collecting federal disability payments increase. The last time the number of Americans collecting disability actually decreased was more than 16 year ago, in January 1997. That month the number of workers taking disability dropped by a whopping 249 people, from 4,385,623 in December 1996 to 4,385,374 in January 1997. And as the overall number of Americans collecting disability has increased, the ratio of full-time workers to disability beneficiaries has decreased.

 

 

Look, back in December 1968, we had 1,295,428 Americans who were collecting disability and, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), we also had 65,630,000 Americans who worked full-time. Thus, there were about 51 Americans working full-time for every person that was collecting disability, at that time. Now fast forward to January 1997, again that being the last time the number of disability beneficiaries had declined, and we were up to 4,385,374 Americans who were collecting disability with 104,900,000 Americans working full-time. Thus, we were then down to about 24 Americans working full-time for each person collecting disability.

 

 

Then we move onto March 2013 and a 8,853,614 Americans who are now collecting disability, with 115,841,000 Americans working fulltime, and that equates to only 13 Americans working full-time for each person collecting disability. Now come on, it doesn't take a genius to look at these numbers and to recognize the fact that what we have here is a rather disturbing little trend. And it should also be painfully obvious to just about anyone with a brain, that if things continue on their present course things are going to end very badly. For EVERYBODY! And oddly enough, it is the very policies that have served to accelerate this downward spiral that a majority of Americans voted for in 2012.

 

 

So in March we saw what was the biggest monthly increase in people dropping out of the labor force since January 2012, when the BLS did its census recast of the labor numbers. The number of people who left the labor force, in the month of March, soared by a staggering 663,000 taking the total number of Americans who are no longer even looking for work to a record of 90 Million. And even worse, the labor force participation rate plunged from an already abysmal 63.5% to an even worse 63.3%. And that's the lowest since 1979! You know, back when Jimmy Carter was in charge. Then we had Reagan to turn things around, this time we have nothing but four more years of the same.

 

 

So I guess it can now be safely said that Barry has met with a considerable amount success when it comes to his little endeavor of "fundamentally transforming" America from what was once a very prosperous nation and into what is essentially the equivalent of a third rate European-like nation. And along the way it seems to have become the new American way to, instead of being proudly independent and self-sufficient, sit back and collect disability and other various forms of welfare and entitlement checks rather than to work. Especially since it now seems that such a practice seems to pay just as well as working. Yup, this whole "fundamental transformation" thing is a pretty nasty business.



"HANOI JANE" GOES ON OPRAH...

Well in what I'm not quite sure was some part of weird quest for redemption or some deal with Oprah to gain some much needed viewers for her struggling network, the esteemed Ms. Jane "Better Red Than Dead" Fonda made a recent appearance on Oprah’s foundering network, OWN. During the interview, Fonda said, "I made one unforgivable mistake when I was in North Vietnam, and I will go to my grave with this." The actress/activist/traitor, as many of you old enough to remember may remember, made a rather infamous trip to North Vietnam in 1972 in which she was photographed singing with North Vietnamese military members as she sat on an anti-aircraft gun. (See photo above) She's a fraud, that's all there is to it!

She was criticized then, as has continued to be pretty much ever since, and she claims that she understands all of the anger that has been directed at her over the years. And so I guess we're all just to somehow let bygones be bygones and take her at her word when she says that she knew immediately that she had made a mistake. She also claims to have apologized repeatedly, both privately and publicly on numerous occasions ever since. But isn't that they way it always is with these leftist celebrities? They feel entitled to go out and shoot their big fat mouths off, then when ordinary folks, maybe, start spending a little less of their hard earned money on such things as going to movies or buying music, these entertainment types say they're oh so sorry.

Maintaining that she had no intention of creating any controversy, Fonda told Oprah that the event happened on the last day of her visit. And in what is, most likely, little more than an attempt at trying to garner some sympathy for herself, she said she was tired and didn’t even want to attend this photo op. For any of those who saw the pictures, I don't know about you, but old Jane didn't look all that tired to me. Nope, it looked like she was really getting into it and having a pretty good time! Sounding more like she was trying to make excuses more than expressing any genuine remorse, she said, "I don't know if I was set up or not," she said. "I was an adult. I take responsibility for my actions." The soldiers sang a song and Fonda joined in.

