Internet Articles (2017)
f you listen closely with your minds' eye open wide, you can almost hear former Obama Administration front man and political shillnow mayor of Chicagosay, "Never let a good massacre go to waste." Of course, that's a play off the phrase Rahm Emanuel made famous during Obama's first stolen mile: "Never let a good crisis go to waste." But for the antigun crowd who clearly understands they will never succeed in overthrowing the American Republic until they unconstitutionally erase the private ownership of guns from the US Code and make it a felony for any American without a special government permit to own any firearms. The liberals in Congress who publicly oppose private gun ownership, privately have two or three weapons strategically concealed around their homes in the nation's capital and, of course, in their "constituency home" in their home state or congressional district especially if that home is in Chicago, New York City, or any number of liberal antigun cities or States in liberal land where honest people are denied the right to own guns. Strangely, the highest crime rates and most murders occur in the cities with the strictest antigun laws. When New York passed the Sullivan Law on August 31, 1911, everyone thought the City of New York would become a safer city virtually overnight. It didfor criminals. For honest citizens, the Big Apple became the most dangerous place in America. The more stringent the gun laws, the more dangerous the city or State. When the only people who are armed are the "bad guys," the bad guys become bolderand more aggressive.
Let A Good Crisis Go to Waste
When Gifford was shot, the antigun crowd didn't hesitate to remind the American people of Emanuel's advise: "Never let a good crisis go to waste." We heard Emanuel's words parroted again when 24-year old James Holmes, disguised as the Joker invaded a late night showing of The Dark Knight Rises, killing 12 people and wounding 58 others. Holmes, a post-grad school dropout used his $26,000 student loan check to purchase the guns and ammunition he fired in the attack, as well as the Kevlar vest, assault helmet and gas mask he wore when he invaded the theater through a side exit. Again, we heard "Never let a good crisis go to waste."
In his Wall Street Journal interview, Rahm Emanuel never apologized for his arrogant, liberal elitist remark when he told WSJ Reporter Ruth Rawe that his statement which had been repeated over and over again in newspaper articles and editorials was never intended to be attached to an incident like the Gifford shooting. Nor, I guess, to the Dark Knight shooting. Or the Dec. 14, 2012 during the Sandy Hook assassination of 20 eight- and nine-year old children and six adult school personnel. In addition, before coming to the school, Adam Lanza shot and killed his mother and using her weapons Lanza took from her locked gun chest, invaded the school and, very deliberately, caused a horrific massacre, leaving a trail of dead innocent children whom he denied life.
And, once again we heard Rahm Emanuel's chilling dictum: :"Never let a good crisis go to waste." It was a comment Emanuel said he wishes he never said, because everytime anyone in the media mentions it, the attributes go to Emanuel because, regardless how horrible the tragedy associated with the crises that continues to trigger the remark, make no bones about it, Emanuel meant it when he said it, and he means it even more with each new crisis (even if he no longer parrots the phrase to the mediabut you can bet he still ballyhoos it to his friends when the mikes are turned off). And, don't think for a moment the left won't exploit every dead baby at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, because the opportunity to exploit children doesn't come along that oftenand the clock is ticking.
the 2nd Amendment
On May 13, 1939 when the New Deal Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act of 1938 in an 8 to 0 vote, they said the Founding Fathers added the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution because they were convinced that somewhere down the road into history, the people of the United States would likely have to forcibly subdue an oppressive government and, therefore, the justices said, "...it is in the best interests of the nation that people of the United States be as well armed as its government." To put those words in the simplest form, the purpose of the 2nd Amendment was not to restrict the rights of the people to own firearms of virtually any type, but to protect the people from their own government by guaranteeing the people the right to own weapons powerful enough to keep its government in check. Oh, and by the way, that is one of the reasons why, in both World War I and World War II, no enemy nation ever tried to invade the United Statesthe American people were too heavily armed, and no nation on Earth had an army large enough to physically overwhelm us. Do the socialists in the United States government know that? If they didn't before May 13, 1939, the liberals on the high court explained it to them.
In 1902, four years after the Spanish-American War, Theodore Roosevelt's Secretary of War, Elihu Root proposed creating a powerful citizen's militia. The plan was floated in the House of Representatives by former Spanish American War Major General and then Congressman Charles W.F. Dick as the Militia Act of 1902, or as it was more commonly known, The Dick Act of 1902 ([HR 11654l 32 Stat 775) ] (which actually did not become law until 1903). Root proposed The Dick Act because Roosevelt, who fantasized about the United States as the mightiest global military power, recognized that, during the Spanish American War, America had demonstrated military weaknesses and, Roosevelt believed that, had we been fighting England instead of Spain, the United States would likely have lost..
