Buzz Paths

Prior to the 2000 Republican Primary and also prior to W’s announcement to even run in that primary, the vile and unnatural hatred toward him had already begun. I remember thinking “MAN!!, this guy hasn’t even done anything yet to deserve this type of hatred …they must really be scared that he will win!”. They were, and he did.

This hatred has continually crescendoed throughout his presidency. Granted, W’s presidency has not been a stellar one, but for all of his lacking, he has stood up for America through many very difficult events while keeping us safe in the very dangerous post 9/11 world with no successful domestic terror attacks.

His presidency has also had to deal with more than any other in our short history with inheriting an economic recession, 9/11, Anthrax scares, Katrina, two simultaneous wars, Ike, and most recently the Fanny Mae meltdown …any one of which would have been enough to define almost any other presidency by itself.

Where as with any presidency, there are many things that people could disagree with that have happened throughout W’s reign, however, in this case it got personal. Vile hatred for not much of a reason other than hatred itself. Hatred for hatred’s sake. It is almost as if W personally ran over the haters dog or something. It is emotionally driven, unexplainable, irrational hatred. Not a pretty picture.

This type of hatred can only be explained in one of two ways:

· Because of specific deeds that he did (ala Hitler, etc.)
· Irrational and exuberant ignorance by the haters

It cannot by definition be due to deeds done… because the hate started prior to even being able to do such deeds. So, ignorance once again seems to win out in this media driven political popularity contest.

As we see a new administration preparing to start their first term, we are also seeing some equally strange attitudes surfacing as well. Before Barack Obama announced his candidacy (only 143 days after becoming a U.S. Senator) to run in the Democratic primaries, he already had an almost cult like following of people that professed a love for his candidacy that was unfounded by any real tangible reasons. He gave a good speech at the last Democratic convention. That’s good, but cannot (or at least should not) explain the overnight intense following.

This type of adoration can only be explained in one of two ways:

· Because of specific deeds that he did (ala Gandhi, Christ, etc.)
· Irrational and exuberant ignorance by adoring fans.

It cannot by definition be due to deeds done… because the adoration started prior to even taking the oath of office and even having the opportunity to do such deeds. So, ignorance once again seems to win out in this media driven political popularity contest.

Even before he has been inaugurated, people have started talking about making Nov. 4 a national holiday in honor of Barack Obama etc. I scratch my head wondering just how this kind of baseless enthusiasm seems to have a life of it’s own without any real merit.

Barack Obama just might become a great president and just might go down in history as more than just our first black president (actually half black), but so far, that’s all of the historical relevance that he has actually earned by his accomplishments. His presidential legacy still has yet to be written or even started. Until he is president and starts doing deeds as president, there is no way that anyone can know if he will actually be a great or even mediocre president. For that, we must wait and see.

Every politician lies. Every politician promises things they have no intension of doing if elected. If they do not lie, they do not get elected (thank you media spin artists). Our job as a citizen is to be well informed, intelligent voters that have done enough research to cut through the media spin and political hype that is the election cycle. After doing our individual due diligence, we should individually (not getting caught up in the herd mentality) come to a conclusion or opinion concerning the important issues in the campaign, and vote accordingly.

Saying this, everyone in the U.S. DOES (at least so far) have the right to their own opinion and also the right to express it. So as strange and negative as this bitter attitude is, we should not keep it from happening. There are still no laws against stupidity. This is what makes stupidity dangerous. A stupid uniformed or misinformed (propagandized) voter carries just as much weight in our free society as a well informed intelligent voter. When the media and candidates can get people to sway from facts and get caught up into emotional driven voting, the entire process becomes ineffective. People who really haven’t bothered to get informed now are emotionally (only) driven to vote. Once the uninformed voters can be motivated to vote based upon non-specific and non-policy based agendas that are emotionally driven (change …what change? I dunno, just change. Change for change sake only etc.), the inmates will start running the asylum.

