Chinese Proverb and 2012 White House Revision:

Original Chinese Proverb:

Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.


2012 White House Revision:

Give a man a welfare check, a free cell phone with unlimited free minutes, cash for his clunker, food stamps, section 8 housing, free contraceptives, Medicaid, ninety-nine weeks of unemployment, free meds, and he will vote for Democrats the rest of his life; even after he's deceased.

Gun control, coming to your state!

California Gov. Jerry Brown's has signed a measure that bans the open carrying of handguns in California. So, how long will it be until your state does the same? Remember, as California goes, so goes the rest of the nation! Is this action against the second amendment? You bet it is! Will the Obama administration defend the constitution and sue California for this attack on citizens rights? I don’t think so, they are to busy suing states that are attempting to stop the support for illegal aliens. You better pray that the NRA fights and wins against this freedom crunching California law.  

The law, AB144, makes it a misdemeanor to carry an exposed and unloaded gun in a public place. Bill Clinton once stated “that depends on what the definition of is, is”. I wonder what the Liberal CA government definition of “Public place” is (your house)? Not to mention that this is clearly a violation of law abiding citizens rights! Now, if the new laws definition is stated correctly, then the Mad American has found a way around this absurdity, Carry a exposed, LOADED GUN! Wear a shirt that states. “My gun, the gun you clearly see on my person, is loaded, ready to fire and I am trained to hit what I aim at!” Now you should comply with the new law because your gun is clearly loaded and not unloaded. “point out the absurdity by being absurd.”

The governor's office made the announcement in a statement early Monday morning Top California law enforcement officials supported the legislation. Hmmm, I can understand their concerns in the crazy state of CA but a law that takes away freedoms from law abiding citizens is against what they are sworn to do and that is to uphold the constitution and protect citizens! All the facts point to and validate, gun restriction measures increase crime! Who has the strictest gun control laws in the nation and who has the most crime committed with fire arms? Welcome to the District of Columba! If you look at the firearms murder rate per 100,000 people, District of Columbia comes out top - with 16 firearms murders per 100,000 man, woman and child in the state. So why does anyone think increasing gun restricting laws prevents crime? All the stats say just the opposite. If you wish to control crime. Make it a law that all citizens are trained in the use of firearms and that every household owns and has readily available, a loaded fire arm at all times!

Gun Ownership Mandatory In Kennesaw, Georgia
Crime Rate Plummets
by Chuck Baldwin
The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia's ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes.
The city's population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996 (latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997). After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982.
And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998.
With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn't. The fact is I can't remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you?
The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence.
The facts tell a different story. What is even more interesting about Kennesaw is that the city's crime rate decreased with the simple knowledge that the entire community was armed. The bad guys didn't force the residents to prove it. Just knowing that residents were armed prompted them to move on to easier targets. Most criminals don't have a death wish.
There have been two occasions in my own family when the presence of a handgun averted potential disaster. In both instances the gun was never aimed at a person and no shot was fired.

The Los Angeles Times reports that Brown said he had "listened to the police chiefs." Given the facts of the matter, are these city dwelling/raised police chiefs stupid or do they wish to increase their budgets by increasing crime? The facts prove that increasing gun control, increases crime. It is demonstrated without a doubt that if your city’s residents own and are trained in firearms, criminals leave and crime is reduced without police intervention!

Supporters say the only person who knows whether the gun is loaded is the person carrying the gun. Dang, maybe the law should make it mandatory that they all carry unloaded guns, then let the criminals find out who is breaking the law... hee hee. Opponents say the bill is one of many assaults on the public's Second Amendment rights.

 Support this Blog by becoming a member and joining this site (FREE on the right side of the blog) and forwarding this to your friends and asking them to do the same. Make your voice heard!

It's All About Me!

USA TODAY reports: Before his speech Tuesday at Eastfield College in Mesquite, Texas, President Obama stopped by an early childhood education laboratory to read to children ages 3 to 5.

Among his reading selections: A book about the presidential dog Bo, including a drawing of the president himself.
Can you say, Narcissist?


Did you know?

In an obvious effort to protect President Barack Obama, a group of congressional Democrats has introduced legislation to create an official process that will allow the commander-in-chief to keep presidential records secret after he leaves office.

Ironically, Obama revoked a similar George W. Bush order in one of his first official acts as president. In 2001 Bush penned an executive order severely limiting public access to his presidential records. Shortly after swearing in, Obama killed it as part of his much-ballyhooed commitment to government transparency. At the time, the new president claimed that he was giving the American people greater access to “historic documents.”

If the Democrats’ proposed measure (Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2011) becomes law, former presidents will be allowed to assert a new “constitutionally based privilege” against disclosing records of their liking. Here is how it would work; the Archivist of the United States would be required to notify the former president, as well as the incumbent, of intentions to make records public. Anything that either the former or current president claims should be kept private won’t be released.  Pretty Cool huh?