She said as everyone was laughing and singing and carrying on, she was led to the gun site, where she sat down. "And I was laughing and clapping, and there were pictures taken." As she walked away, Fonda claims to have suddenly realized that the pictures would be seen in the United States, and they would not look good. Gee, ya think? Fonda said, "There were no planes, the gun was not operable. It didn’t matter. This is an image that belied everything that I was." Come on, I may have been born at night, but it sure as heck wasn't last night. So, the photo "belied" everything that she was? Sorry, but I don't buy that for a second. I seem to recall things about that time just a bit differently than does Ms. Fonda.

After all, it was this little visit that visit earned for Fonda the rather dubious little moniker of "Hanoi Jane," particularly among U.S. veterans, who were outraged by photos of the young actress. And it was something that, if I remember correctly, at the time she was quite proud of. So I'm not really buying this current claim that she made a mistake. And ya, what she says may be true, I don't know. And she also claims to have met with a group of Vietnam veterans in a church basement in Connecticut back in 1988 while she was making a movie there. She said that while not everyone at the meeting became "fond of Fonda," there was healing. Sorry, but anyone who actually believes that she possess any remorse for her actions is a moron!

"What I learned," she said, "we have to listen to each other, even when we don’t agree, even when we think we hate each other. We have to listen to each other’s narratives, not interrupt defensively or with hostility, but really try to open our hearts and listen with empathy." Look, while I think there's a lot of truth in what she says, I question whether it is something she genuinely believes, because it's not generally how liberals approach things. You either agree with them, or you're accused of being some sort of an extremist. I still view her as being nothing more than an America hating liberal and I have no intention of seeing any movie that she appears in. And I contend that she's still proud of what she did those so many years ago.

OBAMA SAYS, "COME ON FOLKS, YOU CAN TRUST ME."

Doing that for which he is essentially best known, that being the ratcheting up of toxic rhetoric in an attempt to increase pressure on Congress to do his bidding, which, in this case, would be the limiting of access by law abiding citizens to guns, our piss-poor excuse for a president, Barry "Almighty," said on Wednesday that recent steps by Colorado to tighten its gun laws show "there doesn’t have to be a conflict" between keeping citizens safe and protecting Second Amendment rights to gun ownership. Barry said, "I believe there doesn’t have to be a conflict in reconciling these realities." It was during this little stopover in Denver, while on his way to some fundraisers in California, that he stepped up his call for background checks for all gun purchases and renewed his demand that Congress at least vote on banning 'assault' weapons and limiting access to large-capacity ammunition magazines.

It was also during this little speech that Barry, in what was a display of what has become his typical arrogance, he dismissed gun owners’ concerns that gun control legislation could be a stepping stone to gun confiscation in the U.S., saying "I am constrained by a system our founders put in place." Come on, just who does this most corrupt of presidents in my life time really think he's kidding. He's ignored those "constraints" placed on him by the Constitution more times that I care to count. Barry treats the Constitution as if it doesn't even exist. I don't trust this slimy f*ck as far as I can throw him. I guess he must just think that we're either not paying attention to what he's been doing, or, that we simply believe everything we hear, or read, in the state-controlled media. But personally, I have been paying attention and I believe nothing that comes from our 'mainstream' media complex.

And he remains quite determined to use the bodies of dead children in his effort to convince us that we should, somehow, trust him. Barry noted that more than 100 days have passed since the shooting rampage that killed 20 first-graders and six adults at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., and reignited the national debate over access to guns. "Every day that we wait to do something about it, even more of our fellow citizens are stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun. Now the good news is Colorado has already chosen to do something about it," he said. Keep in mind here that this is the same tragedy for which Democrat Ed Rendell was so thankful for the fact that it was so horrific. Is that not the sickest thing you've ever heard? And now again we have Barry using those dead kids in his attempt to score some cheap political points. There's a special place in Hell for Barry, and for Rendell as well.

