Release of Criminal Aliens.

I'm Confussed!

I used to think I was just a regular guy, but I was born white, which now, whether I like it or not, makes me a racist. I am a fiscal and moral conservative, which by today's standards, makes me a fascist.

I am heterosexual, which according to gay folks, now makes me a homophobe. I am non-union, which makes me a traitor to the working class and an ally of big business. I am a Christian, which now labels me as an infidel.

I believe in the 2nd Amendment, which now makes me a member of the vast gun lobby. I am older than 60 and retired, which makes me a useless old man. I think and I reason, therefore I doubt much that the main stream media tells me, which must make me a reactionary.

I am proud of my heritage and our inclusive American culture, which makes me a xenophobe. I value my safety and that of my family and I appreciate the police and the legal system, which makes me a right-wing extremist. I believe in hard work, fair play, and fair compensation according to each individual's merits, which today makes me an anti-socialist.

I believe in the defense and protection of the homeland for and by all citizens, which now makes me a militant. Please help me come to terms with the new me… because I'm just not sure who I am anymore!

I would like to thank all my friends for sticking with me through these abrupt, new found changes in my life and my thinking! I just can’t imagine or understand what's happened to me so quickly! Funny …it’s all just taken place over the last 7 or 8 years!

As if all this nonsense wasn't enough to deal with… I'm now afraid to go into either restroom!

Proof of Detroit's Comeback

PROOF OF DETROIT 'S COMEBACK...

                                  and why they need 15 bucks an hour

  

DETAIL OF AN EXTREMELY INTRICATE "COUNTERFEIT"
BILL PASSED IN DETROIT

 

WOW. IT'S A WONDER THIS BILL WAS EVER CAUGHT. 

TALK ABOUT PERFECT!

WE KNOW...They left the 'B' out.....(We B Open).......

SORY TO HEER THAT... CAN WE GETS A HOT DAWG THEN?

STARTING WITH THIS ONE!

LOOKS LIKE SHE COULD USE A LITTLE SUPPORT

(HOPE SHE IS BUYING SOME DUCT TAPE)

LOVE IT... LOVE IT... LOVE IT! (My favorite)

THAT'S ALLS I GOTS .....

          Want more of the same??

      Vote Hillary in 2016

How Ya Doin?

Here are a few things to ponder. Anyone else feel the same?

Divorce Agreement

This isn't about Divorce between a man and a woman. Read it, it makes you think. The person who wrote this is a college (law) student. Perhaps there is hope for us after all. This is so incredible well put and I can hardly believe it's by a young person, a student!! Whatever he runs for I'll vote for him.

Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al: We have stuck together since the late 1950's for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.

Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.

Here is our separation agreement:

--Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

 --We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them.

--You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.

--Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military.

--We'll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and the coal mines, and you can go with wind, solar and biodiesel.

--You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, Rosie O'Donnell. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move them.

--We'll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street.

--You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, homeless, homeboys, hippies, druggies and illegal aliens.

--We'll keep the smart diverse and conservative Governors like Susanna Martinez & Niki Haley, greedy CEO's and rednecks and you can keep Jerry Brown, Bernie Sanders & e-mail Hillary. --We'll keep Bill O'Reilly, and Bibles and give you CNBC and Hollywood .

--You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us.

--You can have the peaceniks, war protesters, Black Lives Matter people and all the sanctuary cities.

-- When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help protect & provide them security.


--We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values. 

 --You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N. but we will no longer be paying the bill.

--We'll keep the SUV's, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Volt and Leaf you can find.

--You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors who’re willing to forego payment.

--We'll keep "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" and "The National Anthem.", and a whole slew of Country songs.

--I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute "Imagine", "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing", "Kum Ba Ya" , "We Are the World", & all of the anti establishment Rap songs.

--We'll practice trickle-down economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.

 --Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag. Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete.

In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you might think about which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.

Sincerely, John J. Wall Law Student and an American P.S. Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin & Charlie Sheen, Barbara Streisand, Al Sharpton, Alan Grayson, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and ( Hanoi ) Jane Fonda with you.

P.S.S. And you won't have to press 1 for English when you call our country.

