Race Bait, Inc. Gets It's Wish

The overwhelming majority of police officers are good men and women, doing a job 99% of people can't, couldn't, wouldn't, won't do - standing between us and the savages of the world - but most of the time all we hear about are the bad ones, or ones involved in situations that people with an agenda try to make out to be bad.

Today, 2 uniformed NYPD officers were gunned down while sitting in their marked police cruiser by an animal posing as a man, in an apparent retaliatory killing for Mike Brown and Eric Garner, just a couple of days after protesters were filmed chanting "What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want them? Now!"

I pray for the families of Officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos, and send my deepest and most heartfelt condolences. They were assassinated doing what they loved by an evil coward.

Anyone who knows me even a little bit knows that I love things political. I've followed politics since I was about ten years old with a passion most people reserve for their favorite sports teams, or a band they love.

As much as I love it, however, even I find it distasteful to bring politics into a tragedy like this, but there are things that must be said, and one of those things is...... This shooting is a direct result of people like the "Reverend" Al Sharpton injecting race into everything they don't like, whether it calls for it or not. Ferguson ring any bells?

Unless and until black America decides that they're Americans first, black second, and ditch their so-called "leaders," whose primary interests are to line their own pockets, perpetuate the victim mentality, accomplishing nothing except dividing us from each other, we will never be free of this nonsense, and that saddens me greatly. ~ Hunter

Let's Go To War Over Sony. Rrriiiggghhhttt...

Last month, it was reported that Sony Entertainment was hacked and this month they were threatened, and now we're paying the price...

The hackers released emails that imply a great deal of racism inherent amongst the leftists that control Hollyweird, which is not surprising to those who know actual history (KKK was founded by racist demoKKKrats).

These hackers also threatened "9/11 style attacks" against movie theaters that dared to screen the upcoming movie "The Interview," a comedy about 2 reporters enlisted by the CIA to assassinate Kim Jong Un, the leader of North Korea - a ridiculous premise, to be sure.

Earlier this week, in response to the threats, nearly every major movie theater chain decided not to show the movie, allowing the terrorists to win. Yesterday, Sony decided not to release the movie in theaters at all (it's unknown whether direct-to-DVD or On-Demand are or aren't options) - again, allowing to terrorists to win.

Now, some people out there (the lunatic fringe, for sure) are calling for a military response to North Korea's alleged hacking of Sony. Think about that for a second...

Assuming it actually was the government of North Korea behind the hacking of Sony - a private company - how, exactly, does that merit a military response from an entity that wasn't attacked - namely the U.S. government?

Seriously, this isn't a knock against Sony, but how does it further America's national interests to restart a war because a private company was electronically attacked?

It's time to use your heads for something other than hat racks. ~ Hunter

China Didn't - Cuba DID

A quick history lesson to those who are wondering why we have trade relations with China and not Cuba, despite both being communist nations - CHINA didn't attempt to set up and host Soviet nuclear missile bases in our backyard - Cuba did. CHINA didn't come to us asking for help in ridding their country of a despotic government, promising to install a pro-America democracy, then turning a hard left into communism and pro-SOVIET dictatorship - Cuba did.

CHINA wasn't a direct threat to the U.S. when we established trade relations with them, not to mention that those trade relations were a natural outgrowth of our trade relations with Hong Kong, which was essentially a British city until relatively recently. CHINA witnessed the power of free-market capitalism in Hong Kong, at one time the fastest growing city on the planet, and they wanted a part of it - hence the reason for free enterprise zones throughout China, where the standard of living is ridiculously higher than the rest of the country.

Cuba had none of this, although various administrations have made overtures to Cuba over the years, and rightfully so, as it really is in OUR best interests to see that our neighbors do well on their own. The biggest obstacle to that - especially in Cuba, Haiti, and Mexico - is the MASSIVE corruption in their respective governments.

It's really not that difficult to figure this stuff out, but those I hear asking why we DO with China and DON'T with Cuba are - most of them, anyway - old enough to remember the Cuban missile crisis of the early 60's. Try opening a history book once in a while - you might have a memory or two resurface through those drug-addled brains. ~ Hunter

The Plantation Of Liberalism

A friend posted this bit of wisdom from a friend of her's on her Facebook page. It is worth the read. ~ Hunter

Ferguson , New York City, Chicago, Detroit, New Orleans and EVERY OTHER MAJOR BLACK CITY IN AMERICA HAS BEEN RUN BY DEMOCRATS FOR DECADES! Now you are seeing the results of decades of social engineering. You are seeing the results of poverty, high crime and ignorance after decades of Democrat control. The War on Poverty that Lyndon Johnson started has been an abject failure, but that was its intention all along - to breed low educated, low informed dependents of government, for the sake of votes.

Blacks make up 13% of Americas population, but are responsible for most of the crime. They fill the jails, the slums, the neighborhoods where the Democrats want them to live. They keep voting Democrat, but nothing gets better.

Now we have the most divisive and racist President in the history of America. We also have his equally racist henchmen, Eric Holder, who refuses to enforce actual law, as opposed to activist law. They choose to make the criminals victims and the law abiding citizens of America the criminals. Need an example? Executive amnesty.

In reality, these so called activists are extreme hypocrites . Black Lives Matter. Yes they do, except where is your outrage for the hundreds of thousands of black on black killings? I see no marches, hashtags, protests, looting, calls for dialogue and conversation when blacks commit murder a thousand fold on each other. No, only the incidents involving a white individual (not including whited killed by blacks) which can be spun into hate crimes.

Planned Parenthood says Black Lives Matter. Planned Parenthood was created by a Nazi sympathizing Klanswoman named Margaret Sanger, for the purpose of eugenics - it's  population control through abortion in the black community. She's a progressive hero, by the way.

The only thing the Brown and Garner incidents have in common is that they both broke the law and resisted arrest.

FYI, the Garner incident was being overseen by a BLACK FEMALE NYPD SERGEANT, and at no time did she call for any sort of restraint. If what happened in the eyes of a black woman did not appear racist, it shoots the whole argument down that this was a hate crime.

Two grand juries, made up of black and white, two "no bill" decisions, based on evidence from black and white witnesses. Apparently, thanks to a POTUS who constantly breaks the law and gets away with it, that sort of mentality is permeating through the neighborhoods of his voters.

If you want to blame white people, blame Mayor Deblasio of New York. He sent the cops after Garner because he wanted his precious tax money! In fact, you can thank both black and white Democrats, who for decades have segregated blacks into the high crime, high poverty areas they currently occupy. Let's not forget Margaret Sanger, Lyndon Johnson, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, and even Bill Clinton, until he got a Republican Congress.

Black Lives do Matter! It's about time the hypocrisy of picking and choosing what outrages you ends. If you are upset about only two, yet ignore the massive black on black crime , you don't have any sort of argument. If you vote Democrat for decades - the party of slavery, the party of Jim Crow and the KKK, the party of segregation, the party of social engineering and eugenics, the party of the government plantation - and you vote Democrat over and over again, and can't understand why nothing has changed for you, you will never find help.

Guest Post: Things I Learned Trolling Liberal Facebook Pages

A friend in one of the conservative groups to which I belong posted what he has learned by going to liberal pages on Facebook. It's short, sweet, and so true to life that I knew I had to post it. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did. ~ Hunter

I consider myself a student of life. I believe everyday is an opportunity to expand your mind and learn new things. So, with that in mind, I'd like to present a new installment that I call "Things I learned trolling lib sites."

1.) There is absolutely NO connection between crime and the destruction of the family unit, despite the percentage of violent crime and the percentage of unwed parents increasing nearly neck and neck over the past 60+ years.

2.) ALL cops are evil racists.

3.) Officer Wilsons charges were dismissed because the jury did not have access to the actual autopsy reports which are available only to liberal Facebook users.

4.) Christianity is an evil cult that teaches nothing but hate and subjugation of women. Meanwhile, people of the islamic faith shouldn't be judged based on a few mentally unstable individuals.

I hope this helps educate some of you silly conservatives as much as it helped me.

Enforcement Of A Crap Law Is Still Necessary For The Rule Of Law

I know this is probably going to make me pretty unpopular with quite a few folks, but I just call things the way I see things.

