Sacred cows of the left

It would appear that the left has more concern for their “sacred cows” than for this Republic. The left’s sacred cows are based on opinion rather than fact.

I may as well dispense with this now. The left will claim that the right has a sacred cow as well, the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is based on fact not opinion, that fact is spelled out in the Constitution.

There is one more thing to dispense with. Opinions change, Facts do not. It is a fact that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, the rising and setting of the sun is based on fact not opinion.

Speaking of opinions. I for one am just about tired of opinion polls, sick and tired of hearing what percentage of Americans support or believe in whatever. Opinions change based on new information or when hidden facts come to light. Pollsters are paid, their polls are skewered to get the answer desired. If you ask 100 gun haters about guns you will get a typical gun hater response. Polls are also wrong, every poll taken with the exception of one had HRC handily winning the last presidential election.

When I hear talking-heads on the right spouting the results of the latest poll I just shake my head. When I hear a leftist talking-head spouting the results of the latest poll, well that is to be expected. Both of them, left and right, only spout the poll numbers that further promotes what they are trying to “sell”.

It is sad indeed that this Republic appears to no longer lives under “the Rule of Law” and lives under the “Rule of Opinion”.

The left is in a tizzy over the newest Supreme Court nominee, some of their present “sacred cows” may be dispensed with and some of their future “sacred cows” may never come to light. So let us examine some of those “sacred cows”, and while I am at that I will point out the dangers of being governed(ruled)by opinion.

Abortion. Abortion(the legalized murder of children in the womb)comes to this Republic courtesy of the opinion of the majority of 9 Supreme Court Justices. The left is scared that the newest nominee mat take this “sacred cow” to slaughter rather than continuing to slaughter(legalized murder)children in the womb.

Congress passed no law legalizing the murder of children in the womb and certainly no president signed it into law. It is very doubtful that legalized murder would have ever became law if not for opinion.

I find it a little more than ironic that those who support abortion and perform abortions were themselves in fact born. They art the product of live birth, but in true leftist fashion they seek to deny or provide an avenue for the denial of others what they themselves have, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

The left uses the equal protections clause when it suits their needs or agenda. They claim that it is the woman’s body and therefore her choice, but the unborn has no choice. The unborn is in essence deprived of life and liberty without due process of Law.

Same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage comes to us courtesy of the opinion of the majority of the Supreme Court Justices.

Congress passed no law legalizing same-sex marriage and again no president signed it into law. There is no address of marriage in the entire Constitution, yet same-sex marriage is now a constitutional right. The left used the equal protections clause.

The only historical document that addresses marriage is the Holy Bible, described by God as being between a man and a woman.

Those that profess to support same-sex marriages are the product of marriage as described by God.

I could go on with examples of opinion trumping law but you get the picture.

As said above the left is in a tizzy over the Supreme Court nominee over the way he may vote on issues that effect their “sacred cows”. The fact is no one knows exactly how he will render his opinion. The left can not take that risk, they want a Justice who will hold the same opinion as the leftists and render his opinions as a leftist. They fear a Constitutionalist.

DEO VINDICE.

Advertisements

This is going to get ugly

The left is unhinged and is rapidly becoming totally unhinged. Where has the civility gone? The left has no idea of how to conduct themselves in a civilized manner. Many thought they were just “blowing off steam” after Donald J. Trump was elected President, and they would finally just accept that fact and move on. They are never going to accept that fact and they get can not get past the fact that HRC is not president. It is already ugly and is only going to get uglier.

A so-called comedienne who referred to the daughter of the president as a “feckless cunt”, many thought that funny. A washed-up actor referred to a female cabinet member as a “gash”, and again many thought that funny. In years past the democrats were claiming that the republicans were waging a “war against/on women”. I guess now we know who has the least amount of respect for women.

The President’s Press Secretary was denied service and asked to leave because the owner of the restaurant has differing political views. So now are we expected to believe it has become appropriate to deny service based on political views? The Secretary of DHS was forced to leave a restaurant because of protesters. Has it now become appropriate to protest a person trying to have a quite dinner with their family?

I might point out that both the Press Secretary and the Secretary of DHS are both women and it was the left that showed once again they can not be civil. Again tell me just who is against women.

One of the protesters at the eatery chosen by the Secretary of DHS was identified as a current employee of the DOJ. Are there no standards of conduct for government employees?

The antifascist left made their way to the scene after the election of President Trump, claiming the president to be a fascist. They set about rioting in the streets, destroying property and creating all sorts of mayhem. They claim to be antifascist yet they act in the most fascist manner. They have attacked both verbally and physically those who have a different political view. They have shut down many free speech events because of a differing view.