Forward This Every Time You Get It ! Let's Keep This Going, Maybe Some Of It Will Start Sinking In!!

Democrats: Pass At Least Two Constitutional Changes Wow!

The Leftists do this just before Independence Day! 

Is there any doubt that the Democrats do not have the best interests of this Country in mind? That they want to help Obama fundamentally change this country?

The Democratic Party's proposed platform is calling for a constitutional amendment to overturn at least two Supreme Court decisions related to campaign finance, and another to ensure "equal rights."

Referring to the Constitution as simply a "blueprint for progress," the platform states, Democrats seek to overturn Buckley v. Valeo, the 1976 decision striking down campaign spending limits, and Citizens United, the 2010 decision that extended press freedom to corporations, labor unions and other associations.

"We need to end secret, unaccountable money in politics by requiring, through executive order or legislation, significantly more disclosure and transparency—by outside groups, federal contractors, and public corporations to their shareholders," the proposed platform states.

The proposal includes a call for more federal campaign subsidies, and a restructuring of the federal agency responsible for campaign finance enforcement. "We need to amplify the voices of the American people through a small donor matching public financing system. We need to overhaul and strengthen the Federal Election Commission so that there is real enforcement of campaign finance laws."

The platform is an extension of principles delineated by Hillary Clinton earlier in her campaign, though the call for more matching campaign subsidies is a recent development in the agenda for national Democrats. A model of the program presently exists in just five states: Arizona, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine and Minnesota. In the last, it has been alternatively deactivated and reactivated over the last decade due to funding disruptions.

Comment: The simple fact is that the Dems want the taxpayers to fund everything. The way things are going with job loss and the lowest job participation rate in the last 50 years, it will soon be 35% of Americans paying taxes and funding everything ,....not just welfare and defense but now the Dems want taxpayer funded campaigns. And if we let the Dems develop a Federal Agency to regulate campaigns like Obama's IRS regulated conservative groups, then we are in trouble.

Democratic policymakers at the federal level have toyed with the idea for years, as well as with the concept of restructuring the FEC. They have generally sought to eliminate a member from the agency, which federal statute mandates be divided between three Republicans and three Democrats, and make it easier for a majority to take enforcement actions.

The platform also calls for passage of an "Equal Rights Amendment," which is followed with a call for a national law requiring employers to provide "paid family and medical leave." It explains that the law "would provide at least 12 weeks of paid leave to care for a new child or address a personal or family member's serious health issue."

Comment: If this gets passed, it will be as job and small business destroying as the $15 minimum wage hike and Obamacare have been, mark my words.

[Source: Rudy Takala, Washington Examiner http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/07/02/democrats-pass-least-two-constitutional-changes]

Mel Reynolds- Jesse Jackson's Newest Staffer

Jesse Jackson's Newest Staffer Jesse Jackson's Newest Staffer,...and, You can't make up stuff better than this! Confirmed by snopes is none other than former Chicago Congressman Mel Reynolds to Rainbow/PUSH Coalition's payroll. Reynolds was among the 176 criminals excused in President Clinton's last-minute clemency forgiveness spree.

Reynolds received a commutation of his six-and-a-half-year federal sentence for 15 convictions of wire fraud, bank fraud, and lies to the Federal Election Commission. He is more notorious, however, for concurrently serving five years for sleeping with an underage campaign volunteer.

This is a first in American politics: An ex-congressman who had sex with a subordinate......Then won clemency from a president who had sex with a subordinate.......Then was hired by a clergyman who had sex with a subordinate!

Oh, and Mel Reynolds' new job? Ready for this? YOUTH COUNSELOR. If anyone complains, Jesse Jackson will just call them a racist and incite minorities against the complainer.

Hillary Hates Guns and Those Who Own Them

This is an article from the Washington Post, called the Washington Compost by most critical readers. For those of you who hate Donald Trump and say that you won't vote for him, vote for Hillary at your own peril. And not voting at all, is a vote for Hillary.

Hillary Clinton declined to say Sunday whether she believes in a constitutional right to bear arms, possibly opening the door to a fresh round of attacks from Donald Trump, who has already accused the likely Democratic presidential nominee of wanting to "abolish" the Second Amendment.

