The Violence Worker!

Leadership

Think back in your life and think of the people you considered true leaders.  Who are the people lat so inspired you that you would follow them into the depths of hell and back?  Those of us who spent any time in the military can probably think of at least a few. 

Now think of all the qualities that you think are essential for a leader and ask yourself this question:  Is that person Barrack Hussein Obama?  

It took nearly two months and national attention before he met with BP execs and then it was for a 20 minute meeting.  From day one he should have had that meeting and it should have been more then a few minutes.  (As a side note, it might have been instructive [if not a bit humorous] if after say, the first 14 days, someone had asked if he even knew the names of more than just the CEO).  Do you think he could have rescheduled that lunch with Slow Joe Biden today?  It's not like Biden has any insight.  The only thing Slow Joe probably knows about oil is that someone puts it in his car and even then, he probably isn't sure exactly where they put it.

Stating that BP will have to pay is a no brainer.  That was going to happen regardless of who is President.  Between the courts and the cost of the clean-up, they will pay.  It's nice they are putting up 20 Billion in cash, but that does not make the spill go away.  Oh, and boycottiong BP?  If they don't get your money, they can't pay.  That's how that works.

Appointing a czar, meeting with the execs and demanding they pay after two months in does not show leadership.  It shows negligence at worst and ineptitude at best.  People are calling a "crisis in competence" and for good reason,  These are just some of the things he should have been doing since day one along with marshalling every resource available.  He should have also told the EPA to get out of the way.

Case in point:

The Dutch offered to fly their skimmer arm systems to the Gulf 3 days after the oil spill started. The offer was apparently turned down because EPA regulations do not allow water with oil to be pumped back into the ocean. If all the oily water was retained in the tanker, the capacity of the system would be greatly diminished because most of what is pumped into the tanker is sea water.

As of June 8th, BP reported that they have collected 64,650 barrels of oil in the Gulf. That is only a fraction of the amount of oil spilled from the well. That is less than one day’s rated capacity of the Dutch oil skimmers.

Turning down the Dutch skimmers just shows a total lack of leadership in the oil spill. To just leave the oil in the water because regulations do not allow you to pump slightly polluted oil back into the ocean is just plain stupid. The small amount of oil pumped back into the ocean with the Dutch system is tiny droplets of suspended oil that will be quickly broken down by naturally occurring bacteria.

From what I understand, the Dutch booms were eventually deployed, but why did it take so long?

When we elect a President, do we look at leadership as a qualification?  Do we understand that a President's job is not that of dictator, but as a leader.  We don't expect the President to be an expert on deep water drilling, but we do expect him to be able to act in a crisis.

Obama is no leader.  He isn't even much of an administrator.  He is a guy who managed (on sheer charisma) to get elected to the Presidency.  He had no resume, no experience and obviously, no skills.

VW

Lech Walesa Thanks Ronald Reagan

 Obama is dithering over the events in Iran, afraid to support the protesters too much in case they fail.  His reasoning, I guess,  is that the Iranian Mullahs will hate us if he shows any kind of solidarity with the protesters..  The truth is that they will hate us anyway.

In the 1980s, another President sat in the White House and he was not afraid to act and sided early on with the independent Polish tade Union, "Solidarity".  From it's start in 1981 untill 1989 when the Communists were finally overthrown, Reagan supported the struggle for freedom in Poland.  In a radio address given on October 9th of 1982,  Ronald Reagan said this:

I am, therefore, today directing steps to bring about the suspension of Poland's most-favored-nation-tariff status as quickly as possible. This will increase the tariffs on Polish manufactured goods exported to the United States and thus reduce the quantities of these goods which have been imported in the past.

The Polish regime should understand that we're prepared to take further steps as a result of this further repression in Poland. We are also consulting urgently with our allies on steps we might take jointly in response to this latest outrage. While taking these steps, I want to make clear, as I have in the past, that they are not directed against the Polish people. We will continue to provide humanitarian assistance to the people of Poland, through organizations such as Catholic Relief Service and CARE, as we have since the beginning of martial law.

At the same time, I stand by my earlier offer to provide recovery assistance to help the Polish economy back on its feet, once Warsaw restores to the Polish people their human rights.

There is no equivocation, hesitation or PC diplomatic prattle in that speech.  President Reagan drew the line and said this is where we stand.

Last Friday, on in op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, Lech Walesa wrote an eloquent essay thanking president reagan for his unwavering support.

When talking about Ronald Reagan, I have to be personal. We in Poland took him so personally. Why? Because we owe him our liberty. This can't be said often enough by people who lived under oppression for half a century, until communism fell in 1989.

Poles fought for their freedom for so many years that they hold in special esteem those who backed them in their struggle. Support was the test of friendship. President Reagan was such a friend. His policy of aiding democratic movements in Central and Eastern Europe in the dark days of the Cold War meant a lot to us. We knew he believed in a few simple principles such as human rights, democracy and civil society. He was someone who was convinced that the citizen is not for the state, but vice-versa, and that freedom is an innate right.

How unlike the spineless individual who now sits in the oval office!  Obama is no statesman.  He would most likely have sided with the Polish Communists because, after all, if Walesa and his movement failed, the Polish thugs in charge might have become upset with us.

Mr. Walesa concludes:

As I say repeatedly, we owe so much to all those who supported us. Perhaps in the early years, we didn't express enough gratitude. We were so busy introducing all the necessary economic and political reforms in our reborn country. Yet President Ronald Reagan must have realized what remarkable changes he brought to Poland, and indeed the rest of the world. And I hope he felt gratified. He should have.

I'm sure he still does.  I think he knew and he still knows just how big an impact he had upon the United States, Poland and the entire world.

Please read the entire piece.  You will not be disappointed.

It's pathetic how far we've fallen from the days of the Gipper. 

VW

Nuclear Poker

The North Korean regime is trying to play a deadly game of nuclear poker.  They have some bombs and they are itching to pick a fight.  With Obama in charge, they sense weakness and their weakness detector may not be that far off the mark.

Japanese intelligence sources say the NoKos might lob a Taepodong-2 toward Hawaii early next month.

North Korea may launch a long-range ballistic missile towards Hawaii on American Independence Day, according to Japanese intelligence officials.

The missile, believed to be a Taepodong-2 with a range of up to 4,000 miles, would be launched in early July from the Dongchang-ni site on the north-western coast of the secretive country.

Intelligence analysts do not believe the device would be capable of hitting Hawaii's main islands, which are 4,500 miles from North Korea.

I don't know much about missile technology, but I wonder just how much tweeking it would take to give it an extra thousand miles?  They'd obviously have to make it weigh less and maybe figure out how to put more fuel on board and change an aerodynamic , but it seems doable and we'd still be thinking the old range was still their best.

This would not be an easy hand to play, regardless of who sat in the oval office.  I do think they'd be a little less bellicose if McCain had won, but with the NoKos, you can never be sure.

The President needs to let the NoKos know that if they lob a missile toward Hawaii, they may get what they wished in spades.  He needs to let Kim know that there will be harsh consequences and if we have to launch an intercept, there will be hell to pay.

We'll see how this spineless Socialist acts in the coming days.  I hope he remembers he has a sworn Constitutional responsibility to protect this nation.

VW

Satire? Yeah right....

Thanks Instapunk.

THE AMERICANS WITH NO ABILITIES ACT

Washington, DC - Congress is considering sweeping legislation that will provide new benefits for many Americans.

The Americans With No Abilities Act (AWNAA) is being hailed as a major legislative goal by advocates of the millions of Americans who lack any real ambition or skills...

'Roughly 50 percent of Americans do not possess the competence and drive necessary to carve out a meaningful role for themselves in society,' said California Senator Barbara Boxer.

'We can no longer stand by and allow People of Inability to be ridiculed and passed over. With this legislation, employers will no longer be able to grant special favors to a small group of workers, simply because they have some idea of what they are doing.'

In a Capitol Hill press conference, House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pointed to the success of the Transportation Security Administration, which has a long-standing policy of providing opportunity without regard to performance. 

Approximately 74 percent of postal employees lack any job skills, making this agency the single largest U. S. employer of Persons of Inability. Private-sector industries with good records of non-discrimination against the Inept include retail sales (72%), the airline industry (68%), and home improvement 'warehouse' stores (65%).

At the state government level, the Department of Motor Vehicles also has an excellent record of hiring Persons of Inability (63%).

Under the Americans With No Abilities Act, more than 25 million 'middle man' positions will be created, with important-sounding titles but little real responsibility, thus providing an illusory sense of purpose and performance.

Mandatory non-performance-based raises and promotions will be given so as to guarantee upward mobility for even the most unremarkable employees.

The legislation provides substantial tax breaks to corporations that promote a significant number of Persons of Inability into middle-management positions, and gives a tax credit to small and medium-sized businesses that agree to hire one clueless worker for every two talented hires.

Finally, the AWNAA contains tough new measures to make it more difficult to discriminate against the Non-abled, banning, for example, discriminatory interview questions such as, 'Do you have any skills or experience that relate to this job?'

'As a Non-abled person, I can't be expected to keep up with people who have something going for them,' said Mary Lou Gertz, who lost her position as a lug-nut twister at the GM plant in Flint, Michigan, due to her inability to remember righty tighty, lefty loosey. 'This new law should be real good for people like me,' Gertz added. 

With the passage of this bill, Gertz and millions of other untalented citizens will finally see a light at the end of the tunnel.

Said Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL): 'As a Senator with no abilities, I believe the same privileges that elected officials enjoy ought to be extended to every American with no abilities. It is our duty as lawmakers to provide each and every American citizen,   regardless of his or her adequacy, with some sort of space to take up in this great nation and a good salary for doing so.'

Rethinking Posse Comitatus

All of us are concerned (or should be) about national security.  If you didn't get the lessons of Mumbai, you weren't paying attention.  Can you imagine the damage a small group of well armed terrorists could do in a major US city?  None of us even want to contemplate such a tragedy but it is something that we should unfortunately plan for and defend against.

That said, the Pentagon announced a plan to deploy up to 20,000 federal troops for Homeland Security.

The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials.

First, I think we need to rethink defense just a little.  For the better part of the 20th century -especially post WWII - our military was trained to fight enemies everywhere but here.  We have a lot of military bases here in the US, but their missions were not built around defending our borders per se.  When I was in Bomber Wings, we trained to bomb Russia and China.  When I was in Fighter Wings, we trained to deploy to predetermined hot spots such as Korea or the defense of Europe.  Most Army troops garrisoned here were actually slated to deploy to Korea, Europe, or wherever.  Few trained to fight on US soil except some fighter interceptor units, but most of those weren't large enough to stave off a large attack.  Certainly training for overseas would translate to homeland defense, but by and large, we were trained for foreign theaters. 

I'm thinking homeland security was mostly an after thought.  After all, we didn't figure a land army would even attempt an invasion and it was not a mistaken assumption.  No one in their right mind would attempt to invade the US.  

And that still holds true.  However, the world has changed and so has warfare.  It's no longer solely a symmetrical endeavor with front lines and generals hovering over huge maps moving toy tanks and soldiers around like Las Vegas Craps croupiers.  To be sure, we still need that kind of training, but with the advent of Islamic terrorism, we also need to rework our defense strategy to deal with the threat today and to anticipate future threats.

The article mentions the Posse Comitatus act of 1878 that limits how federal troops can be used.  From Wikipedia: 

The statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Coast Guard is exempt from the Act.

In general, the Posse Comitatus act is a good idea.  It has served us well and there are some that are worried about using Federal troops for homeland defense.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the libertarian Cato Institute are troubled by what they consider an expansion of executive authority.

Domestic emergency deployment may be "just the first example of a series of expansions in presidential and military authority," or even an increase in domestic surveillance, said Anna Christensen of the ACLU's National Security Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healy warned of "a creeping militarization" of homeland security.

While I think there is reason to be cautious, this is not the America of 1878.  We face threats no one would have even imagined back 130 years ago.  The article also points out that this will possibly stretch our military too far.  If that's the case, I think we need to expand it. 

Warfare and threats are ever changing and in many cases, ever increasing.  Today, we even have a headline telling us some rather chilling news: 

Study Reports U.S. Can Expect Nuclear Terrorist Attack Before 2013

We need to rethink Posse Comitatus and work on building or national defenses.  The continued military draw down since the Reagan years leaves us vulnerable and our enemies know it.

