Post for one of my daughters

One of my daughters presented me with a graph she found from a friend's page on facebook, claiming that Obama has increased our national debt by a smaller amount than any president since before Reagan. I told her that she should never believe anything she simply sees on the internet, and that I would show her some facts/research, to prove that just because something is on the internet, ESPECIALLY on facebook, does not mean that it comes anywhere near the truth.

So this is for her, but feel free to enlighten your liberal friends as well...

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

Before Bush: 1/1/2001 - $ 5.7 TRILLION Total National Debt

After Bush (8 years): 1/1/2009 - $ 10.7 TRILLION Total National Debt ($5 Trillion increase in 8 years, or $625 Billion/year)

Obama (3 years): 1/1/2012 - $ 15.2 TRILLION Total National Debt ($4.5 Trillion increase in 3 years, or $1.5 Trillion/year – 2.4 as much debt per year as Bush)

Last two years of Bush’s presidency under a Democratic controlled House and Senate:  $8.7 Trillion Total National Debt when Democrats took control, minus $ 10.7 Trillion under Bush when he left, for $ 2 Trillion increase in two years, or $1 Trillion/year. That means that for the first 6 years under Bush, with a Republican House and Senate, the Republican’s raised our debt from $ 5.7 Trillion to $8.7 Trillion, or $3 Trillion over 6 years, for only $500 Billion (half a trillion) per year increase in debt WHILE lowering taxes by 5% across the board, and fighting two wars, rebuilding after Hurricane Katrina, and recovering after 9/11.

Myth of the Clinton surplus… used by permission of Mr. Steiner.

http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16

And remember, even if you claim Clinton had a surplus and refuse to believe the article and the facts contained within, then consider that 1994-2000, basically ¾ of Clinton’s presidency, the House and Senate were Republican controlled, meaning the national budget each year, was originated in the House, ratified by the Senate, and sent to Clinton to either sign or veto.

And using that logic, remember that the last two years of Bush’s presidency, 2007 and 2008, the House and Senate came under Democratic control, with an almost philibuster proof majority in the Senate.

Ultimately, both parties are irresponsibly raising our debt rather than getting us out of it, but do not believe the liberal lie that Clinton somehow paid off debt and left Bush with a surplus, and that Bush increased our debt far more than Obama has. And remember, per the United States Constitution:

“Article I Section VII - All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.”

That means quit blaming the President for all the problems, and quit giving him credit for all the good stuff when it comes to budgets. Blame the House of Representatives, and to a lesser extent, the Senate. Then, and only then, blame the President for not vetoing the garbage budget proposed for him to sign. Of course, since we are 1000'ish days since actually having a budget, and the Executive and Legislative branches have been playing the "pay as you go" system and have not issued a budget for over THREE YEARS it is hard to actually assign fair blame to anyone in particular, so to hell with all of them.

Say no to 535 Congressmen, the President, and the Supreme Court. This is our government, not theirs.

Election predictions

Obama beat McCain by 7.2% popular vote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008

Popular vote 69,456,897 for Obama, vs 59,934,814 for McCain. Thats a percentage of 52.9% vs 45.7%

If 3.6% of the people that voted for Obama last time, change their vote to the Republican candidate this year, thats a tie in popular vote. I guarantee there is at least that much in swing voters pissed off and voting him out.

That does not account for those that "turned out the vote" that didn't normally vote, but made a point to, because Obama promised the world, was called "The One" by Oprah Winfrey (referring to a question asked in the fictional novel "The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman" if different newborn babies were the ones who would save african-americans and bring them equality) promised his FIRST ACT as president would be to bring our troops home and that we could "take that to the bank". Of course, that video clip was Oct 7th, 2007, and THIS ONE is Oct 21, 2011, a solid FOUR YEARS TWO WEEKS LATER where Obama takes credit for the troop withdrawal "as promised" but which was promised under the US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) signed and ratified in November of 2008, under then President Bush... People were pissed at Bush and voted against his party. Alot of those voters are going to be sitting at home this year.