Well…he told us all loud and clear that he was “going to fundamentally change America”

(CNSNews.com) - The Obama administration passed another fiscal milestone this week, according to new data released by the Treasury Department. As of the close of business on Oct. 3, the total national debt was $14,837,099,271,196.71—up about $44.8 billion from Sept. 30.

That means that in the less-than-three-years Obama has been in office, the federal debt has increased by $4.212 trillion--more than the total national debt of about $4.1672 trillion accumulated by all 41 U.S. presidents from George Washington through George H.W. Bush combined. Really, really cool huh? Yep, bring on more of that Hope and Change…Bring on Cain and Newt!

Remember he told us all loud and clear that he was “going to fundamentally change America” Well, here is what Obama meant by "Change".

Families were more dependent on government programs than ever last year.
Nearly half, 48.5%, of the population lived in a household that received some type of government benefit in the first quarter of 2010, according to Census data.
I have no idea why the good old USA has such a debt problem, do you?

Well at last, here is some good news;

John Lott has noticed a corollary to his thesis More Guns, Less Crime: more guns, fewer murders.

According to Lott in his article published at Fox News, after Chicago’s and Washington DC’s strict control gun laws were stuck down;

Newly released data for Chicago (Obamas so called home town) shows that, as in Washington, murder and gun crime rates didn’t rise after the bans were eliminated — they plummeted. WHAT??? WHAT DID THEY SAY??? They have fallen much more than the national crime rate. (snip)  In the first six months of this year, there were 14% fewer murders in Chicago compared to the first six months of last year – back when owning handguns was illegal. It was the largest drop in Chicago’s murder rate since the handgun ban went into effect in 1982. Well, imagine that!

In addition to the decrease in murders committed with guns, crimes committed with guns fell more than non-gun crimes. Works for me, see ya :)

Why I really dislike Obama

Because not only is he a compulsive liar, Obama will lie about what others say to gain support for his position. Obama is a despicable person and poor excuse for a man!

President Obama: Ronald Reagan Would Want 'Buffett Rule' from Colin Sumner on Vimeo.

President Obama at a fundraiser (fundraising is what his focus is, and what he does best) in Dallas, Texas on Tuesday: "Now, this notion that folks are inherently selfish, that’s just not true. (BULL! This is his view and it is incorrect! Like it or not, 99% of all people look to take care of themselves and family 1^st. There is nothing wrong with that. You must be able to take care of yourself before you can help anyone else!) But you’ve got to ask them, right? (WHAT?? Obama/Government has to ask them? Ask them what? To contribute to charity? Take care of their ageing parents? To save and put their children through school? To obey our laws, including immigration?  Ask them what???)

People don’t voluntarily pay taxes. (Really? Why not? Are they selfish and just don’t wish to give away their hard earned money?) But if you ask, most wealthy folks here in Dallas or around the country, they’ll tell you, you know what, I want to make sure that I’m doing my share for America to succeed. (For the most part, if these people are wealthy they have created many jobs and it is those jobs and all citizens prosperity is what America needs to succeed!) But somebody has got to ask. (What??? Ask what? Ask if they want to pay more taxes? Anyone that wishes to, can pay as much as they want to the government, all they have to do is send the check. Asking is fine, adding a tax with the threat of the IRS behind it, is not asking, that is demanding!)

"Now, some Republicans in Congress, they’re already dusting off the old -- their old records. (There he goes again, attack the Republicans. Yep, no politics as usual, he is not a divider, he is the Nobel peace prize winning great uniting guy huh?)  “That’s class warfare.” Let me tell you something, 26 years ago -- some of you may have seen this on television, clips have been circulating -- 26 years ago, another President said that some of these tax loopholes, and I quote, “made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing while a bus driver was paying 10 percent of his salary, and that’s crazy. It’s time we stopped it.” That was 26 years ago. You know the name of that President? Ronald Reagan. (yes and he was correct)

"So was that class warfare? (NO, he closed loop holes, just like he said, but did not discourage investment or savings) By the way, taxes are much lower now than they ever were when Ronald Reagan was President. I know a lot of folks have short memories, but I don’t remember Republicans accusing Ronald Reagan of being a socialist (Your tax policy is not what makes you a socialist. It is your redistribution agenda that is un-American, that and your big government/cradle to grave mentality that is socialistic Your agenda MUST and WILL be defeated in 2012)  -- (laughter) (fools follow fools and birds of a feather flock together) -- or engaging in class warfare, because he thought that everybody should do their fair share." (YOU Sir are an A..hole to make this statement. I have never heard, nor have you…President Reagan refer to “their fair share”. To put words or thoughts into a man’s mouth that he would never have said, words that would go against all the man stood for, all  in an effort to make yourself look like the respectable man that Ronald Reagan was. You Sir are despicable, low life political scum…Have I made my opinion of Obama clear?)