History (that is based upon facts and not conjecture) will reflect the success of this presidency based upon deeds and accomplishments, not speeches, popularity, style, race, or any other irrelevant aspects. In fact, because Barack is black, this presidency will hopefully help our country to get past much of the racial divide that has infected this country for much too long. We need to accept him as OUR president (because he is) and give him the help that he needs to realize his vision for our country. If the American people decide after 4 years that this is not the direction we should be heading, we have the opportunity and duty to fire him and elect someone that we think does support the people’s vision.

Voting for change is really only voting against the incumbent, not really voting for anyone. This is not why we should vote. Voting should be FOR something specific based upon principles not party or popularity.

What is very alarming and unsettling is that because of this polarizing process, the usually hopeful and optimistic outlook of the average American citizen has now been polarized and pushed to unnatural limits for no good reason in my opinion. This is a huge shift in the attitude pendulum in America. As a pendulum shifts, so will it correct …with equal force and in the opposite direction.
This pendulum shift has way less to do with the men involved and way more to do with the fickle and flighty nature that has developed within the American population. W did not earn the hate that was bestowed upon him by deeds. How could he? It started before he even announced to run in the first place. Barack Obama has not earned the love that has been bestowed upon him either. He isn’t even the president yet.

So now we have to just wait and see. This is not to say we should be blind and all trusting. This does not say that we should be angry and aggressively negative either. We should stay well informed, have a positive attitude knowing that we live in the greatest country in the history of the free world and have the most opportunities within our free society to change and tweak our own destiny. Get involved. Communicate with your congressmen and senators. Doing nothing or making ignorant uninformed choices and then complaining about the outcome is stupid. Don’t be stupid!

Sphere: Related Content

We received this as an email from Newsmax and thought it was worthy to post. Just so you know, we do not make a penny from posting this. We just thought it was too funny not to post. Here it is:

Feeling an ‘OBAMA HANGOVER’? We’ve got the Cure!

Yes, the election is over. But now, many who voted for Obama are waking up to a massive ‘Obama Hangover’!

The DOW JONES Industrial Average is the bellwether of the ‘Obama Hangover’, falling 2,073 points since Obama’s election just 12 days ago! Yet Obama managed to convince voters that he would be the better pick to support an ailing U.S. economy!

Cure the ‘OBAMA HANGOVER’!
Order your ‘Obama bin Lyin’ Deck of Deception!

And after promising ‘Change’, Obama has picked longtime political insiders:

* Rahm Emanuel (Fmr. Clinton hack and Democratic Rep. from IL)
* Tom Daschle (the always Partisan and defeated Fmr. South Dakota Sen.)
* Eric Holder (Instrumental in Bill Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich)
* Hillary Clinton? (keeping his friends close and enemies closer)

So what’s the cure for the ‘Obama Hangover’? It’s the Obama Bin Lyin Deck of Deception!

Whether you voted for Obama or not, the ‘Obama bin Lyin’ Deck of Deception memorializes, in a deck of high-quality playing cards, an ‘up to election day’ record of 52 of the most significant deceptions, obfuscations, omissions and lies that have defined this man throughout his Primary Campaign and the General Election.

Obama won despite these facts in large part because the Liberal media simply would not engage any of these issues in a meaningful way.

Commemorate this historic election with the Obama bin Lyin ‘DECK OF DECEPTION!’ It captures 52 of the most outrageous deceptions associated with his campaign. Including up-to-the-minute deceptions, such as:

* Obama and Rezko
* Campaign Finance ‘Rope-A-Dope’
* Obama and Ayers
* ‘Spread the Wealth Around’
* Obama and Lobbyists
* ACORN
* OBAMANOMICS
* Obama and Ouchi
* What Hillary said about Obama
* What Biden said about Obama
* Donor List???
* Rural Americans ‘Guns and Religion’ Slur
* AND MUCH, MUCH MORE!

The ‘Obama bin Lyin’ DECK OF DECEPTION makes a GREAT Christmas stocking stuffer (for all your Liberal friends, too!)