And apparently now sensing that that he may be in danger of losing congressional momentum on the issue, Barry went to Colorado, which has a deep-rooted hunting tradition and where gun ownership is a cherished right, to use its example and public pressure to prod Congress to act. Colorado suffered two of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history, at Columbine high school in 1999 and at a movie theater in Aurora last year. It recently expanded background checks for gun purchases and placed restrictions on ammunition magazines. Prospects for passage of similar measures by Congress appear bleak, largely because of concerns by conservative Republicans and moderate Democrats who come down more on the side of gun rights. But it's important to keep in mind that the Colorado of today is a far different place, politically speaking, than the Colorado of just five or ten years ago.

Let's face it, next to having the government seize control of our healthcare, that next thing that Democrats have long been salivating over is successfully 'acquire' the ability to completely disarm the American people. And now with the healthcare issue safely in the 'W' column, it's time to move on to the seizing of our guns. So I'm quite sure that we can now count on being subjected to the same level of outright lies that we heard about Obamacare, about how this is really all about nothing more than increasing public safety. And that my friends, is nothing more than crock. And it is my sincerest hope that bad guys everywhere will soon begin a migration, of sorts, to those states who insist upon disarming their citizens. Because, that will then make me and my family all the safer, in addition to, of course, the fact that we are still able to keep our home safer with the assistance of Smith & Wesson.

WELL, IT'S QUITE THE TANGLED WEB OBAMA SEEKS TO WEAVE...

Just like he did back during his attempt to convince us all that his healthcare reform would be a boon to this country since it would be lowering healthcare cost for everyone while at the same time guaranteeing coverage for all, Barry continues to use the same manner of deception as he pushes for ever more restrictive gun control legislation. And the centerpiece of his attempt to deceive the American people seems to be a statistic, the validity of which, many continue to call into question as he continues to using it as a basis for hi demand for near-universal background checks. Using bogus data to claim that this is somehow a cure-all to 'gun violence,' is disingenuous to say the least.

During several speeches, Barry has persisted in throwing around, as fact, the statistic that 40 percent of all gun purchases ‘today’ are made without a background check. And as has been previously pointed out here, back when that number was first arrived at it was, at best, nothing more than what's fondly referred to by many as being nothing but a scientific-wild-ass-guess (SWAG). And yet Barry persists in presenting it as somehow being a fact. And ya know, the fact that he knows it’s a SWAG, make’s his constantly repeating it, all the more dishonest, providing even more proof that you really can’t believe much of anything that he says. It's all rather disturbing.

Look, as has been stated before by any number of people, this 40 percent number is nearly two decades old and comes from a poll with a relatively tiny sample size. And now gun rights groups like the National Rifle Association (NRA), as well as The Washington Post’s "Fact Checker," are calling out Barry for his continuing to use this obviously bogus stat, saying his numbers on background checks might need a bit of a background check of their own. But let's face it, as he did with Obamacare, Barry will use any 'fact', real or concocted, if he feels that in so doing it will make it easier for him to accomplish that which he seeks to accomplish. Squashing the Second Amendment!

Barry's rather questionable trend of not quite being able to tell the truth, and on a regular basis, is further evidenced by a speech that he gave just last week during which he asked the question, "Why wouldn’t we want to make it more difficult for a dangerous person to get his or her hand on a gun? Why wouldn’t we want to close the loophole that allows as many as 40 percent of all gun purchases to take place without a background check? Why wouldn’t we do that?" And again, he KNEW what he was saying was a lie when he said it! And yet, he continues to use it, and with some conviction, as somehow being proof to back up his claims, and to bolster his effort to hoodwink the American people.

This static, which has now become so frequently bandied about and as somehow being an accurate gauge of what's portrayed as a bigger problem than it is, was actually pulled from a 16 year-old study done by the National Institute of Justice. In this study, researchers actually 'estimated' that roughly 40 percent of all firearm sales took place through people other than licensed gun dealers. The conclusion was based on data from even an older survey of 2,568 households that was conducted 1994. And out of those 2,568 households, only 251 people even bothered to answer the question about where they got their guns. But that all seems to matter very little to Barry.

