Sunday evening, Barack Obama attended and spoke at the memorial service for the 26 victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Obama proclaimed that ″we″ are not doing enough to protect our children and vowed to use his powers to push new gun control laws because ″we must change.″ Already a growing chorus of politicians are lining up, like Senators Joe Manchin, Mark Warner, and Diane Feinstein, as well as NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and former Congressman Joe Scarborough. Many on Capitol Hill seem ready to take on the National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment to ban so-called ′assault weapons′ as well as high-capacity ammunition magazines. In recent weeks, we have heard that America is suffering from a ′Culture of Guns′, but I say it is a Culture of Death which plagues us. How Obama can shed his crocodile tears for the dead from Sandy Hook while supporting late term abortions is the height of hypocrisy!
So here we go! Obama wants to do something to end violence upon children when he is in favor of tiny infants being ripped out of their wombs. Procedures involving the crushing of a child′s skull to make it easier to yank out of the mother′s body are just dandy to Obama. He also has no problem with babies born from ′botched abortions′ to be tossed into trash bins where they die a slow and agonizing death. This is the Culture of Death which stains the hands of Barack Hussein Obama and his friends in the Liberal Progressive movement.
Oh sure, Mika Brzezinski can wail and howl over gun ownership, but where is she on the subject of abortion? While it is fair to say that the murder of 20 children at Sandy Hook is a terrible tragedy, how do we describe the slaughter of nearly 40 million infants following Roe vs Wade? Do they, the Liberal Progressives, call it a holocaust as it should be rightfully known as? No, they call it a choice. Well, I want a choice, too!
I want the freedom as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to be able to arm myself against a tyrannical government. If that means being able to purchase and carry a 10-millimeter Glock or own a Bushmaster rifle, then so be it. Obama has talked before about building a ′domestic army′, a civilian national security force, most likely made up of SEIU and ACORN thugs who will carry out house-to-house searches as part of a national gun confiscation plan.
Let us be serious! America is awash in firearms. At least some 300 million that are legally owned and probably throw in another 50 to 100 million that are illegally obtained. No law is going to curtail gun violence unless you do confiscation. So why does Obama want to waste our time with another foolish, feel-good law? He cannot even write, let alone, balance a budget. But the goofballs on the Far Left think Obama will save the children from acts of violence. Too bad the same idiots do not see where the real violence is being done, in hospitals and medical clinics all across the nation.
So stick that in your choom-bong and smoke it, Barack Hussein Obama! We are not buying your newly discovered concern over the safety of the children of America. The effort by Obama and others to exploit the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting for their political gain is disgusting. Not half as disgusting, however, as the hypocrisy where in Obama and the same Liberal Progressive dingbats think that abortion is just another medical procedure. Sorry, but it is DEATH, death to the most helpless, the most innocent. The blood of millions are on your hands, Obama. You, too, Mika! I just hope that the National Rifle Association has the cajones to truly stand up to these hypocrites and defend our Second Amendment rights.










December 18th, 2012 at 7:39 am
“Culture of Death” is the best way to describe the left. Abortion is evil and more detructive than guns. I am not a fan of guns but I do see the neccessity.
These guys who do mass murder usually go to guns free zones because they can do the most demage there. This young man at The Sandy Hook killed himself when someone finally pointed a gun at him.
I agree with Limbough when he said he would give up his gun if there is absolute guarantee when he walked out the door no one else was carrying a gun and could do him no harm. Unfortantely, that is not the case. Criminals do not obey laws. The rest of us do obey and that is why we do not want to be sitting ducks of criminals and your government.
December 18th, 2012 at 9:06 am
Must be driving liberals crazy that gun sales have soared in the last four years under Obama.
December 18th, 2012 at 11:24 am
Senator Dianne Feinstein on gun control:
“If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it.”
- Senator Dianne Feinstein, 1994
“Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe.”
– Senator Dianne Feinstein, 18 November 1993
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Feinstein carries a Colt Snub Nose .38
December 18th, 2012 at 5:09 pm
Hah !
Its the moonbats who’s runnin around puttin caps in each others asses.
December 18th, 2012 at 6:32 pm
Feinstein is 80 years old hence she is a DINO.
Her assets? Approximately 99 million but “some money is in BLIND TRUSTS”.
Her daughter– a judge in SanTranny.
Honestly I don’t give a rat’s a** what her opinion in on anything.
Term Limits come to mind but yes I am dreaming.
We are sadly stuck with both partys having these “richie rich stuck up do nothings” spew their unwarranted opinions.
John Kerry as Sec of State…..ROFL.
December 18th, 2012 at 8:04 pm
Its much easier to track and confiscate the guns that are legal today.
Getting a hold of all the illegal guns will be much harder.
The population that holds most of those illegal guns are Blacks and Latinos in all your major cities. They’re also moonbats.
