Under Hillary presidency: EO on guns

hillary-clinton-common-goodFrom the WashingtonFreeBeacon.com:

Feingold: Hillary Might Issue Executive Order on Guns

by Joe Schoffstall

Russ Feingold, the former Democratic senator from Wisconsin who is running again in an attempt to win back his old Senate seat, was recorded at a fundraiser saying that Hillary Clinton might issue an executive order on guns.

That should come as no surprise given her background and history. We knew it was in her playbook.

Feingold can be heard in the video discussing what Hillary Clinton could do in relation to guns if she were to be elected president.

“If there’s still Republican control in Congress, and if Hillary is elected, is there anything she can do to uhh…,” a person asks Feingold within the video. “Well, there might be an executive order,” Feingold responds.

“Oh, so she can, I know that Bara…” the questioner counters. Feingold then talks of President Obama’s executive orders throughout his two terms.

“He did some executive orders with the aspects of waiting periods. But what we all need is the Senate, have her there, and then put pressure on the House. And we might win the House,” Feingold says.

I wrote earlier that with Obama enacting such sweeping Executive Orders (EOs) he is setting precedent than can be followed by other presidents. The objection is not necessarily with the number of EOs signed by Obama — in fact he has signed, to date, 252 EOs in seven years compared to George Bush’s 291 in eight years, contrasted with Bill Clinton’s 364 in eight years — but with the overarching and wide-ranging content of the EOs, subject matter best left to Congress and not to one man.

Obama’s EOs are the most restrictive in the history of the presidency, utilizing more compulsory, binding and legally obligatory words like “must” and “shall” than the six prior presidents.

Further, Obama has stated he has done so specifically because the entire DC process is frequently too slow and cumbersome for his taste.

When the president — any president — publicly states that his or her intent is to purposely bypass Congress, that eliminates the concept of “checks and balances” and thusly tends to condense the three branches of government — the Judicial, Legisaltive and Executive — into one: the Executive.

With that follows an imperial presidency and on the heels, nothing good save perhaps that of tyranny.

Finally, I ask: when was the last time a Demorat or Leftist increased your American freedoms instead of reducing them?

I’ll wait.



Knife control: Japanese man kills 19, injures 26

When-Rocks-Are-OutlawedHad that occurred here in America, Barack Hussein Obaka and Loretta Lynch and Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsom and all the rest of the Leftists would still be bleating about gun control.

From CNN.com:

Japan knife attack: At least 19 dead

by Euan McKirdy and Emanuella Grinberg

(CNN)  At least 19 people were killed and 26 injured in a stabbing spree at a facility for disabled people west of Tokyo, making it one of Japan’s deadliest mass killings since World War II. Nine men and 10 women, ranging in age from 18 to 70, were killed in the attack.

Officer Satomi Kurihara of the Sagamihara Fire Department confirmed the death toll at the Tsukui Yamayuri-en facility in Sagamihara, a residential area approximately 40 kilometers (25 miles) west of the capital.
Satoshi Uematsu, a 26-year-old who worked at the facility until February, broke in through a window about 2 a.m. Tuesday (1 p.m. ET Monday), Kanagawa Prefecture officials said at a news conference.

Because, as we all know — and Leftists know this best of all — if we eliminate firearms wholesale, then violence will simply plummet and go away.  All will be well with the world, birds will sing, clouds will part and the sun will shine.


“What’s the frequency, Kenneth?”  Dan Rather knows.

Yes, Leftists are in fact that naive.  Logic and the nature of humanity, as I’ve written before, eludes the deluded.

When firearms are eradicated, violence will cease.  Right?  But wait; what about Australia, where gun deaths are down but knife deaths are climbing.  Why might that be?  Let’s glance at China, where a knife is the weapon of choice and 130 persons were stabbed at random36 persons were stabbed and killed at a Chinese police station in 2013Eight children were killed by a knife-wielder in JapanEight people killed in South Korea41 people were stabbed by a 16-year-old in Berlin.  A 13-year-old girl was stabbed to death in the UK.  The knife is the UK “weapon of choice” for violence, as it is in Israel with Palestinians stabbing and killing Israeli citizensFBI data indicates you are more likely to be beaten, clubbed or stabbed to death than to be murdered using an AR-15 or any other rifle in the United States.