Eric Garner's death, as tragic as it was, was not because he was selling "loosies" (single cigarettes). As with Michael Brown, who wasn't shot and killed for the strong-arm robbery he committed minutes before Ferguson P.D. Officer Darren Wilson encountered him, Garner died as a result of his disobeying the lawful order of the police officers attempting to arrest him.

We can complain that the law the police were there to enforce the day Garner died was, and is, ridiculous. The government interfering in the free-market service Garner was attempting to provide is precisely the type of law that true conservatives wish to abolish, and it should be. But just as with Mike Brown, had Garner complied with the police officers' commands, he would most likely be alive today.

While most people are focusing on the underlying crime in both NYC and Ferguson, they're missing the obvious - the failure of both men to obey the lawful commands of the police. With Garner, we must also keep in mind that he had been previously arrested and was out on bail for selling untaxed cigarettes, driving without a license, marijuana possession, among others. Garner had a criminal record that includes more than 30 arrests dating back to 1980 on charges such as assault, resisting arrest, grand larceny. An official said the charges include multiple incidents in which he was arrested for selling unlicensed cigarettes.

The Garner incident had nothing to do with race. In fact, the police sergeant leading the detail making the arrest was a black woman. It was her decision to go forward with the arrest. I deeply sympathize with the Garner family, but facts are facts, and as he had been arrested multiple times - FOR THE SAME OFFENSE - he *knew* that what he was doing was against the law.

We can argue about the ridiculousness of the law Garner was breaking until we're all blue in the face, but unless and until that law is changed, we are duty-bound to obey that law. This is the type of government overreach that we have allowed to creep into our system.

Just as Mike Brown is responsible for Mike Brown's death, Eric Garner is responsible for Eric Garner's death. The police officers involved in both cases were just trying to do their jobs to the best of their abilities. ~ Hunter

Answering The Pantheon Of Armchair Police Officers (And Other Useful Idiots)

It's getting extremely tiring hearing questions about whether Michael Brown could have been shot in the legs or some other non-lethal body part in order to incapacitate rather than kill him.


1.) Brown had already been shot in his hand when he reached into Wilson's patrol vehicle.


2.) Brown assaulted Officer Wilson, punching him twice in the face hard enough to fracture his eye socket and tried to wrest Wilson's gun from him (causing Wilson to fire 2 shots in the vehicle).


3.) This isn't the movies.


4.) Anyone with even a shred of intellectual honesty will tell you that anyone who may have to use a firearm for their job, like the police and our military, is trained to shoot center mass. Why? Because that's where most of the vital organs are located and it's the biggest target. In the movie "The Patriot," Mel Gibson's character, Benjamin Martin, asks his two boys, who helping him attack the British unit transporting his eldest son as a prisoner, what he taught them about shooting. They replied, "Aim small, miss small." Yes, I know it's a movie, but "Aim small, miss small" is a truism in shooting.


5.) Officer Wilson, having already been attacked by a 300 lb. man (not a child), nearly knocked unconscious, does his job - pursuing a subject suspected of a strong-arm robbery. This suspect flees, then turns around and charges at Wilson, causing the officer to shoot Brown five more times, the fatal round entering Brown's head as he fell to the ground less then eight feet from Wilson, leaving a twenty-five yard long blood trail in the process.


6.) Firefights and officer involved shootings happen quickly, and are typically high-stress situations. I know from the 2 firefights I was in years ago that my heart was racing, my hands shaking, and my aim unsteady. I can only thank the good Lord above that I didn't hit someone other than the ones shooting at me. To shoot at anything other than center mass is to court death.


7.) There's nothing harder in shooting than hitting a moving target, especially when adrenaline is flowing, or you've been assaulted by a man whose intention it can only be assumed was to kill you. Ask any soldier who's been in a firefight in Iraq or Afghanistan - they'll tell you the same thing.


8.) We must also keep in mind that Wilson's entire encounter with Brown lasted about a grand total of ninety seconds. Things moved fast. Thankfully, Officer Wilson's training and instincts kicked in to keep him alive.


The point of this diatribe is to show that while the police willingly put their lives on the line every day, they also aren't like the cops we see on TV and in the movies. They get nervous, scared - just like the rest of us - but they're trained to deal with those emotions better than we are.


Again, based upon the evidence, I believe Officer Wilson acted appropriately and within the law. Once again, it would behoove us to remember that the police are not obligated to use less than lethal means to subdue someone once deadly intent has been displayed.


This isn't now, nor has it ever been, about race. This is, and always has been, about a police officer doing his job - and that's all it ever should have been about. Period. ~ Hunter

The Ferguson Decision

I've held off on writing about this because I wanted to wait until the grand jury reached its decision. It's been tough keeping silent, especially after the true facts started trickling out (as they always do in similar situations). Now it's time to let it all hang out.

It's getting extremely irritating hearing over and over and over how Mike Brown was "unarmed." He forfeited the ability to make that claim - as did his supporters - when he attacked Officer Wilson.

Added to that is the fact that police officers are not obligated to use non-lethal means despite having them at their disposal.

Now let's take that a step further - it's now been determined that Brown was attempting to relieve Wilson of his weapon. How well do you think those non-lethal means would compete had Brown managed to take said weapon?

The grand jury, which included three black people, unanimously refused to indict Officer Wilson based upon the evidence - evidence that clearly showed no wrongdoing on the part of the police officer. Three separate autopsies - including the one from Dr. Michael Baden, who was privately hired by Brown's family - showed that the altercation began inside the vehicle. All - and I stress ALL - the findings support Wilson's version of events.

Mike Brown's family has asked for non-violent protests, despite their grief over the loss of their son and their misplaced anger. The "protesters" have not honored that request - leading to at least twenty-nine arrests, about a dozen businesses burned to the ground, and dozens more looted. How is that helping anyone?

Now Al "Not-so" Sharpton, one of the heads of Race Bait, Inc. is heading to the area. Yeah... That should turn out well...

We owe the grand jury a debt of gratitude for following the law and not letting the "what ifs" to sway their decision to not indict Wilson. Their courage to do the right thing despite knowing what would ensue as a result of their decision, and should serve as an example to us all on doing what's right instead of what's expedient. (You listening, King DingleBarry?)

Darren Wilson acted appropriately, well within the law, and as good as it is to have Wilson vindicated, we must still remember that someone died during this incident, and many lives on both sides have been irrevocably altered. We need to put the race issue aside - especially since it literally had nothing to do with it - and realize that it's the facts that matter. It's the justice system, and its processes, that matters, and for that, we should all be thankful. ~  Hunter

The Death Of The Old Republic

Thursday night, in a not unexpected, but still unprecedented and unbelievable move, the Petulant Pretender, the Boy Who Would Be King essentially granted amnesty to approximately 5,000,000 criminal trespassers. Yes, you read that correctly - FIVE MILLION. In effect, and a fit of pique over losing what is shaping up to be the most important election of our lifetimes (perhaps ever), he's unilaterally rewarding people whose very 1st act in this country was committing a felony (that's a crime, libbies).

Thursday night, we witnessed what could very well be the death knell, the final nail in the coffin, of the United States as a nation, and as a Republic. What King DingleBarry has done with this one decree is say that the most recent elections held no meaning for him, that his policies, which he pointed out were on the ballot, were not soundly repudiated.

Thursday night, we ceased having a president. A self-styled king now rules in his stead. This king, which we were never meant to have, has decided that because he couldn't get some type of immigration reform through Congress (not even when he had control of the entirety of Congress), he has the absolute authority to change whole swaths of immigration law, onn his own. If you really stop to think about it, given the multitude of changes he's made to 0bamadontcare - again, on his own - this latest and most blatant foray into lawlessness isn't all that surprising.

Thursday night, a banana republic was created where a representative republic once existed. No longer citizens governed by the rule of law, we are now subjects of the Clown Prince, ruled by his whims and fancies. King DingleBarry has decreed that he will do as he damn well pleases, regardless of the will of the people. And make no mistake about it - November 4th was all about the people making their will known.

