Truth Before Dishonor

I would rather be right than popular

Archive for the ‘Personal Responsibility’ Category

I Contributed To #GosnellMovie

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/04/16

I contributed to help make the Gosnell movie happen. You can, too. Go to www.gosnellmovie.com and you can help make an important movie happen. Hot Air has some important news about who is blocking the attempt to crowdfund, and two actors who have made youtube videos in support of the crowdfunding.

____________________________
Edit: For those who have not heard of the heinous mass murderer Kermit Gosnell (and mainstream media and Hollywood like it that way), read what I wrote and Dana wrote back in 2011. Fair warning: have a strong stomach (preferably empty).

Posted in abortion, Character, crime, Culture, Health Care, media, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politically correct, Politically Incorrect, politics, Pro-Life, society | Tagged: , , , , , | 3 Comments »

A Canary In The Mine In York Co., PA Special Election – Harbinger of Things to Come?

Posted by Yorkshire on 2014/03/19

In the PA Legislature our local Senator in the 28th District resigned for personal reasons. The Dems thought they could pull a fast one and push a RINO and far out Lib were going to run in a Special Election yesterday. We do have a Primary in two months which would have worked fine to hold this election. But the rush was on to get the career politician into this seat. One the machine knew he would vote for higher taxes. Well, a ringer Conservative joined the race as a Write-In vote. Now, write-ins usually have a snowball’s chance in hell to make it. However, a miracle happened yesterday, the Write-In candidate WON. Not only WON, but won big time. The Write-In Scott Wagner almost had 11K write-in votes. The RINO and Lib Dem TOGETHER had about 12K votes. So, the wonderment is this, did the dirty campaign have an effect, was this the Obama Effect, was it the anti-incumbent effect, or all of the above? But the article has the vote numbers.

Scott Wagner the presumed winner in 28th Senate

CHRISTINA KAUFFMAN / The York Dispatch

In what appears to be an unexpected victory for a conservative businessman who has made a point of bucking his own party, Republican Scott Wagner is presumed to have won a write-in campaign to defeat party nominee Ron Miller for an open seat in the state Senate.

The closely watched, hotly contested face-off ended in disappointment for the Republican mainstay and a first major victory for the tea party in York County.

With 100 percent of precincts reporting Tuesday night, write-in votes totaled 10,595, or 47.7 percent, to Miller’s 5,920, or 26.6 percent. Democrat Linda Small of New Freedom nearly edged out Miller with 5,704 votes, for 25.7 percent.If all or most of the write-in votes are, as expected, for Wagner, he will have won the race by a healthy margin.

http://www.yorkdispatch.com/ci_25365621/york-county-polling-sites-report-low-turnout-28th

Posted in Conservative, Personal Responsibility, Real Life | Leave a Comment »

My New Babies

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/03/18

I just recently added three new babies to my family.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in American pride, Constitution, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, Photography, Politically Incorrect | Tagged: | 5 Comments »

The Rich Pay Their Fair Share

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2013/12/13

From CNBC (owned by that radical left wing NBC, which owns MSNBC) comes this nugget:

Buried inside a Congressional Budget Office report this week was this nugget: when it comes to individual income taxes, the top 40 percent of wage earners in America pay 106 percent of the taxes. The bottom 40 percent…pay negative 9 percent.

The bottom 20 percent actually pay a negative fifteen percent federal income tax rate! it’s time that the bottom 40 percent pay their fair share. It’s time the bottom 20 percent stop getting more back in income tax returns than they pay in. Because, as the lovely lady from CNBC said, “the rich aren’t only paying their fair share, they’re paying everyone’s share.”

Posted in Culture, economics, media, Personal Responsibility, society | 1 Comment »

Colin Powell fan club proven to be imbeciles

Posted by DNW on 2013/12/10

 

Do you prefer Obama or Obama lite?

U.S. News and World Report has an article that reminds us of the catastrophe that is likely to ensue when a morally degraded population tries to exorcise certain social demons through political self-flagellation.

