Daley Dose Of Hypocrisy

The funny thing about people who love gun control and continually ignore the Second Amendment is that while they do not want us to be able to protect ourselves they are always on board with having their own protection. We have seen several liberals who think that all guns are bad and that people should not be allowed to carry them only to have it revealed that they have permits and carry handguns. Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer are two that come to mind. Then there are those like Rosie O’Donnell who don’t want to allow you protection but are wealthy enough to hire armed body guards.

The sleaziest among us are politicians who tell us how safe society is and that we do not need weapons of our own while they enjoy armed protection that we provide. The leaders in Congress have security details and the security for the president is out of this world. One might think that it is necessary and maybe so but why does a president need security in Chicago or in DC? These places have some of the most stringent gun control in the country and yet these people travel with armed men.

We all know why. Gun control does not work and when law abiding citizens are disarmed the only people who have guns are criminals (which makes those of us who can’t afford armed guards, prey).

The Governor of Maryland is one of these morons who says that all is fine and that we need tough gun control (read that as infringing on Second Amendment rights) because it makes society safer. He has a state police detail of about six armed officers who keep him safe.

We pay his salary and we pay for his protection. What makes him better than the rest of us?

The biggest hypocrite is Richard Daley, the recently retired Mayor of Chicago. This moron has been against gun ownership all his life and he has worked very hard to violate the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The unconstitutional gun laws in Chicago were struck down by the Supreme Court so Daley went to work and set up roadblocks that make it nearly impossible for a resident to get a gun much less carry it. There is no way anyone could call what Chicago does, reasonable.

Daley is retired** and get this. While he does not want the people of Chicago to keep and bear arms he wants an armed protection detail to look out for him. Daley wants a team of armed men paid for by the taxpayers to keep him safe while he has done everything in his power to keep the people of Chicago from being able to protect themselves. He has made them less safe while demanding they pay for his safety.

Now that is first class hypocrisy and it smacks of liberal elitism where this schmuck thinks he is better than the average guy (read this as those who pay his salary and for his protection) and that he deserves better protection than the people who actually pay the salaries of the police officers of the city.

Do you think any average citizen in Chicago could request and get an armed detail to provide a safe environment?

Not likely.

I think the people of Chicago should use whatever legal means are available to keep Daley from getting protection. He should be in the exact same position as everyone else.

He should be just as vulnerable as those whose Constitutional right he has violated.

Perhaps if these politicians were to get a dose of the real world they would wise up.

Perhaps not, especially liberals, but at least without armed protection he has the same chance of being murdered as the next guy.

That, after all, is a level playing field and we all know how much liberals think that all things should be fair and equal for everyone.

Until, of course, to comes to their lives. Then they like things tilted in their favor.

People of Chicago, just say NO.

** Daley leaves office on 17 May

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]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.[/tip]

The Saga Of Rahm

Rahm Emanuel is trying to become the Mayor of Chicago so that he can take the place of the retiring thug who is cashing out. One thug will replace another in the nation’s most corrupt city. There is one sticking point and that is, is Emanuel eligible to run?

There are two interpretations of the statute and though I agree with the interpretation that he had to reside in the city for the year prior, there are others who disagree. The court made a compelling argument for the “you must physically live here” interpretation because it is defined separately from the residency requirements of voters.

The statute allows exceptions but it would appear as if Emanuel does not fit into one of the categories, at least as far as the court is concerned.

I am indifferent because I do not live in Chicago. I think that if the law’s definition of residency means you can be out of the state and still be eligible then Emanuel certainly should be allowed to run. He pays taxes there and he votes there so if this is the intent of the law then he has every right to run.

If the meaning of the law is that he had to actually be living there in order to run then he should not be allowed to. It appears as if this was the intent since the rules for voting and the rules for running are spelled out separately and it appears as if the words “reside in” mean that he had to be living there. This is different than having residency.