To say nothing about McCain running a weak campaign...

So I think Obama IS easily defeatable BUT the issue to overcome, is conservative voters being dissatisfied with the GOP's "more of the same" candidate choice.

A little over a year ago, the House of Representatives went from Democrat to Republican by the largest single swap since 1948. That is conservative voters making their voices heard.

Now the GOP is trying to shove Romney down our throats (most think because of a back room deal during the McCain campaign, where he was one of McCains biggest challengers for the GOP nomination, and bowed out from a strong second, and endorsed McCain). I absolutely believe the GOP promised him he would be their choice this election. And thats's the point... facts do not really matter, only perception and beliefs.

Where Obama can win, is where those among us will vote for a 3rd party candidate, or write-in Ron Paul, in protest against the GOP (something I plan on doing not to protest the GOP but because it's my vote, and I intend to cast it for someone I believe in, not someone who is electable).

And besides, I don't think Romney is electable this year.

And if the GOP loses just 5% of it's voter base to disenfranchisement, who vote for 3rd party or write-in candidates or who just stay at home election day, Obama probably wins by a narrow margin.

That, or we can see yet another election where a president wins the electoral votes required to be president, but loses the popular vote... and expect a recount or two.

Just my take on it.

Connecting the dots...

On Yahoo today, read a reuters article, where the Obama administration has loosened their interpretation of online gambling laws (Wire Act of 1961).

http://news.yahoo.com/gambling-gets-boost-obama-administration-113418228--spt.html

Essentially, it says that the path has been cleared for states to legalize internet poker and gambling, and clarifies the regulations to mean that only sporting events cannot be bet on.

Until now, the department held that online gambling in all forms was illegal under the Wire Act of 1961, which bars wagers via telecommunications that cross state lines or international borders.

The new interpretation, by the department's Office of Legal Counsel, said the Wire Act applies only to bets on a "sporting event or contest," not to a state's use of the Internet to sell lottery tickets to adults within its borders or abroad.

Follow the money trail of course, because the article points out that this has the potential for states to reap BILLIONS in tax revenue.

The Obama administration cleared the way for U.S. states to legalize Internet poker and certain other online betting in a switch that may help them reap billions in tax revenue and spur web-based gambling.

The next dot I want to connect, relates to the article where it says that this ruling essentially legalizes gambling that was previously considered illegal, as long as it is legal in the state where the gambling occurs. It also goes on to say if states legalized intra-state gambling and poker, such as DC and Nevada have done, then there is no federal law which could apply.

But the department's conclusion would eliminate "almost every federal anti-gambling law that could apply to gaming that is legal under state laws," Rose wrote on his blog at www.gamblingandthelaw.com.

The dot? If the fed admits it cannot supercede state law, regarding gambling, then what happens now, when states make their own gun laws? Montana passing their law saying guns built, sold, and used in Montana are BATFE exempt, might not even need to take it to the SCOTUS now, if this precedent is set.
All the other dots... health care, welfare, gay marriage laws, medical (or even legal) marijuana laws? Those state laws could all supercede federal law if the President did indeed clear the way for this type of legislation, all because of wanting more of your dollars!

I understand that this is more the administration picking and choosing what laws it wants to enforce and how it interprets them, in the name of the almighty dollar, but give an inch, take a mile sounds like a solid plan for the States in this situation. The federal government has nickle and dimed the States out of rights and powers, and with this, the States could start getting some of their "change" back.

Talk about one of your all-time backfires!

Food Storage Calculator at BePrepared.com

One of the things I believe in, is being prepared.

This wasn't always the case. I grew up in the 80's and 90's and my generation has become the WalMart Generation. If you want something, go buy it. It's so easy to believe in the safety and security of society. We send money to charities, that give food, water, and clothes to those starving kids we see over in war torn, impoverished countries. Those countries that graduates of our stellar public education system cannot pronounce, spell, or find on a map. Yup, THOSE countries...