A political has-been(political hack)from a previous administration has come right and said that the Cabinet should turn against the President. He may as well have called for a mutiny against the President.

A leftist talking head(political hack)has come out and said that if the voters support President Trump, they are the problem, not Trump but his supporters. He as much as said that the ones who support and vote for President Trump are Nazis.

Yet another political has-been(political hack)from a previous administration came out with a tweet showing a picture of the entrance to a Nazi concentration camp. Saying something to the effect, there was another country that had separated children from their mothers. Again a comparison to Nazis.

A sitting member of Congress from the House of Representatives has come out in support of the events at the eateries above and says more like those need to be happening. From my interpretation of what she was saying she was actually encouraging these acts, even saying more like them should happen. Saying as much as when ever a member of the Trump administration is encountered they should be heckled and driven away from eateries, gas stations and where ever they are encountered. Some, if not most, on the left are going to see this as their “call to action”, their license if you will.

This will at some point get out of control.

We need not be wasting our time with challenges as to what would have happen if the right had acted like this towards the previous administration. We on the right manage to conduct ourselves in a civil manner, something they are incapable of doing. We do need to come to the realization that the left operates on hatred. They hate President Trump and will transfer that hatred to his supporters.

DEO VINDICE

It is time, past time, to try something else

The height of insanity, as they say, is to keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. So if what you are doing aint working try something else.

Grab a cup of coffee, it is a long one.

Another shooting in a gun free zone, this time at a school in Texas. Was just recently we had another in Florida, Marion County. The shooter in Texas was a student at the school he attacked, the two in Florida were former students of the schools they attacked.

The fact that these schools were gun free zones did little, actually nothing, to dissuade these three villains. In fact it only made things safer for the perpetrators of these violent acts. The only opposition they faced was a SRO, the one in Broward County failed(to put it mildly), the one in Marion County was “Johnny on the spot” though the villain had already surrendered to a teacher. There was also a school shooting in Maryland not too long ago, that SRO also responded in a timely manner, and again the shooting was in-progress.

So let us look at what is not working.
What is not working is the gun free zones of our school system. Being a gun free zone has not deterred a school shooter. I don’t believe it ever has or ever will. That sign only has an effect on law-abiding citizens. I have often wondered just what prompted the primary, secondary and post-secondary school campuses to be legislated into gun free zones. Was it because of just one incident or a series of incidents? Was it a knee-jerk reaction to a tragedy? Was there suddenly an epidemic outbreak of guns at schools? They say that “Life is a two-way street”. Life in a gun free zone is a one-way street. If an attack occurs the bullets are only going in one direction towards the intended victim, that is until armed help shows up.

So what about the SRO, is it working? Yes and no. Much like the cop on the beat he can not be everywhere at once, but his or her presence is or can be a deterrent. Think about this, would you “blow through” a red light if there was a cop car sitting at the intersection? Of course you would not. The SRO much like most law-enforcement waits for a call for service during his or her patrol. If he or she observes something in the course of there patrol they are expected to take appropriate action. When it comes to preventing crime, police presence can deter crime, but is no guarantee, some criminals are determined and will proceed no matter what. In a shooting situation the SRO only responds after the first shot is fired. The cop on the beat responds to a crime in progress.

There is a more important question, concerning the SRO, and that question is why is there a necessity of having law-enforcement in our schools? I believe that the SRO is in the school system because some of the student body is “off the chain”, no self-control(self-discipline) the total lack of the ability to “police” themselves and no respect and the fact that the school system has lost control of the schools and the students. I do not believe for a moment that the SRO was ever put in place to respond to a shooting, that task has just been added to his or her list of responsibilities.

Further gun control measures directed at the law-abiding gun owning citizens. This one speaks for its self. Criminals are not going to care one iota about staying within the law.

I think everyone can agree on the fact that these types of shootings should never happen again. But for even a chance to at least limit these acts we must first abandon the failed course we have taken, in other words it is time to make a “hard pivot”. The left likes to say; “If these measures save even one life then they are worth it”. There is no evidence that gun free zones or the associated signage have ever saved a life, not one. I would wager that no armed criminal has ever walked away because a sign said the citizens therein were unarmed. There is also no evidence that a SRO has ever prevented a single school shooting, the two schools in Florida had an SRO, and still shootings occurred. Therefore it is time to try something else.

Let us then look at and examine some other approaches that could be considered. One could also look at the chances of success.