Many military members maintain their state residency when away serving but they are not residing in the state. States want you to remain a resident so they can tax you while you are away. Be that as it may, there is a difference between residency status and residing in. If you travel overseas you are still a citizen (resident) of the US but you are not residing in the US.

And I think that is the interpretation that the court applied because those terms appear to be spelled out that way.

However, this will ultimately be settled by the courts and if they decide that Emanuel meets the residing in definition then he should be allowed to run.

Of course, this is Chicago and it is likely that Emanuel will be allowed to run even if there is a hundred pages of notes attached to the law saying that he had to actually live there.

As I said, I have no dog in this race. Even though I don’t care for the guy I think that if he meets the criteria then he should be allowed to run.

I also think if they decide he does not then he should not be allowed to run.

And that means he does not get special favors because he is Obama’s buddy or because the people like him.

Then again, who am I kidding. This is Chicago…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]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.[/tip]

You Write The Caption

Obama kiss

I saw this picture on Drudge and had to put it up for a caption contest. I do not know who owns it so until someone official asks me to take it down, we can use it for the contest.

First the rules. There are no prizes in this contest. Just have fun.

Write the caption that you think should go with this picture. I will put up a few to start us off. You can put yours in the comments.

“Now we know why Michelle and the family were not with him on his birthday.”

“I want you so badly right now Barry…”

“Now this is the Chicago way.”

“Dude, did you just smoke a Newport? That so ruins the mood for me.”

“Oh Barry, your wrist is so limp it turns me on.”

“The gay judge in California said it is OK so how would you like to see my prop 8?”

UPDATE: The best for last, wait for it…

“Once you go Barack you’ll never go back…”

OK, the rest is up to you so have fun…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]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.[/tip]

Mayor Daley Out Of Touch With The People

Mayor Daley is not happy with the decision by the Supreme Court that says the Second Amendment applies to the states. He is an anti gun politician and he wants guns banned. He has no concern for the Constitution or for freedom. He only cares about power and how to get rich through Chicago corruption.

The people of Chicago see things a bit differently. They are happy with the decision. Some indicate that they have weapons to protect themselves even though the weapons are illegal (by virtue of the gun ban). People are willing to break the law to ensure their safety.

Daley cares not one bit and he vowed to enact a new law that will make it extremely difficult to own a gun. These tactics usually involve undue barriers that prevent people, particularly the poor, from getting weapons. The very same tactics that liberals used after slavery to terrorize the freemen.

Why should Daley care? He has armed guards to protect him.

At least the people get it. As one person puts it:

Another neighbor, 50-year-old Charlene Figgins, thinks Chicago Mayor Richard Daley is living in a different Chicago than she is and that he doesn’t understand the citizens’ need for protection.

She says it can take 30 minutes for police to respond to calls for help in her neighborhood. She says the mayor doesn’t have that problem. Chicago Tribune

Or as the bumper sticker says, when seconds count the police are minutes away.

9-1-1, government sponsored dial a prayer…

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]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.[/tip]

The World Of Liberal Lunacy And Other News

Voting linked to taxes…

Walter Williams has made a bold statement but it is something I have said for some time. He does a great job of explaining it:

I’m not proposing that we take voting rights away from those who do not pay taxes. What I’m suggesting is that every American gets one vote in every federal election, plus another vote for each $20,000 he pays in federal taxes. With such a system, there’d be a modicum of linkage between one’s financial stake in our country and his decision-making right. Of course, unequal voting power could be reduced by legislating lower taxes.