Remember all those excitable and emotionally immature Republicans who were big supporters of Colin Powell? Remember experiencing the dizzying feeling that they were driven vastly less by what freedom compatible policies and ideology Powell was known to embrace, than the fact that he served as a blank screen upon which they could project their moral redemption fantasies?

In rather obvious search of someone who could stamp their “I’m not a racist” ticket, they giddily latched onto Powell in a paroxysm of hand flapping wish fulfillment.

If you asked them what his positions were on critical political issues, they couldn’t say. They could not, because he cannily would not. Fortunately for the Republican party, saner heads realized this. Well, more or less, given the fact that an almost equally destructive John McCain somehow became the party’s nominee.

Of course it was not too long before Powell felt drawn to demonstrate where his real allegiances lay; and it was not with freedom. They lay with Obama who he endorsed for president, and with the collectivist social manager class with which he identifies as a part.

Probably should not have been much of a surprise. Not everyone who seeks a career in the U.S. military is a libertarian constitutionalist sacrificing his personal daily liberty in order to guarantee it for the larger political community. Powell’s silence should have been a warning. Just like John Roberts’ should have been. But wish fulfillment Republicans have long been in the habit of assuming that just because people don’t speak up, they are somehow fans of liberty. Kind of strange and actually incoherent a thought if you reflect upon it for a moment: “X is so much a fan of freedom he fears to exercise it personally lest he be deprived of the opportunity of defending it at some future date …”

Yeah, just look how well that assumption has played out …

Now Powell, the closet-leftist-masquerading-as-a-closet-conservative is helpfully advancing the cause of freedom and self-direction by advocating the introduction of an even more comprehensive form of fascistic-leftism, than Obamacare: with what is euphemistically called a “single payer system”.  As we a all know Single Payer is actually a government payer system wherein you get tagged for the medical expenses of the obnoxious through taxes; meaning that even the option of your striking back against a fascist system like ObamaCare through civil disobedience or economic subversion, becomes hardly possible. “A new poll shows 28 percent of uninsured Americans intend to pay a fine rather than enroll in a plan. as required by the Affordable Care Act.

But Powell likes a system with no functional opt out. It worked for him.

” ‘I don’t see why we can’t do what Europe is doing, what Canada is doing, what Korea is doing, what all these other places are doing,” Powell said at the Dec. 5 event. “I am not an expert in health care, or Obamacare, or the Affordable Care Act, or however you choose to describe it, but I do know this: I have benefited from that kind of universal health care in my 55 years of public life.’ “

I want, you will provide.

I want, you will provide.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[US News and World Report Image]

He doesn’t see what the problem with fascism is. He likes it in fact.

What moral subspecies of man are these collectivists?

Unconditional, redistributive, no escape social “solidarity”. What worthwhile person would want such a shit life, or demand it of everyone else; and why?

Hell on earth for edified men; emotional paradise for the “last man” … the soulless man of nothingness.

Maybe that explains it.

Posted in Character, Conservative, Liberal, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politics, race, society | 4 Comments »

Knock Out Game – Common Sense Talk

Posted by Yorkshire on 2013/11/25

Someone speaks some sense.

Posted in Character, Personal Responsibility, society | 3 Comments »

Barack Obama At 37 Percent Approval

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2013/11/20

And M24OH has a questionnaire.

37% you say? Hm, it actually doesn’t seem like 37% of the people I meet are complete morons or absolute pieces of sh**. Maybe I should make up a ‘worthless p.o.s. idiot test’:

1. Are you entitled to an income just for being alive?
2. Are you entitled to healthcare just for being alive?
3. Do you believe your gender, race, ethnicity, or combination thereof entitle you to preferred treatment in any aspect of societal interaction, i.e. preferences for hiring, housing, public assistance etc., or deference in ordinairy social interactions?
4. Would you refuse miltary service, or other public service, to qualify for the above “entitlements”?
5. Are you of sound mind and body but not actively seeking employment?
6. Do your engage in non-contraceptive-use extra-marital sex while without the means to independently (free of public assistance) raise a dependent child?

