In 2012 more people were murdered in Chicago than in New York even though Chicago has a third of the population. The linked article has a lot of information regarding the murders and how many of them are related to bad people who use firearms but the overarching theme is that nearly every city on the list has a strict gun control policy.
Another reality is that many, if not all, are heavily populated with Democrats and run by liberals.
There is no denying that liberalism and Democrat leadership are the root cause of the high murder rates because liberal policies encourage this kind of behavior.
Liberals do not believe in personal responsibility. One needs look no further than Barack Obama who has never taken any responsibility for anything bad that happens under him. He blames everything bad on George Bush or the Republicans in Congress or the TEA Party.
He is quick to take credit for anything good. He took credit for the death of Osama bin Laden even though the military took him out.
Look at the two politicians recalled in Colorado. They are blaming voter fraud, misinformation and anything they can think of rather than the reality which is they thwarted the will of the people.
These murder cities, led by Chicago, have dense populations of liberals who support liberal politicians so they can get their “free” stuff. Get me my food stamps and Obama phones and I will vote for you while my children and peers are out knocking off liquor stores and committing welfare fraud.
The criminal elements in these cities prey on the poor and the defenseless. It is nearly impossible for law abiding citizens to own or carry firearms in Chicago and many of these other murder cities. The criminals, on the other hand, get plenty of weapons including firearms.
Liberalism is hazardous to your health.
This is Obama’s Chicago. It is his buddy Rahm’s Chicago.
Obama was a ghetto organizer before he got into office and those ghettos are now well organized.
Don’t worry though. In keeping with the lack of responsibility inherent in liberalism they will blame this on everything from Bush, to guns, to poverty. Remember, the people who are doing this are not responsible for their actions.
They must be victims of something other than the liberalism and liberal policies that they have in common.
These cities have been turned into shooting galleries and murder-hoods.
Never surrender, never submit.
Jul 23, 2013 Political
Many times Kirstie Alley has espoused views that would appear conservative or libertarian. She opposed Obamacare because we don’t have the money to pay for it (ignoring that government does not belong in the health care business) and she defended Clint Eastwood’s chair routine and said that media are biased in favor of Dems. However, she is misguided in her thoughts about violence and her hypocrisy demonstrates that while she is all over the board politically, she is very much a liberal with regard to justice and violence.
Liberalism is a mental disorder and should be classified as such in the DSM-V. The people who follow that ideology are confused and have no sense of reality. The effects of the disorder are often seen through the hypocritical positions liberals take. They will vehemently oppose something when a person from another party introduces it and then support it full tilt when it is introduced by their own party.
Harry Reid was very passionate about why the nuclear option should NOT be exercised when he was in the minority. Just recently he threatened to do exactly that which he opposed only a few short years ago.
Liberals screamed and hollered about George Bush and his illegal wars but said nary a word about Obama’s illegal use of the military (they called the wars illegal and they voted for them).
The very people who claimed time and again that Saddam Hussein had WMD told us how Bush lied when none were found.
To top it off the left screams for peace and hand holding but then protests and starts violence with those who disagree with them. They say that violence is not the answer and then physically attack people.
When the George Zimmerman verdict was announced actress Kirstie Alley tweeted:
White people used to make black people drink from separate fountains…Now we just shoot their children… [Twitchy]
So according to Ms. Alley (who belongs to the Scientology Cult) white people have evolved from separate but equal to violence against the children of blacks.
I guess she would want us to think she is a peaceful person. While I can understand the anguish over the death of a 17 year old kid (and I have already addressed the issue) I think it is moronic to make a blanket statement about whites like she did and I think that it is even more so considering blacks kill their own much more often than whites do.
But this peaceful woman who thinks it was tragic to kill a child who was beating the hell out of someone has no problem with violence against people she does not care for.
Fellow moron Kanye West had an altercation with the Paparazzi at the LA Airport and Ms. Alley “loves” it. She thinks it is great that Kanye went all whack on the Paparazzi.