Roosevelt's global aspirations were not lost on Congress since whenever he spoke about US interests, he always spoke in a global context (although biographer, Howard Beale, insisted that Roosevelt had abandoned his imperialistic aspirations when he ascended to the White House after the assassination of William McKinley by socialist anarchist Leon Czolgosz on Sept. 6, 1901 at the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, New York.) That's why The Dick Act was so hard to pass. Many Americans viewed it as Roosevelt's attempt to build a National Militia that could be mobilized on a moment's notice and sent off to war. Teddy Roosevelt's 20th century version of the 1775 Minutemen.
Wary of Roosevelt and Root, when Congress finally enacted The Dick Act they created three classes of militia in the United States: the National Guards of the States, Territories, and the District of Columbia; the unorganized citizens' militia (the equivalent of the Revolutionary War Minutemen); and, finally, the regular army of the nation. The Dick Act invalidated every gun control law enacted by either the federal or State governments. Furthermore, The Dick Act of 1902 contained a clause linking it to the 2nd Amendment and mandating that HR 11654 could never be repealed. Also under the non-repealable Dick Act, the President of the United States was denied the authority to deploy the Organized Militia (the National Guard [which is controlled by the governors of each State]) for defensive warfare outside of the United States. The sole purpose of the Organized Militia (the National Guard) was to repel invasions.
When President Woodrow Wilson deployed US National Guard troops to Europe during WWI, Congressman William Gordon [D-OH], in a speech on the floor of the House on Thurs., Oct. 4, 1917, cited HR 11654, arguing that Wilson's sending National Guard troops to Europe was so unconstitutional that Congress was obligated to impeach Wilson and remove him from office. And, you thought Barack Obama was the first to blatantly ignore both the laws of the land and the Constitution of the United States. It's been going on since socialist movement in 1906.
But what was most important and should not be overlooked is that the irrevocable law, HR 11654, repealed every antigun law enacted to date, and forbade the government of the United States from enacting any laws which attempted to restrict or prohibit American citizens from buying, owning, carrying or using firearms anywhere in the United States of Americabecause even the Social Progressives from the first world war era recognized that the minute private citizens lose the right to own and possess firearms, liberty will vanish and free men will become the human chattel of dictators.
children as the prop to
That's why politicians love to use children as political props to sell their agendas. The far left loves to chastise former President George W. Bush who, they claim, "...callously used children as political props to kill stem cell research." What did Bush do? On July 19, 2006, before vetoing the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2006 (HR 810), he held a press conference in which he used what the leftwing media called "snowflake children" (children who came from frozen embryos). The media called the children, there with their parents, "political props" because during his brief press conference announcing that he was vetoing the stem cell bill, he said of the children, "These boys and girls are not spare parts."
(Jon Ponder of the leftwing blog, Pensito Review, who wrote the story, is the editor of Gore Vidal's website. After bashing Bush for using "snowflake children" as props for his veto, Ponder said, "If God is vengeful, She will smite President Bush with an illness that can only be cured by stem cells from discarded embryos."). Yet the left never said anything when Obama used a group of elementary school children who had been prompted by their teachers to write letters to Obama to ban guns. But, Investor's Business Daily did. They said, "Instead of providing [America's schools] with the same armed security his children get, [Obama] exploits children as stage props to repeal a Second Amendment [the school children] haven't been, and likely never will be, taught about."
On Jan. 15, Jay Carney's daily press briefing was centered on Obama's "concrete package of gun control proposals" to renew the assault weapon ban. outlaw high capacity ammunition magazines and Carney said, "close the loopholes on background checks. They will be joined," he said, "by children from around the country expressing their concerns about gun violence and school safety, along with their parents."
When Obama held his photo op, exchanging hugs and "high-fives" with children while "amending" the Constitution with 28 Executive Orders (which lack any standing in this nation as law) that were designed to dilute the 2nd Amendment, Obama said: "Can we say that we're truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose? I've been reflecting on this the last few days, and if we're honest with ourselves, the answer is no. We're doing enough. And we have to change."