If you answered “yes” to any of the above questions, you are most likely a “worthless p.o.s. idiot”.

And you probably still think Obuggerme is just swell.

(typos in original)

Sadly, far too many people have rejected the US Constitution and would say “yes” to one or more of those questions.

Posted in affirmative action, Character, Constitution, Culture, Insanity, Obama, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politics, society | 1 Comment »

President What Constitution?????

Posted by Yorkshire on 2013/11/15

In Article II of the US Constitution, that would be the the one that Presidents swear or affirm to uphold in Article II Section 1. says he shall take the following oath or affirmation:–”I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

With that, the President must uphold the laws of the United States. On occasions, the Supremes have said this happens in the “Take Care Clause” which is below in Article II, Section 3.

ARTICLE II
Section 1.
The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

Section 3.
…………….; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, ……….

Note, it didn’t say just the laws you like, or unilaterally change the laws you don’t like.

The remedy for not doing this is in Section 4.
Section 4.
The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Now in the last few weeks due to the LAW known as BarackObamaCare, we have seen 5 million people thrown off their then Affordable Health Care, but the reason was, they were inferior to ObummerCare, but they also met the losers needs at a lower cost. BO has caught lots of flack for having a law doing this. And further more, Obummer has told these 5 million at least 29 times they could keep their policy. When called on this, Obummer said he didn’t say that. Now that a minor revolt has happened with the losers, the Reps and Senators seeing what they voted for, they were going to answer for. So, Obummer did what he has done a number of times, unilaterally changed the law. However, instead of doing what he usually does in the middle of the night, he did in the daylight, and poorly. Now Obummer is losing his allies in the Press, in Congress, and has lost the trust of the public.

This is reminding more and more of Nixon. We do have what looks like a probable Constitutional Crisis.

Posted in ABJECT FAILURE, Constitution Shredded, Personal Responsibility, Real Life | 2 Comments »

Obamacare is Fascism. There’s no way around it.

Posted by DNW on 2013/11/12

It’s a striking fact that the predicate of Obamacare, i.e., the premise of a redistributionist implementation of what John Rawls approvingly called, a “commitment to a shared fate” is simply, and unequivocally, fascist.

This “shared fate” social obligation, is the very principle behind Obamacare; and is rhetorically traceable among others, to the Fascist in Chief himself.

Hyperventilating lefty professors, so fond of directing the charge of “fascist” at others for whatever rhetorical effect they imagine they can leverage out of it, will continue to busily construct their self-serving political taxonomies based on wish-fulfillment listings of the supposed attributes essential to a fascist attitude and polity. These attributes, they claim, invariably involve hostility to foreigners, or the arts, or minorities.

Yet a libertarian polity or anarchist system of association with a population that manifests these three traits on average, would not thereby be transformed into a fascist solidarity or corporatist state. Something more “positive” must be added without which the fascist state cannot logically or coherently be said to officially exist.

Recall here Obama’s problem with our current charter of negative (negatively defined) liberties. The problem as he sees it, is that it defines what you are free from, not what you must do for whom, or what you are entitled to expect from others.

The individual mandate with its across the board legal transformation of freeborn men and women into social resources unconditionally available to the government for the support and maintenance of a redistributive social solidarity state, is that necessary addition. It’s what the fascist left seeks to implement. And as such it’s the manifest essence of the fascist concept.

Recall that this Obamacare individual mandate claim upon the individual is not temporary, nor based upon the necessity of a repulsion of foreign invaders by all citizens, nor upon the need to distributively protect all from some contagion that knows no distinctions of person. It is instead, based upon the presumption of one’s open-ended duty to sacrifice one’s own opportunities and life choices in order to indemnify others against the costs and consequences of being themselves.