I served in the military, and believe you me, they are prepared. Unfortunately, for most members of the military, we received the traditional "three hots and a cot" and spend an insane amount of money on beer, a new car, cool toys and the like, with little thought given to personal preparedness (Uncle Sam did it for us, and our only contribution was being "prepared" to go when and where he sent us).

Flash forward to America of today. The great country that has been the cornerstone of the world economy for the better part of a century. The military giant, defender of the world (whether the world wants it or not). We have electricity, running water, sanitation/sewer, a WalMart on every corner, and a couple of gas stations across the street from those. Coffee to get us going, fast food to facilitate perpetual going ("going" in more ways than one if you eat that junk) and pills to stop us fast so we can get up the next day and start over. Don't forget the police, the fire department, social services, our health care, and you have the great country that can overcome any adversity thrown our way, unlike those unpronounceable countries on maps right?

Rodney King riots, Hurrican Katrina, Debt ceiling debates with threat of default, $5/gallon gas, massive unemployment, gold prices skyrocketing, jobs exported, and whatever else you can read five times a night on the evening news... ring a bell?

So I support a four-pronged approach to preparedness:
1. Food and water
2. Guns and ammunition
3. Precious metals
4. Physical fitness.

I'll talk about the last three briefly, as they are for other topics.

First, guns and ammunition - self defense, plain and simple (well that, and the founding fathers felt it was the citizens "check and balance" of the other three branches of government). You need firearms, to protect you food, water, precious metals, and property.

Second, Precious metals - our fiat currency (money that is essentially only worth what the powers that be tell us it is) that can be printed when our government needs to spend more than it has, is a ponzi scheme. It is only a matter of time before the dollar goes the way of the British Sterling as the world reserve currency. When that happens, having some silver and gold coins, in a wide variety of forms (bullion, older coins that were still made of silver, jewelry, etc) will go a long way in preserving your wealth. And heck, if everything fixes itself and goes all hunky-dory, then you have a cool collection of coins and stuff to pass onto your kids when you are done with it as hobby value.

Thrid, Physical Fitness - I used to be the epitome of fitness... baseball, volleyball, weight lifting, swimming, running; I did it all for fun. Military service? Check. Now I spend all day working a 12 hour day or night shift, sitting at a panel watching gages, charts, instruments, etc. I've gradually become a sedentary middle-age adult on medication for high blood pressure and cholesterol. My wife and I decided to get into better shape. At the time of this blog, she has lost 55 lbs and I am down 10 lbs, and we walk 3-4 miles a day! We aren't talking military combat fitness, just get out and do something for an hour or so every day, to be active and reap the rewards!

Ok, those are done... NOW onto the food and water storage.

You can see on my blog, on the top-right of page, a link to BePrepared.com (and yes, its a mutually beneficial arrangement... I get a $10 gift card to their website for putting it there). I figured it was easier than putting a link to every grocery store, blog, forum and whatever other site it would take to get people to start reading up on food storage.

And now, again, mutually beneficial, I will get another $10 gift card for posting this review of their food storage calculator!

Basically, their calculator (reachable by clicking the button below) is a webpage where you can enter how much food you have, in what form, and then after you enter the age, gender, and number of people you plan to feed, it calculates how many days of food it will provide, based on USDA recommended caloric intake for those people you listed.

It definitely had some benefits, like showing you a breakdown of nutritional information of your daily diet based on what you claim to have stored. Mine showed me that my wife and I were taking in 230% of our recommended daily sodium based on our preps, so something for us to adjust there.

Another convenience, and I think this is the main point of this program, is you can prepare an order as you are entering your preps. You enter in the food you have (say a #10 can of dehydrated strawberries) and if you want two more cans, you simply add a "2" in the column next to what you have, in the "your next order" category.

