Gun dumbness

A liberal posted a graphic that supposedly showed that guns used in Chicago don't come from Chicago so the fact that Chicago is the murder capital of the country does not show that Chicago's gun control laws aren't working.  The "reasoning" is that if we could eliminate all guns then there'd be less gun violence in Chicago.

The point the liberals miss is this; if reducing the number of guns reduces crime how come there is more crime in Chicago than in areas that don't have gun control?  If guns are the source of evil you'd expect that crime would go down, albeit not to 0, when you keep people from having guns but instead crime has increased in Chicago.

Maybe because the only people that are disarmed and undefended by gun control are honest citizens.  If you can buy illegal drugs why does any sane person think that criminals won't be able to buy illegal guns?  But if the crook thinks his victims won't be able to defend themselves he's going to be more likely to try and attack or rob them thereby increasing crime.  Further if you're a crook and you want to take someone out knowledge that he's less likely to be armed will tend to embolden you.

The problem isn't things; it's people.  People kill people; guns are just something they use.  But liberals don't want to punish killers, unless they're white folks who have killed black folks, because liberals constantly push to make it harder to convict criminals and easier for those criminals to get out of jail early in those cases where the criminals are convicted.

Only a liberal could think that reducing the number of guns in honest citizens hands will reduce violence but allowing violent criminals to walk the streets won't.

An abortion conversation

If you're a woman thinking about having an abortion or a man urging the mother of his daughter to abort your child I suggest you imagine one conversation on abortion before having that abortion.

What will the conversation be between you and your daughter when you meet her in the next life? What will you say to her?  How will you justify killing her rather than having her and giving her up for adoption?

What would you say to your mom if she'd decided to abort you?  If you'd have been conceived in rape would you have been ok with being killed by your mother?  Your mom couldn't kill the monster who raped her but she decided to kill you, her own daughter. Would you be cool with that?





Suppose your mom had aborted you because your dad wasn't the "right one" or because now just wasn't the right time for your mom to have a baby.  Or because her boyfriend was going to walk if you showed up. Would you agree that your life was a small price to pay for your mothers improved quality of life?

But maybe it's not fair to ask you about your mother since she obviously loved you enough not to consider you a burden and kill you.

Don't think of your unborn daughter as family, think of her as a stranger.  How would you explain to a stranger that they needed to die so your life wouldn't be adversely affected?  If you cause a car accident do you think it's ok to kill the other driver and any witnesses so you can't be sued?

Abortion is, according to science, the willful killing of a human being; of your daughter.  How are you going to explain to her that her life was worth your gain when you meet her?  If you don't believe in an afterlife then what about the karma? Killing someone to improve your own life has got to be bad from the karma perspective.

If animals die trying to protect their unborn and there is no God, no afterlife doesn't our killing our young make us worse than animals?

Think about what you'd say to your daughter after you've had her killed and see if perhaps abortion isn't the simple thing you've been led to believe it is.  To not take the "easy" way out and just sweep your daughter under the rug is a hard thing, a thing that requires courage and love. But it's a thing that marks those who are heroes.

Most people who have or urge others to have abortions aren't evil; if they were the pro-abortion movement wouldn't have to talk about choice and use euphemisms.  The folks contemplating having their daughters killed are generally alone and in difficult situations with no support from those who should be there for them, such as the babies father.  In situations like that it's hard for even the best of people to put themselves in their unborn daughters shoes especially when the culture keeps lying about what abortion is.

But maybe if you think about what you're going to tell your unborn daughter when you eventually meet her you'll be able to think about just what is going on and cut through the lies that the abortion profiteers like Planned Parenthood are telling you; they tell you they care but they don't do abortions for free.

If you don't want to talk to your unborn daughter then try imagining the conversation you will have with the daughter you decide not to kill later in your life, the daughter you have with the "right one".

How will you explain to her that she's special and that while you killed her half sister you really truly love her? What will your daughter think when she realizes that the value you assign to your children depends on how they affect your life? You didn't think about it that way when you felt that abortion was your only out but in the cold light of day the daughter you let live will see that her value to you is conditional based on how you perceived she'd impact your life.  If she was the daughter of another "Mr Wrong" she too would have had her life ended.

We're all selfish; it's one of the consequences of being human. But by talking to our daughters before we enter the abortion clinic maybe we can see our way to be the heroic figures that every child deserves.

Liberals lie!