It’s emotionally difficult – despite the occasional rhetorical exercise by those like myself warning of a possibility to the contrary – for many of us, myself included, to face the fact that people whom one has heretofore considered as probable moral fellows, are not in fact anything of the kind. Obamacare has now brought this into the sharpest relief.

They, its advocates, have now willingly and overtly become people who in active and current fact, as well as in prior principle, operate off the principle that they will now recognize no limit to their claims upon other human beings for the sake of that secularized social sodality regime which they crave, and which they feel will benefit themselves through the coerced access they gain to your life energies and expenditures.

It, sadly, is therefore not at all hyperbolic to state that the Democrats in Congress who voted for Obamacare and the individual mandate were seeking to institute or to further an already incipient social fascism in the United States. The Democrats should just rename themselves the Fascist Party, and have done with it.

This Obamacare state of affairs has long been the obvious goal of left-wing ideologues: to construct a default situation wherein there preexists a sociopolitical presumption that the individual exists for the utility of others.

The Democrat party has now explicitly advanced and endorsed this premise through Obamacare. Whether the impulse further progresses to the social  or state ownership of some or all productive resources or tools of production, as in full blown socialism, is besides the point. The point is that man has now been made by law, and by virtue of his mere existence, into a social resource upon which the state has a legally unlimited claim.

The definitional lines are drawn, and the sides chosen. How friends and relatives will react to being told to their faces that they are fascist, remains to be seen. My guess is that they could not care less what they are, or are called, as long as they get what they want out of others.

They like it that way.

And that, is not a matter of mere politics, but includes something that might almost be seen as a “spiritual dimension”.

 

Note: I wrote this out earlier today on the fly, and hit “post” rather than “save”. I’ve made a few of what I think should be improvements in clarity and precision. The labored language … well, that, I can do nothing about. LOL.

Posted in ABJECT FAILURE, Constitution Shredded, Health Care, Law, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, society | 7 Comments »

Liberals and rape, and the integrity of the person

Posted by DNW on 2013/10/29

Before I forget: Another reference to a conversation with the mail lady.

Make sure you use the Post office!

Make sure you use the Post office!

 

 

Concerning liberals, and rape,  and what they – or some of them – really believe about the integrity and inviolability of the human person.

I might have mentioned before that we have this rather outspoken mail carrier. She’s generally cheerful, very left-liberal, not shy about saying so,  and armed with all the usual talking points you would expect from someone for whom progressive media sources constitute the information gold standard.

Though it escapes me at the moment how the topic of the exploitation of women came up, it did. Or rather she brought it up.

Probably something about the abuse and physical exploitation which females are commonly acknowledged to suffer in the so-called third world.

I agreed with her by and large. I said so. In fact I went further. I said that rape should be absolutely intolerable. I said that it constituted a crime beyond the pale. “Yes!” she exclaimed.

“You have an absolute and inviolable moral right to your physical integrity,” I said.

“Absolutely! ” she said. “And,” she added, ” many people expect these women to bear the child of a man who has beaten and degraded them! You can’t expect a woman to allow that monster’s offspring to grow in her womb, can you?”

“You have an absolute right to your own body then? We agree on that?” I asked.

“Yes!”

“I’m glad you feel that way” I said. “Would you agree that rape should be a capital crime?”

“Oh, our justice system …” she began.

“Well hypothetically then, in a case where there was a brutal physical attack, a forcible act, …”

“There’s always doubt” she said “look at the cases where …”

“Ok, let’s limit ourselves to the question as to whether you believe that you would have the moral right to kill – a justification – in order to stop an ongoing act of violent rape being perpetrated on yourself, if: a, it was the only way to stop it, and b, you had the means, to assuredly do so.”

“If my kids were …”, she started.

“I’m not talking about your kids.”

“Well, do you mean, later?”