Also, I really liked the fact that if you didn't see what you had, or what form it was in, you have a tab you can go to, to add items yourself. It requires a bit of effort on your part, to copy the nutritional information off the label, into the program, but what someone sees as effort, another sees as becoming familiar and aware with what you are eating.

Once you are done putting all your information in, the "My Pantry" tab summarizes everything you entered, with a "-" or "+" to add or remove it. You can print your list from there if you like.

The major weakness of this program, is the fact that I think most of us, who shop at WalMart, Sam's Club, Costco, or our local farmers market, will wind up filling in ALOT of information manually. The intent of the program is of course, aimed at generating sales through their website, so you cannot really fault them for this, but it could be made a bit more user friendly, if say, since we already know the general nutritional value of white rice, if we could simply put in the number of pounds we have of it, without having to go into their "add your own items" tab.

I personally would rather just type in "white rice" on a search feature, and have it prompt me for how many pounds I have. Then, after that step, display a list of all the items they sell, that could substitute for my entry (white rice, brown rice, jasmine rice, minute rice, etc) for me to choose from, to add to my order.

Lastly, it would be nice if you could access the calculator as a guest, and not have to sign in (something about OpSec - Operational Security... not wanting to advertise what you have, and having it stored on a file in a computer where it could be hacked, accessed, stolen, etc). Basically, it's not THAT big of a deal, but since we make a list, then give our credit card information, then a mailing address for food to be delivered to (not just a billing address) it could make a few people uncomfortable about putting their information out there (such is the world we live in today).

Overall, it seems like I spent more time on the negatives than the positives, but really, the things this program does right, are already right and were nice to skim across. The things I thought needed improving, well, I figure if I talk them up some, maybe others will agree when they go use this program, and the feedback we generate might be implemented.

Very well executed idea by the people at Emergency Essentials/BePrepared.com!

Demonizing those of dissenting opinion.

In the movie "A Knight's Tale", Jeffrey Chaucer said:

I will eviscerate you in fiction. Every pimple, every character flaw. I was naked for a day; you will be naked for eternity.

One of my hobbies, is playing chess. I play fairly regularly on the Free Internet Chess Server (FICS) at the following website:

http://www.freechess.org/

One of the services provided (all free of course, hence the "free" part of the name) is various chat channels that one can enter, while playing chess, waiting for a game, or just to say hi to friends or engage in conversation. One such channel, is the political chat channel (Ch. 39). There of course exists a broad spectrum of political leanings and ideologies in that channel and sadly, a few individuals that are unable to accept differing opinions, discussion of facts, and who resort to the traditional tactics when confronted with a view not similar to their own.

These of course being name calling, throwing around labels (such as "Fascist", "Neo-Con", or a new one to me "Tea, Klux, Klan") and of course my personal favorite "I'm adding you to my censor list" (a feature which lets you no longer see the chat from the offending candidate, but in this case, it amounts to nothing more than plugging your ears and yelling "LA LA LA LA" over and over).

One can imagine the types that come out of the woodwork, in an environment filled with type-A personality, over-educated chess players (or those that think a little too highly of themselves than they ought to) in a chat room where most feel that using large words in rapid succession amounts to knowledge and a proven point.

I decided to blog this today, after being the recipient of a few choice insults and slurs, not so much because it irritates me when people resort to this tactic, but also because it appears that people have resorted to using the word of the day, applicable or not, and apply this label to all those who disagree with their enlightened opinions. Many use Fascist, Nazi, Socialist, and racist, because everyone else around them does too, so it just seems natural to follow along and hey, safety in numbers...

First, we were in a discussion on the economy and one leftist (his handle is "Jones") was of the opinion that our government should return to the 1950'ish tax rates of 90% on the richest Americans (who Obama refers to as "those making over $250,000/year). He argued that it worked when FDR did it, and redistributed the wealth to the rest of the population, and therefore, if it worked then, it will work now. It was civil at first; I pointed out that regardless of the intent behind it, taking another persons wealth and giving it to someone else, amounts to Robin Hood economics, and that any government that sets that precedent of taking from the haves and giving to the have nots, could later apply it to those of us who don't have quite as much, and giving to those who have almost enough... not a power I want my government to have.