I can see where this is going
December 19th, 2012 at 4:12 am
Faye @ # 5, based on expertise, foreign knowledge, and/or just a strong resume of solid credentials, who other than John Kerry would you suggest? And what specifically do you feel disqualifies Kerry? The only alternative I can come up with is Richard Lugar but became a victim of the Tea Party’s brilliant strategy. Speaking of “ROFL”.
December 19th, 2012 at 5:59 am
Don’t forget that Feinstein’s hubby made a whole lot of money in the 1990s investing in the importation of guns and ammo from China which were allowed in the loopholes of the so-called ‘assault weapons’ ban.
December 19th, 2012 at 9:45 am
Kerry thinks our troops are reminiscent of Genghis Khan and they only enlisted because they’re uneducated.
I would request that our sec of state have a little more faith in our military.
December 19th, 2012 at 12:25 pm
Kerry is a bit of a laughing stock among the troops, not someone who motivates them well. When you put liberals in charge of troops, it gets people killed unfortunately because their morale goes down.
December 19th, 2012 at 1:56 pm
I would try to give your analysis some credence Patrick if it weren’t for the fact there’s seldom credence in your analysis. I mean, Kerry is a laughing stock to the troops based on????? Based on because you say so? You, the same guy that makes up silly stuff on a regular bases and then goes into hiding after I’ve expose it as nonsense? Are you joining Micky in traveling back through time to exploit Kerry’s obvious misspoken statement?
Based on your claim that liberals in charge of troops kill people, obviously anyone other than a conservative won’t cut it for you. But a conservative wasn’t elected to make this appointment and conservatives weren’t given the Senate to confirm a conservative. So other than your asinine jab at Kerry, you may as well be pounding sand while expecting to be taken seriously.
December 19th, 2012 at 2:27 pm
When you put liberals in charge of troops, it gets people killed
You mean like Bin Laden?
December 19th, 2012 at 3:06 pm
My goodness nothing like talking about troop morale to get liberals all mad.
John Kerry had a very low level of support among our military men and women in the 2004 election. Most of the reason was his horrific un-American behavior in testifying before congress after serving. Putting him in charge of troops would lower morale and therefore get soldiers killed, which is why he is being considered for SOS rather than SOD.
More generically, the modern day liberal politician in his infinite quest to pander to a base which loathes our troops just has to come down that way in order to get elected. It’s just too bad. Wasn’t always that way. FDR was a good leader of troops but he is the last Democrat president you can say that about.
December 19th, 2012 at 4:55 pm
“When you put liberals in charge of troops, it gets people killed
You mean like Bin Laden?”
No you silly rabbit, like SEAL team 6
December 19th, 2012 at 5:06 pm
RJW
You cant help yourself, can you ?
Every post of yours begins with a personal attack of some kind.
“Based on your claim that liberals in charge of troops kill people, obviously anyone other than a conservative won’t cut it for you.”
Hey Einstein, the most casualties in Afghanistan, in any time span, happened on Barrys watch.
Obamas national security policy is a freaking disaster.
December 19th, 2012 at 7:52 pm
“Faye @ # 5, based on expertise, foreign knowledge, and/or just a strong resume of solid credentials, who other than John Kerry would you suggest? And what specifically do you feel disqualifies Kerry?”
Ron?
You first.
What “qualifies” John Kerry?
BTW-How about Sillary?
Her resume?
Define “solid credentials”.
FYI–No power here.
Water leak.
Take your time.
December 19th, 2012 at 7:53 pm
Patrick, you present a rather specious argument on several fronts. You once again cherry pick history to use in your favor while ignoring or distorting reality.
I recall my son’s friends or the neighborhood young adults who had joined the military shortly after graduating high school. They were at my home for a Xmas party or to shoot pool with my boys or such while transitioning from training to being deployed to Iraq. They’d tell me, “sir, we need to fight them there so we don’t have to fight them in our streets”. I’d nod and smile at their misguided brainwashing (like an ideological enemy with no army, navy, or air force will massively board transatlantic flights to come here to fight us in our streets unless we continue to furnish them with fresh young men to satisfy their blood lust, or some other stupid shit). The point to that is that soldiers aren’t conditioned from any political perspective but rather to focus on a mission.
Now let’s stroll back to 2004. The Bush admin pushed big on the “you’re with us or against us” sales pitch. They sold the concept that unless you genuflected to the “Saddam attacked us”/WMD snake oil they were selling, you disrespected the troops. If you so much as questioned any rationale, the counter was that you were attacking the troops. I’d say it will be forever questioned as to the possibility of Bush beating Kerry had he not had his fear mongering and dangling the Bin Laden boogie man to help his reelection. Perhaps this is why Bush let OBL slip through at Tora Bora? But again, the troops are conditioned for the mission, not the politics. And anyone not blinded as a political hack realizes Kerry’s unintentional slip of the tongue was grossly exploited.