In fact, she applauds anyone who takes a swing at them.
I do not know what happened with West and the Paparazzi but let us assume that the Paparazzi started the issue. West reacted and an altercation took place. Kirstie Alley is OK with that and applauds ANYONE who takes a swing at them.
She was not so supportive of George Zimmerman who defended himself when a big, strong, drugged up kid broke his nose and bashed his head on the concrete.
See how this works? Alley does not like the Paparazzi (who are just doing their jobs) so it is OK to take a swing at them.
To paraphrase this nut job, actors used to let photographers take pictures of them, now they just beat them up.
Never surrender, never submit.
May 16, 2013 Political
Researchers conducted a study and concluded that men who are physically strong (have more upper body strength) tend to be conservative and men who are physically weak tend to support welfare and wealth redistribution. This should come as no surprise when one looks at liberals. They are metrosexuals who need someone to care for them because they are not able to care for themselves.
It is obvious that liberals are a bit wimpy, have you ever seen Obama throw a baseball? Lest we forget he bowled a 37…
Why do you think liberals oppose firearms? These are tools of strength and liberal men can’t have that. They would prefer to sip frou-frou coffee and collect government assistance because they know they are not able to care for themselves.
Now I know there are some liberal men who are physically strong (I know many) and some conservative men who are physically weak (I know some of them too) but the research does not say the results are true in all cases, just that they tend to be so.
Look at the liberal men you see on TV and see if they appear to have more upper body strength or less and also look to see if they look a bit girly. It should not be hard to find a number of these liberal weaklings beyond Obama and Holder. Look around in everyday life and you can figure which men are self supporting and strong and which ones are weak and need to be taken care of.
The study links the finding to evolution and claims that humans have always been political but in the past governments and courts did not make decisions about the distribution. These were done through shows of strength. The strong were able to enjoy the fruits of their labor while the weak depended on others to help them out. If you were strong it was unlikely someone was going to take your stuff or that you would produce much of your own.
Why do you think liberals always fear conservatives coming to power? Why do you think that liberals run on fear that some mean conservative will take your free gubmint stuff if elected?
They are not strong so they fear that their lifeline, the stuff gubmint has extorted from the strong, will go away.
Liberals want big government give aways because they are unable to support themselves and they fear having to try.
Liberal men equals girly men.
The study showed no difference between conservative and liberal women. My study shows conservative women are smarter and better looking…
And libs, please don’t argue. As Al Gore would say, the science is settled…
Never surrender, never submit.
Feb 5, 2012 Commentary
In the world of liberals they not only want a level playing field but equality of outcomes. I think everyone agrees that people should have the same opportunities in life and in America those opportunities are there. However, just because everyone has the same opportunity does not mean that everyone takes advantage of it. The phrase about leading a horse to water comes to mind.
People have the opportunity to go to school and study to get good grades. Some do just that while others either waste their time or drop out. It is only the fault of the one who did so when his outcome is different.
This does not stop liberals from insisting that everyone not only have the vaunted level playing field (which they do) but that the outcomes for everyone be the same. In the world of the liberal everyone should have the same amount of wealth and should have houses and cars and all kinds of other stuff simply because they exist. If they fail to achieve those things then liberals look to redistributive policies to ensure equality of outcome.
Not everyone is a Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, or Mark Zuckerberg. Therefore, not everyone deserves the same outcomes these people had and since they are liberals they are left alone. Liberals, by and large, go after the wealthy with whom they disagree or say they disagree. The liberals excoriate Wall Street types (while praising the Occupy Wall Street mob) but take millions of dollars from Wall Street. They call them bad and insist that they and other rich folks (the definition of which changes regularly) need to have their money taken so that things will be equal for all. Obama tells us that Jesus wanted that by claiming there is a mandate in the to whom much is given, much is required passage. That passage never says that wealth is involved and it certainly does not tell us that government is supposed to make it so.
