Glenn Beck on the NRA,PeTA and speaking with boldness.

Just about two weeks back Glenn Beck has PeTA's Ingrid Newkirk on to hold Al Gore's feet to the fire on being pro-green by discontinuing the eating of meat. I believe some call that hypocrisy. You know when you do one thing, yet say another.

Anyhow. Glenn Beck then compared, as well as stated, that both PeTA and the NRA both mean what they say and say what they mean. Huh, now I can pretty much agree that PeTA does that. For they don't hide the fact they are vegan nut jobs.

However, not so much for the NRA. See, if we use the "Way-Back" machine, we'd find out differently. For in 1934, then president Karl T. Fredrick stated that citizens don't need machine guns, or to carry pistols, or any of those sort of things. Even when it comes to the states, such as mine, the NRA believes they can run rough-shoot over local groups, like GeorgiaCarry.Org in promoting their agenda, which isn't always a pro-gun one.

Now while I do give credit to Glenn Beck for being one of the few,along with Neal Boortz, who have national shows who tackle the right to carry issue. As Glenn Beck says, or his mother anyhow, "Show me your friends, and I will show you their future.". Well, if your friend is an lobbyist group that has sold out the Second Amendment time and time again, and only grows a pair when it is politically advantageous. Well, there is your future Beck.

Because we have to be racist to fly that flag.

CNN, a state-run cable news channel, is trying to link militias(which in themselves are not all bad) and the Tea Party protesters, as some sort of threat to the country and Obama. That because they both similar flag, the Gadsden Flag, both groups must be linked. And seeing that both groups dislike Obama, it must be racism. For what else could it be.

And while, yes, the person interviewed might not be the sharpest tack in the box, he gut is not far off the mark. For just like him, the media has a lack of knowledge, or at least refuses to report on it...that goes back to that state-run media comment at the beginning.

For Obama, while not directly implementing gun control laws, his subornation are. From the Sec. State Hillary talking to the UN on small arms treaty, to Cass Sunstein's thoughts on hunting, to current socialist congress health care bill effects on gun rights.

So to say that Obama, or that one could not list Obama's anti-gun policy is false, or not truly investigated. Something that took me all of 5 minutes to find,and 20 minutes to read and digest an opinion on.

But this is the state of the Fifth Estate, for it is more like the Fifth Column and reporting that those who dissent must be racist or domestic terrorist or stupid. This is the mantra from the progressives, which is both the left and the right.

To be assure, this most recent report from CNN is not the first, nor will it be the last to show those who dissent with the administration. Which we were assured we could do, are those aforementioned adjectives listed.

Now while I am reporting on this, to prevent further character assignations, it is also to be treated as a distraction,to get you to take your eye off that other hand. For this is what the media wants us to do. Be distracted with such reporting,and to get an emotional response. Don't respond in that fashion, but in a thoughtful one.

To obey or disobey gun laws.

If you have or have not heard, a gentlemen in Seattle has openly disobeyed a bad gun law, (okay, all gun laws are bad,but moving on)that restricts the carry in public parks.

Now while I support dissent, I also have to remember what Thomas Paine said in his book The Rights of Man, which is:

“If a law be bad, it is one thing to oppose the practice of it, but it is quite a different thing to expose its errors, to reason on its defects, and to show cause why it should be repealed, or why another ought to be substituted in its place. I have always held it an opinion (making it also my practice) that it is better to obey a bad law, making use at the same time of every argument to show its errors and procure its repeal, than forcibly to violate it; because the precedent of breaking a bad law might weaken the force, and lead to a discretionary violation of those which are good.” Rights of Man, p.155


Thus I am conflicted on this open showing of breaking a law, even one that is on its face both un-Constitutional and bad.

I must go with Thomas Paine, that we must obey the laws, even bad ones as the one in Seattle, and have it changed in either the courts or the legislature. Not on the streets.

However, still yet, what is done is done. The man was not arrested, and got his point across and quite possible now has cause to file a law suite to have it changed in the court room. So if the means meets the end result I too will support that as well.

More sexism from those claiming not to be sexist.

