Saturday, May 28, 2016

Sign, sign, everywhere a sign. Blocking out the scenery breaking my mind. Do this don't do that, can't you read the sign.







 Today, surfing the InterTubes I came across a post by a fellow named Scrappy.  In part, he said this:

I heard yet again a commercial about how cops are on the lookout for you, you know who you are, you heinous seat belt law scoffers! Then there was the "Click it or ticket" traffic update on KQNT. This comes on, I shut the radio off or change the station. Then there was the billboard I saw again today that reads "Buzzed = Busted = Broke". These go with the billboard a couple years ago with only the eyes of a man showing and the caption reading "were watching you. Litter and it will hurt". As well as a plethora of other TV and radio commercials of a similar nature.

Do we need to be told like little children that unless we comply and behave we will be caught and punished? Its part of a calculated plan to incrementally foster a cultural mindset of conformity and meekness. Just like the children being taught to never deal with matters themselves, to always get someone in "authority". We have collectively allowed our governing bodies to, mistakenly, come to think of themselves as our leaders. Look around, you will see that term all over. Again, its part of a cultural change. This is how you condition a free people to accept control. You start by telling them that you are only out for safety. Then, well you have made a law so it has to be enforced, right?
Scrappy's most salient point is the insidious and subliminal attack on freedom of thought.

The billboards themselves and the ulterior mission behind them is to incrementally train and condition the proletariat to see and then obey without even knowing that they have been ordered to do the biding of the overseers.

My well trained and conditioned Labrador dog sees my hand move toward my pocket, and slobber instantly drips because she has been subliminally programmed to know that a biscuit will soon be produced.

Putting up a billboard displaying  societal norms and expectations as dictated by Big Brother is no different than biscuits in my pocket.  After a while, no command need be given to extract a desired behavior from a dog, or a person.

Political correctness is being rammed into our subconscious.  What is and is not "Politically Correct" is not democratically or popularly decided upon.  We, the People, have little voice in this discussion.

TV, Radio, internet, print media, etc. ad nauseam, are biscuits in Big Brother's pocket doled out by the growing cadre of Thought Police.

In addition to a leash, Big Brother holds a cat o' nine tails in his other hand.


Sign, sign, everywhere a sign. Blocking out  the scenery breaking my mind.  Do this don't do that, can't you read the sign.

I think I'm gonna puke up my biscuits.

Monday, May 23, 2016

Who would make a better President - Don Draper or Abe Drexler?

Were were watching Mad Men on DVD and my better half was waxing nostalgic about the '60s and how grand it was. 

Like I often tell her, it is easy to recall the good times, but the painful ones are often lost in the mists of time. The 60's were also Walter Cronkite announcing body counts of dead Americans, grammar school kids drilling under their desks in preparation of nuclear annihilation, Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground bombing the Pentagon, Murder and mayhem at the Chicago DNC convention, two dead Kennedys a martyred King, and Mary Jo Kopechne killed in a salty bog by a callous and drunken rapist, Black Panthers gunning down Malcom, while Farrakhan was urging his sycophants to kill whitey. 

Many of my fellow Baby Boomers hid under their mamma's skirts or high-tailed it up north in acts of false bravado, while in reality they were more afraid and cowardly than those of us that marched into the Post Office and registered for the draft - a patriotic duty that, in all likelihood, would be a ticket to Saigon.

Gen Xers and Millennials may get all misty at the thought of the good old days that they never saw, however I vote for the here and now and work (not hope) for a better tomorrow. 

Monday, March 21, 2016

Careless with Truth in Small Mattters

I was going to associate this gem with the Clintons, then I realized that in her (and his) case, the opposite is also true.

Saturday, March 19, 2016

Does Global Warming Increase the Murder Rate?