In my school days, back in the last ice age, we did not ever see a cop at school much less have one posted at the school. In High School, I would venture to say that almost all of the pick-up trucks in the student parking lot had a gun in it, especially if it was hunting season yet we did not shoot each other. I would imagine there were guns in school staff cars and trucks as well. Something has changed. There was no need of an SRO in my day, but then again we were a respectful lot. Nowadays students being “off the Chain” is perhaps why the schools have and need a SRO.

So the current thinking is to harden the schools. The Broward and Marion county incidents prove that entry into schools is to easy, neither of these two chaps had any business being where they were. One possible thing is to have fewer entry and exit points(controlled). Installing metal detectors is another option. Is armed school staff an option? Yes and no. Depending on how the school is laid out arming the teachers may be a bad idea. If the classrooms are still laid out nowadays as they were in my school days having armed teachers is a stupid idea. In my day the teacher sat at the head of the class, farthest from the door with the students between the teacher and the door(the only exit, one way in and one way out). If a shooter were to enter the classroom the teacher if he or she responded would have to shoot over or through the students, running around in a panic. Arming administrative and support staff is a better option, but they must be willing to carry out that mission and undergo training. If they aint willing that option goes out the window. Carrying a firearm comes with great responsibility. That responsibility is why a lot of people choose not to carry a firearm. Using the firearm under stress is yet another matter. Then again there is the political machine(agenda)that must be overcome.

Would more SROs be an option? Yes, but they are expensive or maybe not. What ever happened to Reserve Deputies and Auxiliary Police Officers? You may remember, citizen law-enforcement, working with law-enforcement for free in their own communities. They had the same training as regular law-enforcement, had to pass the same background checks and had the same authority. Now the schooling is not free or cheap, nor is the in-service training. But something could be worked out to pay for the training and it may not be as expensive as one might think. I would venture to say that each and every community(school district)has many if not hundreds of capable and qualified citizens in their midst, retired military(including military police), retired law-enforcement(including correctional officers). Many of these would jump at the chance to serve again, they already have much of the training required and would have no problem with a background check. Speaking of training dollars, how many could have been trained with the money wasted watching shrimp on a treadmill? How many could be paid with the money given to abortion providers? But still the only deterrent offered is their presence.

School Protection Teams could be established, groups of trained and armed individuals patrolling the school grounds.

There are other things that could be considered. Like perhaps talking with the Israelis and finding out how they prevent mass shootings at their schools, if what I read is correct they have only had one. That one was years back and none since. Please do not use the argument that firearms in the hands of Israeli citizens is not as “prolific” as private firearm ownership here in America. Firearms have been in this country since the very beginning, these mass shootings are a product of recent times. It has been reported that there may be as many as 300,000,000 firearms in this country, if guns were a problem there would really be a problem. It is not the gun, it is the person with the gun. The hardening of the schools by arming the staff and placing a SRO in each school still invokes a reactionary approach. Perhaps it would be better to keep them out of the schools, the Israeli’s seem to have done that. The Israeli’s have found it easier to keep them out rather than fight them once them they get in. An ounce of prevention beats a pound of cure.

I as well as others have said that we do not have a gun problem, what we have is a people problem. It seems that nowadays violence is the first option. How many times has it been reported of an argument going straight to a shooting? Look at what happened just outside of Atlanta this past weekend, across the street from a graduation ceremony. People, some people, just have lost the art of communicating, they however are prone to violence. Back in my youth when we had a problem we first tried to talk it out(resolve it), after all reasonable attempts were exhausted we took it behind the field house and settled it there. There were even times where it was decided that the best course of action was to keep a respectable distance between the parties involved until things worked themselves out. They almost always did. Thing is that most involved became life-long friends. I my day violence was the last option considered and was the exception not the rule.

Perhaps something like a think tank could be formed to come up with a solution, a group of rational adults with no particular political motivation and no agenda. Well that just killed that idea. Seriously, we need to stop looking to government to do anything to prevent or to even limit mass shootings. It was government that gave us the gun free schools. The only thing government is good at is either spending or wasting money, even if it means that more money must be spent or wasted. Government thought they could eliminate poverty by giving people money they did not earn and certainly were not entitled to, today welfare is referred to as an entitlement. Their welfare created dependence on government as the producers earned more the moochers needed more. The two longest wars are the war on poverty and the war on drugs.

We need to look to “We the People” to come up with a solution.