DECEPTION: Obama’s Aunt is reportedly in the US illegally. Katie Couric asked Obama if he would “support (his Aunt) being deported to Kenya?” Obama replied, “If she has violated laws, then those laws have to be obeyed. We are a nation of laws.” But Obama also said during his campaign that giving Driver’s Licenses to illegal aliens, like the Terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 was “the right Idea.”

DECEPTION: Obama has said “we’ve got to walk the walk and not just talk the talk when it comes to ‘energy independence’!” But he’s against Nuclear energy, Coal, and offshore drilling:

* “I start from the premise that Nuclear Energy is not optimal. Therefore, I’m not a Nuclear Energy proponent.” But Obama opposes any practical means of storing and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, which effectively eliminates adding nuclear plants as a solution to growing demand for energy.

* “If someone wants to build a coal power plant they can. It’s just that (under Obama’s policy) it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a HUGE SUM,” said Obama to a campaign audience in San Francisco. But he tries to include coal as part of his solution when speaking to wider audiences.

* “We only have 3% of the world’s oil supplies but we consume 25% of the world’s oil. So we can’t simply drill our way out of the problem.” Yet Obama and most senate democrats opposed offshore drilling until this summer when gas rose above $4 per gallon and it became a significant campaign issue.

CURE THE OBAMA HANGOVER!

Order Your ‘OBAMA BIN LYIN’
Deck of Deception

Since announcing his candidacy for President, much debate has arisen about Barack Obama’s:

* Public statements
* Voting record
* Quotes from his published books
* Relationships Bill Ayers, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, ACORN, and others.

Debate on these items has never been seriously conducted in the mainstream media. Other than conservative entities like Fox News, NewsMax, and others, the media has shown little interest in doing so, ignoring objective reporting which might have put Obama’s candidacy in jeopardy – even as many of these topics seem to indicate conscious deceptions by Obama and his campaign.

November 4th, 2008, was indeed a day to remember. Any unpleasant memories of the campaign will pale in comparison to the aftermath in terms of taxes, the economy, energy independence, and national security. Americans, even Obama supporters, will find themselves wishing these issues had been examined in public view. They are now feeling the ‘OBAMA HANGOVER’

We have commemorated, in the Deck of Deception, 52 of the most significant items controversially linked to Barack Obama. They were defining factors of his campaign and will continue to define him as a person during his Presidency. Everyone, no matter how they voted, should own this important collectible reminder of the 52 factors that shaped this election.

Order your Deck of Deception today!

Sphere: Related Content

Barry Obama is starting his anti-gun stance before he even gets in office.

Question 59 on the Obama Transition Team’s intrusive and extensive list of questions for potential officials of the Obama administration:

“Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”

The question has raised the ire of the National Rifle Association.

And rightly so. Barry Obama has taken his stance regarding the Second Amendment off his websites (both the campaign and transition). All it says is:

“Sportsmen
Barack Obama did not grow up hunting and fishing, but he recognizes the great conservation legacy of America’s hunters and anglers and has great respect for the passion that hunters and anglers have for their sports. Were it not for America’s hunters and anglers, including the great icons like Theodore Roosevelt and Aldo Leopold, our nation would not have the tradition of sound game management, a system of ethical, science-based game laws and an extensive public lands estate on which to pursue the sport. Barack Obama and Joe Biden recognize that we must forge a broad coalition if we are to address the great conservation challenges we face. America’s hunters and anglers are a key constituency that must take an active role and have a powerful voice in this coalition.”

Pretty vague if you ask me. My initial fear regarding Barry’s views has turned to sheer terror. What hit me was that once in office he could turn around and ban ALL firearms with an Executive Order. With both Houses controlled by his supporters there is nothing we will be able to do. People have told me I’m nuts to even think such a thing. However, looking at his past record when it comes to firearms, I don’t think I’m off one bit. Regardless of what Obama says, his actions don’t line up with his speaking.