In an interview on ABC's "This Week," Clinton deflected twice when she was asked whether she agrees with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Second Amendment. The court ruled in 2008 that the Constitution affords private citizens the right to keep firearms in their homes and that such possession need not be connected to military service.

The wording of the Second Amendment has long made the extent of gun-ownership rights a point of contention. "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Questioned by George Stephanopoulos about her view of the amendment, Clinton talked about a "nuanced reading" and emphasized her belief in the rights of local, state and federal governments to regulate gun ownership. Stephanopoulos, formerly a top aide to President Bill Clinton, wasn't satisfied by the response.

"That's not what I asked," he replied.

Clinton then discussed the right to own a gun as a hypothetical. "If it is a constitutional right," she began her next answer, "then it — like every other constitutional right — is subject to reasonable regulations."

Here's the full exchange:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let's talk about the Second Amendment. As you know, Donald Trump has also been out on the stump talking about the Second Amendment and saying you want to abolish the Second Amendment. I know you reject that. But I want to ask you a specific question: Do you believe that an individual's right to bear arms is a constitutional right — that it's not linked to service in a militia?

CLINTON: I think that for most of our history there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice [Antonin] Scalia. And there was no argument until then that localities and states and the federal government had a right — as we do with every amendment — to impose reasonable regulations. So I believe we can have common-sense gun-safety measures consistent with the Second Amendment. And, in fact, what I have proposed is supported by 90 percent of the American people and more than 75 percent of responsible gun owners. So that is exactly what I think is constitutionally permissible and, once again, you have Donald Trump just making outright fabrications, accusing me of something that is absolutely untrue. But I'm going to continue to speak out for comprehensive background checks; closing the gun-show loophole; closing the online loophole; closing the so-called Charleston loophole; reversing the bill that Senator [Bernie] Sanders voted for and I voted against, giving immunity from liability to gun makers and sellers. I think all of that can and should be done, and it is, in my view, consistent with the Constitution.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And, and the Heller decision also says there can be some restrictions. But that's not what I asked. I said, "Do you believe their conclusion that the right to bear arms is a constitutional right?"

CLINTON: If it is a constitutional right, then it — like every other constitutional right — is subject to reasonable regulations. And what people have done with that decision is to take it as far as they possibly can and reject what has been our history from the very beginning of the republic, where some of the earliest laws that were passed were about firearms. So I think it's important to recognize that reasonable people can say, as I do, responsible gun owners have a right. I have no objection to that. But the rest of the American public has a right to require certain kinds of regulatory, responsible actions to protect everyone else.

[Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/05/hillary-clinton-wavers-on-second-amendment-right-to-bear-arms/]

AN IOWA FARM STORY

During the Iowa political caucuses Hilary Clinton and her driver were cruising along a country road one evening when an old cow loomed in front of the car. The driver tried to avoid it but couldn't. The aged cow was struck and killed.

Hillary told her driver to go up to the farmhouse and explain to the owners what had happened.  She said that he should resist any request from the farmer to pay for the animal, but she said, "You killed it, so if they want money, it will come out of your pocket!"

She stayed in the car making phone calls.

About an hour later the driver staggered back to the car with his clothes in disarray.  He was holding a half-empty bottle of expensive wine in one hand, a huge Cuban cigar in the other, and was smiling happily, smeared with lipstick.

"What happened to you?" asked Hillary.​

"Well," the driver replied, "the farmer gave me the cigar, his wife gave me the wine, and their beautiful twin daughters made passionate love to me.  ​I had just stepped inside the door and said, ‘I'm Hillary Clinton's driver and I've just killed the old cow.'

“The rest happened​ so fast I couldn't stop it."

Brilliance

BRILLIANCE IN 3 PARTS:

Part I:

A. Back off and let those men who want to marry men, marry men.
B. Allow those women who want to marry women, marry women.
C. Allow those folks who want to abort their babies, abort their babies.
D. In three generations, there will be no Democrats.
I love it when a plan comes together; don’t you?!