A Tale of Two CitiesChicago vs. Houston                          



    CHICAGO

HOUSTON, TX
Population
2.7 million

2.15 million




Median HH Income
$38,600

$37,000




% African-American
38.9%

24%




% Hispanic
29.9%

44%




% Asian
5.5%

6%




% Non-Hispanic White
28.7%

26%




Pretty similar until you compare the following:

Chicago, IL

            Houston, TX






Concealed Carry   - Legal
No

           Yes






Number of Gun Stores
None

184 Dedicated gun stores plus 1500 other stores licensed to sell guns






Homicides, 2012
1,806

207






Homicides per 100K
38.4

9.6






Avg. January high temperature
31 F

63 F





Conclusion :  Cold weather causes murders.
This is due to global warming.

Thursday, March 17, 2016

Merrick Garland: No Guns For You!

The Mass Media, the Democratic National Committee, and Academia are blowing their own horns describing Merrick Garland as a moderate.  His actions say otherwise.  In reality, he has consistently and actively campaigned against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  In particular, his record clearly shows he is an enemy of Our Right to free speech, Our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Our Right to be secure in our persons, homes, and papers, Our right to due process of law, Our Right to an impartial jury of our peers.

No kidding, check out his judicial track record.

That pretty much does away with the First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth amendments to the Constitution as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

Moderate?  Nope

Statist?  Yup
Judge-Merrick-Garland

Here is what othe oldest Civil Rights Organization in the United States has to say about Barack Obama's "moderate" nomination to the Supreme Court:



With Justice Scalia’s tragic passing, there is no longer a majority of support among the justices for the fundamental, individual right to own a firearm for self-defense. Four justices believe law-abiding Americans have that right – and four justices do not.

President Obama has nothing but contempt for the Second Amendment and  law-abiding gun owners. Obama has already nominated two Supreme Court justices who oppose the right to own firearms and there is absolutely no reason to think he has changed his approach this time. In fact, a basic analysis of Merrick Garland’s judicial record shows that he does not respect our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.

Therefore, the National Rifle Association, on behalf of our five million members and tens of millions of supporters across the country, strongly opposes the nomination of Merrick Garland for the U.S. Supreme Court.

Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA, says Merrick Garland’s record on the Second Amendment is unacceptable to anyone who respects the U.S. Constitution and an individual’s fundamental right to self-protection.

He is the most anti-gun nominee in recent history. This should come as no surprise, given President Obama’s disdain for the Second Amendment. He has consistently shown a complete disregard of the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Garland’s history of anti-Second Amendment rulings support the conclusion that were he to be confirmed he would vote to overturn Heller.
  • In 2007, he voted to give D.C. a second chance to have its handgun ban upheld after a three-judge panel struck it down. At the time, this was the most significant Second Amendment case in America.
  • In 2004, Garland voted against rehearing another Second Amendment case (Seegars v. Gonzales), effectively casting a vote against the individual right to keep and bear arms.
  • Justice Scalia was the author of Heller v McDonaldHeller affirmed that the Second Amendment is an individual right. The Heller decision stands in the way of gun-control supporters’ ultimate goal of banning and confiscating guns.
  • If Heller is overturned, the Second Amendment for all intents and purposes would cease to exist.
  • In 2000, Garland voted in favor of the federal government’s plan to retain Americans’ personal information from gun purchase background checks despite federal laws prohibiting national firearm registration and requiring the destruction of these records
  • Judge Garland weighed in on several significant firearms-related cases, including Parker, Seegars, NRA v. Reno,. He voted against the rights of firearm owners on each occasion.
The examples of Garland’s disdain for the right to keep and bear arms go on and on, including  in a major case upholding the then-existing Clinton “assault weapons” ban against a constitutional challenge.

It’s almost certain that Garland agrees with Hillary Clinton when she said “the Supreme Court is wrong” that the Second Amendment protects an individual right.

In his nomination, President Obama has again placed partisanship and antagonism towards gun owners above the higher callings of his office.

If Garland is confirmed, Obama would be taking America back in time to an era where Supreme Court justices uphold the anti-gun policies of the president. Obama is hoping Garland will overturn the Supreme Court precedent that stands in the way of confiscatory gun control, like the gun ban and confiscation programs implemented in Australia.

Statement from the Institute for Legislative Action - National Rifle Association.