In any event, in the liberal world the Superbowl would always end in a tie. The playing field is a level one and the teams are evenly matched and in the real world that is sufficient. It is up to the teams to take it from there and work hard to win. Even teams that are not evenly matched are required to go out and work hard. They are expected to try to win the game.
Liberals would have none of that. You see, to them it would be necessary that once the playing field was level and both teams had the same opportunity to win that they both have the same outcome. Equality of outcome would require a tie because both teams cannot possibly win.
This is how they feel about life and it is how they would feel if they ran the Superbowl.
But in real life the outcomes are not the same. Some people achieve greatness and others live happy, peaceful lives that they believe are fulfilling. People have the same opportunity but they do not have the same outcome and that is OK. Without the possibility of achieving something more than someone else our society would stagnate.
Be thankful that the liberal philosophy is not in force at the Superbowl.
Regular Americans expect both teams to play their best and that the team that plays better will win. Regular Americans would be appalled at the idea of a tie because the outcome must be the same.
And yet, millions of Americans have no problem demanding an equal outcome in all other aspects of life.
The sad thing is that many so called leaders feel the same way.
Funny though. Those leaders don’t want a tie or an equal outcome when they are running for office. They want to win.
Yes, class warfare and equality of outcome is for the little people, not those in government who fail to follow our Constitution and who fail to lead. For them, life is about things being slanted in their favor from insider trading to tax breaks that others cannot get. It is about access and being treated as if they are special.
If they lived by what they preached they would soon abandon the idea that equality of outcome is a good idea.
Until the day comes when we get rid of all these people and their anti American policies we will just have to be happy that they have not injected their stupidity into the Superbowl.
Tie games suck just like equality of outcomes in all other aspects of life.
Or as Alan West said, take that stuff and get the hell out…
Never surrender, never submit.
Sep 25, 2011 Political
It would be nice if the liberals who are in the world of entertainment would stick to what they are paid to do and quit making fools of themselves by saying moronic things. We have plenty of wealthy actors telling us the wealthy should pay more taxes and they would be happy to do so and all the while they have accountants working to keep their tax burden low. They could all write checks to the government but for some reason, they don’t.
The latest liberal lunacy from the world of entertainment comes to us from Michael Moore and Morgan Freeman.
Moore is always talking about peace and how we should not be at war but he is OK with violence against the “man” if things are not going the way he likes. Moore has no problem with liberals attacking and harassing people on Wall Street and he certainly is not opposed to liberals who protest people like George W Bush even when those folks carry signs calling for Bush’s assassination.
But Moore had some advice for his fellow rich people and that is they can only build walls so high and that people are going to deal with them. He says it should be non violent for now. Moore is saying to let the political process take care of things but if they are not how people want then violence is OK. If people take to the streets or do something crazy will the left blame Moore for his veiled threat?
Then we have child molester Morgan Freeman. This whack job thinks the TEA Party is all about a bunch of racists who can’t stand a black man being in the White House. It does not occur to him that perhaps the people are opposed to Obama’s policies. No, they just have to be racists because they oppose Obama. What were the people of color who opposed Bush? I say people who were opposed to his policies and you can bet that is what Freeman would say. Let people oppose a black politician and it must be racism.
It is amazing a guy whose name is Free-Man would throw in the race card.
Who is Freeman to question the motives or moral position of people in the TEA Party? Freeman is dating his 27 year old step granddaughter and has been for 10 years. It is reported that he was having a physical relationship with her when she was 17 and that makes him a child molester. Rumor has it they are getting married.
How creepy is that?
Perhaps Freeman dropped his TEA Party attack in order to take the heat off himself. I would gladly allow most any member of the TEA Party around my daughter. Freeman, not at all.
Just another day in the land of entertainment. Liberals acting moronic with veiled threats of violence and child molestation.
And these people think we should listen to them.
Never surrender, never submit.