Why do you think gun and ammunition sales are off the charts? People know deep down that this in-coming administration wants to ban guns or make it so difficult to own one that people are now rushing out to buy like crazy.

One extreme example of an executive order is Executive Order 9066, where Franklin D. Roosevelt delegated military authority to remove all people (used to target specifically Japanese Americans and German Americans) in a military zone. The authority delegated to General John L. DeWitt subsequently paved the way for all Japanese-Americans on the West Coast to be sent to internment camps for the duration of World War II. Thousands of German Americans and Italian Americans were also sent to internment camps under executive order.

Executive Order 13233, which restricted public access to the papers of Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush was more recently criticised by the Society of American Archivists and other groups, stating that it “violates both the spirit and letter of existing US law on access to presidential papers as clearly laid down in 44 USC. 2201-2207,” and adding that the order “potentially threatens to undermine one of the very foundations of our nation.”

Critics fear that the president could make himself a de facto dictator by side-stepping the other branches of government and making autocratic laws. The Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben in particular has criticized the generalization since World War I of the use of executive orders or decrees by all Western democracies, declaring that this tends toward the constitution of a “permanent state of exception.” The presidents, however, cite executive order as often the only way to clarify laws passed through the Congress, laws which often require vague wording in order to please all political parties involved in their creation.

To date, U.S. courts have overturned only two executive orders: the aforementioned Truman order, and a 1996 order issued by President Clinton that attempted to prevent the US government from contracting with organizations that had strike-breakers on the payroll. Congress may overturn an executive order by passing legislation in conflict with it or by refusing to approve funding to enforce it. In the former, the president retains the power to veto such a decision; however, the Congress may override a veto with a two-thirds majority to end an executive order. It has been argued that a Congressional override of an executive order is a nearly impossible event due to the supermajority vote required and the fact that such a vote leaves individual lawmakers very vulnerable to political criticism.

So, be warned…

Sphere: Related Content

 There’s got to be something that can be derived in the fact that the term “Nazi” is derived from the first two syllables of “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei” or, in English, the “National Socialist German Workers’ Party.” Party members didn’t refer to themselves as Nazis, which was considered derogatory, and instead referred to themselves as Nationalsozialisten, or “National Socialists.” So, I find it ironic that American Democrats, who are truly the American Socialist Party, hurl the term “Nazi” at those of us with conservative views as an insult! They also like to use the term “Fascist” in the same manner when, in fact, they are the ones who are promoting government control of private enterprise, a la Mussolini. What can I say — history is apparently not their strong suit!

 Another bit of history that I find chillingly ironic — and I’m sure this, too, has escaped the feeble intellects of the Obama crowd — the platform upon which their candidate ran — “Change” — is exactly the same platform used by Hitler in his rise to power: “Give me five years and you will not recognize Germany!” — how right he was! So, is that the sort of “change” Reichsfuehrer Obama has in mind? It could be, if he allows Iran, North Korea and the rest of the world’s nut-jobs continue on their current paths unchallenged…

Sphere: Related Content

Barack Obama has no idea when it comes to firearms. He and Joe Biden are two of the most anti-gun people on this planet. They have consistently voted to ban firearms. Joe Biden penned the first version of the “Clinton Gun Ban of 1994”. They keep talking about banning “Assualt Weapons”. However they have no idea what they are talking about.

The term Assault Weapon is derived from the term assault rifle, itself a translation of the German word Sturmgewehr, literally “storm-rifle”. In its technical sense, the term Assault weapon refers to a military weapon used to aid in military assault operations, that is, attacking a fortified position. Legislators and political lobbyists have adopted the term to refer to specific semi-automatic firearms and other firearms listed by specific characteristics for statutory purposes. The legislative usage follows usage by political groups seeking to limit the individual’s right to keep and bear arms, who have sought to extend the meaning to include a semi-automatic firearm that is similar in name or appearance to a fully automatic firearm or military weapon. Note that this term is not synonymous with assault rifle, which has an established technical definition.