And in an effort to take things even a step further, PolitiFact actually tracked down one of the co-authors of the study, Duke University professor Philip Cook, and asked him if he thought the 40 percent estimate is accurate. "The answer is I have no idea," Cook is reported to have told PolitiFact. "This survey was done almost 20 years ago." The National Rifle Association has repeatedly questioned the 40 percent claim and says it’s a misrepresentation by gun control advocates to trump up support for universal background checks. To call it merely a misrepresentation of the facts is to be quite generous, to say the least. What it is, is an outright LIE!

Another problem with the study has to do with the sample size, which like I said is a mere 251 people, which is infinitesimal in terms of sampling, with the data acquired being open to interpretation. "With this sample size, the 95 percent confidence interval will be plus or minus six percentage points," The Washington Post fact-checker wrote on Tuesday. "Moreover, when asked whether the respondent brought from a licensed firearms dealer, the possible answers included ‘probably was/think so’ and ‘probably not,’ leaving open the possibility the purchaser was mistaken." So essentially, this 40 percent number that Barry touts on a regular basis, is completely meaningless.

Regarding this nearly 20 year old survey, when all of the "yes" and "probably was" answers were added together, only 35.7 percent of those asked said they did not receive a gun from a licensed firearms dealer. If you round the number up, it becomes 40 percent, however, because the sample size is so small, rounding the number down to 30 percent would also be just as accurate, the paper noted. But for Barry, the quoting of 30 percent compared to 40 percent just doesn't possess the same impact. I mean, from Barry's point of view, one third compared to nearly one half, well that just doesn't make it sound like there's really that much of a problem.

And I'm sure none us are surprised to hear that the administration has yet to respond to questions surrounding the number and why they continue to use it so prominently to promote their gun control measures. But to be fair, Barry isn't the only one who's used the 40 percent figure to make a point. Many other Democrats out stumping for the cause, are also guilty of spreading this falsehood. And if you'll remember, it was in their effort to sway public opinion regarding all the supposed benefits of Obamacare, that made it quite clear that there is no lie that will be left untold if it is seen as, in any way, assisting them to accomplish that which they want so badly. To disarm the American people.

On Jan. 24, Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand stated the importance of background checks during a television interview. "The background checks bill is vitally important. It’s going to basically say you can’t buy guns without getting a background check. Today, about 40 percent of guns are purchased without a background check." Seven months earlier, 'Nanny Mike' Bloomberg used the same statistic to go after the National Rifle Association following the Colorado movie theatre massacre. "There’s a loophole where you can sell guns without a background check," he said last year, on July 22. "Forty percent of guns are sold that way." And he, too, knowingly repeats this lie!

Barry continues to perpetuate this charade of his by using all manner of stats and studies and polls, as he tries to make the case that the Senate is considering common-sense proposals that most Americans support. Which it is NOT! In fact nothing could be further from the truth. Amid resistance from some lawmakers, Barry is ramping up his campaign for the legislation. He plans to visit Denver today, and then in a pathetic attempt to milk, to the fullest extent possible, the deadly mass shooting that occurred in Newtown Conn, he'll stop, next Monday, in Hartford, Conn.. So this slime ball will continue to use dead children as a way to score cheap political points. DISGUSTING!

MORE BOOBS AND BUTTS TO START APPEARING ON A TELEVISION NEAR YOU…

Very soon in the not too distant future the only option that you may have regarding the possessing of any parental control over what your kids will be able to watch on your television will be to…unplug it. That is if the Barry controlled Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has its way. You see this unique group recently announced that it is now looking to relax certain rules that currently prohibit broadcasters from airing indecent material. A public notice posted on the regulatory agency's website Monday said the FCC is launching a review which may end up scrapping the ban on expletives and certain displays of nudity on television. And this would be regardless of the number of public complaints that may result from the action. The notice asked for public comment on its plan.