“Stop!” I said.  “Forget any scenario involving the legal system and mistaken identities. Forget about after the fact self-help acted out in cold blood, if that is what is also disturbing you.  “I’m asking you, you personally, as a “progressive female” if you would use lethal force on a brutalizing rapist in process, if that was the only way to get him to cease, and if you were sure to be successful in doing so. Hell, and assume it’s lawful to do so, if that helps you to come up with an answer”

“Uh, well, uh …  wellllll, uh I have to think about that. I’ll get back with you later.” she said as she sidled out the door.

Virtually identical to the words she used the last time we had this kind of a conversation. That now makes two of those “I’ll get back with you later”s she’s never gotten back with me on.

Leftists, do have different interpersonal boundaries. And for all their shrillness and squawking about domination and violation and exploitation, they, some of them, seem to think that the last thing they should be required to do, is to take an absolute stand on the only absolute locus of self which they have.

What integrity then, is it that they are trying to preserve, if they will not preserve their own?

And if they will not preserve their own if they can, why should anyone else take the care and trouble to do so for them?

 

 

Credit: The image of the two postal workers is from Ilana Cohn’s “thefunclub” parody of a USPS public service announcement featuring Tonya and CiCi, found on Cohn’s YouTube channel. It’s a bit rough for a family style blog, so I won’t link directly. Depending on your sensibilities, it might be said to be hilarious.

Posted in Character, Law, Liberal, Personal Responsibility | 6 Comments »

ObamaCare: But … I didn’t think it would be like this

Posted by DNW on 2013/10/28

Come my Children.

You who are weary of the burden of the self. You who would be free of the burdens of striving and worry.

I demand only one thing.

And that is everything.

Health Care for All

Health Care for All

“But how come I can’t keep my old insurance like you promised!???”

Tiberius as often as he left the Senate-House used to exclaim in Greek, “How ready these men are to be slaves.” Clearly, even he, with his dislike of public freedom, was disgusted at the abject abasement of his creatures …

Posted in ABJECT FAILURE, Constitution Shredded, Health Care, Humor - For Some, Personal Responsibility, Socialists, Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

Road Report

Posted by DNW on 2013/10/12

Most will have noticed that the founder and owner of this blog has been absent for awhile now, and that a couple of us, his blog associates that is, have filled in with a posting here or there.

Not with the deeply researched, time consuming, political data point blogging that he tended to engage in, but with somewhat more abstract or even frivolous posts.

I’m pleased to say that in some cases our new postings have generated almost half the interest his old postings on “clouds” still clock up.

Ahem, well …

But, like a number of conservatives I know, his long-term personal unselfishness was getting in the way of his realizing his own ambitions.

That’s a challenge of course, which liberals seldom face. Their trick is to have others labor to do good, while skimming the proceeds as directors, thus fattening their wallets while simultaneously lightening their pseudo-consciences.

The reason for his recent absence is that our conservative friend decided that it was long overdue for him to grant himself some well justified “me time” in a serious economic sense.

He decided to return to the trucking business for awhile. This is a project which in order for him to reach his goals would obviously require a single-mindedness and dedication which would leave little time for blogging efforts; especially in the manner he was operating.

Moving ahead

Moving ahead

The upshot is that John has now reported back that he’s been a busy entrepreneur these last several months, taking names and kicking … uh tires … and making real progress in building up his trucking business. He and his trainees, have logged an astonishing number of miles, and it seems as though he’s not far from making some additional capital expenditures which will expand his once fledgling enterprise significantly.

We might soon have a gen-u-wine tycoon on our hands.

Detail Update

” John Hitchcock
Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 17:22

By the way, this past week was a banner week for my company …

Congratulations John, and keep up the good work. Success and economic power in others is the one thing, unfortunately, that grasping liberals respect; or better said, FEAR.

Posted in Blogging Matters, Personal Responsibility | 6 Comments »

In the matter of Obama Care

Posted by DNW on 2013/09/21

I’m working today and while doing so I’ve been accessing the Internet.