He is of the misguided opinion that our national debt is ONLY $14 Trillion (all blamed on Bush of course) and that the true number of more than $70 Trillion, in total unfunded liabilities is, how did he put it? Ah, right... "BS". I didn't have a chance at this point, to point out that the Debt was already $5 Trillion when Bush took office, and that in eight years, he raised it to $10 Trillion, an average gain of $625 Billion/year during his presidency. I didn't have a chance to say Obama raised it almost $4 Trillion in TWO YEARS, an increase of $2 Trillion/year, or to point out that a huge chunk of Bush's increased debt (almost half) was during the last two years of his presidency under a Democratic super-majority in the House and Senate.

"BS"... That was his response, his retort, and the beginning of his descent into intellectual oblivion. At this point, most would expect, in a civil conversation, to cite references and sources, you know, "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" so to speak. If only one could be so fortunate...

As I sat there typing in my references to America's true debt/liability, in an attempt to explain that the true number is greater than the planet's GDP, and that his proposed taxrate on the wealthy of 90% would only yield around $880 Billion per year, still leaving roughly $1.2 Trillion deficit just this year alone, I was called a "retard" and an "idiot". He then called me a "racist" who wants to return to the 1920's depression economy in order to destroy civil rights... Can you imagine that? He doesn't know me, does not know my background, my ethnicity, absolutely nothing about me, but somehow feels justified in playing the "racist" card.

A little background... My step-father is black. I have 4 brothers and sisters who are half-black, a brother who is half-latino, I took my step-father's last name, as he is the only father I ever knew. But back on topic...

Anyways, this little punk, after inappropriately throwing out some fairly serious accusations, including the new one of "Tea, Klux, Klan'er" announces to the channel that he is done talking to me (again... "LA LA LA LA I can't hear you LA LA LA LA) and that he has added me to his censor list.

Slander, counter-point responded to with name calling, and dissenting opinion with censorship. These are time-proven methods which make the weak minded among us, feel better in their blanket of ideological superiority, wrapped head to foot in the warm blanket of bliss that is ignorance.

I felt compelled to add "Jones" to my censor list as well, as he was spamming my screen with irrelevant socialist garbage, the likes of which would bring a happy tear to Karl Marx' eye. If I couldn't respond to him, there was no point in watching his ongoing banter, so after adding him to my censor list, the channel was quiet for several minutes.

The next genius, someone who I have never seen in the channel, in the years I have been in it, suddenly feels the need to chime in on the previous discussion between me and Jones. This person (we'll call him "Ritzel") sends a full paragraph directed at me personally, using some big words that were not at all appropriate in the context they were used (I think it made him feel smarter) but which culminated with him calling me a NAZI and a FASCIST!!!

So while I have been in channel, talking about massive cuts to spending and our government being to large, and needing to be signficantly downsized, he resorts to another label that means almost the exact opposite of what I have been promoting.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fascism

That link, defines fascism as:

"a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."

Seriously? This is the insult, the label, that this individual could come up with? Whatever happened to the good old days of someone calling you a name, and you having to stop and say "Wow, good one, got me there"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism

"a unique variety of fascism that incorporated biological racism and antisemitism. Nazism presented itself as politically syncretic, incorporating policies, tactics and philosophies from right- and left-wing ideologies..."

Further down in the article:

"The self-identification term, used by exponents of the ideology past and present is National Socialism and adherents describe themselves as National Socialists."

So Nazi, or "National Socialism" is a form of "Fascism" which we saw above, promotes a strong central government with the power to do whatever it wants essentially (the essence of dictatorship) with incorporated racism (a slur applied to me, somehow justified by its user as applicable in a debate on national debt and taxation) formed of philosophies from BOTH the left and right...