Excuse me for ranting but LIBERALS LIE.  I can't go on Facebook without seeing at least one or two posts by liberals that are out and out lies.  Not statements I disagree with but out and out lies.


In some cases the people repeating these lies are innocent. But after they are told multiple times that items from certain sources are wrong and they keep posting stuff from those sources one has to question their honesty. And of course the people who generate the grossly incorrect material in the first place are unlikely to be completely innocent.

A while back a liberal I know put up a figure showing that the evil Republicans wanted to cut $110B from the CDC budget. It turns out the yearly budget of the CDC is only $13B/year.

Today there was a post declaring that 3000 people died in 9/11 but 2.5 million died in wars justified by 9/11. Given that the only war justified by 9/11 was Afghanistan this is clearly a lie.

While I've seen conservatives post opinions I wouldn't agree with I've never seen the sort of outright lying that is a constant in liberalism.

Outside of Facebook we have the selectively edited interview with George Zimmerman that was purposely distorted to make him sound racist and the recent video that was selectively edited to make it look like gun control opponents heckled the father of one of the children that died at Sandy Hook.  While the media says these are innocent mistakes they never seem to occur in media coverage of liberals.

What is more interesting is that when you point out to liberals they're lying it doesn't phase them at all. They just move on to a new lie.

But then this is to be expected since at the core of liberalism is the belief that truth is whatever furthers their cause.

Why legalize the illegal?

It's clear why liberals want to make citizens of pretty much anyone who can manage to sneak into the US. The simple reason is that a disproportionately large fraction of those illegals will depend on the government and as such will tend to vote Democrat.

Irrespective of how the illegals will vote do we really want to reward those who break the laws?

Somehow I can't imagine liberals wanting to reward conservatives who don't pay their taxes.  Nor do I suspect that liberals would want to reward folks who beat up a gay guy.

The simple fact is that if we grant citizenship to illegals now we'll continue to have a significant problem with illegals in the future because they'll know that we don't really want to control our borders.

We need to fix immigration but rewarding those who break our laws chew up taxpayer money without paying taxes and who generally don't adapt to America but expect America to adapt to them is probably not the best way.

Why hope shouldn't be going out of style

While it's depressing to see that Obama is trying to turn America into a new France the simple fact is that he's limited in what he can do to the average American citizen.

Sure he can bankrupt us and drastically lower our standard of living when his lavish spending max's out our credit card limits and he can ensure that a huge fraction of black babies are killed before they have a chance to live but he can't make us go against God.

He can put us in the position of having to choose between money and God but that's a choice that we all face; as have our ancestors.  But picking God over money will in the long run help us.

God loves us and has a place reserved for us in Heaven why should we panic over the problems of daily life? We get depressed of course because we're human and flawed by original sin. Even Jesus was saddened when He saw evil appear to be winning in the world.  But He told us that our true hope is not in the doings of people in this world but in how we live our lives. If we hold to Him even if everyone else seems to be going to the Devil, literally in some cases, we will be saved and what we're living through will seem as nothing.

To us in America things are harder because just a few decades ago we had a much better country where the main problem was the way some mistreated Blacks. But we were on our way to fixing that when the liberal agenda turned America into a country where 1.3 million babies are killed each year.

But compare modern liberal America with say life in the Soviet Union or the Sudan and you should find reason to thank God.

Additionally keep in mind that Obama won by 2% of the vote.  It's not like the Obamanauts vastly outnumber the folk who believe in individual responsibility.  The numbers get even better when you realize that a lot of Obama voters voted for the faux Obama constructed by the media, the guy who cares for the poor and who is fiscally responsible, not the real Obama.

It's true that our country is divided but the good guys are not massively outnumbered.

So keep hoping for what's important, an eternity with Jesus, when the seemingly never ending lies and schemes from the liberal establishment get to be a bit too much to handle.  Do what you can to turn the tide but remember you will be judged by what you do and not by how well you succeed in the world.

Is Obama hunting conservatives?

What President Obama says rarely seems to have a significant intersection with truth. However given his desire to be king and rule without the silly impediments of the Constitution and Congress I could easily seem him going forth riding with the hounds hunting down those peasants who don't agree with him.

That's about the only way I could consider Obama's latest statement that he goes out and shoots guns even remotely credible. The guy has no real street cred being raised in a pampered rich white world his whole life so it's not like he can say he's conversant with guns because he needed to protect his family in the hood.

Similarly even though his life is so important, in his eyes, that it deserved two autobiographies--admittedly at least partly fictional ones with composite people and such--it seems that mentioning his gun enthusiasm was dropped down the same hole as his college grades until today.