And it should come as no surprise to anybody that the main culprit behind this assault on decency is none other than Barry’s handpicked, but soon to be retiring, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. Yup it's this clown who’s behind this move to bring more smut into living rooms all across America. He kicked off this review after the Supreme Court overturned two indecency fines just last year. The agency says it wants to ensure that "indecency policies and their enforcement are fully consistent with vital First Amendment principles." Funny thing, have you ever noticed that the only time these progressive pukes are ever actually in favor of the First Amendment is when they can somehow use it to expedite the moral decay of our already troubled society? Otherwise they're totally against it!

At stake is whether the commission should waive the ban on isolated expletives and non-sexual nudity, focusing instead on enforcing the most extreme cases such as deliberate and repetitive use of expletives. Non-sexual nudity? No doubt, any changes to be made are intended to trigger a new attitude of permissiveness toward swearing and full frontal nudity on television. Remember in 2002, washed up hag of a singer, Cher, used the F-word during the Billboard Music Awards, while reality TV star Nicole Richie used two different expletives on the same show in 2003. But then such sophomoric theatrics are always to be expected from these supposed celebrities. It's how they garner a little press for themselves and why I stopped watching award shows a log time ago.

Also everybody's favorite holier than thou, out to save the world, rock and roller, U2 singer Bono, was also guilty of dropping the F-bomb during a Golden Globes acceptance speech. And in 2004 Janet Jackson's infamous "wardrobe malfunction" gave a shot of nudity during the Super Bowl. Meanwhile, brief glimpses of nudity on mainstream television programs could also be overlooked. In recent years, the Supreme Court has come down against FCC fines on these high profile cases, but that hasn't stemmed the tide of public outrage against offensive displays on television. During the Super Bowl halftime show last year, supposed entertainer, M.I.A. flipped off millions of viewers during a performance of Madonna’s single, "Give Me All Your Luvin’."

"We have certainly come a long way since Gone With The Wind was almost scrapped because Clark Gable said the word Damn," a parent said after the incident. The FCC said it has reduced the backlog of indecency complaints by 70 percent, down by more than 1 million, since last September by eliminating complaints that were beyond the statute of limitations or were "too stale to pursue." So what criteria, exactly, is used in determining whether inappropriate behavior is too stale to pursue? So in this age of dwindling network ratings at the same time ratings for 'adult themed' cable shows are on the rise, I'm sure it'll only be a matter of time before we're flooded with all manner of gratuitous nudity for no other reason than as a means of gaining higher ratings. It's inevitable.

Look, I'm no prude, far from it as a matter of fact. But as an adult, if I don't feel like viewing something that I consider to be inappropriate, I can turn the channel. Children, on the other hand, don't possess the same level of maturity, and most likely would not turn the channel without some intervention by a parent or other adult. Ya know, there's enough going in our society today that robs from our kids the innocence of childhood and prevents them from just being able to be kids. More nudity and inappropriate language on television will only make matters worse. To show you just how far things have gotten, George Carlin once had a standup routine centered around the seven words that you couldn't, then, say on television. These days, it seems that they can all be said on television.

AND THE CAMPAIGNING CONTINUES…

And so it would seem that for our stellar president, Barry "Almighty," the campaign season never quite comes to end. Here we have a man who is apparently forever stuck in campaign mode, and who cares less about being president than he does campaigning for the job. So with the 2012 election barely over, Barry is once again hitting the campaign trail. This week we'll find him heading out to four California fundraisers on Wednesday and Thursday to begin the effort of raising money for the supposed purpose of helping Democrats keep control of the Senate and to successfully seize control of the House.

Now being just a little old blogger and far from being any kind of a real political expert, it would seem to me that this way-early fundraising blitz suggests that, maybe, just maybe, Barry is a bit more focused on efforts to capture the House for Democrats than, and for whatever reason, maybe the White House would like to admit. But I tell ya, if such a nightmare scenario were to actually take place it would then allow Barry to be even more successful at ramming all manner of socialist legislation, in much the same way as Obamacare was, through Congress after the 2014 elections.