In Europe, guns are involved in 36 percent of murders and knives are involved in 43 percent.  Where is the cry for “knife control”?

Locally, there were a number of knife attacks last year.

Some other interesting statistics.

Murder Victims, by Weapons Used

The following table shows the number and percent of murder victims in the United States by the cause of death. Weapons used or cause of death include guns, stabbing, blunt objects, strangulation, arson, and more.

Weapons used or cause of death
Year Murder
Guns Cutting or
hands, fists,
feet, or pushing
Arson2 All
Total Percent
1965 8,773 5,015 57.2% 2,021 505 894 226 112
1970 13,649 9,039 66.2 2,424 604 1,031 353 198
1975 18,642 12,061 64.7 3,245 1,001 1,646 193 496
1980 21,860 13,650 62.0 4,212 1,094 1,666 291 947
1985 17,545 10,296 58.7 3,694 972 1,491 243 849
1990 20,045 12,847 64.1 3,503 1,075 1,424 287 909
1991 21,676 14,373 66.3 3,430 1,099 1,529 195 847
1992 22,716 15,489 68.2 3,296 1,040 1,445 203 1,043
1993 23,180 16,136 69.6 2,967 1,022 1,482 217 1,168
1994 22,084 15,463 70.0 2,802 912 1,452 196 1,079
1995 20,232 13,790 68.2 2,557 918 1,438 166 968
1996 15,848 10,744 67.8 2,142 733 1,182 151 726
1997 15,289 10,369 67.8 1,963 702 1,187 134 934
2002 14,263 9,528 66.7 1,776 681 954 103 874
2006 14,990 10,177 67.9 1,822 607 833 115 1,128
2007 14,831 10,086 68.0 1,796 647 854 130 1,016
2008 14,224 9,528 66.9 1,888 603 964 85 1,156
2011 12,795 8,653 67.6 1,716 502 751 76 1,009
2012 12,765 8,855 69.4 1,589 518 767 85 951
1. Refers to club, hammer, etc.
2. Before 1973, includes drowning.
3. Includes poison, explosives, unknown, drowning, asphyxiation, narcotics, other means, and weapons not stated.

Source: Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports for the United States, 1997, 2007 and 2008; Crime in the United States 2011, 2012.

But let’s stop dancing around the issue of “gun control.”  Let’s get down to brass tacks: Demorats and Leftists want out-and-out gun confiscation.  Make no mistake about that.  Hillary Clinton and all other power elites have their own private police forces.  You don’t.  They have “theirs” and that is all they care about.

When you get down to it, Leftists and Demorats will only be satisfied when there exists the complete removal of firearms from American citizens.  The outright trampling of the Second Amendment.  What’s left?  Tire irons?  Knives?

But here’s one thing you won’t be able to do with a knife or a rock or a lamp or a baseball bat or a torch or a pitchfork: defend yourself against a government.  Oppose oppressive government regimes.  Governments, all governments, our government, will always be armed with heavy, military grade weapons.  Historically, our Second Amendment does not exist to allow Americans to hunt.  That’s a ridiculous claim when made by anyone.  The Second Amendment exists in America in order to resist tyranny in any form and that includes an over-reaching government, foreign or domestic.

Demorats and Leftists are not grounded in reality.  They are only versed in power and money.  The citizenry can be armed or it can be disarmed.  Those who are disarmed are called Proles, Serfs, Groundlings, Commoners.

In the meantime, criminals will still commit crimes, the mentally unstable will still be unstable, and Leftists will still be unable to grasp these fundamental concepts.



Leftists: dissension must be ELIMINATED

Leftists DON'T ALLOW DISSENSIONFirst on the agenda: the Drudge Report (though it’s nothing more than an aggregator) and Fox News.  Then the entire internet.


First, from the WashingtonExaminer.com:

Fox targeted by FEC Dems in first-ever vote to punish debate sponsorship

by Paul Bedard

Finally making good on long-harbored anger at conservative media, Democrats on the Federal Election Commission voted in secret to punish Fox News’ sponsorship of a Republican presidential debate, using an obscure law to charge the network with helping those on stage.

