No, not Joe Walsh the guitar player with The Eagles, formerly of James Gang.

Representative Joe Walsh of Illinois.

From CNSNews.com:

(CNSNews.com) – Rep. Joe Walsh (R.-Ill.) said Wednesday in an interview with Media Research Center President Brent Bozell that he believes the media will show “real desperation” to protect President Barack Obama during the 2012 campaign.

“This guy pushed every one of the media’s buttons,” Walsh said. “He was liberal, he was different, he was new, he was black. Oh my God, it was the potpourri of everything.

“They are so vested in our first black president not being a failure that it’s going to be amazing to watch the lengths they go to to protect him,” Walsh continued. “They, I believe, will spout this racist line if some of their colleagues up here aren’t doing it aggressively enough. There is going to be a real desperation.”

Those are, at the very least, facts in evidence. Everyone with a modicum of common sense knows that the entire American and Euro media have been and still are “in the tank” for The One.

Despite the fact that Mr Obama is a racist, is a liar, was schooled in the works of Marx, Ayers, Alinsky, Reverend Wright, is a supporter of Cloward-Piven, Agenda 21, et al.

The problem with Mr Obama was that he discovered the PDB: the President’s Daily Brief. He came to realize that the world is not so clear on a daily basis; that there are factions operating purposely to bring him down as the leader of the United States of America. And he discovered that he enjoyed being the Mystic-In-Chief with regard to covert operations in Pakistan, Egypt and Libya.

Twist and fail.

Palin pulls within five points of Obama — and she’s not even in the race.

We can’t even talk to each other — texting is preferred over actual calls.

We are on the verge of a cosmic depression.

Moody’s de-ratings.

And yet, if you ask the Left, Mr Obama is poised to a new win.

I say:

Bullshit.

BZ

Confirmed by a Demorat who drank every bit of the Leftist Kool-Aid — but is still a doctor. From Howard Dean at The Washington Examiner:

Former Democratic National Committee Chairman, and doctor, Howard Dean backed a McKinsey & Co. survey today that found that almost a third of private-sector employers will drop their employee health insurance coverage when Obamacare’s government-managed insurance exchanges come online.

Dean told Morning Joe, “The fact is it is very good for small business. There was a McKinsey study, which the Democrats don’t like, but I do, and I think its true. Most small businesses are not going to be in the health insurance business anymore after this thing goes into effect.”

The reason Democrats fought so hard to dismiss the McKinsey survey when it was released is because its conclusion undermines two major claims Obama made during all the health care debates: “If you like your health plan, you can keep it” and “It will not add one penny to the deficit.”

Lies all around. From a bill passed in the proverbial “dead of night” which transgressed the exclusive “transparency” PROMISED by the Obama Administration. A bill RAMMED down the throats of DC and American citizens. Dean says it’s good for small businesses. Meaning: small businesses are going to drop healthcare coverage like a plate of glowing Uranium 238.

About to come to fruition.

Get a grip, Americans: with everything else, you’re about to be screwed by Mr Obama with a white-hot piece of rebar up your collective and individual taxpaying asses.

At least it might cauterize your wounds. For a few minutes.

You not only voted him in, you’re funding him.

Live with it.

BZ

As so-called Baby Boomers age, they are becoming more Conservative.

That, on its face, should come as no shock whatsoever.

However, with that in mind, the 2012 landscape could be altered in the United States.

The “front” of the Baby Boom, from 1943 to 1958 (and that would include me) were allegedly not as “wild” as their rep.

The bulk of Boomers are dissatisfied with Obama, with only 38% hoping he’d be re-elected.

That would be the 38% of those who believe in Unicorns.

Baby boomers who came of age during the social and political upheavals of the 1960s and 1970s tended to call themselves Democrats, and as time passed, that identification strengthened. In 1969, far more in the 18- to 29-year-old age cohort — the front end of the baby boom — called themselves Democrats (35%) than Republicans (21%). A decade later, when they were 28 to 39 years old, their identification with the Democratic Party over the GOP was even stronger (45% to 19% in Gallup’s surveys).