According to the thugs in the White House, on Wednesday Barry will be attending two fundraisers for the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), which, as most of you probably know, is the political arm of House Democrats. According to Politico the fundraisers will each be on San Francisco’s "Billionaires’ Row," at the homes of Gordon Getty, who cheerfully contributed $35,800 to Barry's reelection last year, and that of another billionaire Democrat fundraiser, and very vocal opponent of the Keystone XL pipeline, the clean-energy advocate/zealot, Tom Steyer.

After over-nighting in San Francisco, Barry moves on Thursday to Atherton, California for two more fundraisers, this time to raise money for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) which according to Debbie Wizzerman Schultz, is broke. These too will be big-money affairs at private residences. The DNC will be focused in 2014 on winning the House and preserving the Senate for Democrats. And I think it pretty safe to assume that in their effort to do so, the Democrats, including Barry, will leave no stone unturned as they continue their quest for ever larger amounts of cash.

Barry has frequently, and justifiably so I might add, been slammed as being nothing more than our "Campaigner-in-Chief." That he is fundraising so early is a sure sign that the next year and half until Election Day will find policy matters and the conduct of the presidency frequently interrupted by more and more fundraising trips, just as happened during the final year of Barry’s first term. After all, it's not about actually governing, it's all about greasing the skids in order to increase the odds of success in dragging our country even further to the left. That is priority number one!!

THE POLITICS INVOLVED IN DEMANDING ONE PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE...

I have heard it said by some that those on the progressive left need to be ready with some new 'ideas' in case the day should ever come when the GOP gets on, what they describe laughably as being, the "right side of history." To those who are concerned I would only suggest that there's no real need to worry as progressives already have such a plan. And I think most of us are aware that that plan is to increase the number of those not required to pay any income tax from 47 percent to 50.1 percent, and to do so with the help of those newly created voters previously identified as illegal aliens, and then to proceed with the milking of the remaining 49.9 percent for all that they are worth. Sound about right? So the attempt here is rig the game so Democrats have a much easier path to victory

And while I'm on the subject of income taxes in this era of fairness that we currently find ourselves, I'd like to put into perspective the blatant 'unfairness' of our federal income tax system as it presently exists. It's quite simple, really, and I will attempt to make my example simple enough so that even your basic liberal/progressive/socialist will be able to understand it. Although, I'm quite sure the logic in my argument will completely escape them and they will stubbornly attempt to point out the insanity in what I'm attempting to point out here. And I feel reasonably confident that I'll be accused of being selfish, or even racist, or that I do not sufficiently care about my fellow man, because that's what liberals/progressives always do. But having said that, everyone needs to be contributing something!

Anyway, here goes. Let's say a man, just an example, goes to the movie theater and buys a ticket for $10. However, the next man in line has to pony up $40 for a ticket to see the same movie. And the next man is forced to pay $80. Does that sound 'fair?' And then a person steps up to the ticket booth and the cashier actually gives them $10 to go in an see the movie. How about that, is that 'fair?' How can such a system make any sense to anyone but a progressive? But unfortunately that's exactly how our income tax system works. Close to half of all wage earners, or that previously mentioned 47 percent, pay zero federal income tax, with many of them actually receiving income tax credits. Which, I suppose, is a good gig if you can get it. But being a good gig, doesn't make it fair!

Now this is not only unfair to those of us who pay taxes, but in a sense, and your basic progressive will probably have a difficult time grasping this, it's also unfair to them. Those not provided with the opportunity to chip in to keep this little thing called America afloat can be perceived by some, but not all, as being a little demeaning. But Barry is determined in his efforts to increase to highest number possible those not required to pay income tax while taking great pleasure in continuing to describe those which he describes as being rich as not paying their fair share. So as bizarre as it may sound, 0 percent is considered fair for some while 50 percent is not fair for others. Such is the arrangement that we currently find ourselves faced with when it comes to the paying of income taxes.