Part II: 10 Poorest Cities in America (How did it happen?)
City, State, % of People Below the Poverty Level

1. Detroit, MI 32.5%
2. Buffalo, NY 29.9%
3. Cincinnati, OH 27.8%
4. Cleveland, OH 27.0%
5. Miami, FL 26.9%
5. St. Louis, MO 26.8%
7. El Paso, TX 26.4%
8. Milwaukee, WI 26.2%
9. Philadelphia, PA 25.1%
10. Newark, NJ 24.2%

What do the top ten cities (over 250,000 pop.) with the highest poverty rate all have in common?

Detroit, MI - (1st on poverty rate list) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961
Buffalo, NY - (2nd) hasn't elected one since 1954
Cincinnati, OH - (3rd) not since 1984
Cleveland, OH - (4th) not since 1989
Miami, FL - (5th) has never had a Republican mayor
St. Louis, MO - (6th) not since 1949
El Paso, TX - (7th) has never had a Republican mayor
Milwaukee, WI - (8th) not since 1908
Philadelphia, PA - (9th) not since 1952
Newark, NJ - (10th) not since 1907

Einstein once said, 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.'
It is the poor who habitually elect Democrats... Yet they are still POOR.

Part III:

"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's Initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what They could and should do for themselves."
~Abraham Lincoln

"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by
Letting the government take care of him had better take a much closer look at the American Indian."
~Henry Ford


Six trivia questions to see how much history you really know. Be honest; it's kind of fun and revealing. If you don't know the answer make your best guess. Answer all of the questions (no cheating) before looking at the answers.

1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

A. Karl Marx B. Adolph Hitler C. Joseph Stalin D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few... And to replace it with shared responsibility, for shared prosperity."

A. Lenin B. Mussolini C. Idi Amin D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

3) "(We).... Can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

A. Nikita Khrushchev B. Joseph Goebbels C. Boris Yeltsin D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own ... In order to create this common ground."

A. Mao Tse Tung B. Hugo Chavez C. Kim Jong II D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed."

A. Karl Marx B. Lenin C. Molotov D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."

A. Pinochet B. Milosevic C. Saddam Hussein D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

No peeking!

Scroll down for answers...

... and the answers are:


(1) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004


(2) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 5/29/2007


(3) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007


(4) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007


(5) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007


(6) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 9/2/2005


Do something for your country, forward this!

Democrat Humor

A little fun at the Dem's expense...

Plan way ahead, all the airlines will probably get booked very early so you may have to go by Greyhound. SAVE THE DATE! Democrat Convention Schedule Monday, July 25, 2016 11:15 AM Free lunch, medical marijuana, and bus ride to the Convention Forms distributed for Food Stamp enrollment. 1:30 PM Group Voter Registration for Illegal Immigrants. 3:15 PM Address on "Being the Real You" Rachel Dolezal, former Head of the Seattle NAACP and Caitlyn Jenner 4:30 PM "How to Bank $200 Million as a Public Servant and claim to be broke" Hillary Clinton 4:45 PM How to have a successful career Without ever having a job, and Still avoid paying taxes! A Seminar Moderated by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson 5:00 PM Medals of Freedom presentation to Army deserter Bo Bergdahl For serving with Honor and Distinction National Security Adviser Susan Rice 5:30 PM Invitation-only Autograph Session Souvenir photographs of Hillary and Chelsea dodging Sniper Fire in Bosnia 6:30 PM General vote on praising Baltimore rioters, And on using the terminology "Alternative Shoppers" instead of “Looters" 7:30 PM Breakout session with Bill Clinton For women on avoiding the upcoming draft 8:30 PM The White House "Semantics Committee" Meeting General vote on re-branding "Muslim Terrorism" as "Random Acts of Islamic Over-Exuberance" 9:00 PM "Liberal Bias in Media“ How we can make it work for you! Tutorial sponsored by CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, PBS, The Washington Post and the New York Times With Guest Speaker, Brian Williams 9:15 PM Tribute Film to the Brave Freedom Fighters Still incarcerated at GITMO Michael Moore 9:45 PM Personal Finance Seminar - "Businesses Don't Create Jobs" President Obama 11:00 PM Short film, "Setting Up Your Own Illegal Email Server While Serving in A Cabinet Post and How to Pretend It's No Big Deal" Hosted by Hillary Clinton 11:30 PM Official Nomination of Hillary Bill Maher and Chris Matthews SOMEBODY SPENT A LOT OF PREMIUM TIME PUTTING THIS AGENDA TOGETHER, DON'T LET IT GO TO WASTE!