Megyn Kelly of Fox News also noted that Obama didn't have a problem using children as political props although he complained about Bush-43 doing so in 2006. Kelly noted than when he held his press conference in which he decided to amend the 2nd Amendment by Executive Order, Obama used as his backdrop a group of children who had been prompted by elementary school teachers to write tear-jerker letters to Obama begging him to legislatively outlaw guns since everyone knows it will not happen constitutionally. If Obama's "bully boys"Organizing For Americasomehow strong-armed (or bribed) members of Congress to create a constitutional amendment resolution and by a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate, send it to the States where 3/4 of the States must ratify it before it becomes part of the Constitution. Kelly noted that people on her Twitter line called it "disgusting and shameless" that Obama would use children for props to sell his wholly unconstitutional gun regulation Executive Orders. One Twitter fan wrote that that GOP should have their own news conference with the parents of children whose lives were saved by guns.
One of Megyn Kelly's Twitter followers asked: "Is Obama deliberately trying to start a revolution in America? He's actually starting to make dumb-dumb Dubya look good." Another said, "The only reason Obama's not Hitler is because he hasn't had enough time to become him." Another Megyn Kelly fan quoted two sentences from Mein Kampf. Let those words roll around in your mind and gel with the words of the Hughes Court in US v Miller. "The State must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of libertyand almost any deprivation."
Right now is a good time to remind you, once more, of US v Miller 307 US 174. You need to think it at least a few minutes every day because, believe me, Barack Obama and the left on Capitol Hill do. Every day. And for more than just a few minutes. They think about US v Miller more than US v Heller and much more than McDonald v Chicago. They know they will never be able to abolish the 2nd Amendment constitutionally because they believe that US v Miller was a decision by a liberal court rather than a conservative oneand that scares them. And they know that Miller protects the American people from its government by guaranteeing them the right to own weapons powerful enough to keep its government in checkand that scares them even more. In other words, according to the Hughes Court in an 8 to 0 votein the checks and balances system of governmentruled that the people of the United States need to be perpetually armed as well as its government just in case a replay of April 19, 1775 is needed.
Young children, of course, don't know about how, or why, the Founding Fathers created a system of government where the People, the politicians and the courts share power equally because American schools no longer teach real American history. Today in America's schools they teach our children about how Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt saved the world by creating the United Nations; but they don't teach about George Washington at Valley Forge, or how two men named John Hancock and Samuel Adams inflamed a nation and started the American Revolution. Nor do they teach how, in the 20th century, elected despots became dictators for life by accomplishing one very difficult task "in the name of the children"disarming their parents by outlawing the private ownership of guns..
The despots, whether socialist or fascist, usually pose as benevolent caregivers who only want the best of everything for the citizens of the nations they were attempting to stealwhich is why, in their photo ops, they were usually surrounded by children. People who love children generally don't despise their parents. The banner (above) shows a sampling of world despots who used children as political ploys: Adolph Hitler, Fidel Castro, Josef Stalin, and Hugo Chavez. We could have also added men like Vladimir Lenin, Benito Mussolini, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Milton Obote and Jean-Claude Duvalier. Once they got a stranglehold on power, the adolescent props were no longer needed although several dictators continued to use them as they slaughtered hundreds of thousand to millions of their citizens, possibly using the children to deflect accusations and to camouflage their crimes.
Despots like Hitler, Stalin, Mao and, yes, Barack Obama, will manufacture every crisis they needlike spending a trillion dollars a year in order to create a global financial crisis by deliberately collapsing the US economy and creating precisely the same type of hyperinflation in the United States that the government of the Weimar Republic brought to Germany. Only, they didn't do it on purpose. Obama did. Don't get me wrong. Obama isn't that smart. Contrary to the liberal media experts who have it on "good authority" from Obama public relations spinmeisters that Barack Hussein Obama has a brilliant mind and an above average IQ. Without a TelePrompTer, the man can't put six cohesive words together to form a sentence. Yet he sits in the White House. And the elitist media kingpins sit on their regal fourth estate thrones telling the conservatives in the House of Representatives they are obligated by common decency to give the victor his spoils. I have one question for the fourth estate.