Now that it's been announced, the question now becomes - what can be done to stop it? It can't really be defunded, as the true effect isn't an action so much as an enforced inaction. Some states have already launched lawsuits, and some members of Congress have intimated they will do the same. I pray the courts take it up and rule against the Prince of Pique,and not just in the Republicans or conservatives favor, but in favor of the Constitution, and the Separation of Powers enumerated therein.

Thursday night, we witnessed something unparalleled in the history of America - the complete abrogation, even abandonment, of the presidential Oath of Office. The oath to "support and defend" the Constitution and "faithfully execute the laws" is one that should never be taken lightly, whether a lowly civil servant, a member of the military, a member of Congress, or the President of the United States. I know some will say that it's nothing new, that Congress and presidents past have broken their oaths before - to which I say never to this degree.

This cannot and WILL not stand. I, for one, will never bow before this, or any other king. There will be a reckoning for this Pretender to the throne, this Petulant Powermonger. I sincerely hope and pray that it's during my lifetime, as I don't want my children and grandchildren to have to clean up any more of our mess than is absolutely necessary. ~ Hunter

A Short Lesson On Congress, Or Why The Senate Is So Screwed Up

Everyone knows what the House of Representatives is supposed to be - the voice of We the People. We select, through direct election, those people we think will most closely represent our social-economic-political beliefs to speak for us in our form of government. Hence the reason they've always been elected through direct election. The House was the only body in our federal government to have such elections, and here's the most important part - the only one MEANT to be directly elected.

The Senate, on the other hand, was meant to be the voice of their individual states, and only indirectly be a voice for the people.

The Founders, given their natural (and completely understandable) fear of a strong central government, wanted senators chosen by the state legislatures of the individual states. Their intent was to ensure that the federal government's power resided in the states. Hence the reason every state - from smallest to largest, least populated to most populated - have just two senators.

Until Woodrow Wilson, that is. That brilliant progressive, in his infinite wisdom, decided we'd be better served with directly electing our senators. Why? It's simple really - progressives, above all things, crave power. Not necessarily for themselves, but for the strong, overbearing, and centralized federal government that couldn't be had with senators that are beholden only to the states they represent. Progressives, liberals - call them what you will - all leftists believe that they know better what's best for you than you do - and what better way to enforce their vision of "best" than a government capable of intruding into every aspect of your life.

We are now forced to endure the likes of Harry Reid-iculous, John McCan't, Lindsey Graham, et al, because becoming a senator is more of a popularity contest than doing what's right for the state you serve.

Had the brilliance of the Founders been left as they intended, those senators (and many others throughout the years) wouldn't have lasted as long as they have, because the ones they damaged most - their state - would have removed them from office, and the rest of us wouldn't have gotten stuck with them. ~ Hunter

Congressional Obstructionism: It's Not Who The Main Stream Media Says It Is

While listening to the morning show on my local talk radio station (thank God for Chris Stigall), I heard a caller state that if King DingleBarry is going to be called an "obstructionist" for vetoing bills coming out of the next Congress it's a tacit admission of the obstructionist nature of the present Congress. Seriously, someone actually said that...

Let's review, shall we?

At last count, there are presently somewhere in the neighborhood of 270-plus bills, the overwhelming majority of which have bipartisan support (that means members of both parties support them, libbies) languishing in the black hole known as the desk of Harry Reid-diculous. That's in a Senate controlled by the democrats - which means, libbies, that the Republicans can do.........wait for it.........absolutely nothing to stop their passage and then hitting the Petulant Pretender's desk for his signature into law.

For the first two years of what will forever be known as "The Dark Times" (King DingleBarry's reign), the demoKKKrats controlled the whole of Congress, and the only major piece of legislation they could get thru was a law nobody wanted (that would be 0bamadontcare - follow along, libbies).

Sounds to me like he's been obstructed by his own party throughout his reign. Huh - Whoulda thunk?

The caller also went on to say that he's interested to see what the Republicans are going to do to help all Americans, not just the "top 2%."

Here's a hint - Republican policies, on the whole, help all Americans, with an eye towards helping all of us become the "top 2%."

I loathe liberals, everything they do, and all they represent (Just to clarify for the Lurking LiberTrolls, who I know will deliberately take that statement out of context - I loathe their big government approach to each and every problem). ~ Hunter

The House That Obama Built

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan." - King DingleBarry (multiple occasions)

"If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor." - King DingleBarry (multiple occassions)

"We have to pass the bill to see what's in it." - Former Speaker Nancy Piglosi

"I don't know who this Gruber character is." - Nancy Piglosi (apparently forgetting the existence of such small technological achievements like video recording, microphones, and the internet)

These are but a scant few of the lies surrounding the passage of the Petulant Pretender's legacy legislation. We, the informed people of the nation, were roundly excoriated for raising the alarm about it (even though everything we predicted has come to pass), being called racist, idiots, and a whole host of other vile epithets. We knew it was a lie, created with a lien based on lies, passed with the biggest lie of all, and cemented with a lie in SCOTUS.

Conventional wisdom would dictate that even those on the left would be angry by now, especially with their delicate sensibilities tweaked and supposed intellectual superiority having been downplayed as "stupid" by Gruber, one of the architects of the law.

Sadly, that's not the case, because - to the left - the ends justify the means, even if those ends are an abysmal failure (like all of liberalism).

But really, does it surprise - I mean truly surprise - anyone?

After all, liberalism is the biggest lie of all. ~ Hunter

Veterans Day Salute

Thank you to all who have served this, the greatest nation in history. Without your sacrifices, the United States wouldn't be.

Thank you to those who serve now. May your sacrifices not be in vain.

Thank you to all who will serve in the future. May you stand strong, but never needed.

God bless all of our veterans, but especially my Pop-Pop, Riley, who fought the Nazis and is no longer with us; my father, Michael, who fought in Vietnam; and Tammy, one of the best friends I've ever had (and definitely the best internet wife ❤), a veteran of the Gulf War. Thank you for ensuring America remains free.

We didn't serve for the recognition. We served because it was the right thing to do.

We didn't serve to become one of the sheep. We served to keep the wolves at bay.

We didn't serve because we like death and destruction. We served to prevent those things from visiting us.

We didn't serve to save ourselves. We served to save you.

We didn't serve so we could kill. We served to keep you from dying at the hands of the enemy.

We served so you didn't have to...

The Republican Mandate - And The Repudiation Of Liberalism

I keep hearing political pundits on TV, reading them online, from both sides of the aisle (although certainly many more from the left than right), who keep saying that even though the Republicans ran away with the midterms in historic fashion, they don't have a "mandate."

I'm sorry, but were they watching the same election results as the rest of the country? The rejection, repudiation, and outright dismissal of liberal policies could not have been made any more and absolutely crystal clear.

Republicans, for the first time in about twenty years, have firm ground under them. Their job now is to pull America up out of the ditch liberalism has driven her, and it can't be focused solely on stopping the Empty Suit's agenda, although that's undoubtedly a top priority.

They need to craft legislation that puts Americans back to work. Make America palatable to businesses again by ending unnecessary and burdensome regulations, purge the government from the marketplace as much as possible, as quickly as possible. Yesterday would be nice.

Corporate tax reform is another big issue. Billions upon billions of dollars are kept offshore by businesses to avoid double taxation - once from the host nation, then again by the U.S. Yeah... It's that crazy...

Build a damn fence along the southern border. Deport all illegals - period. Entering the U.S. illegally should forever disqualify you from working here, emigrating legally, or even visiting.

Reinstitute the Welfare to Work requirement and push for mandatory drug testing (that means it must be done, liberals) for welfare recipients. Tighten the restrictions on where and for what welfare money and food stamps can purchase and/or be used. Nobody should be able to buy a video game, or alcohol, or cigarettes, or marijuana.

Strengthen our military - again. There's more than enough wasteful spending in the defense budget that can be slashed, thus avoiding cutting personnel that want to be there. Above all else, TAKE CARE OF OUR VETERANS.

Reduce the size of the bureaucracies and their redundant programs. Root out the waste and fraud inherent in these bureaucracies. Make it easier to demote or fire public sector workers.