Remember that Playboy article on conservatives they'd like to hate fuck", well Al Gore's Current TV has taken their turn at it too. For this organization,which just cut 80 jobs recently,are dreaming about Palin being a whore,or Gun-ho,and being a TWILF(twitter I'd like to - you can fill in the rest).

If this sort of blatant sexism would have came from a conservative they left wing statis media would have called for heads to roll. But, since it didn't we hear nothing but crickets and silence.

For one must remember that there are three groups not covered by political correctness, those being: white men,Christians and conservatives. If you fall into one or more of those categories, they the media,the left, or whom ever can malign you as much as they want, and with zero repercussions.

More proof that the police can't protect you.

I don't know what is sadder, that the woman did in a horrific manner,all while the police were right outside, or that her state,California, legislatively made it difficult, if not impossible for her to defend herself with a firearm?

I tend to go with the latter, that she was deterred from purchasing an effective means of defense, and depended upon to government workers and a piece of paper from the state for the defense of her life. Thus, forfeiting, without even knowing it perhaps, her liberty to life.

Ladies(and gents too), hear me now. For the police, 911, or that dispatcher on the end of the line has no obligation to protect you, or send protecting for you. For it has been found time and time again by the government, that the government(the aforementioned three all work and represent the government by the way) has zero obligation to protect you as an individual. That they only have an obligation to maintain order and enforce the laws,ordinance,and such that have been passed by the government.

More that, "How is gun control working for you Chicago", stuff.

If one wants to know why Chicago has such high levels of gun crime, then all one has to do is look at the proclivity toward guns, as Deputy Chief Nick Roti explains with an analogy. For his analogy of 'the tale of two cities" is misguided and wrong. Sure, if take all the guns away from the civilians, and make the city a virtual police state,sure you might curb some gun crime - Oh, what the UK tried that,and it doesn't work either. For criminals will always fined a way to get a gun, after all,and as stated many times before, they are freaking criminals who don't care to obey the law.

Perhaps instead of search warrants, buy backs, and unconstitutionally restrictive gun laws, - perhaps, just perhaps - you allow your civilians to behave live citizens.

I know Mayor Daly, it goes against everything you nanny-statis believe in. Allow people, and not the government, to take care of themselves. But other cities have done it,and with great success and results.

If you can read this thank a teacher, if not thank a union.

Don't remember if it was a bumper sticker or on a talk radio pundit in which I heard this profoundly true statement. Yet it rings true, and even proven such by the City of New York College, since most can't do basic algebra. It also explains why a former manger at my work place,who graduated from NYU, didn't known that the Civil War was not fought in 1918, but WW I.

This is why I refer to them,as Neal Boortz does, as government schools. For only a government entity could produce such incompetent graduates.

Nice to know, but still won't shop there.

According to GCO president, Ed Stone, Home Depot will now allow guns in their stores, or to be more precise, according to state law.

Now while it pleases me that yet another large national chain store are permitting gun owners, mostly to bow to a large demographic and the all mighty dollar. Home Depot still has to work on that customer service.

Wheel chair bound man rights that he alread had.

Welcome to New Jersey, the only state that would not refuse the right to bear arms to everyday citizens, but also to those who haven't the physical ability to fight off thugs.

Thank goodness the courts actually read the Constitution.

That is not good.

That the supply of gold is rapidly running out,all while price is spiking and new sources are not being found. For those who believe that gold is money, like myself, this isn't good. Moreover, this does not bode well for silver, which I predict, with no expertise just a gut feeling, will soon be spiking as well as people turn to it in lieu of the recent gold decline and price spike.

Couldn't agree more.

We end the ban on prohibition of military personal from carrying guns. And, should allow our fighting men and women exercise their Constitutional rights. After all, they are protecting us, we should allow them to protect themselves as well. For just because you wear the uniform doesn't mean your natural rights to self-defense have stopped.

Armistice Day

May know this day November 11th as Veterans Day, however it originally known as Armistice Day, which commentates the end of World War One, that ended at 11:00PM on November 11th, 1918.

To all of those who served with honor and pride, whether in peace time or at war, may God bless you for your service to liberty.