A school uniform might lessen the school shootings. How many times has jealousy brought about acts of violence? Uniforms do make a person not in one to stand out as not belonging. I can hear it now, “My clothes are freedom of expression, you are trampling my rights”. Then there is always the left and “the poor cant afford school uniforms” crap. Hell, they cant even afford identification according to the left. How do they live? Private Schools have uniforms. Do not those student have rights also? Go ahead say how the poor cant afford private schools. I point this out, the parents that pay to send their children to private schools are also the one’s footing the bill to pay for the public schools, you know property taxes. They pay twice and still manage to fund the school uniforms, if you rent you pay nothing and still cant fund the school uniforms. Knock of the “pity party” and do better for yourself and your children.

How about we demand that that stupid sign be removed? You know the one that says, “Gun free zone”. Replacing it with one that has the wording similar to,
“Warning”
The Staff and Faculty herein is Heavily Armed, Highly Trained, Highly Motivated and Dedicated Beyond Belief and they will Use any Force necessary, up to and including Deadly Force, to protect the Lives and Well-Being of those placed in our Trust.
Stupid People Win Stupid Prizes.
Do Not Test Our Resolve.
This Is And Will Be Your Only Warning.

Whether or not it is true(the statement on the proposed sign)the above warning may give “pause” to someone with evil intentions. The other sign certainly has not. After all, using the logic of the left, “if it only saves one life it would be worth it”.

By the way, if memory serves schools are also “drug free” zones, the schools must be very successful at combating drugs while failing miserably at keeping guns out of schools. We are not bombarded with coverage of drug busts at schools, the schools must have won the war on drugs. If the schools have won the war on drugs, please tell the federal government your secret, it appears they could use some help. My guess is that drugs are prevalent yet we hear nothing of the drugs.

Maybe the media should end the practice of constantly showing the face of and mentioning the name of the villain. Yesterday nobody even heard of that POS and as soon as the deed is done the face and the name of the POS is everywhere. Instant recognition, now everybody knows their name, much like the so-called talent shows that invade the homes(by invitation)almost nightly. Instant fame. When a person wins one of those “talent shows” how many are inspired by the fame and recognition. How many are inspired by those who carry out these vile acts, because of the coverage they get? Mention their name once, either that whoever is now dead or captured. If the POS was captured the name should be mentioned once more when a guilty verdict comes in. Unless there is a man-hunt underway we should never see their face of hear their name again. The only story that needs to be told is the story of the victims.

Perhaps the answer is as simple as the adults regaining control of the children. Parents are not meant to be friends with their children. Parents need to be parents, they are responsible for raising their off-spring. It seems that in the lives of some or most children today there is no discipline, none from their parents and those that are old enough to practice self-discipline are severely lacking in that arena. There was a time when I saw children I saw the next generation of citizens and it offered great hope for the continued success of this great Republic. In my outings to the local China-mart that vision sadly disappears. What I see is the next generation of inmates. When I see their parents I do not have to wonder why the child is behaving in such a manner. The parent, most often singular, does not give a crap how unruly their child is much less what the child does in the store. The child is a product of their upbringing or the lack of it, a reflection of the parent and life at home with the child being worse that the parent. When those children grow up and have children of their own they will be worse yet. The breakdown in society begins at the home and is only amplified outside the home and over time.

If the parent/s step up to the plate(become parents)most of this may fix itself and would not cost a dime. If it saves even one life it would be worth it.

Or just keep doing what you are doing and let the “village” raise your children and this crap will never stop. What we are doing aint working.

DEO VINDICE

The coming mid-terms

This seems to be one of the three or four things on the minds of most folks these days. I will get to the others later. November aint that far off some primaries have already been held with more upcoming.

Democrat talking heads are predicting a “blue wave”, while Republican talking heads are predicting a “red wave”. Must be political football season again, the blue and red teams are about to take to the field. According to the experts(ex-spurts)the home team(the party in control)generally suffers the most defeats in the mid-terms, referred to as the “mid-term curse”(more on this in a minute).

A few of the democrat “clowns” still want to impeach the President. For what I don’t know. I did not think that hating the sitting president was an impeachable offense. Their leadership wants them to knock off such talk as it might create a windfall for the republicans, as in guarantee a republican(red wave)victory. Basically the democrats have nothing to offer other than the same old same old.

It seems that some of the republicans are trying to throw(lose)the upcoming elections. The republicans hold the majority in the House as well as the Senate, even got the White House. But I do have to wonder what the republicans are up to. Why are they(some of them)doing the work of the minority party. It looks to me that some in the republican party are trying to intentionally lose(throw)the mid-terms with this push to force a discharge petition on amnesty. Now there may be some sort of genius behind this move but I doubt it. I think this is a move to piss of the voters so they sit this one out, ensuring a “blue wave”.