Using lists of physical features or specific firearms in defining assault weapons in the United States was first codified by the language defining semi-automatic rifles with certain characteristics in the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban.

The term “assault weapon” in the context of civilian rifles has been attributed to gun-control activist Josh Sugarmann. Assault weapon refers to semi-automatic firearms (that is, firearms that, when fired, automatically extract the spent casing and load the next round into the chamber, ready to fire again) that were developed from earlier fully-automatic weapons. By former U.S. law the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, H&K G36E, TEC-9, all AK-47s, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms because they possess a minimum set of features from the following list of features:

A semi-automatic AK-47 rifle.
An Intratec TEC-9 with 32-round magazine; a semi-automatic pistol formerly classified as an Assault Weapon under Federal Law.

Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

* Folding stock
* Conspicuous pistol grip
* Bayonet mount
* Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
* Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)

Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

* Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
* Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or silencer
* Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
* Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
* A semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm

Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:

* Folding or telescoping stock
* Pistol grip
* Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
* Detachable magazine

The earlier term assault rifle, refers to rifles that are select-fire (that is, rifles that are capable of either semi-automatic or fully-automatic fire), firing intermediate-power rounds (such as the 5.56 x 45 mm NATO, or 7.62 x 39 mm), which along with fully automatic pistols, provided the pre-cursor for the term “assault weapon.”

(Fully automatic, such as describing a machine gun, means that a firearm can fire multiple rounds with a single pull of the trigger and will continue to fire as long as the trigger is depressed and ammunition remains in the magazine. In contrast, the term assault weapon as used in civilian and U.S. legal usage refers to a semi-automatic weapon that fires one shot for each trigger pull, the same as any other semi-automatic hunting rifle, or semi-automatic household handgun, all of which automatically load another round of ammunition that can be fired with each subsequent trigger pull until the attached magazine is empty. Note: a double-action revolver also fires one shot for each trigger pull but is not considered “semi-automatic” since the force of pulling the trigger brings the next round ready rather than the recoil of the last cartridge.)

Now, if you are going to start your anti-gun rhetoric let’s get more of our terminology correct.

Here’s what Obama had to say about the Virginia Tech shootings:

“(Cho) had a semiautomatic weapon with a clip that allowed him to take 19 shots in a row,” Obama said. “I don’t know any self-respecting hunter that needs 19 rounds of anything. The only reason you have 19 rounds is potentially to do physical harm to people. You don’t shoot 19 rounds at a deer. And if you do, you shouldn’t be hunting.”

Source: http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2007/04/20/obama_says_us_needs_to_review_gun_policies/

If they allowed all the people who had concealed carry licenses to be able to carry on campus, they could have stopped this maniac. But, the college wouldn’t allow law abiding citizens to carry on campus.

Hey Barry, just a head’s up, but it’s not a clip. It’s called a MAGAZINE. If you want to be an authority on gun control, get your terminology right. Clips are not Magazines!
Don’t expose yourself to ridicule as a gun goof by misusing terms.

It is amusing that people con­sider themselves knowledgeable or authoritative don’t know the difference between the two. If called on their gaffe, they often fall back on “Well, everyone knows what was meant,” or a plea to not be so pedantic.

Here’s the difference Barry and Joe. Now pay attention and take notes:

A “Clip” is a device for holding cartridges together, usually to facilitate loading. Widely used as a synonym for “magazine” (although most firearm authorities consider this substandard usage). Technically, a magazine has a feeding spring, a clip does not.

A clip is different from a magazine and the terms are by no means interchangeable. Using “clip” when one means “magazine” is akin to saying “tires” when one actually means “wheels.” Such a malaprop marks the user as a hopeless idiot. More reasons why the two terms should not be confused or interchanged is because the “clip” actually fits inside a magazine.

