America Has Been Hijacked!!!

Barack Hussein Obama, who now openly embraces his Islamic heritage, declares that the United States of America is one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. This after it was forbidden that we speak his middle name during his campaign; this after he told the world the United States is not a Christian nation; this after candidate John McCain was criticized heavily for calling the United States a Christian nation; this after Obama refuses to acknowledge that two American soldiers were gunned down at a military recruiting station but was quick to acknowledge the shooting death of a doctor who regularly performed late-term abortions; this after Obama has nationalized the auto industry; this after Obama has left my children and grandchildren trillions of dollars in debt; this after playing hardball and trying to strong arm our longtime friends and allies in Israel in favor of the terrorist Palestinians and Hamas; this after refusing to acknowledge any attacks on U.S. soil by extremist Muslims; this after declaring that Iran has the right to build nukes; this after doing absolutely nothing about activities in North Korea; this after telling the world all our interrogation methods.

The list is endless and this has all taken place within the first four months of his presidency. Wake up America. Our nation has been hijacked by a person now proud to be a Muslim. What should we expect next in his bag of hopenchange tricks?

Millions Of Americans Could Die!!

Do you like the title? I’m taking a page out of the liberal’s playbook on how to play on people’s emotions while side stepping any form of actual factual information to back up a claim. The following is taking facts and spinning emotion into it.

Yes, millions of people could die under the rule of Barack Obama! This morning I read a headline in a lefty newspaper that read, “As many as 1,000 wolves could be killed!” This all because it was decided to remove federal protection of the wolf.

This morning, I’m claiming that millions of people, worldwide, could die while Barack Obama is in office. My reasoning is that he is a fascist dictator and like Hitler, millions of people died. Read more

$5 Per Gallon Gasoline! Reason: Endangered Species Act

That shouldn’t make a lick of sense unless of course scientists were to discover some rare and endangered species living deep beneath the earth where oil and natural gas reserves lie. But this is what has become of our beloved Endangered Species Act, a legal document devised in 1973 that was intended to help prevent the man-made destruction of animal and plant life.

Last year the Bush administration decided to list the polar bear as a species that is threatened – meaning that there is a possibility that if we don’t pay close attention to this animal, certain circumstances could put the bear in danger of going extinct. We don’t want that but was it necessary?

I guess it depends on whose science we opt to use and how much politicking comes into play. It appears that the Bush administration attempted to play politics instead of opting for science and fighting the battle based on that. Read more

Obama’s Obsession With Rush Limbaugh

I just don’t get it! President Obama and now it appears the majority of the democratic party , seems fixated on Rush Limbaugh as though he is now some evil monster – well I suppose to them he is. But why?

Recently, President Obama told Congressional republican leaders to stop listening to Rush so that they could get something done. In all seriousness, is President Obama so insecure that he fears Rush Limbaugh? Granted Rush is a powerful man with a large following but does anyone think he can lead a junta against the president and his party? Or that he would even want to?

It all makes little sense to me. Read more

Sen. Barrasso Says Wyoming “Double-Crossed” By USFWS

Wyoming’s U.S. Senator John Barrasso yesterday says that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision to withdraw its proposal to remove protection of the gray wolf from the Endangered Species Act was a “significant breach of trust”.

We shouldn’t stop at Wyoming. Let’s add Idaho and Montana to the list as well, as I’m sure several states could also be included as being shafted by the USFWS. Promises were made from the beginning, promises some said the federal government would never adhere to, had no intentions of fulfilling and couldn’t achieve if it wanted to. Yet, the USFWS got its way and dumped the unwanted wolves on the back doorsteps of thousands of citizens in the Rocky Mountain West areas. Read more

Oh, Stop Worrying About Barack Obama

I get a constant dose of, “Stop worrying about Barack Obama!”. I read it everywhere. One of the most spread about lies is the one telling Americans that as gun owners we have nothing to worry about. We are told that Obama supports the Second Amendment and respects the rights of lawful citizens to keep and bear arms.

When I read all this malarkey, I am reminded of a parrot a co-worker of mine used to have. After work one afternoon, I went with this guy to his beach-side condominium. From previous conversations at work, I knew Dave had a parrot. He had told me some of the shenanigans this parrot, named Julio, had gotten into since becoming of member of Dave’s family. One thing I was told is that the parrot was really only loyal to one person and that happened to be Dave. He merely tolerated the rest. Read more

Reasonable Restrictions On Guns And Gun Ownership

Last month we received a long awaited definition of the Second Amendment. In other words, the highest court in the land declared that the Second Amendment – “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.” – guaranteed the right of the individual U.S. citizen to keep and bear arms.

Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority opinion of the case and in his summation wrote this: Read more

“Why Do We Keep And Bear Arms?, Part 1″

Tomorrow, July 4th, we celebrate Independence Day, the day we signed the Declaration of Independence to set us free from the rule of England. We actually made that declaration on July 2nd but signed the actual document on the Fourth.