There are many in the republican establishment that still are never Trump(NT), and or anybody but Trump(ABT)and they want him gone(out of office). The question is, How far are they willing to achieve this goal? It was reported that 18 and possibly 19 republican representatives have signed onto this discharge petition. I have to wonder if there might be someone behind the scenes pulling the strings, perhaps a big money donor calling in his or her marker.

Back to the so-called experts. The pollsters(I believe all but one)had HRC handily winning the 2016 presidential election. Well they were wrong. Trump won the election much to the consternation of the experts. They thought the “fix” was in, there gal would win. Now we have the Russian collusion investigation going on entering the second year. There would have been no such investigation had HRC won. Why? I suppose they figured there was no way Trump could become president and if he did it would be because of some outside help or interference. They just could not accept that their candidate was flawed, horribly so.

From the moment President Trump announced he was in the run the establishment was against him(I believe they still are). How many times did they try to get him to drop out? He hung in. I believe there was a secret strategy meeting(most likely more)to find a way to do something about Trump. Not going to rehash that whole fiasco, you get the point.

The night of the election and Trump won it looked like the democrats, liberals, leftists, socialists, progressives(repeated myself)and the establishment were going to lose their minds. Some democrat clowns in congress were looking for reasons to impeach even before President Trump was inaugurated. Before the election how many of the left said Trump would never be president? It was if they had a crystal ball or something(insurance policy).

Now let us go back to these 18 and why they are doing, or attempting to do, the bidding of the left. It takes a lot of money to run for political(Constitutional)office a lot of donors and I do not mean the ones who contribute 20 or so dollars. I am talking about the big money supporters. There is no one who will invest that much financial support and not expect something in return. I have to wonder about these 18 and their motivation. Are they just looking for that last vote? That which they now attempt, is it what they believe to be right? It was not what they campaigned on, did they “evolve”? Are they just repaying donations? When it comes to political campaigns many millions are spent to make hundreds of thousands. Many holding Constitutional office are millionaires or multi-millionaires yet when it come re-election time they hold out their hands begging for contributions, they seem unwilling to risk their own personal fortunes. They end up owing somebody something. President Trump was the exception.

This coming November will be two years since the political establishment was shocked by the win of a “political nobody”. President Trump is still president despite the attempts by some in both parties to force him out or kick him out. In their attacks against the president they have been attacking those who voted him into office. They have been dragging this Republic through the mud for far too long. The investigation by the Special Counsel is entering its second year and the president has come through unscathed. Look at some of the actions to protect that investigation, some republicans have tried to introduce legislation to protect the Special Counsel from being fired by the President. If I am correct it is republican leadership that has stopped this legislation saying it is unnecessary. I believe that they have a different reason, even if the legislation is passed the president would have to either sign it into law or veto it. If he signed it into law then that would in effect be saying he has nothing to fear(no collusion), and they know it. I doubt that the president would veto this.

There were rumors that the investigation would take a break due to the upcoming elections. I believe that says more than just that, the investigation may be hinged to the mid-terms. If the republicans hold both the House and the Senate the investigation may just wrap up with no further findings. If the republicans lose the House but retain the Senate it may continue for a while or come to an end. It will definitely continue if the democrats take both the House and the Senate. One of the first orders for business for the democrats if they take both the House and the Senate will be to impeach the president. They may bring the president up on impeachment charges if they only win the House, if for no other reason that to please(quieten down) some of the noisier democrats.

So are the republicans intentionally trying to lose(throw)the upcoming elections? I will let you draw your own conclusions, I have my own. I point out that around four dozen republicans(House and Senate)are calling it quits. Some are facing a tough re-election(wonder why)or maybe they feel that they may just lose the primaries(remembering what happened in Virginia). These 18 appear to be trying to put the icing on the lose cake.

The republican establishment, including the big money supporters are still pretty well ticked off at us lowly voters for putting A President Donald Trump in the White House, instead of electing one out of their preferred stables. They may just still be ticked enough to throw the elections and subject us to the democrats for a while, you know just to teach us a lesson for departing the reservation.

DEO VINDICE

Just too far apart

Liberals and Conservatives can work things out through compromise(negotiation), truth is they have much in common. Their differences are not all that far apart. They just have to hammer out the finer details. The same is not true of the Left and the Right, they have nothing in common. There are no finer details to hammer out. When it comes to compromise(give and take)with the left they are willing to give nothing and are only interested in how much the right is willing to give them. That is their idea of give and take, taking anything the right is willing to give. The Right and the Left have nothing in common on any issue.