So what is socialism?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism

"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles."

So basically, what my two opponents above were arguing in favor of... take from the rich and redistribute to everyone else, with the full power and force of a government strong enough to do it.

I would go so far as to say that these two individuals are everything they accused me of and more. The trend in debates among the rapidly polarized population today, is to resort to this sort of tactic. Whenever someone disagrees with you, villify them, demonize them, call them a racist, a nazi, a fascist, even if the terms you are using more accurately describe your own viewpoints, use them on your opponent first, because they sound really evil, and no one likes evil! Of course, if your opponent uses them on you, which sadly, some conservatives do, even though they may actually be accurate in this case, they start accusing the conservative of name-calling, etc... even though they just did it to. What a world we live in.

I was naked for a day, you will be naked for eternity...

4th of July parades turn kids into *GASP* Republicans!

Well, chalk one up for another useless story with no purpose but to try to scare good, left-leaning liberals into keeping their kids from becoming a future conservative (read, Republican) of America...

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/07/02/do-july-4th-parades-turn-kids-into-republicans/

All that fireworks-watching, flag-waving and potato salad-eating this weekend could in fact lead to a vote for the Republican party for your child.

And the stats from Harvard back up the claim. When children were exposed at a young age to the Americana fanfare associated with the Fourth of July, they were more likely to vote Republican and make campaign contributions to the party.

Harvard researchers David Yanagizawa-Drott and Andreas Madestam found that kids who attended one rain-free July 4th celebration before the age of 18 were four percent more likely to vote Republican before the age of 40. And whether or not they went to the polls, young Independence Day revelers were more likely to identify with the right wing by 2 percent.

The liberal media makes it sound like going to a 4th of July celebration could give your kid lice, or E. Coli, or some other disease. Sounds great doesn't it? Demonize the one holiday in America where we celebrate EVERYTHING great about our nation, in spite of it's shorfalls, to provide incentive for some far-leftwing wackos to not celebrate this great day with their children...

They try to trivialize the study somewhat, by saying "kids who attended one rain-free July 4th celebration before the age of 18 were four percent more likely to vote Republican before the age of 40". Hey, what's four percent, right?

Well, in the "landslide" win of Obama, over McCain in the 2008 presidential election, Obama won by SEVEN PERCENT.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/president/

That means, if 4 percent of the voters, who voted for Obama, swapped, and voted for McCain instead, McCain would have won by ONE PERCENT.

Left wing liberal media scare tactics? You be the judge.

The study DID admit however, that Republican parents tend to celebrate the 4th of July more intensely than their Democratic counter-parts:

The study notes, "Republican adults celebrate Fourth of July more intensively in the first place."

Anyways, have a happy 4th of July, enjoy the parades, hotdogs, burgers, watermelon, lemonade, and fireworks. Remember, you may be doing your part for the future of America, by taking your kids along! Heck, volunteer to take your liberal neighbors kid(s) with you too... then show their parents the article afterwards, to freak them out a little bit!

Guns and Immigrants, a tale of hypocrisy.

Once upon a time (actually April 23rd 2010) a princess (ok, a governor) of a far away place (Arizona is sort of out of the way) decreed (signed into law) a bill designed to fight the CRIME of crossing the border and living in the great country of America illegally. The liberal government had dropped the ball and left many states to fend for themselves without support and turned a deaf ear to the plight of the border states, being over-run with a mix of good people and drug-running criminals swarming their sacred lands...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/24/us/politics/24immig.html

Of course, we all remember how this story played out. The government sued Arizona, and some activist citizens appealed to the liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (federal court out of that cesspool called San Francisco, CA) who overturned the portions of the law that actually would have worked.