Most folks who go out and shoot guns for fun don't hide it away with their bad college grades but then Obama is the new Messiah, at least according to his fans, so we can't really measure him by human standards.

The most likely truth however is that this is another example of how liberals view the truth.

To conservatives the truth is the truth. To liberals the truth is whatever advances their cause today.  Back in the 1960's liberals were all enthused about nuclear power because it created so little pollution now they think nuclear power is the ultimate evil.  The facts haven't changed but liberal objectives have; from cheap power to reducing the number of people and making do with less.

Similarly liberals mocked condoms in the pre-AIDS days of the sexual revolution because condoms fail.  Yet now those same liberals, with the same knowledge of condom failure rates, tell us that condoms will protect you from all STDs.

Obama's latest crusade is to disarm America so that only criminals and government employee's will have guns. He thinks that portraying himself as being pro-gun will help him convince folks whose reality is defined by the main stream media that his objectives are reasonable.

Since the truth is infinitely malleable in the eyes of liberals like Obama he doesn't consider it a lie when he makes up a new "truth" any more than he considered it a lie to create fake composite people in his autobiography.

In this sense liberals are anti-Christians because Christians believe that the end does not justify the means while liberals believe that any means can be used to achieve their objectives.

How real is your reality?

One of the largest problems in America today is that many Americans are living in an alternate reality.

In their reality 650,000 people didn't march on Friday in Washington DC to end the killing of the unborn.

In their reality abortion is only legal through the first three months of pregnancy and only for a serious reason like rape.

In their reality casual sex does not result in pregnancies.

In their reality nothing happened in Benghazi last year.

In their reality the economy has been constantly recovering for years.

In their reality all America's problems are due to George W. Bush.

In their reality illegal aliens are all wonderful people who work hard and pay taxes.

In their reality guns never protect innocent people.

In their reality Fast and Furious is just a movie franchise.

This alternate reality is the product of the main stream media. By  censoring stories that don't align with liberal goals and emphasizing stories that do the modern American media has built up a massive following of people who think they know what reality is but who, through no fault of their own, don't have a clue.

In that alternative reality reelecting Obama made sense.

A key objective of conservatives has to be to get those Americans out of their version of the twilight zone and back into reality.  If we fail then those folks will collide with reality when Obama's house of cards comes tumbling down.

Statue of Blessed Virgin Mary at Our Lady of Peace Roman Catholic Church in Santa Clara CA

Pitching in to help the helpless

Yesterday 650,000 people marched in frigid temperatures in Washington DC to protest the genocidal mass murder of over a million Americans each year.

Yet most major media outlets ignored or downplayed the story. Can you imagine there would have been a similar lack of coverage if the same number of people had marched on DC to support same sex marriage or an end to the war in Afghanistan?

Compare the coverage of Occupy Wall St, which involved a few hundred people, to the annual March for Life which musters hundreds of thousands in the coldest part of the Eastern winter.

What you can do to help is write a letter to your favorite media outlet and ask why they didn't devote a hundredth of the coverage they spent on Occupy Wall St. to the Walk for Life.

Do onto others

Would you object if your mother had decided to abort you; to kill you before you were born?  If so how can you believe that it's ok for other mothers to kill their children?

As a society we can choose to be selfish or we can choose to be charitable. Choosing to kill 1.3 million people each year because they are "unwanted" is not being charitable.

Can you think like a liberal?

I can't.  Four Americans died in Benghazi due to what is at best gross incompetence by the government.

Yet on FB there's a liberal photo that portrays congressmen who were questioning Hillary Clinton as little babies.

At best Secretary Clinton was responsible for abysmally poor judgement on what security was needed on 9/11 in Libya, a country which has not fully recovered from a bloody civil war. At worst she's involved in a deliberate coverup which was designed to conceal a key foreign policy failure by Obama in order to help his reelection chances.

As such how any rational person could portray the folks questioning Hillary as babies is beyond me.

But then if all that matters is political power you will accept anything the people you're backing say no matter what.

I remember when Nixon resigned having a dispute with my Dad.  I said we had to kick out Nixon because while what he had done wasn't as bad as what Kennedy and Johnson had done if we stood up for what was right a future Democrat president caught doing something wrong wouldn't be able to count on his party to support him.

Given the case of Bill Clinton I have to admit my dad was right.  When conservatives base their decisions on principles not power we can't expect liberals, who base their decisions on power not principles, to emulate us.