As stated above the Right and Left have nothing in common, no common ground. They, the Left, cant be negotiated with, they seek no compromise. Yet many on the right believe, and wrongly so, that they can work out the differences between the Right and the Left. Here is how the Left negotiates with the Right. We(the Left)are going to cut off one of your arms. Here is what the right does. They present the left or right arm to be cut off and then claim that at least they(the Right)saved the other arm, or say at least we(the Right)did not lose both arms. You simply cant negotiate like that, the correct response would have been “No you(the Left)are not, You(the Left)will cut neither arm off”. No negotiation. No compromise.

Look at what happened in Broward County as a direct result of the PROMISE program. Criminal behavior and acivity were decriminalized because of a supposed school to prison pipeline. There is no direct path from school to prison. To get to prison one must be convicted of a crime serious enough to be sent to prison, that means that law-enforcement was involved. Crimes were overlooked and as such there was no punishment for criminal acts or behavior, no law-enforcement involvement. It seems that too many school children were having run-ins with law-enforcement in Broward County, making the school district look bad. In other words some if not many students were not conducting themselves in a legal and lawful manner so the school district intervened. Because laws were not being enforced one POS was able to legally acquire a firearm, one which he would later use to do exactly what he threatened to do. So in this instance it was the Left that had a program that decriminalized criminal activities and then demanded that non-criminal activities be criminalized. Lost yet? Had the laws already in place been enforced the shooter would have in most likelihood been denied the purchase of a firearm. But sadly we will never know for sure. What we do know for sure is that each and every 18, 19 and 20 year-old(unless in the military or law-enforcement)in the State of Florida is being penalized for the actions of one, just one, 19 year-old. The Left demanded more gun control and the Right offered up the less that 21 year-olds, they can no longer purchase long guns without meeting certain criteria. In fact all Floridians were offered up, as now there is a waiting period to purchase long-guns(unless the customer holds a CCW license). The laws on the books were not being enforced and yet more laws were demanded and enacted. Great, just great.

How are these laws going to effect the elections here in Florida? The gun control legislation in Florida was enacted with the support of the republicans, here the republicans control both Houses and the Governors office. The republicans running for re-election are going to have some explaining to do. They were elected to serve the State, not to vote away the rights of its citizens. States that have enacted onerous gun control laws that are firmly in the hands of the leftist democrats have little to worry about. But Florida? Nationally?

One thing that happened as a direct result of the shooting at MSD in Parkland was that the gun control cult has finally been unmasked, and they did it themselves(though most of us have long suspected). They have come right out and said it is time for the Second Amendment to be repealed. So all of their talk about “common sense reforms” when it come to firearms in the hands of normal citizens was and is just that, talk. They do not seek anything less than total disarmament of the general population. The Left wants the population disarmed, the Right wants to keep and bear arms. There is no middle ground here, but again the Right believes they can negotiate and compromise.

One thing the Left always screams for a more background checks. We already submit to background checks to purchase a firearm from a licensed firearms dealer. They claim it is to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. But how good is a background check if the information is missing or inaccurate? If the young chap in Parkland had been arrested for his many episodes would he have been able to pass a background check? Would his butt have been sitting in jail or prison instead of taking those innocent lives?

So let us stick with background checks for just a moment. As far as legal immigration is concerned a person legally entering this country must pass a background check including a health screening and submit to several interviews. The same cant be said of illegals entering this country, there is no background check, no interview, no health screening, no nothing. When anybody and everybody is let in you have no idea who or what is among us. So the left does not really give a tinker’s damn about background checks.

The Left likes to promote and throw their idea of gun control(gun confiscation)in the country’s collective face, using the UK and Australia as an example.. The UK has some pretty restrictive gun laws. I am sure that by now most everyone has seen the video of the man with a knife keeping a large body of law-enforcement at bay. Even chasing them, first one then another. It looked a bit like an old Keystone Cops episode. Thing is the Keystone Cops were meant to be funny, you know poking fun. I was actually embarrassed for the UK police force, humiliating video. But even with the strict gun laws in the UK there are still reports of people getting shot. But in addition to people still getting shot they now have new threats, knives and acid. People being stabbed and most often being killed and acid attacks leaving the victims horribly disfigured. Not to mention the occasional motor vehicle being used as weapon. The city of London surpassed New York City in murders for two straight months. What is the Mayor of London concerned about? Fat food ads. Seems like not all that long ago NY city had a Mayor with similar concerns. Recently Australia, also having restrictive gun laws, suffered the first mass shooting in over two decades. Clever wording the report said first mass shooting not first shooting.