STOP.  Read that first sentence again: “Finally making good on LONG-HARBORED ANGER at CONSERVATIVE media, DEMOCRATS on the Federal Election Commission voted in SECRET to PUNISH Fox News’ sponsorship of a Republican presidential debate, USING AN OBSCURE LAW to charge the network with helping those on stage.”

Would that not be unlike Lois Lerner and the IRS who complained bitterly that no such thing was done until finally the IRS admitted that precisely that thing was done?

It is the first time in history that members of the FEC voted to punish a media outlet’s debate sponsorship, and it follows several years of Democratic threats against conservative media and websites like the Drudge Report.

The punishment, however, was blocked by all three Republicans on the commission, resulting in a 3-3 tie vote and no action. The vote was posted Thursday and is here.

Imagine the results had Demorats simply owned that board, as Demorats own the state of California on most every level?

It seems that CNN sponsored quite a number of Democrat debates.  CNN sponsored four Democrat debates, of the ten documented — that’s almost half.  The GOP had twelve debates, six of which were sponsored by Fox.  That also is half.  Any issue with the FEC?

Here’s the obvious kicker:

CNN did the same thing, but there is no indication that they faced a complaint.

Do not think that the Demorats and Leftists are content to stop there.  They absolutely, incontrovertibly, wish to control the entire internet and all its content — particularly if that content is right-leaning in nature.


Also from the WashingtonExaminer.com:

Federal regulation of Internet coming, warn FCC, FEC commissioners

by Paul Bedard

Democrats targeting content and control of the Internet, especially from conservative sources, are pushing hard to layer on new regulations and even censorship under the guise of promoting diversity while policing bullying, warn commissioners from the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Election Commission.

“Protecting freedom on the Internet is just one vote away,” said Lee E. Goodman, a commissioner on the FEC which is divided three Democrats to three Republicans. “There is a cloud over your free speech.”

What is diversity?  In the eyes of Leftists, it is a One World Barbeque — that is, all persons saying, writing and thinking the same: a Leftist fashion.  Dissension cannot be tolerated.  What the FEC and Leftists and Demorats want is the same freedom of speech one now customarily finds on college campuses in America today; that is, little to none.

BZ License To BlogIn this vein I wrote, many years ago in 2010, that I could foresee the time where I as a blogger would require a literal license to blog.  To express my opinions and feelings.

Freedom of speech on the Internet, added Ajit Pai, commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission, “is increasingly under threat.”

Pai and Goodman cited political correctness campaigns by Democrats as a threat. Both also said their agencies are becoming politicized and the liberals are using their power to push regulations that impact business and conservative outlets and voices.

Of course it’s under threat.  Leftists and Demorat want absolute control of speech as well as most every other aspect of your life.  With a SCOTUS that leans far left as would occur under the lying and brazenly-corrupt Hillary Clinton, you can quite certainly wave good-bye to your Bill of Rights, with the Second and First Amendments primarily in their PC sights.

“One of the things that is critical for this country is to reassert the value of the First Amendment, the fact that robust discourse, that is sometimes cacophonous, is nonetheless a value, in fact it creates value,” said Pai.

But wait; perhaps you thought I was kidding with the whole “my blog will be involved as will yours” thingie?  Read on.

At a CATO Institute discussion on online speech Wednesday night, both said that regulators are eager to issue new rules that could put limits on what people could say on blogs, online news and even YouTube. Washington Examiner reporter Rudy Takala and Cato’s digital manager Kat Murti were also on the panel.

There it is in black and white.  Do not for a moment believe that, somehow, miraculously, you will remain unaffected — particularly if you are a Conservative.  Or a Libertarian for that matter — John Stossel, I’m looking at you, sir.

Pai, addressing Goodman, added, “The common thread of our experiences I think is this impulse of control, whether it’s the FCC and the impulse of the government to want to control how these networks operate, and the FEC to control the content of the traffic that traverses over those networks, and I think that certainly highlights the importance of the First Amendment.”

Goodman concluded, “We need to be ever mindful and vigilant not to let governmental agencies through 3-2 votes, or 4-2 votes at the FEC take that away from us.”

Let there be no mistake.  Leftists and Demorats want control of our lives, complete and utter control of what we do, what we eat, where we live, how we live our lives and ultimately what we write, say and even think.

Leftists and Demorats would truly be pleased with a 1984 environment.