Further, check this:

The importance of the ’60s generation is magnified by its demographic weight. The near-olds vote in much higher numbers than some other groups. Census data from 2008 showed that 49% of the eligible voting-age population between the ages 18 and 24 turned out to vote, while 72% of the larger 55-to-63 group said they voted. The combined electoral heft of the near- and new-olds could dramatically alter the political landscape.

And finally:

Today both groups are deeply dissatisfied with President Obama. About 43% of those ages 50 to 64, and just 33% of those over 65, approved of Obama’s job performance, according to an August Gallup poll. A new poll from the Pew Research Center shows a fairly even division among registered voters in the 50- to 64-year-old baby boom group about reelecting Obama. Thirty-eight percent told the pollsters they would prefer to see him reelected while 42% would like to see a Republican candidate win. In 2008, the near-olds divided their votes between Obama and Sen. John McCain, making them more Republican than the population as a whole.

I was a liberal Democrat. A completely registered Democrat. A wonderfully and gleefully-registered Democrat. I graduated from CSUS. I lived in San Francisco, I grew my hair down to the small of my back, I grew my beard, I excoriated anything corporate. Until I encountered Ronald Reagan in 1980.

Things change. And they changed. When you have the ability to grasp a piece of property, when you have the chance to acquire a firm job, when you have the ability to secure a retirement, when you have the ability to confirm an actual bit of property you actually own. . .

Things change.

One’s work should = positive results.

BZ

I submit: that video says it all.

BZ

Currently, because I am a full time peace officer in Fornicalia (though ancient, with about 40 years of service), I know that it is lawful for a citizen to openly carry a handgun in a holster, unloaded, in public. Some 2nd Amendment advocates have done so — lawfully — in recent Fornicalia demonstrations.

Because of this — and the TEA Party/Right-linked inference, the Fornicalia legislature passed a bill recently, now sitting on Governor Jerry Brown’s desk, which would forbid the practice completely, making any public carry of a firearm, unloaded, illegal.

Under the current section PC 12025 of the Fornicalia penal code:

(f) Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed within the meaning of this section.Meaning that, in this fashion, you cannot be arrested for “carrying a concealed firearm” under PC 12025 if the weapon is unloaded.

However, section (A) of PC 12025 states:

Both the pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person and the unexpended ammunition capable of being discharged from that firearm are either in the immediate possession of the person or readily accessible to that person, or the pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person is loaded as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 12031.

. . . which makes you guilty of “carrying a concealed firearm” in concert with the firearm actually being concealed on your person or in a vehicle.

California penal code section PC 12031 states:

(a) (1) A person is guilty of carrying a loaded firearm when he or she carries a loaded firearm on his or her person or in a vehicle while in any public place or on any public street in an incorporated city or in any public place or on any public street in a prohibited area of unincorporated territory.

Violations of both of these sections are misdemeanors and citeable; that is to say, in Fornicalia, a physical arrest is not mandated; a citation would suffice, dependent upon a number of variables. So far.

To date, open public carry of a handgun in Fornicalia is legal, as long as you are not in a post office, government building, school zone and a number of other delineated areas. The handgun must be displayed openly and be unloaded.

Some Fornicalia officers would, however, argue that carrying an unloaded firearm openly on your person and its ammo somewhere else (as in a pocket) is itself per se illegal. On its face, absent other circumstances, officers thinking that would be wrong. Lawful, abiding citizens not intending to commit a felony would be conducting themselves properly, in general. People v. Clark (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1147 , 53 Cal.Rptr.2d 99 — indicates so.

Go here for California Open Carry.org.

Go here for the open carry argument.

Go here for a further analysis of the definition of “loaded” in Fornicalia.

Finally, from the LA Times article:

Brown has until early October to act on the bill, and his past comments and actions on the issue of guns have sent a mixed message. In April, he told a gathering of police officers that it is natural for people to have guns in their homes, and said he owned three firearms.

The Logical Extension, as I like to call it, is this: as goes Fornicalia, so goes the rest of the nation. Leftists and Socialists and Liberals and “Progressives” recognize it. With that in mind, the bill’s passage (or not) will either buttress support for the 2nd Amendment — or start the anti-gun snowball rolling down the hill, gravity-fed, in other states.

BZ