Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Wringing Out the Giffords Shootings: Good to the Last Drop

Disgusting. The left will stop at nothing, certainly not tragedy or even facts, to promote their liberal ideology, whether it is through gun control, removal of freedoms, basically continuing their Constitution shredding. Takeaways from this article: 

- "extremism" = right-wing white conservatives
- The 2-year old DHS report warned us that this could happen
- Loughner must be a right-wing extremist, even with no proof (finally mentioned in paragraph 19 of 20)

However, Americans aren't buying it.  In addition, it stinks to high heaven that the article was written by "Aaron Mehta is a reporter for the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit, nonpartisan investigative reporting organization in Washington D.C." - the same Center for Public Integrity that takes money from George Soros' Open Society Institute.  NOW who is exploiting this for political ideology?  'Nonpartisan' my a$$.


So, the media and the left (the same thing, really) are pivoting to gun control.  
There are two things that jump out immediately on this proposed legislation by King.  One, any legislation having to do with gun control that NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg is in favor of is bad news from a 2nd amendment perspective.  
Two, King said this: "From a conservative perspective, we have to have a stable society, we have to keep crime down.  You cannot do that if the police cannot be assured that illegal guns are not on the street.”

(Side note: when the left is on the ropes, they always argue their point using negative language and terms.  Just try to parse that last sentence.  Sounds like Hillary's 'willing suspension of disbelief' regarding General Petraus' testimony in 2007).

Now, how will legislation making it illegal to have a weapon within 1,000 feet of a federal official keep illegal guns off the street?  Why 1,000 feet?  Are there ballistic studies showing 1,000 feet is deadly while a distance of 1,001 feet is safe?  Would this or any other gun control law have prevented the Giffords shootings from happening?  If bad people want to do bad things, they will find a way, using a variety of objects.

The exact same flawed logic is in use by the TSA: find and stop terrorist's  objects, not the terrorists themselves.  I think we will find that this puffed-up AZ Sherrif Dupnik was grossly negligent in stopping Loughner.  He knew that Loughner was a danger and failed to stop him.

Sounds just like Bill Clinton not having the balls to take the shot at bin Laden when he had the chance.  Libs are spineless and weak against real enemies but energized, unified, hate-filed and ready to resort to violence when it comes to anything or anyone considered conservative or patriotic.
How's that for inflamed and hateful rhetoric?


Monday, January 10, 2011

The Giffords Shooting: Hypocrisy and The Left


The Giffords Shooting: Hypocrisy and The Left
Shick McRogue
January 10, 2011


OK, I've had enough.  The baseless claim that the AZ shooting took place because of Sarah Palin/the Tea Party/Hate Speech and Vitriol on the Right/Lack of Gun Control is sickening.  The people making those accusations have no courage to look at the FACT that the shooter was a deranged leftist on a vendetta.  Mark David Chapman murdered John Lennon, in part, because he felt that Lennon had "sold out" and he didn't like the way Lennon spoke with him when he got his album signed.  
Sounds suspiciously like Loughner's reaction to a 2007 Gifford campaign event where she didn't answer a loony question to his satisfaction, saying she was a "phony".
Fast forward to 1-10-11.  The meme from the left and their media was that it was all Sarah Palin’s fault, the hate speech and vitriol caused this.  Michelle Malkin has an excellent presentation of the FACTS as to who is really generating the hate speech, the violent imagery and that is, of course, the left – from President “they bring a knife, we bring a gun” Obama right on down through each spouting puppet on CNN, MSNBC and the other alphabet networks.  Now Democrat Robert Brady wants to make “language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening” a federal crime.
Think back when Sarah Palin came on the stage, when George Bush 43 was president: the left laughed their way through the movies of assassination, and images on posters of rape, abortion and worse.  Where was Brady’s sense of outrage then?
When Nadal Hasaan (an obviously radical Muslim) did his part at Ft. Hood to get his virgins, the media and the President were all about “We can’t jump to conclusions, all the facts must come in, we can’t dare pi$$ off the Muslims.”  But when a white male does ANYTHING violent, they immediately cram it into the mold of another Timothy McVeigh.
Which President’s Chief of Staff said “Never let a crisis go to waste” again?  If this or any tragedy can be used by today’s bloated, insane and militant Democratic Party that is completely over the edge into radical leftism to further their cause, they will do it.  They do it not in the arena of reasonably discussing ideas but in the swamp and mire of ideological machinations and character assassinations, all amplified by their very willing brothers and sisters in the media.  Saul Alinsky, George Soros and William Ayers taught them all so well.
Oh and for the loons (this time led by Democrat Rep. Carolyn McCarthy and no doubt supported by extreme 2nd-amendment hating NY Mayor Bloomberg) who want to use this as a weak excuse for gun control or ammo control or magazine control or any other type of control, consider this: making it illegal for qualified citizens to purchase a gun is the same flawed logic as making it illegal for anyone to buy a car in order to do away with drunk driving.  Should we investigate how this nutter was able to buy a gun in the first place, how he passed the FBI’s background check?  Should we tighten up those procedures?  Of course.  
Using this lone whackjob’s warped act of premeditated assassination to further ANY political agenda is heinous in the extreme and those who do must be held accountable and STOPPED.