This is a collection of replies to some, oh, how should I say this, Dimwits that I saw posting to articles on the web. I was feeling like I needed to do some Fearless Speaking today.
This was in answer to someone asking why the Rasmussen polling is usually lower than others:
"Because Rasmussen uses "likely voters" as opposed to most of the rest that use total random calls like ABCNews/Washington Post. If you're trying to say that Ras. is bias, you can't tell me ABC and CNN are not.
Likely voters are ones that pay attention, as opposed to any Joe Blow that can answer a phone."
Someone here was wondering how Sarah Palin felt about the bank bailout and also about the MSNBC reporter that took on a formidable opponent, one 13 year old smart girl:
"As I told Lemure, Sarah supported her running mate, and he tried to work for the bail-out. I never saw her fully endorse the bail out, except to say that something needed to be done. This little girl stuck to her guns and promoted the US Constitution, that is one proud daddy! I know I would be. Splat might be too strong, but this little girl held her own with a seasoned (P)MSNBC reporter, she did great. I think this lady needs to start looking in strollers next time to find a fight she can win."
I posted this to an article about the 2000+ page Senate Health Care bill:
"This has been proposed before, but I think it should get more traction now. EVERY Bill presented to the congress should start, "Under Article ## of the US Constitution, we see that the US Congress has the authority to pass a bill concerning (fill in the blank). That way, when someone asks Nancy where in the constitution the government has the authority to pass such a law, like mandates forcing us to buy health insurance, she will be able to come up with something more than " are you serious?"
This was in response to someone saying, "the GOP is killing this country":
"er...um....WHO"S IN CHARGE RIGHT NOW!!!!! The GOP is just trying to put the brakes on in this run-away down hill train. It's people that don't give a Shiite about the Constitution of this country that are tearing it down. "
And finally, someone saying that "I wander how many Republicans will read the Health Care Bill? They didn't even read the Patriot Act.:
"Give me an example of how the Patriot act infringed on your rights. Did you call someone in the Mideast that might have something to do with terrorism? Did you transfer money to Syria, or Afghanistan? Then maybe you were watched, but tell me, how did the patriot act do anything to you?
Now tell me where in the constitution you can find where is says I have to buy medical insurance to be a free member of this country, and if I don't I could go to jail. PLEASE TELL ME!!!!!!"
It was fun tearing some of these folks a new one, but reading many of these posts, it just shows how truly uninformed some many people are on very important subjects. God helps us all!
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Gun Bans Kill People
We know the story now, a man, a US Army Major, buys some guns, then uses them to go and kill his fellow soldiers in cold, calculated blood. He knows that he will be able to do this because soldiers on the base are not allowed to carry weapons. On an Army base?
If there is one place where weapons training is thorough and extensive, it would be at Ft. Hood, TX. I don't know the reasons behind the gun ban on base, but I don't see the need. In fact, just like the criminal element outside the gates of Ft. Hood know, if they are in an area of very intense gun control, then they are likely to be the only ones with guns and hence, they are safe to carry out their bad deeds.
Just days later, after Ft. Hood, here in Orlando, FL we found ourselves at the mercy of another crazed idiot as he brought down town Orlando to a halt . He walked into the 8th floor of the Gateway Center on the north end of down town and opened fire on workers there, a firm he was fired from 2 years prior. He ended up killing one young man and injuring 5 others.
This tragedy and Ft. Hood could have been stopped; not by banning guns but by promoting their use! Banning guns will never keep guns out of the hands of people meaning to do harm. Police rarely intervene in a crime but follow up to catch the bad guys after the fact, and God Bless them for it. But even though their mottos are usually to "serve and protect", they rarely get the chance to do the "protecting" part of that goal.
The madman at Ft. Hood was stopped by a heroine, a mom and a reservist, and now, a national treasure. Sgt Kimberly Munley heard that there was a shooter while in her vehicle, and raced to the scene. This was after he had shot and killed 12, and injured more than twice that. (one soldier died a day later to make the total 13) She saw the man, walking up on a wounded soldier crawling away from him, and as he pointed his gun at the man on the ground, Munley opened fire on him, and he shifted his attention towards her. She may have saved that man from execution. She then proceeded to open up on him, and he did the same, hitting her three times, one in each thigh and one in the hand. But she kept firing, both within 25 feet of each other, and struck him 4 times, dropping him. See her story here.
Putting guns in the hands of good, background checked, trained citizens gives you and me the best protection of all. Yes, I know that both of these evil doers got their guns through proper channels, but so do millions of people every year, and they don't shoot up military bases or office buildings. But if others, people of level heads and training, had guns in their reach on those days, the tolls would have been much lower.