But in the end when we look back on our lives it'll be better to know that we behaved in an honorable fashion.  Life is a transitory thing and what's most important is serving God by doing the right thing.  Winning is the most important thing in life but we need to remember what it means to win. Mother Theresa was a greater winner than any football player, tycoon, or politician because she dedicated her whole life to serving Jesus through the poor.

One can't lose in any meaningful way by standing up for what is right no matter what the world thinks.

Even the animal world can't believe the direction that Obama is headed.

Kennedy vs Obama

Kennedy asked us to ask what we can do for our country not what our country can do for us.

Obama asks us to ask what we can do for Obama not what Obama can do for the country.

Women in combat

Anyone who lives in reality knows that men will be protective of women and that men and women in close proximity will tend to form emotional and romantic bounds.

The risk of forming relationships is high even in standard work where people are together 8 or so hours per day.  In the military men and women will be together for days at a time.

I can imagine a lot of military wives not being too enthused about the new situation; thousands of miles away from their spouses who are in the same foxhole as another woman.  I suspect we'll see a retention impact given that roughly 60% of service members are married. 

Remember the huge lengths the military went through when a female soldier was captured in the Iraq?  The same thing will happen when women in combat get captured to the detriment of the mission.

But if you're Obama and believe that the US military is the problem and that the real role of the military is to serve to drive social change in America the reduction in combat capability of the military is irrelevant. What's shameful is that the generals are going along with this rather than resigning.

As usual with Obama it's not about what's best for America but rather what's best for Obama.

American Thinker Readers please read

I have recently started to add new material on a more regular basis to this blog.  Please come back in a few days or a week if you like what I have to say.

Thanks for dropping by!

Why is Obama President?

No I know he won the election.  The question is what does Obama think his job is?  Historically the job of President has been to do what's best for the American people.

But Obama has made it clear that his second term will be about gay marriage, global warming, and gun control. Given that unemployment, if you throw in those folks who have given up hoping to find a job in the Obama economy and folks forced to settle for part time jobs, is running at over 14% a typical American would probably think that the President should be focusing on jobs, jobs, and more jobs.

Given that Obama's agenda is pushing the far left liberal agenda and not helping the average American get a job it would appear that Obama believes the reason he's President is to radicalize America.  Obama thinks he's President so he can make America into a country he likes; Obama thinks like a king, he's President so he can do what he wants not so he can help the average American.  So look forward to four more years of high unemployment and fiscal disaster because the plight of the average American isn't Obama's priority.

Is Obama Black?

Back in 2008 there were rumblings from some Blacks that Obama wasn't authentically Black because he had no slave blood.

The fact that Obama came out on Martin Luther King day to declare that gay marriage was essential to America raises the question again.  Blacks overwhelming oppose the societal acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle and same sex marriage; Blacks are why Prop 8 passed in California.

Generally speaking Blacks in America are pretty religious folk; Obama certainly doesn't seem to be that way.

But Obama supports the same thing that rich white academics support ranging from government health care to abortion and gay marriage.

Liberal whites often declare that conservative Blacks aren't authentically Black; apparently you can only be truly Black if you agree with white liberals. 

But isn't it more accurate to say that Obama isn't authentically Black because he doesn't agree with what most Black people believe?

Telling the difference between liberals and conservatives: Lesson 1

If someone wants to have the government take your money and spend it they're a liberal.

If someone thinks you're smart enough to know how to spend your own money they're a conservative.

What is truth?

In a society which is fixated on Te'o the media seems to have no time to ask why the same Obama who excoriated Bush for raising the national debt in 2006 is now excoriating Republicans for not giving him the power to spend as much money as he wants.

It would seem that to a rational person knowing what the President really thinks about the deficit and the debt is more important than knowing what a college football player did or didn't know about a long distance girl friend.

But media seems to disagree.

Relativity

Why is the media so upset about Lance Armstrong admitting to cheating at a game but so uninterested in Obama lying about the deaths of four Americans?

Armstrong is a bum but nobody died because he is a cheater.

It's not just relativity of course. The media loves to keep us interested in the things that don't really matter--cheating at sports is wrong and Armstrong should be punished but it's not about the real life of most Americans--so we ignore things that do matter--forcing people to buy insurance that covers abortion in direct violation of their First Amendment rights.