Why did not a single newspaper reporter or TV journalist take five minutes to examine the 2008 Federal Election Commission election results report which Obama arrogantly posted on the White House website prior to my finding it there on Nov. 28, 2009 as a slap in the face to California attorney Orly Taitz? Taitz filed a Quo Warranto lawsuit against Obama, demanding to know by what authority he sat in the Oval Office (believing that would somehow make Obama produce his birth certificate)? By posting the FEC document, Obama was telling her, "...by winning the election." Had Obama, or anyone on the White House IT staff looked at the document they had posted, they would have noticed one glaring mistake. There were more votes than voters. Well, wait a minutesomeone did. They simply "cut out" the mistake before posting the document. It was the blank box that should not have been blank that caught my attention and made me examine the documentand then go to the FEC website where I found the same document. Completely filled out. Line one on the White House website said: "Number of registered voters: 169 million. Number of registered voters who voted: BLANK. Percentage of registered voters who voted: 56.8%" If you know how many registered voters there are, and you know what percentage of those voters voted, you have to know how many registered voters voted since the percentage comes from the other two numbers. You can't have two of them without the third. Line one on the FEC document said: "Number of registered voters: 169 million. Number of registered voters who voted: 96.992 million. Percentage of registered voters who voted: 56.8% The bottom line on both the FEC document and the White House document told the whole story: "Number of votes counted: 132,618,580." There were 35,626,580 more votes than voters.
Although the government is constitutionally required to post those numbers, the FEC document did not end up in the public domain anywhere where I could find it. It took me about 12 hours to find most of the information. The only stat I did not find was the number of registered voters. That aside, various leftwing websites, bragging about Obama's second "win," provided me with the rest of it. Percentage of registered voters who voted: 57.7%. Number of registered voters who voted: 90,682,968. Number of votes counted: 126,985,809. In 2012, there were 36,302,651 too many votes. Don't forget, this time around, the Obama-ites stole about 6 million votes from registered Republicans by early-voting them, that needs to be added to the vote spread, so the vote theft in 2012 was somewhere around 42,500,000. Obama was credited with winning 61,173,739 votes to Romney's 58,167,260 votes. Ignoring the stolen "GOP election day voter" votes by someone early voting their names, the totals tell us that Barack Obama didn't really win 61,173,739 votes in 2012, he only won 24,871,088 votesor 8,959,229 votes less than he actually won in 2008 (which totaled 33,830,317 votes). If you could correct the totals by giving the stolen votes back to the registered GOP voters in the battleground states who complained someone early voted them, Romney's total in 2012 would not be 58,167,260 votesit would have been closer to 64,167,260 votes. Even without deducting the voting machine theft which was rampant throughout the United States, Mitt Romney would have been the 45th President of the United States. Or rather, he should have been. If I could catch the theft in 12 hours, the FEC with the power to subpoena, could have had that information by the time their office opened on Wednesday morning. But sadly for America, Obama was controlling the head of the FEC..
Once again, if a simple blogger without a research staff or access to the Democratic or Republican Parties, or access to this data without a FOIA request, can uncover this information within 12 hours following each election, why didn't the leftwing mainstream media do its job and kick over a few moldy, social progressive rocks? The answer? Because a cabal of globalist, one-world, New World Order politicians, princes of industry and barons of banking and business with membership in the Trilateral Commission (which was formed in 1973 as an adjunct arm of the Council on Foreign Relations [founded in 1921]) to disarm the world and create world government had a Manchurian Candidate in the race, and to accomplish their objective, they needed him to win. Since the 25 largest newspapers in the United States, Reuters and the Associated Press are controlled by them, it's a safe bet the only rocks they would ever kick over would have been those the Trilateralists wanted kicked overwhich was none of them..
And, right now, there are several very large, ugly political rocks the Trilateralists don't want kicked over. The first and most important rock the Trilateralists (and, by extension, the Trilateralists controlled newspapers, don't want turned over is why the leftwing "free press" aren't asking the White House why there was a birth certificate on whitehouse.gov that was forensically proven by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio [R-AZ] to be a forgery? (Clearly, if Obama had a real birth certificate that actually verified he was born in Hawaii, he would have produced it instead of this charade. Logic tells us that Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. was not born anywhere even remotely close to the United States. And since his mother was 3 months and 25 days shy of being able to transfer blood citizenship rights to her offspring, what does that make him? "No mama, no papa, no Uncle Sam."