1984 - Big BrotherI can see an upheaval coming, ladies and gentlemen, if Demorats and Leftists keep removing our rights and our freedoms.



Reflections on Orlando: we’re not learning

Muslim Kills 49 Orlando Gay ClubApologies for the lack of current posts. Personal issues. — BZ ]

The US is not learning from the radical wave of Islam that is thundering across Europe right now and, of course, it is having its own effects here.

I’m referencing the San Bernardino shootings from December of last year by Muslims and most recently the Orlando gay bar mass shooting on Saturday night/Sunday morning in Florida.  This Islamic fuck — whose name isn’t warranted printing here on my blog — now holds the “record” for the number of persons killed in one US mass shooting, at 49 murdered and 53 wounded.  (Except for Antietam, where roughly 22,000 persons were killed in one day, American vs American, and perhaps Wounded Knee.)

The wife of this piece of shit was a clear accomplice and should be charged as a co-conspirator to murder.  She knew that, on June 4th and 5th, he purchased a 9mm handgun and an AR-15 rifle.  She knew how false he was.  Of what his dogma truly consisted.  You cannot live together and now know, unless you are continents away.  They were not.  She knew his heart.  She knew what he was.  And what he wasn’t.  Specifically, she knew about the attack.

Oh, but wait.  It was not an AR-15 the Islamic fuck possessed.  It was a Sig Sauer MCX carbine which shares no major parts with an AR-15.  At all.  The MCX also  Of course, how can you fault the American Media Maggots?  Everything, as you well know, is an AR-15.  This is no mistake, naturally.  This is called a narrative.


And like good anti-gun Lefitsts, everything evil must be an AR-15.  Therefore the ammunition for AR-15s must be eliminated as well.

Clue into this, Leftists: again, like the bulk of most recent shootings in the US, he was in compliance with the current gun laws for the area.  Further, he was a security operator for a company that held a contract with the federal government.  He not only had to pass local security laws for possession of various weapons — as a security operator that guarded federal facilities — but had to pass federal background checks.

And did.

Further, the FBI conducted two separate investigations into the suspect.  They found nothing.  They cleared him.  They met with him three times.

We — the United States — we are not learning.

The Muslim fuck was working for a multi-national security company that employs about 625,000 people with many contracts to the US federal government.  A “security company” can range from someone guarding a parking lot to persons providing specialized security for special ops American forces on the ground — as with those highlighted in the “13 Hours of Benghazi.

With these contracts, the federal government required a security backgrounding of every employee.  Both sides failed to report.  The Muslim fuck had two gun licenses.  One was for the rifle — the “AR-15” — and it is unlikely he would have acquired these licenses had his employer known of the FBI investigation.  They proscribe even “contact” with the FBI.

AR6[ Hillary Clinton, as an aside, is wrong again as the bint she is.  The “AR-15” she falsely said was involved is not a “weapon of war.”  It is a rifle.  It shoots semi-automatically.  It is in fact used by hunters.  What she really objects to, like most Leftists, is that it has odd bits and angles that make it, with its black color, appear to be completely sinister in their over-imaginative minds. ]

The FBI concluded it lacked sufficient evidence to go forward with even what they call a “preliminary investigation.”  But whatever they found out about him, they should have told his employer.  In that they failed.

Let me repeat for the abundant Leftists amongst you here and now: the Islamic fuck Omar Mateen (okay, sorry) passed every background check required by the state and by the federal government.  He was never “institutionalized” as well.  But there’s more; just wait a few paragraphs.

Captain Obvious: the bar was a “No Gun Zone.”  Right.  Larfs all around.  But nothing works against a gun like?  Right.  Another gun.

Columbine, Newtown.  All of these mass killings took place where the government prohibited people from protecting themselves.  A “gun free zone” is like shooting fish in a barrel.  Gays or not.

A LE axiom: when an assailant is confronted sooner rather than later, lives are saved.  Period.

Leftists immediately jumped to gun control.  And the American Media Maggots helped to buttress that so-called “argument.”

There was no call from the Oval Office to Orlando.  Party politics.  Leftist Obaka to Republican Governor Rick Scott.  Didn’t happen.

There is no doubt that the Muslim fuck was motivated by Islam.  His father was a supporter of the Taliban.  The Muslim fuck himself cheered when planes struck the WTC on 9/11.  Inspire magazine exists to, eh, “inspire” after all.

