Recent Articles

Obama’s Failure In Iraq

Obama ran as a guy who opposed action in Iraq and he vowed to remove our troops from that country as soon as he could. Once he decided to leave he announced it to the world and he did not entertain ideas about leaving security forces to ensure the peace.

The man who has never run anything and who has no military experience was warned that announcing a departure date was stupid because the enemy would know when the chance of running into American forces would end. It had the end date.

The bad guys also knew that if none of our forces remained then they would be able to regroup and attack.

That has now all happened. Iraqis in many parts of the country are being attacked and murdered by the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Shams (Isis). That group is taking cities at a fast pace and leaving murder and mayhem in its path. The decapitated heads of policemen and soldiers line the streets of Mosul as the carnage continues.

Sharia Law is being imposed and anyone who refuses or breaks the law will be murdered.

This is what Barack Obama has given the people of Iraq and it is because of his ego. He thinks the world loves us because he is in charge. He thinks all he has to do is make nice and others will do the same. The enemy knows that America does not have the stomach to recommit troops to Iraq after many years of war and it is taking advantage of our (Obama’s) weakness.

Members of Congress who fought in Iraq are wondering aloud what the point of their (indicating our armed forces) effort was if Obama was just going to allow it to disintegrate into chaos.

Joe Biden once said that Iraq was one of Obama’s great achievements. Well how great is the achievement now that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are being displaced and untold numbers are being murdered?

I don’t know what can be done for Iraq short of sending military assistance (drones and air power) but it is a good bet that we will not be sending ground troops. I am not advocating that but I know even if it were one hundred percent right to do so Obama would not. That would be admitting that his policies and what he did all resulted in failure and Obama does not admit his mistakes.

I am curious how many Democrats will be screaming that we need to do something to help those folks after spending years screaming about our involvement there and saying we needed to get out. How long before they blame George W Bush for the chaos? [UPDATE: That did not take long]

During the last presidential election debates Mitt Romney said it would be a mistake to remove all our troops from Iraq.

How many more times do his past utterances, ones ridiculed by liberals, have to come to fruition before people who worship Obama realize Romney was right and Obama was wrong?

How long before people begin to realize he does not know what he is doing?

How long before they realize the Emperor has no clothes?

How many people in Iraq will be murdered because Obama is a weak inept leader with no real experience?

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Make No Mistake, Obama Wants To Confiscate Firearms

Barack Obama will tell you he supports the Second Amendment and he will tell you he does not want to confiscate your firearms but he is a liar. Barack Obama is lying about firearms related incidents by telling people that these incidents are off the chart. Well they are but they are off the bottom of the chart. The number of firearms related incidents is down and are now at their lowest in over 20 years.

Obama says he wants common sense laws for gun control. He wants what he thinks is common sense to be imposed on a constitutionally protected right. Interestingly, he is against any restrictions on abortions. It is all about control.

Even Washington DC has seen a decrease in murders by firearm.

Interestingly, these numbers are down despite the huge increase in firearms ownership and the large stockpiling of ammunition. These numbers are down even though many states are shall issue states and some do not require a permit to carry a firearm either open or concealed. These numbers are all going down.

Except in places like Chicago where gun control is alive and well. In that city people are murdered with firearms all the time. They are murdered with firearms that they are not allowed to have.

How could that possibly happen and how could places where the Second Amendment is not infringed upon have lower firearms related incidents? How could DC have a drop in firearms related murders?

More guns equal less crime. Criminals do not want to try bad things in places where someone else might have a firearm and might actually use it. In DC the Heller decision seems to have given criminals pause.

The availability of firearms in free (or freer) places keeps crime down.

It is not gun control and it is not any kind of scheme where people are restricted as these schemes always lead to more firearms related crime. Once again, look at Chicago (and for that matter any place run by liberals where gun control exists) and you will see what happens.

Criminals simply do not obey the law.

Barack Obama is upset that Congress will not work on gun control measures so he has decided that he will do all that he can through executive action. Obama will circumvent Congress and the Constitution in order to infringe on a constitutionally protected right.

And his actions will not involve registration and background schemes. No, Obama will look for a way to ban and confiscate firearms. He has already given support for that kind of law.

Obama praised Australia’s gun laws that took effect after a mass shooting. Australia banned most types of firearms and confiscated them. There are still plenty of firearms related incidents in Australia (how can that happen when gun have been banned and confiscated) but that is beside the point. Obama praised Australia’s gun law and part of that process was the confiscation of privately owned firearms.