Thinking about the Unthinkable

Back in 1962 Herman Kahn wrote a book entitled "Thinking about the unthinkable".  It discussed nuclear war and did not assume that we should all just commit suicide if we weren't immediately killed by the bombs.

It is now time for many Americans to start thinking about a new unthinkable; the loss of America to Americans who don't believe in what America stands for.

Forty years ago no one would have seriously thought that someone like President Obama could ever have been elected president. That he was indicates that what was previously unthinkable has become that which we must cognate on.

How do we rebuild an America where a sufficiently large minority of Americans who no longer feel they should be responsible for themselves exists and can determine who runs the country?

America has always stood for individual liberty and individual responsibility.   Americans commitment to the individual was so strong that even when most Americans thought blacks were inferior Americans went to war to end slavery.

Yet  Obama was able to cobble together a coalition of those who do not include individual responsibility or individual liberty in their vision of America.

Instead Obama found that many Americans would sell their liberty for more government money or for promises of special treatment by the government. True the average Obama voter was not aware of what freedoms they were selling but they, unlike previous generations of Americans, were quite willing to support a candidate whose only economic solution was to take money from those who earned to and give that money to those who didn't earn it.

In some sense the situation in America today is eerily reminiscent of what was happening in pre-Civil War America.  Instead of slaves we have the new government serfs who are economically and culturally discriminated against.  Back in the Middle Ages a serf had to work 3 months out of every year for the "evil" rulers. Today a hard working American has to work 3.5 months. The Americans who pay taxes spend more on taxes than on food, clothing, and housing combined.





While tax serfs are not in as dire straights as slaves the simple fact is that it is wrong to take from those who work to give to those who don't wish to work.  We can all agree that there is no problem helping those who have physical or mental handicaps nor does anyone object to helping those who are trying but who are down on their luck for a short time and need assistance.

But when we see men with multiple children by multiple women living comfortable lifestyles based on welfare and food stamps we see a gross injustice. Similarly when a person on the government dole can live a lifestyle on par with those who work at menial labor there is a violation of the true spirit of charity at work.

It's important to keep in mind that those living off the government are paid with money confiscated at gun point.  If you don't pay your taxes the government will be very sure to use any and all mechanisms--unless you're an Obama cabinet nominee of course--to get their money.  If welfare was paid for out of voluntary donations then there would be nothing to discuss since people can obviously do with what is theirs what they want.

In the end the world will come tumbling down for those who reject the historical American commitment to individual responsibility.  Eventually the producers will either give up or rebel and then those whose only capability is to vote for thieves will find themselves unable to take care of themselves.

But out of love for our fellow American's, even the takers, we need to think about the unthinkable; how do we return America to the ideals that made America great?  The path will not be without suffering but we can pray that it will be without the violence needed to right America the last time, when we eliminated the evil of slavery.

Pointing out the cost

To win the minds of Americans conservatives must begin a relentless campaign to make sure that everyone knows what they are personally paying due to Obama's policies.

The media and Obama act as though his policies only negatively impact the "rich" but in reality pretty much anyone who isn't on welfare is adversely impacted by one or more Obama policies.

For example under Obamacare workers can only put aside $2500 pre tax to pay for medical expenses compared to the $5000 they could put aside before.  If your marginal tax rate is 10%, ie if you're single and make only $8,700 a year, that means Obamacare cost you $500.  Not to mention the fact that your health insurance premium is going to go up dramatically due to Obamacare.

The new Obamacare tax on medical devices, a huge increase, will dramatically increase the cost of medical care as well as driving many suppliers out of business which will reduce competition and further increase costs.

The Obama war on coal will dramatically increase the cost of energy, by a factor of 5 in some locations, which translates into higher energy bills and higher costs for all products made in areas that depend on coal fired power plants.  Higher costs mean fewer jobs and more unemployment.

These are just a few examples of the ways in which Obama is robbing the middle class which are hidden by the media. 

Conservatives need to begin a grass roots campaign to educate, by word of mouth, the Obama voters on just what they've voted for.

It's not all bad

While the recent "compromise" is full of bad ideas, crony pay offs, and huge tax increases it does make permanent the tax rate cuts on most Americans.  That's something.

Another plus is that Republicans raised taxes on the rich. Since that's been the only card in Obama's deck for the last 4 years he will no longer be able to blame his trillion dollar deficits on the rich not paying enough taxes. As the economy spirals down it's possible even the low information voters who preferred Romney's policies but felt Obama cared about them will get a clue and realize that the only thing Obama cares about in increasing the power of the government.