This is not a far-out idea. The founders worried about it. James Madison’s concern about class warfare between the rich and the poor led him to favor the House of Representatives being elected by the people at large and the Senate elected by property owners. He said, “It is nevertheless certain, that there are various ways in which the rich may oppress the poor; in which property may oppress liberty; and that the world is filled with examples. It is necessary that the poor should have a defense against the danger. On the other hand, the danger to the holders of property cannot be disguised, if they be undefended against a majority without property.” Jewish World Review

Makes perfectly good sense. If you have more skin in the game (or as Biden would put it, if you are more patriotic) then you should have more of a say in how things are run. It would force politicians to new ways of thinking. One way might be to lower taxes so we all only have one vote…

Obama and state run media incite black man to commit violence

A white supremacist was beaten to death by a black guy. How ironic is that? According to the article, the white guy kept to himself in his neighborhood and had protested different things but never amounted to much in the supremacist movement and the black guy was a criminal who served time in jail for assaulting a police officer.

The police found the supremacist, Richard Barrett, after he was stabbed and beaten to death and then set on fire. Police arrested a neighbor, Vincent McGee, (who had done work for Barrett) and charged him with the murder. Here is the interesting part:

[Sheriff Ron] Pennington did not disclose a motive but said neighbour (sic) Vincent McGee, 22, was charged with murder on Thursday and deputies charged three other people in the case on Friday. Daily Mail UK

I can tell you the motive, McGee is a racist and he was incited by the rhetoric of Barack Obama (if they bring a knife, you bring a gun) and the state run media. For some time now Obama and his state run media have told us that anyone who opposes them is a racist and that they are dangerous and could commit violent acts. After hearing all this rhetoric from Obama and the state run media, McGee decided that he needed to get the racist before the racist got him. This is a direct result of Obama and the state run media using inflammatory language and causing the fringe elements to go berserk.

And since it was a black guy killing a white guy it had to be racism. We all know that if this white supremacist had killed the black guy Clinton, Obama and the state run media would be talking about Beck, Limbaugh, and Palin inciting him to violence and how this is an act of racism.

Well, the truth must be the same when the roles are reversed.

What to do about violence?

Two lawmakers in Illinois want the governor to activate the National Guard and have them perform police duties because of all the crime and gun violence in Chicago. Officials are even more concerned that since warm weather is upon us the number of murders will increase. Seems that Chicago has more death and violence than an actual war zone and the police are unable to do anything about the violence.

It must be an election year because these bozos are trying to show their concern for the citizens. They are at wit’s end with the problem they created and now they want to activate a military force to handle it. Not a wise idea. Let the police handle it, let the politicians handle it but keep the military out. I would love to see the military go in to neighborhoods and wipe out gangs but that is not their job and they will be set up for failure. The minute they kill some thug in a shootout the same politicians who put them there will scream about what they did and then yell torture and Abu Ghraib and then blame it all on George Bush.

Besides, how credible is this information concerning violence? Chicago has one of the most stringent gun laws in the country so no one is using guns to kill people. They can’t be because they cannot buy guns, they cannot carry guns, and they have a hard time keeping guns in the home. The only people who can carry guns are politicians who tell the rest of us that they are not necessary and others who have greased the correct political palms. No one is buying guns elsewhere and bringing them in because there are laws against that as well. Laws always work because criminals have a lot of respect for the law and law enforcement. They would never consider buying guns illegally or carrying them illegally or importing them illegally because there are laws against that and liberals tell us that gun laws work.

Nope, Chicago has no gun crime and no murders by gun because guns are practically banned there. This must be some election year stunt to get the National Guard on all the streets to make people feel safer and have them believe that their government is there for them.

I wonder what would happen in Chicago if the state of Illinois allowed law abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms. They should probably give that a try since the way they are doing it seems not to be working. Seems to me it would be a lot cheaper than calling out the Guard.

Crime would go down fast.

One other thing they might consider and that is letting gangs have shootouts with each other. Put them all in an abandoned part of town and let them have gun battles with each other. If they are hell bent on killing each other then why stop it? We do not need them and putting them in jail does not seem to curb gang violence so just let them kill each other off.

Keep the people of Mississippi in your prayers

A number of people were killed and many more impacted by a tornado that touched down in the Yazoo County area. Keep these folks in your prayers.

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]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.[/tip]