- Advice (5)
- Attila the Hun School Announcements (3)
- Books (1)
- Culture (6)
- Fashion Faux Pas (1)
- Government (5)
- Human Nature (17)
- Ideas (6)
- In the News (4)
- Manners (6)
- Movies (1)
- Music (1)
- Poetry (7)
- Politics (11)
- Television (1)
- Uncategorized (2)
- November 12, 2009: How to Get Elected
- September 10, 2009: Joe Wilson and Gresham's Law of Manners
- May 22, 2009: Note to Spammers
- February 10, 2009: Welcome to Venezuela
- February 4, 2009: The Barbarians are Rising
- November 15, 2008: The World's Wisest Liberal
- November 5, 2008: Will some ask President Elect Obama...
- October 30, 2008: The Revolution
- July 30, 2008: How Much Can We Learn?
- July 24, 2008: Disarming Vote
Blogroll
Related Sites
Disarming Vote
The American people should be absolutely terrified about the possibility that Barak Obama could be elected president of our country based entirely on the type of Supreme Court Justices he would appoint. Why?
Look at the recent case involving limiting the rights of Americans to bear arms. Four Liberal justices voted against the small majority of five to allow states (in this case the Washington, DC) - John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Berger. Had Bush not made the last two appointments, we would all soon be turning in our rifles and hand guns.
My fellow Americans read the constitution:
Article the fourth [Amendment II] A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
How can this be misinterpreted? Does this speak of only the rights of the people to have a militia? It would take a real stretch to read “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” as only implying to the masses as a whole. The tradition of common law that has protected an individuals right to own and bear arms is as old and established as the constitution itself.
Also, Mr. Obama went to Iraq. However, first he made an announcement about his policy there. He went and observed what every-other politician of both sides admitted was great progress following the surge but Mr. Obama would not acknowledge that fact. His position is purely political.
His immaturity and inexperience has been abundantly displayed and, were the national press not in his back pocket or if he were a Republican, he would have been vilified numerous times to date. He is the darling of Democrats, Liberals, and the Press. It is most fair that his opponent fight the first two but his need to fight the third is an embarrassment to the journalism. Conservative claims that the national news media is prejudice can no longer be argued against. They are now showing it openly.
Mr. Obama is of the party that has restricted this country from drilling oil finds in many parts of the country. They have prohibited the building of nuclear power plants and refineries. Had all this have been allowed and encouraged would we be in the mess we are today? Even now they claim it is too late, drilling oil and getting it ready to distribute would take too long. Well, I say close the barn door. We lost a lot of the animals but there are still more we can save.
Unless we totally ban the use of petroleum products we will be using oil by-products for many, many years to come. Yes we have to conserve, yes we have to find alternate sources of energy but that will also take time. Our politicians promised us that we would be less dependent on oil back in the 70s. Do any of you remember waiting in line? Only being allowed to purchase gas every other day based on your license plate number? Fights in the gas lines? Having the station run out of gas just before it is your turn and you are on empty? What have they done in 30 years? In our new National language “nada”.
Wake up Americans. It is not that we need McCain. It is that we can not survive Obama.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.