I don’t know why exactly, but possibly because after hearing about the House Republican’s courageous act of defunding Obama Care, I glanced at one of Perry Hood’s typically puling exercises in social justice pimping.

I then decided to revisit and review the fact situation premises underlying the arguments we’ve all seen concerning “national” health care costs by doing a couple of searches. Just for the sake of Auld Lang Syne …

My first search was on the topic of uncompensated emergency care. I Googled: “Percentage of US health care expenditures on uncompensated emergency room treatment”.

There, in the results window I found links that informed me that emergency room treatment accounted for only about 2 cents of every dollar expended on medical treatment in the United States.

“Main Points

Emergency care represents less than 2 percent of the nation’s $2.4 trillion in health care expenditures while covering 136 million people a year.i ii
Emergency departments are open 24 hours a day and provide “one-stop shopping” with all the hospital’s resources – such as diagnostic testing and consultation by other medical specialists – in one place.
The most pressing economic issue in emergency medicine is uncompensated care: the lack of adequate reimbursement for emergency medical care has led to the closure of hundreds of emergency departments.
The focus on preventing so-called “non-urgent” ER visits distracts policymakers from the real cost savings in reducing hospital admissions.
Emergency departments are critical to our communities and must be adequately funded.”

We also learn that,

“About half of all emergency services go uncompensated, according to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).iv The typical ER treats 1 in 5 patients without insurance or a clear method for reimbursement. The CDC reported that 19 percent of all emergency patients in 2009 were uninsured.”

and

“Nearly half (44 percent) of emergency physicians responding to a poll say fear of lawsuits is the biggest challenge to cutting emergency department costs. More than half (53 percent) say this fear is the main reason for ordering the number of tests they do.viii Every additional diagnostic test adds to the overall cost of care.”

See also this American College of Emergency Physicians link

So, at first glance anyway, only about 20 percent of 2 percent of the money spent in the US on medical treatment is spent on the uninsureds’ emergency room treatment. Though, this burden is costly enough, and damaging enough, to the facilities treating these patients.

Next I began to check on structural issues related to demographics. Say for example, on the cost of behavioral problems to the US economy. But that was not really a fruitful avenue. We learn of course that fat kids are a large (pun intended) and growing (same) problem and that they will likely experience a host of chronic conditions which will eventually …

Oh. Yeah, “Chronic care”

Wonder what that costs “us” as a portion of what “we” spend?

Google: “Chronic condition expenses as a percentage of American medical costs”

And this my friends really set me back on my heels. I couldn’t believe it. Though I cannot now explain why I hadn’t known it earlier.

We debate insurance reform, and malpractice reform, and we talk of defensive medicine. But what are the real causes of this social phenomenon are we being held political hostage to? Is it really primarily due to greedy doctors and profiteering insurance companies,  inflated drug costs, scheming lawyers, and proliferating defensive medicine?

We speak in terms of “social costs”. What of social use? Is the demand itself unreal? What of actual use and spending, and of who is doing the using and spending?

Well, while,

” … Half of the population spends little or nothing on health care …”

it turns out that,

” … 5 percent of the population spends almost half of the total amount [spent]…”

What? How can this be? Feeling dizzy too? But why should we stop there when there is so much more to learn …

” … In 2002, the 5 percent of the U.S.community (civilian noninstitutionalized) population that spent the most on health care accounted for 49 percent of overall U.S. health care spending …”

” … the 50 percent of the population with the lowest expenses accounted for only 3 percent of overall U.S. medical spending, with annual medical spending below $664 per person. … those in the top 5 percent spent, on average, more than 17 times as much per personas those in the bottom 50 percent of spenders

” … The elderly (age 65 and over) made up around 13 percent of the U.S. population in 2002, but they consumed 36 percent of total U.S. personal health care expenses. The average health care expense in 2002 was $11,089 per year for elderly people but only $3,352 per year for working-age people (ages 19-64 …”