Many, particularly our young people, don’t know what Independence Day means. They simply state it as our birthday. Independence Day was the beginning of our freedom and set forth over the course of many years a series of battles, in many venues, to keep and preserve that freedom – some of those events costing the lives of brave Americans. For this, understanding patriots are grateful. Read more

Obama On Second Amendment. Let The Communities Decide

Obama continues his effort to convince voters that he believes that the Second Amendment gives an individual the right to keep and bear arms but when he further explains in detail what that means, it becomes clear he doesn’t believe an individual or anyone for that matter, has a right to arm themselves.

In an interview with the Chicago Sun Times last week Obama was answering questions more specifically directed at the rising gun violence in Chicago. This is what he had to say about the pending case before the U.S. Supreme Court – Washington, D.C. versus Heller. Read more

Preserving The Rights of Terrorists

In Maine a while back, so called eco-terrorists reeked havoc on property belonging to a development company as well as the destruction and threatening of its employees and their families.

Here’s a brief description of what took place. Plum Creek Timber Co. is proposing a very large development, I believe around 9000 acres, in the wilderness areas adjacent to Moosehead Lake in northern Maine. Obviously a development of this magnitude in such a pristine, wilderness area is causing quite a bit of controversy.

As is the case in so many “protests” throughout this land, the extremists always resort to violence in an attempt to demonstrate their feelings about certain issues. Why this is necessary is beyond my comprehension and I can only assume this as being some kind of mental sickness.

These terrorists attacked buildings owned by the company as well as the private residences of many of the employees. They smashed windows, spray painted buildings and walls, threw paintballs and rocks through windows and spread feces and animal parts all around the buildings.

The victims want arrests and penalties handed down to those who are responsible. Enter the picture, liberal democrats who are out to protect the rights of terrorists and have little or no regard for victims or for justice.

It needs to be said that there is absolutely no difference between the acts of these so-called “eco-terrorists” than that of Al Qaeda and any of its followers. In this case, no deaths occurred but could very easily have happened.

An attempt is being made by Sen. John Nutting, a democrat from Leeds to make stiffer penalties for environmental terrorism. He wants it to become a felony. The Maine State Police stepped in and convinced Nutting to water the Bill down and eliminate the use of the word terrorism. This is what a watered down version basically would say as was found in an article in the Bangor Daily News this morning.

The broader language makes it aggravated criminal mischief – a felony – to injure someone or cause property damage with the intent of intimidating or coercing the conduct of a business or organization, regardless of the reasons.

Excuse me, but isn’t that description exactly what TERRORISM is? What is it that these law makers and enforcers are afraid of? It’s calling a spade a spade. To injure or cause damage with the intent of intimidating or coercing someone or some business, is terrorism, no matter what color you paint it.

The protectors of terrorists rights begin to weigh in.

Leading the skeptics was Rep. Stan Gerzofsky, a Brunswick Democrat, who reiterated concerns expressed in 2001 when a similar measure was defeated by a single vote in the Senate. He said the latest proposal, like the previous one, could unintentionally stifle legal political protest.

God forbid that we unintentionally stifle the protests of terrorists in our sane, civilized society. Forget about any victims. Forget about the fact that by doing nothing to stop this kind of terrorism, it will continue and will grow larger, particularly when these terrorists see that there is no punishment for their actions and they get results.

Then of course we can’t forget about the good ole ACLU. A representative of the Maine Chapter offered this bit of protectionism.

Richard Thompson, representing the Maine Civil Liberties Union, said everyone agrees that the people who vandalized the Plum Creek properties should be punished. But Thompson said he worries the proposed bill could subject people to felony convictions for relatively minor acts of protest.

These people just don’t get it! I wonder if Mr. Thompson would feel the same way if this happened to his business, his family and property?

Thompson goes further to show how much he devalues property, protecting innocent people and businesses by downplaying violence in protesting.

He gave the example of college students who tamper with the lock of a dean’s office to stage a peaceful sit-in or someone who tips over a sign to signal opposition to development.

“By doing a very minor act to an organization with the intent to coerce them to change something, … then you are guilty of a felony under this act,” Thompson said.

He advocates that breaking and entering (he describes it as tampering with a lock) as legal protest and “tipping a sign over”, which is destruction of property and if it where a traffic sign it would be destruction of government property. Thompson says these are all minor acts. He refuses to even call them criminal acts and is afraid that with a new Bill to more harshly punish terrorists, this would stifle this kind of “legal protest”, as he calls it.

It is easy to see why we have the problems we do when it comes to the continued violence in demonstrations and protests. Liberals have watered down reality in their sick attempts at protecting the rights of criminals more than the rights of victims and lawful citizens.

Many opponents of a new Bill say there are existing laws to handle this kind of criminal act. They call it an enforcement problem not a punishment problem. I couldn’t disagree more. It is a punishment problem because our liberal courts refuse to hand down just punishments to criminals. Perhaps we need stiffer mandatory sentences for certain crimes, like terrorism but this will never happen as long as our court systems and judges are dominated by liberals who value the rights of criminals more than those of lawful citizens.

Tom Remington