REPEAL OBAMADONTCARE.

I don't often disagree with Rush Limbaugh, but I don't believe we won this election so handily solely to stop King DingleBarry in his tracks. The American people don't want a "do nothing Congress." We want a Congress that does what's right for America. ~ Hunter

A Glorious Day For The Republic

Last night, in a massive repudiation of King DingleBarry's policies - and cronies - the Republican Party took control of the Senate by gaining seven seats (maybe eight - Alaska hasn't been called yet, but the Republican is leading), gained about ten more seats in the House, and won a boatload of gubernatorial races.

The question now is this - even tho this was a victory for Republicans, is it going to be a victory for We the People?

I believe it can be, but we must stay aware of what they're doing and hold them accountable. This is just the first step - albeit a big one - in retaking the U.S. and we canNOT be complacent. Complacency is what got us in this mess.

Keep the pressure on all our senators and representatives, but especially the Republicans. If the last six years have proven anything at all - it's that we can no longer sit back and watch. We must remain actively involved.

Like I said, this is merely the 1st step. There's more that needs doing, and this is a great start. Let's keep the pressure on. ~ Hunter

What's Wrong With America: Voter Apathy

I've been seeing a great many Facebook posts today about making sure people get out to vote. They've been inundated by comments about how voting doesn't matter - things are decided already by some shadowy secret cabal or some other such nonsense.


The only position I take on "the fix is already in" is that I don't believe it - not for a second. It's nearly impossible to comprehend that, in a nation where almost every secret is leaked by someone, somewhere, sometime, it's somehow possible to keep this cabal hidden. Sorry - just not buying it.

As for those who aren't voting - you are the problem. Or at least a very big part of it. As a citizen of the greatest nation ever set on this planet, you not only have the right to vote - it's your responsibility to exercise that right. Every last one of the rights enumerated in the Constitution and Bill of Rights comes with the responsibility to USE THEM. Yes, it really is that simple.


If you can't bring yourself to drag your sorry a$$ off your couch to go to your local polling place and press a few buttons, you - yes, YOU - are an even bigger danger to this Republic than the liberals/socialists/communists.


Voting for the lesser of two evils is, by far, not the best of solutions, and certainly not what the Founders would have wanted. At the moment, however, we don't have a better option. By not voting, you're helping the greater evil win.


Don't believe me? Look at the 2012 presidential election. Upwards of 5 *MILLION* conservatives failed to vote. I agree that Romney was far from the ideal candidate (I would've preferred Cain or Gingrich), but he was certainly a better choice than allowing King DingleBarry a second term.


If you don't vote, if you don't at least make the attempt to help turn back the tide, how can you possibly have the temerity to complain about the direction we're going? By not exercising one of your moat basic rights as a citizen of the United States, you're acting just as selfishly as those who vote for the liberals ruining this great nation.


And that, my friends, makes ME sick - and makes YOU pretty damn contemptible. ~ Hunter

The Mercy Rule

I heard what could be one of the most ridiculous things ever on the radio this evening. The host on my local talk radio station, 1210 WPHT, was detailing a recent story about a Peewee football game in Georgia. Why does a Philly radio station care about a kid's football game in Georgia? Allow me to explain...

Apparently, the league for these kids has a "mercy rule," which states that no team can score more than 33 points against another team. Not kidding.

Well, recently a team accidentally broke that rule when an 8-year-old boy returned an interception for his first ever touchdown, thus causing his team to exceed the 33-point limit. The team was fined - yes, fined - $500 as penalty for breaking the mercy rule.

But wait, that's not all. The coach was suspended for a week for running up the score. Nope, not kidding about that one, either.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is precisely what's wrong with this nation. Self-esteem is an awesome thing - when it's earned. As with all things, however, when it's just handed to you, it essentially means next to nothing.

The drive to compete is being exterminated from our society, and it's not by accident. All one need do is look to how badly our children are doing in worldwide education rankings over the last 40 years or so.

Liberals believe that fairness and equality mean that everyone, everywhere is equal, and if they're not then the government should make them so. What they don't understand - the equality is in the opportunity, not the results. Nobody on this planet is equal to any other in terms of talent, drive, etc., nor will they ever be equal. There's always someone out there better than you, better than me. That's just a fact of life.

We need to get back to teaching our kids that not only is life not fair, but success is OK. It's not something to be punished, but encouraged. Teaching them how to deal with failure is just as important, however, as people tend to learn more from failing than succeeding.

It's beyond time to bring back good, old-fashioned competition, and with it, American exceptionalism.

Let's have a mercy rule on the "mercy rule" before it's too late. ~ Hunter

The Smoke And Mirrors Of the Clinton Surplus

I am sick unto death hearing about the “Clinton surplus.” It was a *M*Y*T*H* - created by smoke and mirrors, accounting tricks that would get you and me thrown in prison with lengthy sentences, and out-and-out LIES by the MSM, which have persisted to this day. It's time to expose those lies. ~ Hunter

Clinton ran deficits through both of his terms, and one can go to the US Treasury Department and looking through the history of the total outstanding debt through Clinton's presidency.

Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to climb.

Clinton managed to claim a surplus even as the general operating budgets ran deficits, Clinton borrowed from numerous “trust funds” to cover said deficits.

For example, in 2000, Clinton claimed a $230B surplus, but Clinton borrowed
$152.3B from Social Security
$30.9B from Civil Service Retirement Fund
$18.5B from Federal Supplementary Medical insurance Trust Fund
$15.0B from Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund
$9.0B from the Federal Unemployment Trust Fund
$8.2B from Military Retirement Fund
$3.8B from Transportation Trust Funds
$1.8B from Employee Life Insurance & Retirement fund
$7.0B from others

A true surplus will decrease the national debt, which only INCREASED during the Clinton administration.
http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16
http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/30
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

Evil Done In The Name Of Good

I just watched a review on FNC of the new Dracula movie being released in a couple weeks.

The review included interviews with the actors, who said the story focuses on why Vlad makes evil choices for good reasons, and the first thing that popped into my mind was - Evil done in the name of Good doesn't make it any less evil.

My second thought - Gee, that sounds like liberalism/progressivism (yes, my sarcasm circuit is one of the first to start functioning in the morning). For liberals, it's their intentions that matter, not the actual results. And that's why their programs are invariably huge failures. War on poverty, social engineering instead of education, tax everything that moves and spend all the money in the world, all liberal foreign policy, Obama's presidency, climate "change" (also known as weather), etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

Intentions mean less than nothing. The results are what matter. Just to clarify - throwing even more money at a problem that your "intentions" failed to provide a solution for isn't an answer for said problem. I know, I know - this is shocking to you liberals, and extremely antithetical to your very existence, but facts are facts whether you believe them or not. ~ Hunter

Seattle School Board Loses Its Collective Mind

Seattle school board votes to replace Columbus Day with "Indigenous Peoples Day." Their stated reason is to promote understanding and tolerance for the "indigenous" people of the nation, as well as standing up against the country's racism inherent in the holiday (paraphrased, but essentially what was said.)

I am BEYOND disgusted with the continual attacks upon the traditions of the United States. Regardless of whether Columbus ACTUALLY discovered America for Europe, we celebrate a federal holiday as if he did. Let's just leave out the fact that there ARE NO INDIGENOUS PEOPLE in America (human beings are NOT native to the Americas.)

This is no longer the nation in which I grew up. That saddens and frightens me.

It frightens me because this is the last bastion of freedom and opportunity for ALL people, regardless of accident of birth.

It saddens me because future generations won't even realize that they missed out. ~ Hunter

Should The U.S. Be The World's Policeman?

I'm sitting here watching FNC's Bulls and Bears (I think), and I hear some twit asking if the U.S. really needs to be the world's policeman, specifically asking, "Do we need to be in Germany?"

As much as I agree with the sentiment that we shouldn't be the "world's policeman," one question comes to mind when I hear someone make that statement - If not the U.S., then who?

What other nation has the power projection? What other country has the track record we do? Russia? China? If those nation's project their power, it's only to invade and occupy, or "annex," like Crimea.

The United States has been, is now, and will be the only global force for good in history. We are the only ones who can do it, and people who believe that it's not in our national security interests to do so are dangerously naive.

It's one thing to stay out of other nation's internal affairs when one political ideology is squabbling with another ideology, but when an ideology's stated goal is the destruction of western ideals and they've been willing to put action behind those thoughts, as is the case with Islamic terror groups such as Al Qaeda and ISIS, then we are obligated, in my opinion, to take whatever actions are necessary to ensure our safety and the safety of our allies.

None of this means the U.S. needs to be involved in every brush war that pops up everywhere across the globe, nor does it mean we should be "nation building." It simply means that we can't hunker down, with our heads in the sand, and just wait for the problem to clear itself up, or worse yet, make its way to our shores before we act.

It's past time to stop worrying about what other nations think about the U.S. and start worrying about making sure we're safe. ~ Hunter

Bob Beckel Says U.S. Should "Move On" From 9/11.......Really

"It's time for America to move on," says Bob Beckel, The Five's resident liberal jackass (yes, I know that's redundant), referring to 9/11.

Really, Bob? REALLY?!?! THREE THOUSAND PEOPLE DIED THAT DAY, you syphilitic psychopath. That ALONE ...makes it worthy of remembrance until the end of time.

Let me ask you, Bobbie (female spelling because you're completely emasculated) - should we "move on" from remembering Pearl Harbor?

Should we "move on" from remembering our Declaration of Independence from an oppressive and overbearing government, so like the one we have RIGHT NOW?

Should we "move on" from remembering our victories in Europe and the Pacific and the price we paid to obtain them?

Should we "move on" from remembrances of our honored dead very Memorial Day, thus cheapening their sacrifices to the point of NOTHINGNESS? Just give them an "attaboy" pat on the coffin and "move on" to the next one, right Bobbie?

It's called HISTORY, you window-licking crayon-eater. The events of that day are part of the very fabric of this nation, no less important than any of the other events I listed.

I've been following politics since I was about 10 years old like most people follow their favorite sports teams. In those 34-plus years, I can't recall a more RIDICULOUS statement made by a liberal (or ANYONE for that matter). It's no secret that I absolutely LOATHE all things liberal, but Bobbie Beckel has just made himself the most despised liberal on a VERY lengthy list. ~ Hunter

More Truth About Islam

23,770: In the 29 days since my last post on this subject, the followers of mohammed (all mentions of anything muslim are in lowercase letters to denote my disrespect) have been very busy, committing 186 attacks, with fatalities -  an average of over 6 per day.

Fifty-one, including a Syrian child who was crucified, have been killed in 6 known attacks committed between 02 SEP and 05 SEP, an average of almost 13 people a day.

The number of Christians who killed in the name of Christianity............*crickets chirping* That's right - NONE.

Between 23 AUG 14 and 29 AUG 14, there were:

44 jihad attacks
6 “allahu akbar” suicide attacks
700 dead bodies (that's 100 per day) 
433 critically injured in these attacks

Very busy week.

August 2014 totals:

222 jihad attacks
27 countries
24 "allahu akbars"
4573 dead bodies (averaging almost 148 people murdered in the name of allah per day)
2287 critically injured

The numbers for the entirety of 2013 are bringing the reality of the “religion” of “peace” will bring some additional clarity to this post:

2801 jihad attacks
51 countries
16,170 dead bodies (average of just under 86 people killed PER DAY)
29,432 critically injured

To put this in a little perspective, the estimate - which is based on new, very thorough research - of people killed during the entire *500* years of the Medieval and the Spanish Inquisitions is about 6,000 deaths. While those deaths are reprehensible, and all Catholics lament them, it's not quite the same, is it? The acknowledged average estimate is around 30,000.

I have no patience for the people who say "islam is a religion of peace" or "Christianity is just as bad." When I challenge them to prove it, they ALWAYS bring up the Crusades (which I've debunked here, or the Inquisitions (debunked here). I'm sorry, but if you have to go back at least 500 years to come up with a comparison that's tenuous, at best, to what's happening before your very eyes, well.....it's not really much of a comparison, is it? ~ Hunter

Are You Ready For The Department Of Parental Suitability?

In addition to the pages I help run, I belong to a few private Facebook groups for conservatives. They're groups for conservatives to get together, share ideas, gather facts, and just generally have fun making fun of the socialist morons we call "liberals."


(As an aside, I absolutely LOATHE using that word for them. Allowing them to claim they're standing for freedom puts true liberals - you know, the conservatives that stand with the Founders and Framers - at an immense disadvantage. We need to reclaim that word.)


The reason I bring up the groups is because late into the night a couple of days ago, I was engaged in a debate with a fellow conservative in the comment thread of this story, which is the Chicks On The Right commentary about this story.


The subject of our debate was this conservative's insistence upon setting standards for becoming - and remaining - a parent as a way to keep people off, or remove them from, government assistance programs. He didn't just insist upon standards, though; he wants to set up a government bureaucracy - a "Department of Parental Suitability," if you will - in order to administer his "objective test" for prospective and current parents.


Yes... You did read that correctly.


I have often said that conservatives need to bring the fight to liberals using the same tactics liberals use. That means flooding liberal pages with conservatives, but instead of using "what ifs" or feelings, we need to use the facts that most conservatives usually have on hand. Overwhelm them. Get down and dirty, call the names like they do to us, It's long past time to adjust our fighting style to match theirs. I did NOT mean to use the same WEAPONS.


According to this conservative's grand plan, the idea is to establish some sort of "objective test" to determine whether one is suitable to become a parent. The criteria includes your financial situation (salary, savings, home ownership, etc.), drinking and smoking habits, marital situation. Practically every aspect of your life will be laid bare before some faceless, "objective" government worker. Sounds a little Nazi-esque to me.


Basically, his proposal means that you have to earn a certain amount, lose the right to do as you please within the law, and accede to the demands of others in how you live your life. When he made this proposal, I literally had to check to make sure right and left hadn't changed places when I wasn't looking. Fortunately, King DingleBarry was making some patently ridiculous statement at the time and Ronaldus Magnus was still credited with ushering in the single longest peacetime economic expansion in the history of the world, so I figured it out pretty quickly.


My immediate response, along with several other people in the group, was to tell him that to invite more government intrusion into our lives runs counter to everything conservatives believe, and that using his "remove people from the government dole" excuse wasn't sufficient reason to expand the government into areas it was never designed to go. Good intentions aren't enough to ensure the system won't be abused.


How long before a Lois Lerner wannabe decides to start asking, "How conservative are you" to determine suitability for parenting? Think that can't happen? I'm fairly certain that the conservative groups that filed for their tax exempt status didn't think it could happen to them, either. Can you say "unintended consequences?"


The bottom line is that doing "good" at the point of a gun - which is what government is - isn't really doing good at all. It's just doing less bad. Our position as conservatives should always be on the side of less government, as the Founders intended. When modern liberal ideas start creeping into conservatism, we might as well switch sides. It is ridiculous to invite the government deeper into our lives, especially under the guise of "doing good." It's never worked before. All one need do is review the welfare system. The poverty rate has remained virtually unchanged in the fifty-plus years since LBJ declared his "War on Poverty."


While I agree with the overall premise that the breakdown of the nuclear family is one of the central reasons for the "need" for welfare, but in true liberal fashion, welfare is a major cause of that family breakdown. I submit, however, that being single should not be a disqualifier to becoming, or remaining, a parent. I was a single father, with custody for seven years before meeting my now-wife. On top of that, I was dirt poor (another disqualifier under his proposal). I challenge anyone to find a more respectful, better adjusted child than my son. No, my situation wasn't ideal for raising a child, but it clearly worked. I've also known two parent households, in what would be ideal conditions according to the "objective test," that aren't worth a damn. The point is this: parenting situations are not static, nor is one situation identical to another.


As I said earlier, good intentions aren't enough of a safeguard against further government interference in our lives. There isn't a single government program that has stayed within its initial parameters. Ever. Why would this one be any different?


If we don't guard against this kind of thinking, we're essentially no different than those we profess to be fighting against, and this nation really will be lost. FOREVER. ~ Hunter

"Divergent" - A Glimpse Into Our Future?

Anyone wanting to get a glimpse into the future of our nation needs to see the movie "Divergent."

Set in a post-apocalyptic near-future, what occurs in the movie is very close to what will happen if we keep allowing liberals and political correctness to put people into various groups by defining people as they see fit.

Liberals see America as groups of people to set against other groups. "Your group is doing bad because this group over here is [insert today's buzzword here], which means your group needs [insert pet cause here] from us." They need to keep people as separate as possible. Keeping people in little "boxes," constantly at odds with one another, tends to accomplish that rather well, doesn't it?

By contrast, what conservatives see in groups of people is the miracle that is America. I know I've said this before, but it bears repeating - America is a nation defined less by the people inhabiting it than the ideas and ideals that brought forth its existence. A legal immigrant to this country, having just taken the oath to the Constitution, is considered just as American as someone who was born here. Nowhere else on earth is such a thing possible.

Conservatives see Americans as, well, Americans. No one individual is better or worse than any other in terms of class, or accident of birth.

We need to teach people, and perhaps relearn ourselves, to stop letting others define who we are and let our actions define us, before it's too late to avoid the type of society depicted in "Divergent." ~ Hunter

Fascism, California Style

The California Assembly has passed a bill and sent it to the desk of Governor Brown for his signature to put into law. "What's the subject of this bill?" You ask. Good question, and the answer is nothing short or pure, unadulterated ridiculousness.

California is proposing to ban - meaning make it illegal -for stores to use "single use plastic shopping bags." Yep, you read that correctly. The bags that nearly every store in the nation uses to pack your purchases in for you to carry them home will be illegal in CA. Their stated reasons are to save the "environment and small animals."

Noble sentiments, to be sure, but is the government really the best avenue to accomplish this?

For the record, even as an "evil, dirty air and dirty water conservative," I have no problem with the desire to preserve our environment. I don't even object to reasonable laws, such as anti-littering and anti-pollution laws. It is incumbent upon all of humanity to leave our children a healthy world in which to live. That's almost an automatic understanding for a conservative.

But.......

What I object to is the left's absolute insistence that the government interfere in our lives to the point of making a certain product - usually one that's convenient for the consumer, as well as the most cost-efficient for businesses - illegal, or so costly to use that businesses are forced to stop using said product, whatever it is, thereby inconveniencing the consumer.

One of the definitions of fascism is using the government to force businesses and the citizenry to sell and/or use a certain product/service a certain way. 0bamadontcare, anyone? What this approach usually does is drive up prices. That's proven throughout history.

If you don't want plastic bags used, convince businesses to stop using them. Make it beneficial to consumers to use something else, but leave that decision to the consumers and businesses.

Stop using the government to enforce your social conscience. Let the markets decide what's best for consumers and businesses alike. ~ Hunter

Tax Inversion? We Need THOUGHT Inversion

The U.S. corporate tax rate is among the highest in the world (we used to be among the lowest) and people actually have the audacity to wonder why corporations are leaving these shores?!

The latest company to make the news on this front is Burger King. The federal corporate tax burden on BK is fully 24% of their operating costs and a whopping 34% of their profits!!! Think about that for a minute - 34 cents of every dollar BK has left after paying their costs to run their business is paid to the federal government. None of this includes state and local taxes. The corporate tax encompasses both domestic and international profits, by the way, which is in addition to whatever taxes they pay to the other nations in which they operate.

It's ridiculous to expect a company, any company, to hand over that much of its profit to the government. By the way, don't think for a second that we aren't paying those taxes, as all companies ultimately pass on their expenses to the consumer.

Although Burger King has already stated they're not moving to Canada as part of their deal to purchase Tim Horton's, a Canadian donut and breakfast chain, making such a move would lower the tax burden on their profits a full 25%. What company wouldn't want that?

We need a thorough overhaul of our taxation system, and not just of personal income taxes. To think that doing what's best for your company is somehow "unpatriotic" is ridiculous to the point of absurdity. No company has any more of an "obligation" to keep its headquarters in this nation than any individual - more and more individuals are renouncing their American citizenship every year just because of taxes. That alone should give you pause the next time you think about voting for the socialists of the Left.

Another quick thought for you - the U.S. revolution occurred, in large part, because the colonists believed the tax burden placed upon them by a monarch was too onerous. Companies are fleeing the overbearing tax rate of the U.S., and heading to nations with more favorable corporate tax rates like Canada - which, in the irony of all ironies, is a Constitutional Monarchy. ~ Hunter

We Still Stand With Israel

I've been visiting some Facebook pages over the last few days, paying particular attention to posts about Israel and its fight against hamass (deliberately misspelled). I've seen some amazing and heartening comments which give me hope. I now know that the majority of American citizens still stand with Israel.

Other comments I've seen are the written approximation of the video of the Marine veteran, who was punched, kicked, and spit upon by pro-Palestine supporters in front of the White House recently, and they're infuriating to say the least.

I read one comment, written by one "Jo Freedom." She went on a long soliloquy about how it's the duty of the "palestinians" to resist the "occupier" that is Israel, and lobbing rockets into Israel is a perfectly acceptable tactic.

She was correct in only one aspect. It is the duty of the citizens of an occupied nation to resist the occupiers.

She, and others like her, fail to take some very basic facts into account (more likely ignore) when they talk about the Israeli "occupation."

One, Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005, so there is no "occupying force" to resist. In fact, when Israel pulled out, the entirety of the Gaza Strip was in far better shape (under those evil, Arab-hating Jews) than it is today (under those Arab-loving hamass "angels").

Two, in all of recorded history, there has never been a nation called "Palestine." Palestine is a region, akin to a county here in the U.S. The so-called "palestinians" are Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian by ancestry. They were abandoned by those nations after Israel kicked their collective asses in the various wars the Arabs started.

Three, Israel would like nothing more than to live in peace. Israelis don't "hate" Arabs. If they did, the hundreds of thousands living inside the borders of Israel right this second wouldn't be there, would they? Millions upon millions of dollars have been spent, by Israel, to improve the lives of the "palestinians," building hospitals, schools, and other improvements, all while some of them are trying to lop the head off of those helping them.

If the "palestinians" really want to "resist" an occupying force, perhaps they should turn their attention to hamass, and the other terror groups existing amongst them, and eradicate them like the vermin they are.

Then, and only then, should Israel, and the rest of the world, treat with them. ~ Hunter

Saying What Needs Saying, Political Correctness Be Damned

Friends, here's a man who tells it like it is, much like I believe MLK would, about the rioting and looting in Ferguson, MO. This is very powerful, and Johnathan Gentry is right on the money. Kudos to him for saying what needs saying. ~ Hunter

Robin Williams, Comedic Genius 1951-2014

This isn't my normal fare. I loathe the entertainment world like most people loathe the political one, but I believe this had to be mentioned.

For those who don't already know, Robin Williams died yesterday of asphyxiation in an apparent suicide.

I don't know the man's politics very well, nor do I care. What I *do* know is that, from all accounts, he was a genuine person - a realty in Hollyweird. He did much for our troops, going on 6 separate USO tours, and was very active in raising money for St. Jude's Children's Hospital.

His comedic genius was legendary, his roles more memorable than not, and he will be sorely missed in a world desperately needing more laughter.

My favorite memories of him are his roles as Mork from Ork and as the Genie in Alladin. Share your memories as we remember the late, great Robin Williams. ~ Hunter

Move Along - Nothing To See Here

23,584: It's been 31 days since my last post on this subject, and shock of all shocks, there's been no let up from the followers of mohammed (all mentions of anything muslim are in lowercase letters to denote my disrespect). Between then and now, there's been 260 attacks with fatalities committed by islamic terrorists, a little over eight attacks per day.

One hundred sixty people, including an undetermined number, but at least three children, have been killed in 6 known attacks committed on just one day, 6 AUG 2014. No need to average that number.


During ramadan, the so-called "holiest month" of the muslim calendar, there was:
272 terror attacks
37 allahu akbars
2429 dead bodies (for those keeping score, that's almost 81 people killed per day)
2028 wounded

By the way, still no Christians killing in the name of Christianity (but Christians are the most evil people in the world, dontcha know?).