On the other hand, it could be clear that the Muslim fuck was sexually confounded.  He could have been trying to resolve various homosexual issues that he finally applied to the Pulse gay bar.

I suspect there were a number of motivators of the Muslim fuck.

I suspect that he was conflicted with his own personal sexuality.  I suspect that he realized the inherent conflict that exists in the Middle East — a conflict that very few persons seem willing to address in the Western Media.  That is to say, the conflict that exists between small boys and older men.

In the ME form of Islam it does not seem to be disagreeable that small boys are penetrated anally for sexual satisfaction.

US soldiers in ME assignments realize this rather rapidly: “women are for procreation, and boys are for fun.”

That brings us to the “bacha bazi” dancing boys.  Click at your own disgust.

Muslim Bacha Bazi BoysThe secret shame of Afghanistan’s bacha bazi ‘dancing boys’ who are made to dress like little girls, then abused by paedophiles

  • Bacha bazi, meaning ‘boy play’, is a tradition found across Afghanistan, where boys dress as women and perform

  • But these boys, some as young as 10, are also sexually abused by the men – passed around after the parties

  • The stigma of having been a ‘bacha bereesh’ sees the victims shunned by their families and society

  • However, ‘owning’ more than one boy is seen as a display of both power and wealth among some Afghan war lords

  • See full news coverage and stories from Afghanistan at www.dailymail.co.uk/afghanistan 

For some deviant reason, in the ME form of Islam, this is not considered a form of pederasty.  Only when one transitions from boys to men is buggery considered verboten by Islam.  And by that the Islamic fuck found himself conflicted.  He was not attracted by boys.

He liked men.  He hated America.  He may have been spurned in conflict of his religion.  It only takes one blowjob to make someone a “homosexual.”  And that appellation of “homosexual” is completely unacceptable in Islam.

As a conflicted homosexual, to attack a gay bar would solve the bulk of his problems.  It would resolve his unstated sexuality, and it would place him into a place of importance within Islam.  Let’s kill gays.

But instead of Islam or violence or philosophy, instead, according to Obama and his sycophants, it’s all about guns.

If guns were the issue, then what about Belgium?  What about France?  What about the UK?  What about California?  These locations all have the strictest gun control imaginable.  California has the strongest, most constrictive laws on the books of any state — and they are creating even more.

And yet it’s about the tools and not about the root cause.

To Leftists: let there be no mistake.  Barack Hussein Obama has drawn the battle lines between Islam and gays.

Guess what?  Islam wins.

“Evil always wins through the strength of its splendid dupes; and there has in all ages been a disastrous alliance between abnormal innocence and abnormal sin.”
— G.K. Chesterton


The most immediate goal of Leftists now?  To eliminate those weapons which have detachable magazines.

Trust me.


Hillary: the right to own guns isn’t really in the Constitution

Hilary Clinton ELECT MEHilary WitchyAnd that is what you face if you, as Republicans or Conservatives, decide to stay home in November because #NeverTrump.

From the WashingtonExaminer.com:

Clinton refuses to say gun ownership a constitutional right

by Gabby Morrongiello

Hillary Clinton declined to say during an interview Sunday whether she believes the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitution.

“Do you believe that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right, that it’s not linked to service in a militia?” ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked the Democratic presidential front-runner.

“I think that for most of our history, there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice [Antonin] Scalia, and there was no argument until then that localities and states and the federal government had a right, as we do with every amendment, to impose reasonable regulations,” Clinton responded.

She added, “So I believe we can have common-sense gun safety measures consistent with the Second Amendment.”

Here’s a clue: even for George Stephanopoulis, that wasn’t an answer.  It was Mouth Jello.  World pablum.

“But that’s not what I asked,” Stephanopoulos interjected. “I said, do you believe that their conclusion that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right?”

“If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulations, and what people have done with that decision is to take it as far as they possibly can and reject what has been our history from the very beginning of the republic, where some of the earliest laws that were passed were about firearms,” Clinton said, declining a second time to answer the question directly.


For God’s sake, even Bernie Sanders believes in the Second Amendment more than Hillary Clinton.


Hillary Clinton Accomplishment 3