Back to America and the Leftist enclaves. If your so-called gun control laws worked the cities and states with the strictest gun laws would be the safest. The opposite is true, the cities with the strictest gun laws are the most violent and dangerous cities in this land. They are also the most crime infested. It is the law-abiding citizens who are the losers, while the criminal element enjoys the upper hand. Law-enforcement just cant keep up. I could not imagine being afraid to sit on my front porch at night because I might become the victim of a drive-by shooting. Nor could I imagine sitting in my house behind locked doors out of fear even in broad daylight. Criminals do tend to operate most effectively in areas where they will face the least resistance. The opposite is true, they tend to avoid areas where they don’t have the upper hand, facing resistance and possibly(most likely)armed resistance at that.

The Right can no longer foolishly believe that the Left can be reasoned with, negotiated with or compromised with. The time has come to say “No more”. Perhaps it is time to tell them to go piss up a rope. The left has renounced reason.

DEO VINDICE

The liberals in a nut shell

They are for the death penalty as long as the condemned is still in the womb. Other wise they are totally against putting a person to death. Kind of seems backwards to me, willing to condemn the innocent but protecting the life of the guilty.

They fight tooth and nail against voter ID laws, claiming it imposes undue hardships on the poor. I guess that the poor can not afford a picture ID. Yet they have never proposed legislation that would provide a photo ID at taxpayer expense for the poorest. I can not understand why they never propose such legislation especially when they believe that government is always the solution. I also wonder why the republicans never propose this.

They are for religious expression as long as Christianity is not the religion being expressed. They are for free speech as long as everyone is saying what they are saying or what they want to hear. If it goes against what they say, think or believe then they call it hate speech. They demand to be heard while demanding others be silent. They don’t really have to worry about the press, the press is in their corner. They would rather have the First Amendment repealed than have to contend with differing view points.

They support the Second Amendment as it pertains to hunting, except for those that have come right and said the Second Amendment should be repealed. Problem with that cupcake is that the Second Amendment was not written to allow hunting. You can read the Second Amendment forwards, backwards and even upside down and you will not find the words hunting, target practice or sports shooting. The Second Amendment was written for a specific purpose and reason.

They only want to ban scary looking rifles and high-capacity magazines. They even come up with new words, their new one is military grade. The old one was assault weapon. They say no one should be allowed to have military grade weapons but the military and law-enforcement. I believe the correct term would be Mil-Spec(Military Specification). But you could not call the AR-15 a Mil-Spec weapon could you? The AR-15 is not made to Military Specifications, it is a modern sporting rifle made for civilian use.

But then that is what you do you use words, more accurately use a play on words. You cant really come out and say you are pro-abortion, can you? That would equate to being pro-death. So you use the phrase pro-choice, by using the word choice it gives the impression that what happens was the choice of all. The truth of the matter is that the one directly effected by the “choice” had no “choice” in the matter. So lets look at some of your other plays on words.

When it comes to gun-control you use phrases like;
End gun-violence. Why do you never speak of ending violence? The U.K. banned guns and that did not end or stop crimes committed with a firearm, they still happen. They may have lees crimes committed with a firearm than here in the U.S., but for two straight months this year(Feb and Mar)the murder rate in London surpassed the murder rate in N.Y. City. The residents of London now have to contend with knife-crimes and acid-crimes(violent acts committed with a knife or acid). So the U.K. stopped the mass shootings, sort of, and now they face the possibility of mass stabbings and acid attacks. Now London lawmakers are having to come up with laws to control knives and acid. They now have to end knife-violence and acid-violence. Our northern neighbors had an act of violence that involved a man driving a van on a sidewalk and mowing down pedestrians, 10 dead and 15 injured. He used neither a gun, knife or acid his weapon of choice was a motor vehicle. A person intent on killing or maiming will use whatever tool is available. Neither the gun, the knife, the acid nor the motor vehicle is violent on its own in each case it takes a human to use those items in a violent manner. For you it is not about ending violence, it is about ending guns in the hands of the citizens(law-abiding citizens). If your gun-control measures worked the most violent cities in this land would be the safest, but it is the exact opposite.

We have to do it for the children. You really expect me to believe that you care about children when far more are murdered by abortion. Enough said on this one.

If it saves just one life it is worth it. My question is worth what? You and I both know that there is no way to prove that even one life was saved. This simply can not be measured. Besides some in your camp(cult)have come out and said that no legislation could have prevented______(fill in the blank).

And then there is everyone’s favorite. We just did not go far enough.