” … people in the highest 5 percent of the distribution of medical expenses were 11 times as likely to be in fair or poor physical health as people in the bottom half of that distribution (45 percent vs. 4 percent) …”

” … 21 percent of people in the top 5 percent [those with the highest medical expenses] were in fair or poor mental health, compared with 3 percent of people in the bottom 50 percent [of medical expenses]“

Chronic, crazy, (and a modest percentage of the) elderly account for half of that infamous 16 percent or so of the GDP being spent on health care. This then is half of the “crisis” that has been driving a formerly free people into the clutches of an Obama Care mandate, and toward the degraded status of “Property of the State”.

I’m going to quit writing now; before I say something really, really cruel …

You can read and judge for yourself. As for me, I am done researching for today.

Oh you can bet your bottom dollar on this though. Once the government really gets its say, and those figures are considered, as they already have been by many in the Single Payer system movement, there will be death panels.

And what will the left do? That is to say the same left that earlier mocked Palin?

They will shrug and ask, “What did you fools expect?”

Fools! I am the Lido and you will do as I command!

Fools! I am the Lido and you will do as I command!

Posted in ABJECT FAILURE, Constitution Shredded, economics, Health Care, Personal Responsibility | 1 Comment »

This Just In – Seventy-two killed resisting gun confiscation in Boston!

Posted by Yorkshire on 2013/07/06

This may sound a little familiar. It just happened in Canada. But not the killing.

Seventy-two killed resisting gun confiscation in Boston!

Boston – National Guard units seeking to confiscate a cache of recently banned assault weapons were ambushed by elements of a Para-military extremist faction. Military and law enforcement sources estimate that 72 were killed and more than 200 injured before government forces were compelled to withdraw.

Speaking after the clash, Massachusetts Governor Thomas Gage declared that the extremist faction, which was made up of local citizens, has links to the radical right-wing tax protest movement.

Gage blamed the extremists for recent incidents of vandalism directed against internal revenue offices. The governor, who described the group’s organizers as “criminals,” issued an executive order authorizing the summary arrest of any individual who has interfered with the government’s efforts to secure law and order.

The military raid on the extremist arsenal followed wide-spread refusal by the local citizenry to turn over recently outlawed assault weapons.

Gage issued a ban on military-style assault weapons and ammunition earlier in the week. This decision followed a meeting in early this month between government and military leaders at which the governor authorized the forcible confiscation of illegal arms.

One government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, pointed out that “none of these people would have been killed had the extremists obeyed the law and turned over their weapons voluntarily.”

Read it all here:
http://fauquierfreecitizen.com/seventy-two-killed-resisting-gun-confiscation-in-boston/

Posted in education, Law, military, Personal Responsibility, TEA Party | Tagged: , , | 4 Comments »

Anderson Cooper Confirms MSM Bias

Posted by Yorkshire on 2013/06/29

Yes, sometimes Miracles do happen in the most unlikely places. Yes, I know Anderson Cooper is gay, but the main part of this story to me is he confirms as a lib what we all knew, but no lib dare utter – Confirming MSM BIAS

Anderson Cooper: ‘Why Does Alec Baldwin Get a Pass Using Gay Slurs?’ Conservative ‘Would Be Vilified’
By Noel Sheppard | June 28, 2013 | 18:35

As NewsBusters previously reported, Alec Baldwin had another major meltdown on Twitter Thursday which included a homophobic attack on a British reporter.

CNN’s Anderson Cooper struck back Friday posting on Twitter, “Why does #AlecBaldwin get a pass when he uses gay slurs? If a conservative talked of beating up a ‘queen’ they would be vilified”:

Read a lot more here: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/06/28/anderson-cooper-why-does-alec-baldwin-get-pass-using-gay-slurs-conser#ixzz2Xcfs0xtA

Posted in Culture, Personal Responsibility, Politically Incorrect, politics | Tagged: | Comments Off

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 126 other followers

%d bloggers like this: