Monthly Archives: January 2014

A storm is brewing, darkness already upon us. We stand upon the edge of a knife, stray but a little and The United States as we know it will fall. The political seas are churning, tossing the vessel of American liberty about like it is nothing more than a bath toy. To either side razor sharp rocks threaten to send it to the crushing black depths of history. The slightest misstep and the great American Republic will join the wreckage of the Roman Empire. No help is coming. No coast guard vessel will appear in the night to rescue the stricken vessel. We alone can save it.

The true conservative movement is the only means by which American Liberty can reach safe harbor. Unfortunately it has been hijacked and cast out by the very people who once claimed to support it. The Republican Party was once the strong hold of conservatism. Within the GOP the light of limited government ensured that American Liberty would always find safe passage from one generation to the next.  Always the light had shown fighting back the progressive darkness. However, a pestilence has infested the GOP, and poisoned the minds of those who run it. The progressive plague has corrupted the establishment members of the GOP and manipulated them into forsaking the vary principles that we sent them to protect. The progressives convinced the GOP the light blinded the American People, and hurt our eyes. We would hate them for this torment. If the GOP did not want the wrath of the people brought down upon them, they had but only one choice. So the light of limited government, was extinguished.

So now we live in the darkness that is the progressive way. With each passing moment, the blessings of American Liberty drift further into oblivion. More regulation and control is being inserted into our lives. We have now only but one choice, we must retake the GOP. We must cast the moderate, right wing progressives out of the Republican Party, and relight the beacon of limited government. If we fail, if we allow the progressive sickness to continue within the GOP, the blessings of American Liberty will be lost to the sea of time, and we will be forced to accept progressive dominion over these lands.

all posts under this name will be dealing with the progressive fiends that lurk within the Republican Party, and why they should not be allowed to carry the banner of the conservative movement.

Progressives are waging a war, a war on the liberties of the people in this nation. So far they have been doing a rather good job of it. Far too many people have lined up to trade away their liberties for the sake of security. They have given up the opportunity for greatness, for the guarantee of mediocrity. How have the progressives done this, how have they convinced sentient beings into being nothing more than puppets, servants of the progressive movement? They have achieved this goal not through physical force, but rather through mental manipulation and sheer strength of will. They have cast a stone into the crystal clear lake of liberty, stirred up the dust of insanity, clouding our vision. What was once so obvious to us is now a mystery. They have forced us to justify what need not be justified. We few who protect liberty must prove our innocents, our value, rather than them proving our guilt.  We are forced to stand before the progressive hoard, day after day, defending the inalienable rights that they so badly seek to destroy.

This used to be a free nation, and for the most part it still is, but it will not be for long if the progressives have their way. They claim they are pro-choice, but that is a laughable sentiment.  Progressives do not believe you should have a choice in anything, except killing an unborn child. They claim they are pro-choice, but when you ask them,
                Q.Can I choose to buy a 32 ounce soda,
                A. No it will make you fat
                Q. Can I choose to have a gun?
                A. No it might hurt someone.
                Q. Can I choose not to wear a seat belt?
                A. No you might hurt yourself.
                Q. Can I choose to smoke?
                A. No you might get cancer.
                Q. Can I choose to use low cost coal?
                A. no it’s bad for the environment.
                Q. Can I choose to buy an incandescent light bulb?
                A. No it’s bad for the environment.
                Q. Can I choose to whether or not I can have insurance?
                A. No you might need it someday.
                Q. Can I choose to honor God in my daily life?
                A. No you might offend someone.

So sure they no more believe in choice than a Spartan believes in retreat. Once you understand that, once you understand that a progressive only seeks to control, then it becomes easier to see them for what they really are, tyrants.

It was during a rather rare debate surrounding firearms within this nation that I felt the need to write about this. I had to get these feelings onto paper, so to speak. You see, this was not a debate about whether or not people should have the right to defend themselves, but rather about how to go about defending the position.  It was during this debate that it struck me, the lunacy of the arguments that we were having to make. We have been forced to defend our right to defend ourselves. Because of progressive audacity we now find ourselves having to defend our right to own and bear arms. How has it come to this?

It is really rather simple I am afraid. Progressives have infiltrated our culture, and poisoned our minds. They have changed this from a land of unlimited possibilities, into a land of limited but secure outcomes. They have convinced people to see the world differently.  To explore this point, let us examine the arguments used by progressive when it comes to the second amendment.  After a mass shooting, something that they just love to exploit for political gain, they will feed off the hysteria and use it to push for the eradication of some sort of firearms. They will stand in front of the American People and ask “Why do you need something like an AR-15” and this is considered to be a valid argument.  This revelation struck me harder than Michael Moore doing a belly flop. The progressives have actually been able to convince people that in a free nation, that it is justifiable to limit the rights of people based off of artificially perceived needs.  I was under the impression that this was a free country.

This is a nation where the rights of the people do not come from the government, some vast body of elected officials did not sit down and grant us privileges. The founders worked in the opposite direction, they created a government then granted it privileges, and restricted its ability to attack our liberties. So tell me how is it that in a free nation is “why do you need” a valid argument for limiting my rights? It does not matter why I need it, I don’t have to need it all all, I have it because I want it. I saw something that I wanted, I used MY money that I received from MY job, to go out and purchase something that I want. Of course, and just you watch progressives (if they find this) will swarm down on this article like locus, progressives will say “your wants do not our way the lives of children” or the environment, or the mud dobber dung beetle wasp, or whatever their bleeding heart story is for the day.

Firearms are an easy target for them to villainize people like me on. Guns are scary, and easy to blame for societal ills. Many people feel as though they would be unaffected by a ban on firearms, a restriction in their right to defend themselves, and that’s what makes it easy. However, what if I went for something closer to home? How about the obesity crisis in this country? What if I decided video games were to blame, and argued “Why do you need to buy and X-Box” to justify eliminating video games from this country? Or how about “why do you need to buy a 32 ounce soda”? How about if I were to go after the press in this country, “Why do you need to be able to express decent against the government?” Would “why do you need” still be a justifiable argument then?

The answer is it depends. It depends on whether or not we live as subjects, or as kings. Do we live in a nation where every man is a king, or a nation where every man must kneel?  The progressive feel that we must justify our rights, as after all they are nothing more than privileges granted to us by a benevolent government. I however believe that our rights are inalienable, and require no justification, especially to those lacking moral fiber.

It is not just the progressives in government who try to take our rights away, we are surrounded by them.  Look at the car in your driveway. Many of us have been forced from buying a car that we would like, into a car that has been deemed politically suitable. I can’t tell you how many times I have been asked by some east coast progressive who has never left the city “why do you need that big Bronco?” Now of course I have fallen into the trap, and unloaded on them. I have told them that I go camping, skiing, hunting, fishing, I live in a part of the country that frequently receives large amounts of snow. None of these are valid arguments to them. From now on what I am going to say is “Because I want it.” I no longer feel the need to justify my purchasing habits to weasels. Why do I have a house, a truck, a trans-am, a gun, a dog, a tv because I wanted these things. I like them, and I have a liberty to have them. I am tired of progressives trying to dictate my liberties based off of what they perceive I need.  I fear the day when they have the power to dictate liberty based upon some artificially produced needs, and so should you.

Little disclaimer, I am not saying that everyone should just go out and buy things that they want, because they can. I am saying that the progressives don’t have the right to tell me I can’t, because they feel I don’t need it.

Progressives truly are amazing creatures. Amazing in their audacity, they arrogance, and in many aspects their ignorance. A progressive always knows better than you, you are always inferior, and as such they believe they can lie to you, and you will just believe it. They think that you will just lay down and allow them to erode away at your humanity little by little. One such example, and probably one of the best, has to do with our right to own and bear arms, and the progressive’s desire to take that right away from you.

When it comes to gun control, progressives rarely argue hard facts, they prefer to engage in the realm of feelings, emotions, vagaries of perception. The say guns are dangerous, that guns are the problem, that guns need to be controlled. They tells us that if we just allowed them to limit our right to defend ourselves, we would all be safer. When evidence is put forward showing the failings of their arguments, they choose to start an emotional blood bath. They call you a monster, say you want to kill children, ask you if your precious gun is worth the lives of little school children. Of course this is an easy argument to when, you just keep dragging them back into the realm of facts, truth, the world we live in known as reality.

However, every now and again a progressive comes forth that tries to make a factual argument, that attempts to use their superior intelligence to confound the ignorant public, and show us the error of our ways. They step up onto the national stage and show us just how ignorant they truly are. They make claims that AR-15’s are military grade rifles, not based upon how they operate or are made, but rather based upon how they look. They make claims that it can easily be modified into a full auto machine gun, which any firearm enthusiast can tell you is a laughable notion.  They make outrageous claims about lethality, and rates of fire, that any sentient being possessing common sense can see through. They call magazines clips, and clips magazines. I even heard one progressive actually say that if we ban 30 round magazines now, that will lead to their eventual removal from the market. The reason being, that eventually they would all be used. This individual was completely ignorant to the fact that magazines can be reloaded.  I could probably write a book on the foolish things said by Diane Feinstein alone surrounding our right to defend ourselves.

As comical as all of these attempts to coerce us into submission have been, they all pale in comparison to the one that I just saw. Kevin de Leon California State Senator from Los Angeles made a fool of himself and his constituents when he stood in front of the cameras and attempt to promote his legislation requiring background checks for people who build their own firearms. When first I saw this video I about fell out of my chair, there was no way anyone could be this stupid, this had to be a well put together joke. Something I needed this morning. However it hurt my soul when I found out that it was not a joke, Kevin de Leon actually said these things.

In the video Kevin de Leon held in his hands a confiscated homemade fully automatic firearm. Referring to this firearm he says “This is a ghost gun. This right here has the ability with a .30-caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second. Thirty magazine clip in half a second.” So why is this statement made by a politician no one has ever heard of, the greatest example of progressive audacity in recent history? The answer lies in the fact that here is a man who is trying to regulate something he has no clue about. Here is a man who is completely ignorant of firearms, yet his arrogance convinces him that with his more evolved thought processes will cover up for any failings in his firearm knowledge. Rednecks deal with guns, an educated man like himself will make short work of these uncivilized relics.

Allow me to explain. There is a lot of terminology in the world of firearms, terminology that is important to use if you are going to convince people you know what you are talking about. It is like any subject, if you use the right words, you can make yourself appear smart. It is hard to convince people you know how to repair the problem with their car, if you use phrases like “the thing-a-ma-bob on your air scoop thing is broken, please pay me $500”.  Unfortunately using the terminology only works if you know what it means.  The first term he used was correct, a Ghost Gun is a firearm that does not have a serial number, or was homemade. The gun he held in his hand was a valid example of a Ghost Gun. However, after this point the ignorance of Kevin de Leon poured from his mouth like water over Niagara Falls.

Mr.  de Leon said, “this right here has the ability with a .30-caliber clip….” I am going to pause right there, because I just can’t get past this comment.  I grew up around guns, so it is easy for me to tell the difference between someone who knows about firearms, and someone who is pretending to.  For those of you who do not have a large knowledge base about firearms, allow me to explain why this statement brings tears to my eyes.  When someone makes a reference to a caliber, what they are describing is the width of the bullet. There is no such thing as a .30-caliber clip, I assume that Kevin de Leon was trying to say 30 round clip. This little hiccup could easily be attributed to nerves, a slip of the tongue, however, there is more wrong with this statement than just a little verbal slip.  Kevin de Leon said “.30-caliber clip” even if he was trying to make reference to a 30 round clip, his terminology still betrays his ignorance of firearm mechanics. To those unfamiliar with firearms, the term magazine and clip are interchangeable. However, there is a major difference. A clip is a device that holds ammunition together, but it does not feed ammunition into the firearm. A magazine on the other hand stores ammunition, much like a clip, however it has a spring that helps feed ammunition into the firearm. Some firearms do utilize a “clip” such as the M1 Garand, but the one in this video clearly is a magazine fed firearm.

Continuing along with our examination of the firearm terminology that Kevin de Leon attempted to use in this statement. The Senator referenced the rate of fire of the firearm in question then said, “Thirty magazine clip in half a second”. We will address the rate of fire referenced here in a moment, for now I would like to focus on the terminology used.  A magazine is a container that feeds ammunition into a firearm. A clip is a container that holds the ammunition. There is no such thing as a magazine clip. It does not exist.

Moving on, I would like to examine one of the claims made in Kevin de Leon’s statement. He made a comment on firearms rate of fire. He claimed that the firearm in his hands had the ability to “disperse with 30 bullets within half a second”. 30 bullets in half a second that works out to 60 bullets a second, 3600 rounds a minute. The MG-42, also known as Hitler’s Buzz Saw had a rate of fire of 1,200 rounds per minute. The 30 millimeter avenger cannon mounted on the A10 Warthog has a rate of fire of 4200 rounds per minute.  So Senator Kevin de Leon is claiming that this homemade submachine gun, has a greater rate of fire than one of the deadliest machineguns of World War II, and is within striking distance of out pacing one of the fastest firearms in the world.  To me something just does not seem to add up.

Here is a link to the MG-42 being fired.  Remember according to the Senator the ghost gun he was holding has a superior rate of fire to this firearm.

Here is a link to the A10 firing its cannon. A weapon that the Senator claims the ghost gun he was holding is almost on par with.

Now it would be easy for me to go into the facts of this issue, very easy. The plain and simple fact is that the gun that Senator Kevin de Leon was holding was fully automatic, and it is all but illegal for citizens to own one of those firearms to begin with. To own a fully automatic firearm a citizen must have a class three license, which requires a background check to acquire. So new legislation requiring that anyone trying to make a gun like the one he has in his hands have a background check is pointless. It is illegal for the average citizen to have one, even if it is home made. So there is already a law that can be used to prosecute people making them. However there is a far greater issue here.

We can argue until the cows come home about our right to defend ourselves, and the reasons the progressives feel they should be allowed to take it from us. But that would be missing the bigger picture. This little clip strikes at the very core of the progressive mindset. Here is a man who is completely ignorant to firearms. He could not be bothered to learn the terminology, understand the items he will be discussing. He went on television and made a mockery of himself, and those whom he represents. Here is a man who knows nothing about firearms, yet he is trying to regulate them. He is trying to restrict those of us who do.  This is something that lays at the core of the progressive mindset. They know better. They always think that they know better than the people who are “below” them. The progressives in the Carter and Clinton administrations thought they knew better than the banks when it came to making home loans, and started dictating how lending agencies had to conduct business. What did we get, the subprime loan crisis. President Obama thought that he knew better than the automakers about how to build cars. What did we get, bond holders screwed out of their money to make union pensions whole,  General Motors going bankrupt despite government intervention, and a 10 billion dollar lose when the government finally relinquished control of the company. President Obama knew more than insurance companies, and he dictated how they were to operate, and for this arrogance we received the obamacare failure. Now they are trying to say they know better when it comes to fire arms, and our right to defend ourselves? How many examples of progressive arrogance, laced with an arsenic coating of ignorance, do we need before we start seeing them for the failures that they are, before we stop listening to them?

I just cannot help but be amazed at the fact that this man went in front of TV cameras and thought that he had a winning argument, that he could pull this illusion off. If you are going to try and convince people to give up one of their fundamental rights, to allow the government to limit rights given from God, and denied to the government, I would think the least you could do would be to at least make a decent attempt.  I know nothing about fashion, not a thing. I have a black shirt dress shirt, black dress pants, and a silver tie, and that rounds out my “formal wear”. I don’t know why that is okay, why it is acceptable. My sister said it was, and it has worked sense high school.  Because of my ignorance, I do not stick my nose into the world of fashion. I would never dream of trying to dictate to people about fashion. However, if I felt that fashion needed to be controlled by the government because of its mental effects on young women, and I was given a chance to do something about it you had better believe that I would take that chance. The difference here is that I accept that I am ignorant of fashion, and I would take the time to learn just what it was that I was talking about. It is clear to me that Senator Kevin de Leon did not feel the need to learn about firearms, to learn about the industry, the terminology, the actual pieces themselves. If he had, he would not have made such a fool of himself in front of millions of people. He is a progressive, and he is trying to achieve one of the progressive’s dreams of eliminating firearms from the people’s hands. They have been working at this goal for decades, slowly striping away at our liberties, step by step.  The senator walked in front of those cameras and tried to regurgitate decades of talking points in a couple minutes, without a clue of what any of it meant.

I had to fight back tears when I first saw this clip, as I said I could not believe that someone actually made this comment on television. Normally the progressives are better at masking their ignorance, using emotions to fill in the gaps in their arguments created by the absence of any supporting facts. When I found out it was real, blood squirted from my eyes. It never ceases to amaze me the arrogance of progressives. They are trying to pass legislation, to regulate, to control something they know absolutely nothing about. They hate it because they were told to. They are marching to orders without a moment’s hesitation, or thought of why. That is what makes them so dangerous. They meddle with things they cannot possibly hope to comprehend, or control. That is what has led to the stagnation of the United States of America under President Obama’s failed economic policies. That is what led to the collapse of the housing market via programs started by Carter, and expanded by Clinton. This is what will collapse our health care system under obamacare.  The arrogance of progressives is enough to cause your blood to boil. The ignorance of progressives is enough to make you feel pity for them. This is just another example of progressive audacity at its finest.

Today we honor Dr. Martian Luther King Jr. a man who changed the world. Dr. King found himself in a world riddled with injustice and bigotry, and though he was but one man he set out to fight that injustice. This one ordinary man, born to a life so many others had found themselves in for a century, stood up, while so many others sat down. He transcended the station of his birth, and set forth to achieve his dream.

We all can learn something from Dr. King, for he reminded us that there is strength in peace, and power in respect. He changed the world, shifted the paradigm of countless Americans, and he did so without threatening violence. He did so without demanding restitution, or seeking revenge.  I am inspired by Dr. King, because of his self control. I often find myself fighting back a fiery temper that resides within my soul, a fight which I often lose. When I feel as though I am beaten, when I cannot continue the fight, I look to men like Dr. King and through his example I find my courage.  Here was a man who had every right to hate, yet spoke of love. He had every right to seek revenge, yet preached peace.  He had every right to seek out a blind justice for the atrocities thrust upon minorities for generations, yet he sought equality. He had every right to vilify and isolate the bigots that had so wronged the minorities of this country, yet he spoke, and fought for unity.  Such unwavering dedication, and belief helps me to keep putting one foot in front of the other, it is a light for me in the darkest of tunnels.

I find myself admiring Dr. King, and striving to emulate him. Many might find that odd, considering that I am a conservative, and conservatives hate the minorities, or at least that is what the progressives would have you believe.  The debate between conservatives and progressives is a debate almost as old as civil rights themselves.  It is this debate, this battle between liberty and tyranny that I fear will someday taint the greatness of Dr. King.

Dr. King spoke of a time when “one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” He told the world of his wild eyed dream, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Dr. King spoke of equality, and justice. Yet there are those out there now, who would seek to corrupt his dream, to tarnish his unwavering light. Those who once fought beside him for equality, who have lost their way, and now those whom Dr. King fought for as nothing more than a gateway to political power. There are those who claim to have taken up the mantel of Dr. King, those who claim to be marching for the same goal, who seeks to use fear and racism as a political weapon. These worms, devoid of virtue, would use the memory of Martian Luther King to divide this nation.

Dr. King spoke of, fought, and died for a world where “one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.” How can one ever sit down in brotherhood, when they are plotting the down fall of the other? When I see these race baiters proclaiming themselves the civil-rights fighters of the 21st century that fiery temper of mine begins to boil, I have to remind myself to take the high road, to be the better man.

They call it social justice, where the descendents of those who wronged must pay the descendents of the wrong. It is a system where those who are now successful must be punished, in the name of those who have not yet reached their desired station in life. This demand for so called “social justice” is nothing more than ancient rancor bitterly clinging to the past, a vengeful phantom seeking to wet its blood lust. What so many now call Social Justice is an affront to the dreams and the memory of Dr. King, and will only seek to further the divide in this nation.  

This sickness has infected even President Obama, a man whom so many thought would finally herald of the fruition of Dr. King’s fantastic dream, cannot let go of the bigotries of the past. Even he, a man who owes his place in history to the dreams of Dr. King, seeks to corrupt them for political gain. In 2001 Barack Obama had this to say about the civil rights movement “But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution,” that in and of itself is not a damnation, however, he continued on and said “think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that” All he can see, is a way to move forward the collapse of the American Republic, and he does so through the use of old wounds. To think that this man, the man that so many thought would herald in a new age of peace and unity, an age that would transcend race, class, and creed, could use the civil rights movement as a tool to push for his dream of a socialist state.

I fear that the lessons of the civil rights movement will be lost to history, if we do not stop the course that we are on. I fear that they will become nothing but a foot note, in the history of something I do not want to be a part of. I see the world differently than most, and I am proud to admit that. I do not care about the color of your skin, the type of car you drive, what religion you are, or who you love. I care about how you live your life. By which I mean, live your life the way you see fit, so long as it neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my bones. I too dream of a world, unified in the beliefs our founding fathers put forth in the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness.” This is a dream that Dr. King shared.

I leave you now, but before I go I want to leave you with a thought. How can you bring about the dream that so many share with Dr. King? How best can we bring about a nation unified in brotherhood, is it through division and revenge, or through equality and understanding? I take my leave, pounder that, and reflect on the words of Dr. King.

Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.

And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of “interposition” and “nullification” — one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; “and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together.”2

This is our hope, and this is the faith that I go back to the South with.

With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

And this will be the day — this will be the day when all of God’s children will be able to sing with new meaning:

My country ’tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing.

Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim’s pride,

From every mountainside, let freedom ring!

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.

And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.

Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.

Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.

Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.

Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.

But not only that:

Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.

From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, and when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:

Free at last! Free at last!

Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!3

So Governor Chris Christie, one of those who have earned themselves a spot in the Progressive Hall of Shame, has gotten himself into a little bit of trouble. It seems someone in his administration saw fit to shut down traffic on the George Washington Bridge in order to punish the mayor of Fort Lee for not supporting Christie’s re-election bid. Sounds like yet another scandal ripping apart a rising progressive star. A scandal I am going to name after the worst political cover up in American history, Benghazi, I haven’t decided is Lane-Ghazi, or Bridge-Ghazi sounds better yet.
Emails have been re-leased that linked Bridget Anne Kelly, Christie’s deputy chief of staff to the deliberate lane closers. Part of the email actually read “time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee”. Prior to the release of the emails Christie had claimed that no one on his staff was involved in the incident, in fact he even joked about it saying he moved the cones himself. It certainly looks like a typical progressive style cover up. Lie about what happened, make it into a joke, and let the work horses in the propaganda machine rewrite history. However, something with this Christie story is different than the countless scandals that have all but defined the failed Presidency of Barack Obama. It appears as though there is some accountability.
A typical Obama scandal works like this, progressive minions use government authority to try and illegally steer the political landscape, create issues where there are none, intimidate a few people here and there, and make sure no one is able to talk about it. When eventually they make a mistake, which they always do, and the press is forced to acknowledge the illegal actions taking place (giving guns to Mexican drug cartels, using the IRS to subdue political opposition, leaving people to die during a terrorist act, lying about destroying millions of peoples health insurance), they make a quick note of the crime, pretend to be outraged, then move on to the sports news, or whatever Kard Kimdashian is doing. Any attempt to bring it to light is seen as nothing more than a political witch hunt, and called that by the Administration, and the propaganda machine makes sure it stays that way. The Department of Justice drags its feet, stalling in its investigations. The GOP makes a big show of looking for the truth, while progressives within the organization (John McCain, John Boehner) help to ensure they never get anywhere. People are brought up, and ridiculed, disgraced, and then go back to what it is that they were doing prior to the scandal.
Every time there is a scandal, every time President Obama’s administration makes a mockery of the law, he gets away politically unharmed (except with OBAMAcare). Everyone demands a smoking gun, and there is never one to be found. So President Obama gets to pretend like he is outraged, then moves about his marry way. Of course there is no smoking gun, President Obama is smart enough to avoid direct contact, it is called plausible deniability. President Obama, like all executives, ensures that people whom he knows, people whom he trusts, people who think like he does are in positions of power within his administration. That way, when it comes time to stomp out political opposition, or create a world gun trade issue from thin air, President Obama does not have to order it, he does not have to be involved, his appointees can just make it happen. He did not order Fast and Furious, he didn’t have to. He was not involved in the Benghazi cover up, he didn’t need to be. The same is true for Chris Christie. I doubt there will ever be a smoking gun linking him to the actual crime.
So how do we go about judging Christies guilt in Bridge-ghazi? How do we determine if his “outrage” is real or not? Well it is easy to tell a guilty man. For instance during a press conference if they refuse to answer questions, that is a good example of guilt. Answering questions would mean deviating from what is written, and could lead to a Freudian slip. Odd how President Obama doesn’t seem to take a lot of questions. Another way to tell is what the executive does to those responsible. If the executive is truly innocent, if the actions are those they truly do not approve of, if it is actually a case of an employee going rouge, then normally one would assume that they find themselves in the unemployment line. Something that rarely seems to happen in the Obama Administration. I believe the disgraced Eric Holder is still at the Justice Department.
So how did Governor Christie do, well he got up and answered questions for two hours, giving plenty of material for the progressive media to comb through looking for a gotcha moment. He fired Bridget Anne Kelly. So he pretty much handled Bridge-ghazi in the exact opposite method that President Obama uses.
There is no doubt that Governor Christie handled Bridge-ghazi much better than President Obama has handled his endless list of scandals. However, don’t go thinking that I am a big Christie supporter. I am not, he is a progressive, it does not matter what letter falls before or behind his name, he is a progressive. He is a lesser progressive than President Obama, like a progressive lite. I am not going to get up on some soap box and preach about how Christie is the rising star of the GOP and this is just some witch hunt, I am not going to go on a rant about his redeeming qualities, and what it is I like about him. That would be a very short post. What I want to talk about is the affect the R in Christie’s title has on the media.
Christie is a progressive, but he is the wrong type of Progressive, he has an R in front of his name. As such he is only destined to be a pawn in the progressive movement. That R, that one letter separates him the inoculation that has been so enjoyed by President Obama. Because of that R Christie has not been spared from the watch dog that the media once was. The network news agencies, ABC, NBC, CBS, gave Bridge-Ghazi 17 times more coverage in the first 24 hours than they gave the IRS scandal in six months. The progressive media thought that shutting down a bridge was more news worthy than the Executive Branch of the United States government using the Internal Revenue Service to intimidate and suppress political opposition. An act of revenge was more news worthy than an act that would be more at home in Germany under the National Socialist Workers Party. The progressive media feels that a traffic jam is more important than the integrity and legitimacy of our Republic. Not just more news worthy, 17 times more news worthy.
Bridge-Ghazi is not the scandal of the century, it is not even close, The IRS Scandal, Fast and Furious, Obamacare, Benghazi all dwarf it. But the media has not chosen to demand answers for any of the crimes committed by President Obama and his administration. They refused to demand justice for the border agents killed by guns that President Obama’s administration allowed drug cartels to get their hands on. Guns that were sent a crossed the border in order to create a global demand for gun control in America. They refused to demand answers for why President Obama’s administration chose to behave like National Socialists and used the IRS to suppress political opposition. They refused to demand answers for why President Obama lied about Benghazi. Why he left those four Americans there to die. Why he did nothing, while they called and begged for help. Why his administration sat idle for weeks, ignoring the calls for aid. Why he and his administration lied, blaming the attacks on a protest that didn’t exist, that were sparked by a video that no one saw. Yet they were quick to crucify Governor Christie, one of their own, for this little scandal. Bridge-ghazi is not a political scandal surrounding a progressive governor, it is a political scandal surrounding the progressive movement, and their lap dogs in the media. It should show every red blooded American, every last true conservative, any soul that holds liberty dear that the media is nothing more than a propaganda machine for the progressive movement. Sure they loved Christie when he embraced the radical President Obama, but as soon as he had served his purpose they cast him aside. President Obama is becoming a liability to them, his countless scandals and inability to persuade the American People to surrender their liberties has damaged the camouflage that they have hidden behind for so many years. They had to draw the people’s eyes away, they had to target someone. Christie was just found in the wrong place at the wrong time. I do not doubt that he will survive, but I want you to think about something. John McCain was the moderate that could win independents that is what the progressives told us, and he lost. The progressives told us a conservative could not win an election any more in this country, we ignored them in 2010 and retook the House of Representatives in the largest transfer of power in this nation’s history. The progressives told us Mitt Romney was the moderate that could win independents, and thus win the White House, yet he lost. The progressive convince the GOP establishment to run these moderates, to run the candidate they say can win, why? Why do the progressives want us to run these moderate candidates, why do they want to share their votes with us?

The answer is they don’t. They know that a true conservative candidate would win these elections in a walk. So they find people who have the tinsel of conservatisms about them. They find these moderates that they claim can bring conservative and independent voters to the table, but as we saw in 2012 with Mitt Romney that is not the case. It did not matter that Romney beat President Obama by 5 points amongst independents, millions of conservatives that voted against President Obama in 2008, did not show up in 2012, if they had the election would have gone differently. The progressives set the GOP up constantly, the prep them for failure. They hold up the progressive candidate in the primaries, then destroy them in the general elections. Christie was loved in 2012 because he played his part, but the second they had a chance to destroy him, they took it. This should be all the more proof we need to stop listening to the propaganda machine, and actually nominate a conservative to send these progressive monsters back into the abyss.

I assure you more rants about Chris Christie are to come.

So President Obama is at it again, showing his true radical colors. This Tuesday President Obama told his cabinet that he had a way around congress, that he was going to rule illegally, rule as a tyrant, rule without the authority of law or consent of the masses. In a cabinet meeting President Obama said, “But one of the things that I’ll be emphasizing in this meeting is the fact that we are not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help that they need. I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone.” What does he mean he has a pen, what good is that going to do him if he is not going to wait for legislation? He cannot create law, he can only sign and enforce the laws passed by the legislature. So the only thing that can be derived from this statement is that President Obama is going to begin ruling outside of the law, outside of the Constitution, and therefore without the consent of the masses, like a tyrant, a dictator.

I really wish someone could have seen this coming, warned the United States of the radical progressive that is President Barack Obama, oh wait someone did, just about every red blooded conservative in the nation warned about the dangers of re-electing this fascists drunk on power. Of course no one took us seriously, the propaganda machine that inhabits what was once the main stream media was complacent in covering up the countless scandals and abuses of power that summed up the first four years of President Obama’s rule.  If the media was actually doing its job, President Obama would have been exposed for the radical that he is, and never would have been elected.  If the media was actually non-bias, was actual a news outlet, rather than a propaganda outlet, the Christ Christie scandal would not have received 17 times more coverage in a mere 24 hours, than the Obama Administration abuse of the IRS did in six months.