Perhaps you should look at the chart below and find a way to tax people that are not paying taxes now or those that are far below the average. Those are the people that have no stake in America s growth. They are the people who vote for you so you can take care of them. Where is their fair share? Why do the only take, generation after generation? Is this the class you wish to grow?

You want fair? Do away with employer with holdings and make everyone write a check at the end of the year for the Taxes they owe! 

Tax refunds are the government SCAM to make people feel good about taxes!

Yep, thought that is what you were thinking about my comments to your speech.

Mad American

Best Bar Joke Ever

Guy goes into a bar, there's a robot bartender. The robot says, "What will you have?"
The guy says, "Martini."
The robot brings back the best martini ever and says to the man, "What's your IQ?"
The guy says," 168."
The robot then proceeds to talk about physics, space exploration and medical technology.


The guy leaves, but he is curious...So he goes back into the bar.
The robot bartender says, "What will you have?"
The guy says, "Martini."
Again, the robot makes a great martini gives it to the man and says, "What's your IQ?"
The guy says, "100."
The robot then starts to talk about Nascar, Budweiser and John Deere tractors. 
The guy leaves, but finds it very interesting, so he thinks he will try it one more time.


He goes back into the bar.
The robot says, "What will you have?"
The guy says, "Martini," and the robot brings him another great martini.
The robot then says, "What's your IQ?"
The guy says, "Uh, about 50."
The robot leans in real close and says, "So, you people still happy you voted for Obama?"

Illegal alien problem

The letter below is from my good friend in WA

Zupan’s Founder Killed by Illegal Alien

Another Needless Death

When 32 year old Edy Renoso-Ramirez knowingly ignored our immigration laws and came into this country illegally, it was a very simple matter to also flaunt many of our other laws, such as not drinking and driving.  When he did so and hit Mr. Zupan, he immediately tried to run from the scene of the accident, but fortunately was caught by the police.  He has now joined tens of thousands of other criminal illegal aliens who kill over 24 U.S. citizens every single day, and injure, maim or rape hundreds more. This is a huge problem, Americans are not safe from non americans in our own country.

We welcome LEGAL immigrants with open arms, and they typically desire to join our national ‘melting pot’, assimilate into our society and eventually become U.S. citizens.  The crime rate for these ‘legal’ immigrants is about 70% that of U.S. born citizens, while the crime rate of illegal aliens is fully 2 ½ times that of U.S. born citizens (& 3 ½ times that of ‘Legal’ immigrants). Makes sense to me. If you come here illegal, why abide by any laws?

The vast majority of these crimes would not take place if we simply enacted reasonable low-cost legislation.  For example, many more illegal aliens head for Washington State to live, rather than Oregon, simply because Oregon has tightened requirements for getting a driver’s license, which is the gateway document for many services.  Washington however, does not require proof of legal residency. They darn sure do if you are white!

We need to mandate the use of the federal E-Verify program, so only U.S. citizens and ‘legal’ immigrants with Green Cards can obtain jobs.  We also must require all agencies giving out any form of welfare, to use the S.A.V.E. program so that only legal residents and U.S. citizens can get these benefits. Common sense!

With no access to jobs or taxpayer provided benefits, most illegal aliens and their families would pack up and self-deport.  This would not require massive round-ups, will cost taxpayers almost nothing and will have numerous benefits, such as:

1. Free 8-10 million jobs for unemployed U.S. citizens
2. Greatly reduce school funding needs and overcrowding
3. Reduce voter fraud (3% of registered voters in California were found to be illegal aliens)
4. Implementing E-Verify would also prevent a lot of unnecessary pain and suffering by the families of the victims of illegal alien criminals. So why does the government not do these simple steps?

Washington State alone has over 240,000 illegal aliens, costing well over $2 Billion annually.  Savings these costs would go a long way to plugging the budget hole in our state’s deficit.  The cost for illegal aliens in just one county (Los Angeles), in southern California is also over $2 Billion annually. And we can't afford to secure the borders?

One must ask some questions, such as “Where was Mr. Renoso-Ramirez working, and why didn’t someone pay attention to the fact he had a phony Social Security Number?”  How many times had he come into contact with authorities, and was not detained?

More importantly, the simple fact is that deaths like this one could simply not occur if illegal aliens like Edy Renoso-Ramirez could not enter our country and stay here illegally. 

Allen Rogers

4009 NE 158^th Ave.

Vancouver, WA

Chairman

Washington Citizens For Responsible Government

 So do you think there is a problem when people knowing break the law and yet believe that they are not criminals?

 What about this proud man? He just says he will keep killing until he gets what he and illegal followers want, (YOUR MONEY!)    

Is he a criminal?

Is he someone you would like to protect?

Do you think America will benifit by having him and his friends stay in the USA?

What do you think you owe him?

 

 What about our Federal Government... Are they criminals for not doing their duty, by protecting us and our borders? 

..