Now that the gun-control cult has been outed, your far enough in that matter is the repeal of the Second Amendment and banning all firearms from the public. You are okay with the military and law-enforcement having all of the guns, well all of them but what the criminals have. The criminals will still have guns. Maybe you should look back in history, not that far back either, and see what happens to the civilian population when they are deprived of the tools to defend themselves. There was a reason that the Founders and Framers included a Bill of Rights, in particular the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Read about Boston, Lexington Green and Concord. Read the Declaration of Independence. Read the Constitution, there was a reason the Founders and Framers did not want a full-time standing army, if they did not want a full-time army they certainly had no intention of giving them all of the guns. Since law-enforcement is part of the government local, state and federal they certainly never meant for government to have all of the guns either. They also never meant for the people to be deprived of arms, if they had they would have said so.

Speaking of the Constitution you use it to your advantage when it suits your agenda. Take the Electoral College for instance, when your guy wins the Electoral vote you shout to the world that the system works, you do not mention the popular vote unless you by chance get both. When your guy, or in this case gal, loses the Electoral vote but wins the popular vote you scream that the election was illegitimate the Electoral College is outdated and does not represent America. When it comes to the Second Amendment you say the Founding Fathers never intended for us to have _____(fill in the blank). You use the equal protection clause for every group but Christians and gun owners.

They want every person in this country to vote in the elections regardless of citizenship. I guess not enough legal citizens supported your candidate, you need some illegal support. Win any way you can, right? You really are an obstructionist when it comes to securing the border. Would you act the same if those coming here illegally were apt to vote republican? While on this subject, you are having a “kitten” over the citizenship question being talked about when the new census comes out. You want to count heads not citizens. Why? Seats in the house are based on population, the number of citizens not heads. You could stand to lose some House seats, reports have it that there has been an exodus of citizens from your liberal leftist states. Not to mention the money that flows to states is also based on population. If it was the way it was you would have to send money to D.C. based on the census, you would kick the illegals out so fast and hard they would bounce three times before coming to a rest on the other side of the border and build a wall a hundred feet tall and ten feet thick with a minefield to keep them out.

What is going to happen on your march to go far enough? This question sets up another post.

DEO VINDICE

What? You expected something else

Some of act like you are surprised that your Facebook data was and is being used by research firms. Really, how much security did you expect? After all who was it that told them you were on your way to take a “dump”? You or them? Now you are mad at Facebook. Who forced you to set up the account and constantly update your status? You or them? Did you fill out all the information when you opened your account? Or did you just fill out the blocks with an asterisk(*), you know required fields? And the photos, please, if you must post “selfies” clean your mirror.

Speaking of mirrors, look in one and tell me what you see. Better yet do it this way. First affix the blame for your Facebook data being “out there”. Blame either Facebook or Yourself. Second look in the mirror. What do you see? If you blamed Facebook, you should be seeing the reflection of a Leftist Liberal Socialist Progressive. If you blamed yourself, you should be seeing the reflection of a Conservative.

Facebook only put the product out for you to use or not. It was your choice to have a Facebook account or not. Facebook is not to blame you are. But go ahead and take your anger out on Facebook. Frankly, this is the action of a socialist democrat. Blaming everything but the “root cause”. HRC has been all over this planet giving speeches and having a “good old-fashioned pity party” about losing the election. She lost, but has she yet to blame herself for losing? Everything and everybody else but never herself. Come to think of it has any politician ever really blamed themselves for losing an election, I really mean blame themselves? I do not mean the lack of “fire in their belly”, a total “copout”, an excuse.

The folks at Facebook should not get to worked-up over this “indiscretion”. The American people have a way of forgetting when they were wronged and who wronged them. Was not all that long ago there were some videos that came out with an abortion provider selling “baby body parts”. Man, the right sure got worked over that little “indiscretion”, hell, even congress threaten to defund them. I wonder if they got any part of that 1.3 trillion dollar pork package? I mean hell it was even more recent when the right were swearing off football, never to watch a game again because some knucklehead took a knee during the National Anthem. It seems that they got over that as well. The folks will get over the “indiscretion” at Facebook as well, after all there will surely be another “shiny object” to look at. If no other shiny object appears a good old-fashioned heartfelt apology usually does the trick, if all else fails somebody has to resign.

I very seriously doubt that anybody will be talking about the indiscretion at Facebook or the company that benefited after tomorrow. A new shiny object is about to appear that will cause all the past shiny objects to “pale in comparison”. The Facebook indiscretion will be forgiven, for tomorrow millions will put their anger aside and turn to social media.

Think about all of the other “social media” accounts you have. How much information did you voluntarily give them? Who has access to that data? Who has control of deciding who has access to the information? You did read the privacy policy and the terms of service, didn’t you?

DEO VINDICE