Tag Archives: freedom

Democrat Crocodile Tears and Gun Control

Posted on by
Reply

Congressman Louie Gohmert (R, TX) confronted Democrats during their gun control sit-in [Wednesday] night, shouting instead about the threat of radical Islam.

“Radical Islam killed these people!” he yelled during a speech by [Congressman (D, CA) Brad Sherman…referring to the Orlando terror attack.

A…Democrat…participating in the temper tantrum sit-in shouted back Don’t let terrorists have a gun! which only shows the disingenuousness of the House Democrats, if not their outright dishonesty.  That response is only a cynically offered straw man, and the Democrats should be encouraged to keep their dollies to themselves.

No one is arguing for letting terrorists—Islamic or otherwise—have guns.  The question, as Democrats know full well, is confronting and destroying terrorists like those that inflicted Orlando, San Bernardino, and on and on.  The first step in this is recognizing terrorism when it occurs and not pretending these are gun crimes so excuses for disarming Americans can be manufactured.  The second step in recognizing this is recognizing who the terrorists are and not pretending they’re isolated gun-toting criminals.  The third step in this is protecting the rights of honest Americans’ ability to defend themselves.

But as Gohmert put in a subsequent interview with Fox and Friends [emphasis added]

They were violating just a whole myriad of rules, and it didn’t matter at all.

Indeed, nor rule nor law matters to Democrats when they are inconvenient to Democrats out to make political points for personal political gain.

Keep it in mind this fall.

Dangers of a Progressive Senate

Posted on by
Reply

Last Monday the Senate voted down four gun control measures, the least offensive of which was Senator John Cornyn’s (R, TX) proposal to let DoJ delay a gun purchase by someone DoJ suspected but that also would require Justice to show probable cause in court within 72 hours in order to permanently block the purchase.

The Democrats’ response was as predictable as it was disingenuous.  Here’s Senator Chuck Schumer (D, NY), for instance.

It’s hard to believe, but still true, that our Republican colleagues voted to allow suspected terrorists to buy guns.  We will keep pushing until they see the light.

It’s hard to believe, but astoundingly still true, that Democrats continue to insist on depriving Americans of our rights whenever those rights become inconvenient to Democrat agenda goals.  Suspected terrorists.  Never mind conviction.  Never mind even probable cause, which isn’t anything more than a showing to a judge that a case that might be brought has a legitimate chance of success in court, in front of a jury.  Due process?  Democrats don’t need no stinking due process.

72 hours is too short?  The DoJ already has an extensive file on the suspected individual; that’s why they suspect him.  The long pole in this tent is the drive over to the local courthouse.

We must keep resisting because Democrats disparage American rights and refuse to see the light.

Elections have consequences.

Crony Capitalism

Posted on by
Reply

Hillary Clinton’s former chief of staff [Cheryl Mills] at the State Department had a Democratic donor with virtually no relevant experience appointed to a nuclear intelligence advisory board, according to a new report that also claims the aide tried to stall journalists examining his background.

And

[Rajiv K] Fernando, a Chicago securities trader, had been a fundraiser for Democratic candidates and a financial contributor to the Clinton Foundation and even traveled with Bill Clinton on a trip to Africa.  The board he was appointed to—the International Security Advisory Board—included nuclear scientists, members of Congress and former cabinet secretaries.

The ISA “advises” State’s Arms Control and International Security sub-secretariat, a section that does highly classified work because, pursuant to its “advice”-giving, it investigates nations like Russia, Pakistan, northern Korea and their arsenals and development plans.

Fernando had, supposedly, an unpaid position, but he also had that lack of qualification, and so he had no Need to Know.  And the spot puts him in well with any Clinton administration.

This is the sort of cronyism to which we can look forward, and it’s the new Ambassadorship-as-Reward.  Elections have consequences.

A Fascism of the Left

Posted on by
Reply

A writer for the Huffington Post is defending his recent op-ed that “a violent response” is the “logical” approach to stopping presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump.

And PuffHo agrees, through their inaction.

What Jesse Benn wrote in his op-ed Sorry Liberals, A Violent Response To Trump Is As Logical As Any:

 [T]here’s an inherent value in forestalling Trump’s normalization. Violent resistance accomplishes this.

Because unpopular speech, rude speech—especially speech unpopular with the Left, speech that’s rude to the Left—must be shut down.  At any cost.  And others’ right to decide for themselves what speech they will hear must be destroyed.  At any cost.

Elections have consequences.

Stonewalling

Posted on by
Reply

This blatantly insults our intelligence.  The Republication National Committee sued in Federal court to enforce a FOIA request for a years’ worth of correspondence involving then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s aides, including her former chief of staff, Cheryl Mills; Jacob Sullivan, one of her advisers; and Patrick Kennedy, a senior State official at the time, a FOIA request against which State had already been stonewalling.  In response, State had a filing:

The State Department has told a federal court that processing a Republican National Committee demand for documents relating to Hillary Clinton and her aides would take as long as 75 years—and would stretch “generations.”

Generations to check out a year.  State expanded on those 75 years:

…it would take approximately 16-and-2/3 years to complete the review of the Mills documents, 33-and-1/3 years to finish the review of the Sullivan documents, and 25 years to wrap up the review of the Kennedy documents — or 75 years in total[.]

Because, State says, it’ll only process 500 pages, per month, and there are 450,000 pages of these documents.

The presiding judge should hold those State Department bureaucrats in contempt of court and send his bailiff to seize the records and the computers on which they sit, as well as any hard copy files, and bring them to his court where a court-appointed team of evaluators can go over them.

Fat chance, unfortunately.