Motivational Posters

"Motivational Posters"

CDC Gun Research Backfires on Obama

In the wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy, President Obama issued a list of Executive Orders. Notably among them, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) was given $10 million to research gun violence.

“Year after year, those who oppose even modest gun-safety measures have threatened to defund scientific or medical research into the causes of gun violence, I will direct the Centers for Disease Control to go ahead and study the best ways to reduce it,” Obama said on Jan. 16.

As a result, a 1996 Congressional ban on research by the CDC “to advocate or promote gun control” was lifted. Finally, anti-gun proponents—and presumably the Obama Administration—thought gun owners and the NRA would be met with irrefutable scientific evidence to support why guns make Americans less safe.

Mainstream media outlets praised the order to lift the ban and lambasted the NRA and Congress for having put it in place.

It was the “Executive Order the NRA Should Fear the Most,” according to The Atlantic.

The CDC ban on gun research “caused lasting damage,” reported ABC News.

Salon said the ban was part of the NRA’s “war on gun science.”

And CBS News lamented that the NRA “stymied” CDC research.

Most mainstream journalists argued the NRA’s opposition to CDC gun research demonstrated its fear of being contradicted by science; few—if any—cited why the NRA may have had legitimate concerns. The culture of the CDC at the time could hardly be described as lacking bias on firearms.

“We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes,” Dr. Mark Rosenberg, who oversaw CDC gun research, told The Washington Post in 1994. “Now [smoking] is dirty, deadly and banned.”

Does Rosenberg sound like a man who should be trusted to conduct taxpayer-funded studies on guns?

Rosenberg’s statement coincided with a CDC study by Arthur Kellermann and Donald Reay, who argued guns in the home are 43 times more likely to be used to kill a family member than an intruder. The study had serious flaws; namely, it skewed the ratio by failing to consider defensive uses of firearms in which the intruder wasn’t killed. It has since been refuted by several studies, including one by Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck, indicating Americans use guns for self-defense 2.5 million times annually. However, the damage had been done—the “43 times” myth is perhaps gun-control advocates’ most commonly cited argument, and a lot of people still believe it to this day.

So, the NRA and Congress took action. But with the ban lifted, what does the CDC’s first major gun research in 17 years reveal? Not exactly what Obama and anti-gun advocates expected. In fact, you might say Obama’s plan backfired.

Here are some key findings from the CDC report, “Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence,” released in June:

1. Armed citizens are less likely to be injured by an attacker:
“Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”

2. Defensive uses of guns are common:
“Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year…in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.”

3. Mass shootings and accidental firearm deaths account for a small fraction of gun-related deaths, and both are declining:

“The number of public mass shootings of the type that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School accounted for a very small fraction of all firearm-related deaths. Since 1983 there have been 78 events in which 4 or more individuals were killed by a single perpetrator in 1 day in the United States, resulting in 547 victims and 476 injured persons.” The report also notes, “Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010.”

4. “Interventions” (i.e, gun control) such as background checks, so-called assault rifle bans and gun-free zones produce “mixed” results:

“Whether gun restrictions reduce firearm-related violence is an unresolved issue.” The report could not conclude whether “passage of right-to-carry laws decrease or increase violence crime.”

5. Gun buyback/turn-in programs are “ineffective” in reducing crime:

“There is empirical evidence that gun turn in programs are ineffective, as noted in the 2005 NRC study Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review. For example, in 2009, an estimated 310 million guns were available to civilians in the United States (Krouse, 2012), but gun buy-back programs typically recover less than 1,000 guns (NRC, 2005). On the local level, buy-backs may increase awareness of firearm violence. However, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, for example, guns recovered in the buy-back were not the same guns as those most often used in homicides and suicides (Kuhn et al., 2002).”