Between 26 JUL 14 and 01 AUG14, there were:

75 jihad attacks
10 “allahu akbar” suicide attacks
707 dead bodies (that's 101 per day) 
711 critically injured in these attacks

Very busy week.

Let's look at the totals for just July 2014:

268 jihad attacks
28 countries
41 "allahu akbars"
2660 dead bodies (averaging almost 94 people murdered in the name of allah per day)
2079 critically injured

The numbers for the entirety of 2013 are bringing the reality of the “religion” of “peace” will bring some additional clarity to this post:

2801 jihad attacks
51 countries
16,170 dead bodies (average of just under 86 people killed PER DAY)
29,432 critically injured

To put this in a little perspective, the estimate - which is based on new, very thorough research - of people killed during the entire *500* years of the Medieval and the Spanish Inquisitions is about 6,000 deaths. While those deaths are reprehensible, and all Catholics lament them, it's not quite the same, is it? The acknowledged average estimate is around 30,000.

I have no patience for the people who say that the Inquisition was just as bad as islamic terrorism, especially given that anyone with half a brain, and five minutes can easily find this information online. The next time someone brings up the Inquisition, you now have the facts to refute their arguments.

I know some will say I'm “islamophobic.” That's fine; it's not true, mind you - but I can handle that. To those people, however, I submit this: A phobia is an “unreasoning fear” of something. With numbers like I've detailed above, you have to ask yourselves one question: Is it really “unreasoning fear” when their mantra is “Convert or Die”? ~ Hunter

The Tolerance Of Liberalism, Or Proud To Be Called A Traitor

I received my very first threat on this blog a couple of days ago from a rabid liberal - and apparently professional - crayon-eater. "He" objected to my conservatism and my belief that criminal aliens should be deported as soon as possible.

http://liberalsarehypocrites.blogspot.com/2014/03/operation-wetback-or-how-us-dealt-with.html

It was really quite amusing, and not frightening in the least, but what made it all the more amusing was that this open-minded, oh-so-tolerant window-licker called me a traitor based on the meme at the top of this page, and when "it all goes down," he promised to "meet me on the battlefield" (after saying I would never see him).

I'd like to remind the Lurking LiberTrolls out there that the Founders intended for people to love their country, not their government. That's the reason the military, all members of all 3 branches of the government, and all federal employees swear an oath to the Constitution and not the government or the President.

"I, Michael J. Flanagan Jr., do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, pledging my life, my fortune, and my sacred honor. So help me God."

I took that oath on 27 JUL 1988. My oath, now 26 long years gone, has never expired. If believing in, following, and defending the most brilliant document ever written by man - the very foundation of this nation - makes me a "traitor," well............................that's a cross I'm willing to bear.

Oh, before I forget - if you decide to come after me, "sir," you better make sure you kill me with the 1st shot, because if you don't, you will not get a second chance at it. ~ Hunter

We Stand With Israel

Pop some popcorn, folks, and buckle in, because this might be a bumpy ride.

I need to get a few things off my chest, and this might turn into a rant, which is pretty rare for me. If I offend anyone with what I say tonight, oh well. You're probably who and/or what I'm talking about.

Let it be known, and entered into the record, that this page stands 100% with Israel. If you don't like that, well, this isn't the page for you.

Ever since the ground action by Israel into Gaza, I've been seeing more and more anti-Israel comments. Not so many on the pages I write for, thank God, and the ones I have seen on our pages have been cleaned up fairly quickly, but on just about every other page I frequent. It frightens me that so many Americans would be so against our only true ally in the Middle East. I even saw a comment tonight that basically said Hitler had provocation for the Holocaust. REALLY?! There is no possible justification for the extermination of 6 million Jews, along with the countless other "undesirables" as Hitler saw them. Period.

If you profess to be a Christian, a devout follower of Jesus Christ, yet spout anti-Semitic nonsense, you're an idiot of the highest magnitude. Psst - I know this might be a little difficult for you crayon-eaters to understand, but I'll use the smallest words possible, just for you - Jesus was a JEW. *G*A*S*P* I realize that might be shocking to you, but it's true, numbnuts. Don't bring your tripe onto this page, as you're not only not a Christian, you bring down the I.Q. points of everyone who has to read your drivel.

Speaking out in favor of hamass (deliberately misspelled) is a quick way to get on my bad side as well. Israel, much like the U.S., generally tends to react to situations, often placing themselves in far greater danger than they probably should. Yes, I realize that they're somewhat proactive, but I would submit necessarily so. After all, they're surrounded by literally millions upon millions of people who would like nothing more than to wipe them out down to the last man, woman, and child. If you support muslims, you will not do so on this page. I trust that's clear?

Keep in mind that this is NOT a "debate" page. I, and a couple of the other admins on our pages, will argue a few points with a LiberTroll or two, but not often, and it usually ends quickly. This page is a respite for conservatives, a place to gather facts, etc., for the daily battle for the future of this once great nation, and we will continue to provide that respite as best i can. One thing I will not do is allow the stench of liberalism and its ilk to pollute the air.

Can I possibly make this any clearer? ~ Hunter

What's Wrong With America: Disposability

I was listening to a few people talking while at work the other day. The subject of the conversation was happiness in a marriage - more specifically, the lack of happiness in a marriage.

I don't recall the details too clearly, but what drew my attention was a remark made by a woman I work with declaring "if she wasn't happy in a marriage, she'd get a divorce." She made it sound like she wanted to be made happy in a marriage every minute, of every day, of every year, and would tolerate nothing less.

It was an offhand comment, and while I'm sure she didn't truly intend to sound so flippant, it did get me thinking about one of the issues facing society today: Disposability.

Don't misunderstand - I'm not talking about disposable diapers, or disposable razors, or any of the countless other disposable products that have made our lives easier in a basic sense. Those are little things overall. No, my issue is with the larger things that have become "disposable" to far too many in America. I'm talking about the bigger picture, if you will.

Marriage used to be a lifelong commitment. My own grandmother became a widow in 1948, two short years after my father was born. Not only was she still a widow when she passed away in 1993, to the best of my knowledge, my grandmother never even dated anyone after my grandfather died. All of her siblings, save one, were married, just once, and they stayed married for decades.

My own parents have been married just shy of forty-five years. It hasn't been easy, especially with ten children. They're both as stubborn as mules, both quick to anger, and neither quick to forgive and/or forget. But commitments were made and, thus far, honored.

Today, it seems people believe that they just deserve to be happy, but it also seems like they believe they don't have to work at it.

(Hey, if you can find a relationship that works like that outside of some ridiculous TV show, more power to ya. The rest of us will just have to be jealous while we work at ours.)

Marriage today is disposable. You don't like how much money your spouse makes - kick him/her to the curb and find someone else. Don't like your sex life? Let's go out and find a new partner. The list of "grievances" could go on until the end of time. People today give up at the slightest hint of trouble. The United States is becoming a nation of quitters.

(For the record, I am in NO WAY advocating that people stay in a violent or abusive relationship. NOBODY has the right to commit violence upon another.)

What went wrong? Why do so many take the easy way out?

To my mind, it all comes down to progressivism. (I won't call them liberals any longer. The Founders were liberals. Today, they would be known as conservatives.)

Progressives have broken down everything that once made this nation the envy of the world. Your marriage is rough? It's not your fault. End it and find another one. Your parents want you to take responsibility for your mistakes? You don't have to take that from them. You don't need them anyway. After all, it takes a village. You're pregnant because you had unprotected sex? Kill it. It's not your fault, so you shouldn't have to be "punished" with that non-human blob of goo. Then you can go back to your fun!!! You're  a minority? Well hell, the white man keeps you down (they're all racists). Here, take this money. You don't need to demean yourself and actually work to better yourself. Just make sure to vote for us in the next election and we'll take care of you. Wink, wink

Everything is disposable to a progressive. Once it's served its purpose they get rid of it. Relationships, self-esteem and pride in one's own ability and self worth - none of that matters anymore. Even human life is disposable to a progressive. Just witness the murder of 3,300 or so of pre-born human beings every day. (And that's just here in the U.S.)