And the second and third biggest rocks they don't want kicked over are those hiding the number of voters and number of votes counted in 2008 and 2012. And, the fourth biggest rock they didn't want kicked over was Obama's political and economic agenda. But, that doesn't matter because his motives are already becoming frighteningly transparent. In his first term, Obama almost broke the back of the US economy. When he began talking about coining at least seven $1 trillion coins (because the Constitution gives the exclusive right to "coin money" to the US government [i.e., the US Treasury]), Obama thinks he's found a way around Article I, Section 7 which makes the House the caretaker of the nation's pursestrings. If the House of Representatives tells the White Houseand the US Senateit had better get used to living within its budget because the debt ceiling is not going to rise, it's clear Obama will use his new trillion dollar coins to deliberately spent the United States into bankruptcy. Keep in mind, while the Federal Reserve, based on the Federal Reserve Act which was signed into law on Dec. 23, 1913, now prints our paper money, only the US Treasury has the right to coin it. And the Treasury doesn't have to sell debt bonds to cover the pocket change it coins. The only thing the law says is that coins must be made of metals that have some intrinsic value. That's why nickels contain nickel and dimes, quarters, half dollars and dollars, containing a small amount of silver. In fact, Congress is now considering eliminating the $1, $2 and $5 bill, replacing them with coinage. In other words, someone has already cracked the door for Obama's trillion dollar scheme.
As of Jan. 28, 2013 the US national debt was $16,432,567,939,377.22or $54,086 in personal debt for every man, woman and child in the United States. Have you ever wondered by newborn babies cry when they come out of the womb?
Because they exit the womb owing Barack Obama $54,086. And, if Obama is able to promulgate his plan of creating a dozen or so $1 trillion coins that he can spend like pocket change, the babies born in 2016 should be literally screaming because they will owe $124,938 the moment they draw their first breathif the US economy still exists, that is.
Just between you and me, I think its time for the children of the United Stateswith absolutely no prompting from the school teachers (which, in this case, would never happen)demanding that Congress rein in economic maniac in the White House and curtail his spending their money and the money of future generations of unborn children because it appears that Obama plans to spend the United States out of existence. He will leavie behind only economic devastation in a nation that will, from sea to shining sea, look like the slums of Detroit. Americans interested in protecting liberty and economic freedom in the United States, need to begin by protecting what Obama calls an archaic, outdated documentthe Constitution of the United Stateswith added emphasis on the safeguarding the 1st and 2nd Amendments which provides both the teeth and the muscle to that aging, archaic document. If the 2nd Amendment did not exist, or that constitutionally unrestrictable right of the American people was abridged, liberty would soon be dead in America, as would the nation itself.
Now you see why the intellectual midgets in the White House and the lefties in the US Senate decided to bring out the children's brigade to sell Congress on banning automatic weapons and gun magazines that hold more than ten rounds. First, the IQs of the Adolescent Advocacy Brigade is higher than the "Occupiers" who work for Obama, and much higher than the lefties in the House and Senate who clearly understand that the right to keep and bear arms was deliberately inserted in the Constitution to protect "We The People" from those whom they entrust with power. You see Congressman and Senator, we've been there...and we've done that.
You see, we're smart enough to realize that the Adolescent Advocacy Brigade was not about protecting the children (even though they believed Obama when he said it was). And, its not about stopping crime (since every city and every State that bans or critically curtails the private ownership of guns increases all forms of crime within that city, county or State by eliminating the right of private persons to protect themselves, thereby giving criminals the edge over the population at large). What its about, plain and simple, is eliminating your right to own firearms to protect you from the criminal elementsand the governmentthat prey on people to take from them what is rightly theirs.
If you think for a minute that the politicians in Washington, DC are using Rahm Emanuel's "never let a good crisis go to waste" in order to make your life safer and more serene, then you have the intellect of a door knobyou turn your head right or left based on the direction your neck is being twisted. While the 2nd Amendment and The Dick Law say the only way gun rights in the United States can be modified in any way is through the ratification of a constitutional amendmentalthough Vice President Joe Biden, who doesn't have the IQ of the Adolescent Advocacy Brigade who advocate against their parents' own best interests, said that Obama has the right to use Executive Orders to restrict guns.
Myself, I think the House of Representatives needs to use some Adolescent Advocacy Brigade monetary advocates to appear in a series of photo ops with House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan [R-WI], House Appropriations Chairman Harold Rogers [R-KY] and House Speaker John Boehner [R-OH] to plead with Obama and the "give me free stuff" social progressives who think money is manufactured by the tooth fairy, to stopimmediatelyfrom indenturing the next ten generations of children not yet born by manufacturing debt they will be obligated to pay with money they will never have from jobs that will never again exist in the United States due to people like Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Harry Reid [D-NV] and Nancy Pelosi [D-CA] who will all decry the use of the Adolescent Advocacy Brigade to sell the GOP's greedy agenda of "If you want what I have, get a job and earn it."