Obama would love nothing more than to confiscate all firearms but not because he thinks that will make us safer (people are not safer in so called no gun countries). He wants to confiscate guns because they are the means to resist tyranny.

Obama knows that he could not push too far (though the compliant media and testicle lacking Congress let him get away with too much) so long as people have the means to fight back. The standoff at the Bundy Ranch showed what well armed people can do to tyrants from the government.

The article in National Review is spot on when it indicates that Obama cannot praise the Australian Law without praising the mass confiscation program.

Obama envies the Australian government because it confiscated firearms. He wishes he could do the same and might just try some variant via executive action.

We need Congress to reel Obama in and stop him from his lawless acts. He is far more dangerous to this country than citizens with firearms.

Citizens who, by the way, will never allow their firearms to be confiscated…

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Obama Importing Disease

It looks like Barack Obama is waging biological warfare on the American public by placing us at risk for infection. His policies have provided incentive for tens of thousands of illegals (mostly children) to cross into this country under the belief they will be provided amnesty and be cared for.

With those illegals comes a great deal of public health issues. Border patrol agents have already been infested with scabies and now there is concern that other diseases might reemerge here in the US along with their unwanted hosts.

“We are starting to see chicken pox, MRSA staph infections; we are starting to see different viruses,” said Rio Grande Valley Border Patrol agent Chris Cabrera said, ABC 15 reported. Washington Times

This is a manufactured crisis. The false impression Obama has given these young people and the families who send them is that they will receive amnesty. Additionally, Obama is having them sent to states where they are not wanted and where his government has battled to prevent enforcement of immigration law. He is ramping up this crisis so that he can demand action on immigration reform to help these people out.

He is preying on the sympathies of Americans in order to push a political agenda. Imagine how he will crow if some kind of reform passes. He will crow loudly and the illegal alien supporters, particularly the illegals in the Hispanic community, will rally to help him and his Democrats.

While he is doing this though, he is placing thousands of children at risk. He is also placing a lot of Americans at risk of disease.

He is allowing diseased people to come here and he is housing them like livestock in close quarters where disease will run rampant.

His is waging biological warfare on us.

Enforce our immigration laws. Put all the kids on buses or planes and ship them back to their home countries.

Then arrest Obama and Holder for trafficking illegal aliens and waging biological warfare.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

So Trickle Down Does Work

The idea that when the people at the top make money the money trickles down has been attacked by the left for a long time. It is true that this happens as no poor man ever created jobs or had his money trickle to others. But for those who strike out and do well their prosperity trickles to the workers and those who get jobs. They get a paycheck and they can contribute to society.

I understand why liberals think it does not work. You see, they make lots of money but they keep it. They find ways to avoid taxes and they are not very generous with their own money (liberals are VERY generous with other people’s money).

Barack Obama has had his wealth increase quite substantially since he occupied the White House but that has not trickled down. While he was getting richer people were losing their jobs, having their houses and other property repossessed and have been in line for scraps at the welfare office.

But Obama is doing well.

Harry Reid has finally admitted that trickle down works. Harry and his wife sold their their house in Searchlight Nevada to a mining company for 1.7 MILLION dollars. There is no word on what the appraised value of the home is but I am willing to bet it is not nearly 2 MILLION dollars. This might be like other Reid deals where someone pays him through what looks like a legitimate transaction but is actually part of a shady process.

Reid’s financial disclose listed his most valuable asset as property he owns in Bullhead City Arizona at between 1 and 5 million. Seems to me if this is his most valuable his house is not valued between those two number though he sold it for that much.

In any event, Reid claimed that the sale of his house will create 60 jobs. I assume this means that 60 people will be hired to work at the expanded mining property but since this is Reid the 60 new hires might be the HAZMAT team required to clean the stench from the place. It might be a 60 person team searching to ensure Reid did not leave any evidence of his past payoffs.

One thing is undeniable. Reid made a lot of money and now the result of that is a trickle down to 60 people who will get jobs.

It looks like money (in this case in the form of jobs) does trickle down from a wealthy guy to the people on the lower rungs of the ladder.

Perhaps the Koch brothers, whose money trickles down to tens of thousands of people, could point this out to Harry so he can stop obsessing over them and get back to working for the money the taxpayers trickle up to him…

Harry Reid has gotten very rich as a “public servant.”

It seems to me the only people he serves (beside himself) and those who are related to him.