We need to get back to a reverence for the better way of doing things, instead of taking the easy way.

But most of all, we need to get back to a reverence for life, because without that, everything else - and I do mean everything - really is disposable. ~ Hunter

What's Wrong With America: Professional Perpetual Politicians

Part of the problems facing this nation, at least as I see it, lies in the fact that we now have a ruling class, something to which the majority of the Founding Fathers were vehemently opposed.


Benjamin Franklin, arguably the greatest mind ever to set foot on this earth, believed that a person elected into office should be a "common man," motivated solely by helping out his fellow citizens as best he could, then stepping down and making way for the next common man. He also believed that public servants shouldn't receive a salary, as the office should attract people "...wise and moderate... the men fittest for the trust..." The idea of a "career politician" was anathema to the Founders.


Thomas Jefferson, the second greatest mind of his time (behind only the aforementioned Franklin), said, "(a) government of representatives elected by the people at short periods was our object." Writing about a proposed Constitution for Virginia, Jefferson favored a single long term for senators, thus preventing senators from conducting their office to further their own careers, with the added benefit of focusing a senator's perspective on those whom they represented. Holding public office was to be a public service, not a means of lining one's own pockets.


George Washington, our first president, eschewed his $25,000 yearly salary and voluntarily left office after two terms to make way for others who wished to serve their fellow man. Try finding a politician who would make this same sacrifice today. Washington gave us the example to follow, like he had for so much of his life, in that the duty to serve was never supposed to mean a longevity in office. Until Franklin Delano Roosevelt, no other president served more than two terms.


The intent of the Founders was to limit time spent in public office. If it isn't, it leads one  to become besotted with his or her own power, the belief in one's infallibility, and the notion that you, and you alone, can solve the problems you were elected to fix in the first place (yet done next to nothing to actually repair). A case in point - FDR. His "New Deal" prolonged the Great Depression by several years, if not decades, while raising federal taxes threefold over just seven years (1933 to 1940). In combination with several other policies, hundreds of thousands of jobs were lost, not to mention the jobs that were never created due to a lack of capital overall.


Today, we have politicians who spend lifetimes in public office. That's true on both sides of the aisle. I'm sure most, if not all of them started their political lives with a sincere desire to do good things for their constituents, but like all things that grant power over others, they became addicted to that power. They're focused more on how to stay in power rather than focusing on how to exercise that power to benefit the nation. It's time to put an end to it.


I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm pretty sure the Founders of this great nation would have already ended it, given that it was leaders they wanted, not rulers. ~ Hunter

What's Wrong With America: Governance By Polls

Just about to go to bed, and flipping thrust Fox News, and caught the last few minutes of O'Reilly. I don't usually watch him anymore because he's NOT a conservative.

During his email segment, someone wrote in, apparently chastising Bernie Goldberg, who said that impeaching King DingleBarry would be a bad idea due to polls suggesting that only 33% of voters would support such a move.

I don't believe for a second that it's only 33%. That being said, since when is doing the right thing dependent upon POLLS?

I couldn't possibly care less if Republicans lose every election from now until the end of time IF THEY DO THE RIGHT THING NOW. Doing what's right isn't political, or SHOULDN'T be.

Governance by polls is one of the biggest reasons this nation is as screwed up as it is. I, for one, am sick unto DEATH of it.

Just do the right thing because it's THE RIGHT THING TO DO. ~ Hunter

Liberalism Explained, Or How To Become A "Liberal Whisperer"

A friend posted this on her Facebook timeline yesterday evening, and after I read it, I knew I had to post it here. I'm not absolutely sure she wrote it, so I won't mention her name, but based on her usual posts, I certainly wouldn't doubt that every word is hers. I think this is brilliant. Enjoy. ~ Hunter

*  *  *  *

Liberals love to think of themselves as intellectual and nuanced, but liberalism is incredibly simplistic. It’s nothing more than “childlike emotionalism applied to adult issues.” Very seldom does any issue that doesn’t involve pandering to their supporters boil down at its core level to more than feeling “nice” or “mean” to liberals. This makes liberals ill equipped to deal with complex issues.

Since liberals tend to support or oppose policies based on how those policies make them feel about themselves, they do very little intellectual examination of whether the policies they advocate work or not. That’s because it doesn’t matter to them whether the policy is effective or not; it matters whether advocating the policy makes them feel “good” or “bad,” “compassionate” or “stingy,” “nice” or “mean.”

Because of this, liberalism has more in common with religion than it does with other political ideologies like conservatism or libertarianism. Moreover, liberal beliefs are more like religious doctrine than any sort of battle-tested policies that bear up under logic or examination. Although the interpretation of the doctrine that the Left supports may change a bit over time, just as religious doctrine does, it’s essentially taken on faith, like scripture.

That’s why, for example, you may see ferocious debates on the right side of the blogosphere about the war, illegal immigration, or spending. But, with the netroots, the debates almost always revolve around the best strategy to get more liberals elected. The issues are not really up for debate, other than debate over how to get them enacted.

This same thinking leads to very little criticism of liberals by other liberals. Liberals will ferociously defend and even happily echo the lies of other liberals. Liberal feminists will defend Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy. Liberals who pride themselves on being tolerant of other races will support Robert Byrd. Why? Because even if they’re wrong, they’re still fellow liberals — which must mean they’re nice people. What this leads to is an attitude that can be summed up like so: “The only things that a liberal can do wrong is to be insufficiently liberal, to question an important plank of the liberal agenda, or to do something politically that aids conservatives.”

Conservatives, on the other hand, just by virtue of being conservatives, are mean at best and evil at worst. Is it wrong to lie about an evil person? Technically, “yes,” but there’s a reason “two wrongs don’t make a right” is said so often — it’s because so many people do believe “two wrongs do make a right.” Moreover, what about defending the indefensible? Well, is it wrong to defend a good (liberal) person who is being attacked by an evil (conservative) person, even if it’s justifiable? At the gut level, most liberals don’t think so.

Once you understand what I’ve written so far, you can understand everything that liberals do.

* Why are so many liberals hostile to religion? Because religion sets rules and tells people that if they break those rules, they’re sinning! That keeps people from doing things that make them feel good and telling people that they’re sinning makes them feel bad.

* Why are so many liberals hostile to the troops? Because the troops tend to be conservative (evil) and because they’re out killing people and breaking things (which would make most liberals feel like bad people).

* Why are so many liberals unpatriotic? It makes liberals feel morally superior to rant about what’s wrong with their own country. Plus, as an added bonus, people from other nations agree with them and that makes them feel good as well.

* Why do so many liberals have so much confidence in the government? With liberals, it’s not about whether something works or not, it’s about how it makes them feel.

*So, they can look at the IRS, post office, airport security, FEMA, and ICE and then say, “These are the same people we want handling our health care” — because it’s about making themselves feel good that they got people insured, not about getting the best system of health care for everyone.

* Why do so many liberals have so much confidence in the UN? See the previous answer and apply it on a global scale. The UN may be corrupt, anti-American, and utterly incompetent, but it makes liberals feel good to think that they’re sending money to the poor in some godforsaken country (sure, it’s not their money and almost all the money may be wasted or stolen, but it’s the thought that counts).

*Why are liberals so hostile to successful people who don’t happen to be celebrities, trial lawyers, or big donors to the Democratic Party? Again, this is another great opportunity for them to feel morally superior. They can feel like good people because they want to give money to the poor — granted, not their money, but rich people’s money. The rich have so much and the poor have so little, so why shouldn’t liberals take it from them and then pat themselves on the back for their compassion?

Once you understand the basics of how liberals think, you can understand everything that they do. Granted, there will be a few exceptions, but if the vast herd of liberals is doing something that doesn’t seem to fit the template, it’s either because there’s money or sex involved, they’re doing what they have to do to win politically, they’re taking that position because they refuse to be on the same side as conservatives, or there’s something going on you don’t know about and it’s not really an exception.

You’ve heard of the Dog Whisperer, right? Well, congrats, because after reading this column, you are now a “liberal whisperer” and you understand everything you need to know about the way that liberals think.