So back to my question to Faye about Kerry’s qualification. Your response that solders don’t or didn’t like him is irrelevant and that putting liberals in charge of troops gets people killed is just stupid.
Kerry would make a great SOS or SOD. Don’t mistake those qualifications as those needed for a USO.
December 19th, 2012 at 8:26 pm
“Ron? You first. What “qualifies” John Kerry?
Faye, considering that John Kerry has been a
strong runner up for this position, has been hashed out by pundits from the left and right, and has dominated the news for some time, your question disqualifies you from being taken serious.
December 20th, 2012 at 4:17 am
“Define “solid credentials”.
Ron?
Are Liberal Left Wingers capable of answering a direct question?
ROFL @ “dominated the news”
How so Ron?
His yacht parked in RI instead of Boston harbor?
Avoiding the TaxMan.
December 20th, 2012 at 5:17 am
“I recall my son’s friends or the neighborhood young adults who had joined the military shortly after graduating high school. They were at my home for a Xmas party or to shoot pool with my boys or such while transitioning from training to being deployed to Iraq. They’d tell me, “sir, we need to fight them there so we don’t have to fight them in our streets”. I’d nod and smile at their misguided brainwashing (like an ideological enemy with no army, navy, or air force will massively board transatlantic flights to come here to fight us in our streets unless we continue to furnish them with fresh young men to satisfy their blood lust, or some other stupid shit).”
You sound just like Kerry..”they’re too dumb to know”
No one (except you) implied anyone would land our shores in some Normandy D day fashion.
They’ve attacked us on our shores many times. The first tower bombing, 911, our Embassies, Richard Reed, Ft. Hood The point to that is that soldiers aren’t conditioned from any political perspective but rather to focus on a mission.
“Now let’s stroll back to 2004. The Bush admin pushed big on the “you’re with us or against us” sales pitch.”
Stroll this , Bush said that long before 911.
” They sold the concept that unless you genuflected to the “Saddam attacked us”/WMD snake oil they were selling, you disrespected the troops. If you so much as questioned any rationale, the counter was that you were attacking the troops.”
They volunteered,70% republicans, knowing damn well what their mission was before day one in any boot camp.
” I’d say it will be forever questioned as to the possibility of Bush beating Kerry had he not had his fear mongering and dangling the Bin Laden boogie man to help his reelection.”
Bin Laden lived in no ones closet.
If he was such a boggyman then who the hell was that guy SEAL team 6 attacked and killed ?
” Perhaps this is why Bush let OBL slip through at Tora Bora? ”
And you know this how ?
“But again, the troops are conditioned for the mission, not the politics.”
See above.
” And anyone not blinded as a political hack realizes Kerry’s unintentional slip of the tongue was grossly exploited.”
Thats plural Holmes, “slips of the tongue”
If he were any dumber Biden would lose his foot n mouth trophy” to Kerry
“So back to my question to Faye about Kerry’s qualification. Your response that solders don’t or didn’t like him is irrelevant and that putting liberals in charge of troops gets people killed is just stupid.”
Yes, liberals in charge got Stevens and gang along with SEAL team 6 members killed.
Barry also takes the award for the most troops killed in Afghanistan in the shortest time period ever.
So, you call people stupid and then say his exposure qualifies him ?
If thats the case then why in Sye “Gangnam style” being nominated ?
December 20th, 2012 at 5:33 am
John Kerry’s credentials for being SecState are that he likes French mustard, Belgium waffles and his Euro-trash wifey has hairy armpits.
December 20th, 2012 at 5:45 am
Yeah, theres definitely more than one way to some get Heinz on your dog.
I’d make a deal on Kerrys nomination.
If you dont make any cuts to the military and Pentagon, but actually increase their funding I might give Kerry the nod
December 20th, 2012 at 5:46 am
some get= get some
December 20th, 2012 at 7:54 am
One can always rely on Andy to concede in his own way that the dog ate his home work. Micky, I once again didn’t read your spew because when you do that copy/paste/respond thing you just sound stupider (yes, that’s actually a word) than you normally do. And that’s pretty damn stupid.
December 20th, 2012 at 8:40 am
Ronald, nice rebuttal dude.
The typical mindless liberal dribble that attacks style because the substance is to complicated for you.
What you really mean is that you disagree, but are to fckin dumb to articulate it.
The reason many people cut n paste opponents comments in such close proximity is so other readers dont have to scroll up to make the connection.
The format is to bring others awareness to your idiocy.
It aint all about you sweety.
Dont talk about Andy conceding you moron.
Why the hell should he concede to and argument thats based om Kerrys exposure being the reason hes qualified ?
Tell us Ron, how the hell does your crap fix the problems we see causing the rampages these loons go on ?
You really are one sad idiotic disgusting person