Remember, this law did not require all latinos to "present their papers" as the critics would have you believe, nor did it result in automatic deportation of anyone caught in town without proper identification on them. Instead, this law simply took away the discretion of local law enforcement to choose to follow up on suspects whom they felt may be in the country illegally. If you were stopped, had no ID, couldn't speak English (this is AMERICA after all, it's what we speak) and essentially gave the officer reason to think you were here illegally, they had to follow up on it. Actually, the law required "suspected" illegal immigrants be detained while they tried to clear up the issue of legal status, and if they were PROVEN to be here illegally, then turned over to the appropriate Federal authorities, to be handled in accordance with Federal law.

 No ID? That can get any white, caucasian male, a trip to the police station. That's how criminals get around a traffic stop, hoping the officer won't want to waste the time doing the paperwork and investigating who they really have in the vehicle. But do it to a latino, and it's somehow racial profiling.

The government's puppet appeals courts have now also struck down the effective parts of Georgia's attempt at similar legislation. You know, those courts where judges sit, anxiously hoping someday to have a President appoint them to a higher court, maybe even the Supreme Court! Of course, given recent events, they have to wait in line behind teachers who have never been a judge in their life (but she probably DID stay at a Holiday Inn last night).

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2011/07/03/georgia-immigration-law-goes-mostly-into-effect-amid-confusion/

Remember the good old days, when the States were sovereign? Probably not, because they have been subject to the whims of the ever-growing Federal Government for the better part of a century now...

BUT now we come to the next part of this story... we've already seen how the government has forsaken the borders, and slapped the hands of the States trying to protect their sovereign borders. NOW the same federal government that chooses to look the other way while states suffer an onslaught of ILLEGAL immigrants crossing their borders, has its liberal agents of doom talking about how the poor government in Mexico and our ATF agents are so overworked because of our slack gunlaws.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/30/us.fast.and.furious/index.html?hpt=po_bn1

According to the report...

It called for increased criminal penalties for illegal straw purchases, enactment by Congress of a "dedicated firearms trafficking statute," and for ATF to get reports from gun dealers on purchases of multiple long guns "that are now the weapons of choice for Mexican drug cartels."

Translation:

We have laws on the books, but they just don't deter the criminals, so we want to make it not only illegal, but this time, REALLY REALLY illegal, to traffic in guns illegally, and the felony and jail time needs to be a BIGGER felony with MORE jail time.

Also, though we cannot infringe on your right to bear arms, we want that to mean just as long as you buy one at a time, or one every few years or so, we'll decide where to draw that line later, but trust us, we'll be fair about it.

And finally, we know we already pretend hand guns are worse than other guns, but now, since we have gotten law after law on the book about waiting periods, magazine capacity, different ages for different guns, etc... NOW we think we've got everyone dumbed down enough that they'll just take our word and accept that "long guns" (sounds really scary) are now the weapon of choice of these EVIL DRUG CARTELS (oooh, scary voice).

Actually, "long gun" is what we call our rifles and shotguns. They aren't just going after our assault rifles (those evil black guns that go bang as fast as you can pull the trigger) but now they want your sporting and hunting guns to be tracked as well.

How do you think they propose to track multiple gun purchases? Not on the good word and intentions of the purchaser (that would be us, the law abiding, voting citizens who hold our Second Amendment rights near and dear). No, they would have to keep a record... of course, this would be too cumbersome to have dealers keep the records, so of course, they have to require all dealers to forward all records of purchases to some new three-letter government agency .The ATF, afterall, is so overworked (the reason for this proposed legislation) and due to the SHEER AND UTTER STUPIDITY of it's leadership, has lost a few good agents recently.

Remember, the biggest threat to the citizenry of America, is not a foreign nation hell-bent on wiping us out. It's not due to some obscure and insignificant terrorist threat, who maybe every few years might get away with a successful attack. Nope, it's from our own government, from those we carelessly elect because of empty promises, or those who some other dimwit population of some failing socialist state elect to try to enforce their far left viewpoints on the rest of us red-staters because they just know so much better whats best for us than we do... God bless their little bleeding liberal hearts.