Related:
Reid pays off his mortgage

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

When Seconds Count Even The Police Are In Trouble

In Washington DC there is an uproar among the police because Chief Cathy Lanier has issued an all hands call requiring officers to work for five weekends in a row. Officers balk that this will leave the public less protected on the higher crime days like Tuesday and Wednesday. The person who made the assertion then gives an example (that interestingly takes place on a Thursday) where an officer needed help and no one was free to assist.

For example, on Thursday night in the Seventh District, a school resource officer radioed for help in trying to control two kids, but no one was free to answer.

He said, “I heard a radio transmission. A lieutenant needed some assistance on Suitland Parkway for a possible DUI suspect. It was a good five to ten minutes before anybody backed him up. Because of the manpower issues, we have minimum staffing on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursdays. [emphasis mine] My FOX DC

There is a saying that when seconds count the police are only minutes away. Looks like this is true even for officers.

Why is this important? The people who oppose the Second Amendment and who do not want law abiding citizens to carry firearms always tell us that this is what the police are for and that if we have a problem we should call 911. Why do you people need firearms when the police are here to protect you? If we have all these guns out there more folks will get hurt. We don’t want to confiscate them we just don’t want YOU to have them.

And on these assertions go. The leaders of most police forces are politically appointed and they do the bidding of their puppet master political bosses. This has been very evident in Maryland where Governor Martin O’Malley pulled the strings of his appointees and prevented others from discussing the Maryland gun control laws because safety was not really the concern. It was all politically motivated because O’Malley, a man who has armed officers around him at all times, does not like guns in the hands of law abiding citizens and he wants to tout his liberal gun control success as he aspires to higher office. He does not believe in freedom, he believes in tyranny and control of the masses and he believes in screwing the public to advance his career.

In any event, the DC situation and the example given clearly demonstrate why law abiding citizens must not have their Second Amendment right infringed upon. It took a long time for a fellow officer to get help and officers rush to help their own. They are not so motivated when it is some schmo they do not know or work with.

We see this time and again. A cop gets murdered and it is all hands on deck to find the murderer. When an average citizen gets murdered they work on it and sometimes close the case but the intensity is nowhere near that when it is one of their own.

Most rank and file police officers prefer armed citizens. There are the few anti social morons who shoot dogs and innocent people and get away with it under the cover of I feared for my life but most of them try to do a good job and get home at the end of their shift. They realize that armed citizens provide extra protection in society. They know that there is less violent crime in areas where people carry firearms because criminals do not like to face opposition and they don’t want to die.

In places where people’s rights are infringed upon (like DC and Maryland) the crime rates are higher and crimes committed with firearms increase. Bad guys don’t obey the law so they get guns anyway. Most officers are comfortable with law abiding citizens who own and carry firearms because they know that is a force multiplier. They know there are people who can protect others when the police are not around and they know the prospect of armed people deters criminals. How many of these mass shootings could have been stopped before huge loss of life had people been allowed to carry firearms where the shootings occurred?

My friend Kit Lange made a brilliant observation that demonstrates this point. In Canada some nut is going around with a rifle and has already shot and killed three Mounties. There are pictures of the guy people have snapped with their cell phones. She points out that there are pictures because people see him and if they were allowed to carry firearms in Canada they could take him down but since they can’t do so all they can do is snap photos. I am sure the Mounties would not care who took him down as long as he was no longer a threat.

It is possible that many of the leaders in law enforcement feel the same way but can’t express it because their liberal, anti gun political bosses forbid them from doing so. That to me is weakness and a failure to uphold an oath but this is how people in power often act. Though my gut tells me they agree wight heir bosses or they would not have been appointed to their positions…

In any event, the cops in DC don’t like to wait for assistance. Well here is a newsflash for them and their bosses. We the people, those who PAY your salaries don’t like to wait either. We don’t like to be at the mercy of criminals because we have been denied the right to defend ourselves.

Keep in mind, the police are a reactive force not a proactive one. The cops come AFTER a crime and take a report and try to find who did it. Cops don’t show up 2 minutes before a crime and wait to prevent it.

Why should we be denied the ability to prevent crimes (or at least minimize them) when the police can’t do so?

Why should we be denied the right to keep and bear arms that is enshrined in our Constitution?

Because liberals want to control us. As many have stated, it is not about guns it is about control.

As far as DC and its police chief go, she can do what she wants. The officers will have to deal with it and perhaps they will understand what the people who pay them are subject to each and every day.

An armed society is a polite society but liberals do not want polite, they want control. Keep in mind that an armed society is free and the disarmed are enslaved.

There would not have been slavery had the slaves owned firearms…

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.