Here is a picture of a magazine which is what you reference in your statement:

Here is a picture of a clip:

If you can’t figure this out by reading, you can watch this video:

 

So Barry, if you and Joey are planning your gun ban, I would suggest maybe you take a few NRA courses and actually learn what you are banning. Because listening to you talk I sit back and laugh, because neither one of you have any idea what you are talking about.

Sphere: Related Content

I find it Omazing that the Barack Obama website took down the pages and .pdf files of his gun control policies the day after the election.Barry and Joe Biden are two of the most anti-gun supporters in this nation. Biden was one of the original writers of the Clinton Gun Ban. I can promise you that this will be one of the first items on the table after they are sworn in on January 20th. I have had people tell me it would take years to get this through. How long did it take for the Bailout Plan to get written, voted on and signed into law? Answer: Less than a week.

Here’s where the gun control policies were:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/additional/Obama_FactSheet_Western_Sportsmen.pdf

This is where the statement on Obama’s “support” of the second amendment used to be before Nov 4th. Look how quickly they took it down!

I sent an email to Barry’s website regarding the issue of gun control and why the pages regarding the second amendment were taken down. And on this website they have one paragraph talking about “Sportsmen”. You can also apply for a job with the new administration while your there. I guess that’s his way of creating jobs and saving the economy. I received an auto-responder message which follows:

“You have just contacted Obama for America, the Obama/Biden campaign organization. A new organization is being formed to facilitate communication with the Obama/Biden Administration that will take office on January 20, 2009. If you have questions, suggestions, or comments about the federal government, policy, or the coming Obama/Biden Administration, please visit the online Office of the President-elect for more information and to get involved:

http://www.change.gov

If you’re contacting us because you’ve been energized by your participation in our grassroots movement, we hope you will remain active in your community and involved in national policy debates. Please continue to visit www.BarackObama.com regularly. We’ve built one of the most comprehensive nationwide organizing networks in history, and our victory on November 4th is only the beginning of the work we will do together.

The 56th Presidential Inauguration will take place on January 20th, 2009, and will be run by the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies. We encourage you to check their website for more details:

http://inaugural.senate.gov/

If you have other thoughts or business with the campaign, you can continue to reach us toll free at 866-675-2008. Due to the extremely high number of messages we are currently receiving, we may be unable to respond to your message individually, but we do appreciate hearing from you and hope you’ll work with us as we build America’s future together.

Thank you again for contacting us.

Sincerely,
Obama for America”

I would go to http://change.gov/page/s/contact and send them an email demanding Barry & Joe’s policies on gun control and what their detailed agenda is. I asked for a detailed plan on his stance for gun control, not just smooth talking B.S. So far I have heard nothing. However, we the people can bug the hell out of them to make sure that our Second Amendment Rights stay just as they are.

Support the NRA, it’s the only hope we have:

http://membership.nrahq.org/default.asp?campaignid=XR020174

Sphere: Related Content

“There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity.”
– Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

One thing that I learned from traveling on the road for so many years….was that there is an average intelligence in this country. And much to my dismay, it is WAY lower than I would like to admit. The IGNORANT vote has the potential of being WAY larger than the well informed vote. The only safe guard up until now is that the IGNORANT voter is too IGNORANT to actually go VOTE!

Be scared….VERY SCARED if the IGNORANT VOTER can be mobilized into action. THEIR VOTE is JUST AS POWERFUL as an intelligent vote. Think about that one….hmmmm
Did I say SCARY!!!

I could live with ANY outcome as long as I felt that it was what the US population REALLY WANTED. Right now, I am not at all sure that people are voting from a well informed position. People are voting from an emotionally driven place that is not based upon the reality that faces us in the world today.

There should be some kind of test given BEFORE being allowed to vote….have to know how to spell your candidates full name, know who their vice presidential nominee is, know what their job is currently (prior to running), know what state they are from, etc…..knowing at least 3 policies that they stand for that the voter agrees with….blah blah blah….that would certainly thin the heard and produce a more targeted outcome based upon reality and intelligence.

YIKES! ….can you tell I am WORN OUT with this crap!

Sphere: Related Content