President Obama is preparing his staff, alerting them to his plans, his contingency. The progressives are on the run, they are scared, they have come so close to achieving their goal, the complete restructuring of the United States of America. They were there, they had control of the House, The Senate, and they had their radical son in Power, but something happened these elitists thugs did not intend, could not perceive, 2010. The people of America stood up, the common man said no, we will not be dictated to, we will not be ruled. Ever sense then the progressive march towards a socialist state has been nearly halted. He knows this is their last chance, this is the last stand of the progressives, they have been exposed and drawn into the light. He is preparing his minions, telling them that he will not yield to the will of the people, that he will force his agenda upon us. He tried to collapse the system through the system, but he learned the hard way the free men will not just lay down and accept serfdom. He is not giving up, he is willing to rule outside of the law, like the criminal he is.  2014 is a year of choices, you can choose the side of the tyrants, or you can choose liberty, the choice is yours.

I am sorry that I have been somewhat absent the last couple of weeks. Life has been somewhat hectic. I am back now, and ready to take on the great fight of 2014. Our country stands upon the edge of a knife. If we falter we now, we will be cast into the eternal abyss of tyranny and slavery. The progressive hoard has been destroying the vary foundation of our great nation. They have been working tirelessly for more than a century, eroding away at everything that made this country great.

This nation was created as a beacon of freedom, of liberty, it was a slap in the face to the aristocracies of the old world. Here we have no kings, no queens, no one save God himself is our master. America was a bold step into a new way of life. America became the greatest nation in the world because there was no monarch, no tyrant, telling people that they couldn’t. We were free to create, free to explore, free to change the world. The progressives are trying to change that. They believe that they can control the uncontrollable, that they can alter the laws of nature. They believe that we are not capable of living our own lives, we have to have someone making sure that the world is fair. They believe that they can dictate that everyone has an equal outcome, despite varying levels of input.

I have long believed that America is great because America is free. Progressives think the common man small, inferior, insignificant. They see him as a feeble creature incapable of fending for himself, like a gold fish in a river full of piranhas. They seek to protect these weak, dimwitted, creatures from the harsh realities of the world. They place the gold fish in a tank, safe from dangers of the river, free to continue living. But, in so doing they deprive them the adventure of life. What good is it to merely survive, if you are a prisoner. You can’t grow, you can’t learn, you can’t improve, you just float in the void a pawn for the enjoyment of the greater power. I however know that the individual man is not weak, he is not helpless, for within each individual there lies the yearning for adventure, the potential for greatness, the potential to change the world. A potential that progressives seek  to bottle, to harness, to control, and will ultimately extinguish. It was not some government entity that brought the freedom of mobility to the masses, it was the brain child of Henry Ford. It was not through federal decree that one man put pick ups on a four by four, and created the first Gibson electric guitar, changing music forever. It was not some elitist in a cold marble chamber who legislated the creation of a device that would bring about the downfall of land line. That was done by a man who dared to dream, who started out in his garage, of course we know him as Steve Jobs. These men saw the world differently, they could see the voids, the openings, the possibilities. They took a risk, and changed the world. They did not run from the piranha infested river, they jumped in. Where would we be if they had stayed on the shores were it was safe? Where would we be if they just followed the stream, excepted the norm? Where would we be without risk?

2014 is an important year, it is the year that our children will look back on as the year we made a choice. Will we choose to continue the progressive path, the path of servitude and desperation, or will we choose the path of risk, liberty, and unlimited possibilities? In 2014 if we allow the progressive filth to continue to infest the marble halls of Washington DC our nation will fall. If we continue down the easy path, the safe path, the path of a gold fish, the path of all the great civilizations of old, how could we ever face our children? How could we let them know about the greatness of America, the cradle of innovation and creation, and tell them we gave it all up for the guarantee of a small house, a crappy job, and miserable car.  How can we tell them that we choose to abandon all that makes us human, our individuality? How can we tell them that we gave up unlimited possibilities, a chance at greatness, all for a guarantee of  mediocrity? 2014 is the year we must choose to set the country right, to cast out the progressive tyrants, to reclaim our dominance over our lives. We must purge the capital of their filth, and never again let it infest its hallowed halls.

Join me, fight with me, for God and Country, for your children, we must take the senate back, not from the democrats, but from the slimy grips of progressive worms.  2014 will be a year of legends, what side will you stand on? Will you be liberator, or a captor? A progressive usurper, or a conservative restorer? The choice is yours, I just though you should know what the choices are, liberty, or tyranny, a chance at greatness, or a guarantee of mediocrity, but you must choose in 2014