If just one or two people in the Gateway Center would have been carrying that day, after the first few rounds, maybe this man would have been stopped, and I mean shot to death. And maybe, just maybe, if some of the non-coms, Sargent and the like would have been allowed to carry side arms, then maybe this terrorist would have thought twice, or at worst, been stopped right after he got off his first few rounds.
Just last night here in Orlando, a young lady, protecting her home, shot and killed a man trying to invade her home. The other two men with him ran off. Criminals are cowards and they will not risk breaking in a home if they feel the owners may have a gun. This is the example of why the 2nd amendment is really in our constitution, not only to protect us from a government gone crazy, don't get me started, but to also protect our lives and our family's lives. The young lady had 3 kids in the home, and she had a gun....what would you have done?
If there is one place where weapons training is thorough and extensive, it would be at Ft. Hood, TX. I don't know the reasons behind the gun ban on base, but I don't see the need. In fact, just like the criminal element outside the gates of Ft. Hood know, if they are in an area of very intense gun control, then they are likely to be the only ones with guns and hence, they are safe to carry out their bad deeds.
Just days later, after Ft. Hood, here in Orlando, FL we found ourselves at the mercy of another crazed idiot as he brought down town Orlando to a halt . He walked into the 8th floor of the Gateway Center on the north end of down town and opened fire on workers there, a firm he was fired from 2 years prior. He ended up killing one young man and injuring 5 others.
This tragedy and Ft. Hood could have been stopped; not by banning guns but by promoting their use! Banning guns will never keep guns out of the hands of people meaning to do harm. Police rarely intervene in a crime but follow up to catch the bad guys after the fact, and God Bless them for it. But even though their mottos are usually to "serve and protect", they rarely get the chance to do the "protecting" part of that goal.
The madman at Ft. Hood was stopped by a heroine, a mom and a reservist, and now, a national treasure. Sgt Kimberly Munley heard that there was a shooter while in her vehicle, and raced to the scene. This was after he had shot and killed 12, and injured more than twice that. (one soldier died a day later to make the total 13) She saw the man, walking up on a wounded soldier crawling away from him, and as he pointed his gun at the man on the ground, Munley opened fire on him, and he shifted his attention towards her. She may have saved that man from execution. She then proceeded to open up on him, and he did the same, hitting her three times, one in each thigh and one in the hand. But she kept firing, both within 25 feet of each other, and struck him 4 times, dropping him. See her story here.
Putting guns in the hands of good, background checked, trained citizens gives you and me the best protection of all. Yes, I know that both of these evil doers got their guns through proper channels, but so do millions of people every year, and they don't shoot up military bases or office buildings. But if others, people of level heads and training, had guns in their reach on those days, the tolls would have been much lower.
If just one or two people in the Gateway Center would have been carrying that day, after the first few rounds, maybe this man would have been stopped, and I mean shot to death. And maybe, just maybe, if some of the non-coms, Sargent and the like would have been allowed to carry side arms, then maybe this terrorist would have thought twice, or at worst, been stopped right after he got off his first few rounds.
Just last night here in Orlando, a young lady, protecting her home, shot and killed a man trying to invade her home. The other two men with him ran off. Criminals are cowards and they will not risk breaking in a home if they feel the owners may have a gun. This is the example of why the 2nd amendment is really in our constitution, not only to protect us from a government gone crazy, don't get me started, but to also protect our lives and our family's lives. The young lady had 3 kids in the home, and she had a gun....what would you have done?
Monday, November 2, 2009
FORD CROSSES THE FINISH LINE A BILLION $$ AHEAD!
Congratulations to Ford Motors, Inc., posting a Billion profit for the 3rd Qtr.! With cost cutting, wise choices in regards to corporate financing and labor contracts, Ford shows the country and especially the Obama administration what the free market can still do.
Yes they may have, no, they most likely did benefit from the "Cash for Clunkers" program, but they were in the same market as GM and Chrysler. I believe that there is another reason that they had a profitable 3rd Qtr..
Ford, to its credit, stayed away from government bailout money, and I think their vision is the key to customers flowing into their doors. The public knows who took money and who was in bed with the Obama administration. They know it was wrong to do so, that the free market should have let those businesses fail and the assets of those businesses should have been sold off.
Ford created another demand factor for their product, the fact they stood up to
the pressures of the economy and the administration and the public responded. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people tell me, "the next time I buy a car, I'm looking at a Ford first". I think this had a major factor in their performance that allowed them to post such great numbers.
the pressures of the economy and the administration and the public responded. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people tell me, "the next time I buy a car, I'm looking at a Ford first". I think this had a major factor in their performance that allowed them to post such great numbers. Congratulations again Ford, well done!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