6. Stolen guns and retail/gun show purchases account for very little crime:

“More recent prisoner surveys suggest that stolen guns account for only a small percentage of guns used by convicted criminals. … According to a 1997 survey of inmates, approximately 70 percent of the guns used or possess by criminals at the time of their arrest came from family or friends, drug dealers, street purchases, or the underground market.”

7. The vast majority of gun-related deaths are not homicides, but suicides:

“Between the years 2000-2010 firearm-related suicides significantly outnumbered homicides for all age groups, annually accounting for 61 percent of the more than 335,600 people who died from firearms related violence in the United States.”

Why No One Has Heard This

Given the CDC’s prior track record on guns, you may be surprised by the extent with which the new research refutes some of the anti-gun movement’s deepest convictions.

What are opponents of the Second Amendment doing about the new data? Perhaps predictably, they’re ignoring it. President Obama, Michael Bloomberg and the Brady Campaign remain silent. Most suspicious of all, the various media outlets that so eagerly anticipated the CDC research are looking the other way as well. One must wonder how media coverage of the CDC report may have differed, had the research more closely fit an anti-gun narrative.

Even worse, the few mainstream journalists who did report the CDC’s findings chose to cherry-pick from the data. Most, like NBC News, reported exclusively on the finding that gun suicides are up. Largely lost in that discussion is the fact that the overall rate of suicide—regardless of whether a gun is involved or not—is also up.

Others seized upon the CDC’s finding that, “The U.S. rate of firearm-related homicide is higher than that of any other industrialized country: 19.5 times higher than the rates in other high-income countries.” However, as noted by the Las Vegas Guardian Express, if figures are excluded from such anti-gun bastions as Illinois, California, New Jersey and Washington, D.C., “The homicide rate in the United States would be in line with any other country.”

The CDC report is overall a blow to the Obama Administration’s unconstitutional agenda. It largely supports the Second Amendment, and contradicts common anti-gun arguments. Unfortunately, mainstream media failed to get the story they were hoping for, and their silence on the matter is a screaming illustration of their underlying agenda.

[Source: http://www.gunsandammo.com/politics/cdc-gun-research-backfires-on-obama/#ixzz42Y4AGjYg]

Celebration Of Normandy

Every year the French have a 4 day celebration in Normandy complete with American uniforms, tanks, jeeps and guns.

June 6, 2015, the 70th anniversary of "D-Day", the largest invasion ever attempted, where 200,000 Americans stormed the beaches at Normandy to begin the final push to defeat Nazi Germany in WWII. D-Day marked the turning point in WWII in Europe ... Today, European heads of state make it a point to recall and honor the sacrifices of those who landed in Normandy , as do our Presidents.... well, most of them....




In the 70 years since D-Day, there are six occasions when the President of the United States chose not to visit the D-Day Monument that honors the soldiers killed during the Invasion.

The occasions were:

1. Barack Obama, 2010

2. Barack Obama, 2011

3. Barack Obama, 2012

4. Barack Obama, 2013

2014 – 2015 Still too busy!

For the past 70 years, every American President except Obama have taken the time to honor the memory and sacrifices of the 6,000 American soldiers killed on D-Day. ...Except Obama!



June 6 2010, Obama had no events scheduled.

June 6, 2011, Obama met with the National Security team and was interviewed by WEWS Cleveland and WDIV in Detroit about the auto industry - FAR too busy to visit the D-Day memorial.

June 6, 2012, instead of honoring our fallen soldiers, Obama made a campaign trip to California on Air Force 1 (at our expense) to raise funds for (his) upcoming election.



June 6, 2013, Obama was doing ANOTHER fund raiser with the multimillionaires in the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in Palo Alto , CA , once again at our expense.

2014-2015 Still too busy!
America - Aren't you proud?

6 times in 70 years!! 

SHAME ON AMERICA FOR ELECTING A PRESIDENT WHO DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF: HE IS ABSOLUTELY A DISGRACE TO ALL WHO FOUGHT FOR THIS NATION AND GAVE THEIR LIVES. 


VETERANS - PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO YOUR VETERAN FRIENDS AND FRIENDS!!