VW

Why Obama?

Are people so desperate for some kind of change they will throw all reason to the wind?  Do they think that by electing Obama, all of our troubles will simply dissappear and the world will be somehow more kinder and gentler?  Do they think that he will raise his arms, yell, "Peace, be Still!" and Ahmadinajad, The Dear Leader (or whoever is running that train wreck called North Korea at the moment) and the Taliban will suddenly turn over a new leaf?  Do they think Al Qaida will all of sudden start planting daisies instead of IEDs?

It almost seems like there is some kind of Obama drug out there that make people become mind-numbed sycophants!  He's going to go talk to these tyrants and same some magical words and they will be all nice and docile. 

It doesn't seem to matter that there are a whole lot of unanswered questions about his background.  No one seems to think that it is anything but ordinary for him to be a close associate with an unrepentant and admitted terrorist!

Obamazoids seem to be little concerned with his association with the group ACORN.  ACORN is not some genteel organization feeding the homeless or helping illiterates how to read.  ACORN is part of why we have a mortgage problem!  They are also at the forefront of massive voter registration fraud throughout the country! 

ACORN and Obama have a history!

Various ACORN chapters across the country, led by folks like Chicago's Madeline Talbott, staged in-your-face protests in bank lobbies and filed complaints meant to hold up mergers sought by targeted banking firms.

Unless the banks agreed to ACORN's terms - which many (understandably) did.

Talbott & Co. generally wanted them to ease down-payment requirements and ignore weak credit histories. And their intimidating tactics often necessitated police action, as at a '97 protest at Pulaski Bank & Trust in Arkansas, where activists blocked drive-through lanes.

The movement's biggest victory, of course, came when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac began buying up the riskier loans - providing fresh incentive for banks to make even more of them.

No need to recount where all that led.

Meanwhile, Obama was right there by ACORN's side all along.

"I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career," he told the group last November.

Indeed, in the early '90s, Obama was recruited by Talbott herself to run training sessions for ACORN activists.

ACORN also got funding from two charities, the Woods Fund and the Joyce Foundation, when Obama served on their boards, and from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge - the radical "education reform" outfit Obama ran from '95 to '99.

Check out this video that is going around:

It's long, but watch it!

Again I say to you, Obama will weaken this country financially and militarily!  Wake up from whatever myopic fog you are in and realize who Obam is.

He is a left-wing extremist radical whose intention is to lead us in that direction.  It has never worked anywhere and it will do nothing but take this country in direction no one could have ever conceived just a few short years ago.

Wake Up Sheeple! 

VW

Obama Is Wasting Fuel!

UPDATE:  If you are coming here from Google Finance:  Welcome.  I recommend you also read this:

Why Obama Should Not Be President!

VW

Today, there was a malfunction on Obama's campaign jet that necessitated an emergency landing.  Thankfully the jet landed safely and Obama continued on in another smaller jet. 

That set me to wondering what type of airplane the Presidential wannabes are flying around the country in these days.  The jets are usually bigger than a Gulfstream because of the press contingent that accompanies them so I did a little digging and was a little surprised. 

As it turns out, Obama's ride is an MD-80.  The MD-80 was once made by McDonnell-Douglas, but is now part of the Boeing Company.  According to Boeing, the first one entered service in 1980 and the last MD-80 came off the Long Beach assembly line in December of 1999.  The MD-80s are a good airplane, but they are starting to age a bit. 

McCain's jet is a bit newer.  It's a 737-800.  They first entered service in 1994 and are still being manufactured.

Now here's the rub.  Whose airplane has the bigger "carbon footprint"?

That's right, kids - the MD-80 uses 20-30 percent (depending upon such things as configuration and engine model) more fuel than the 737-800. 

Now I understand that there are a lot of details about leasing airplanes.  I don't care which model you lease, it's gonna cost you a couple of more drachmas then leasing a Toyota Prius.  There are such things as the total lease cost, fuel costs and crew to fly the thing.  But it begs the question -- wouldn't it be greener to use less fuel - even if it cost more to lease the airplane?

It reminds me of the difference between W. and Algore.  Bush's Texas ranch house is the epitome of green and Algore's Tennessee mansion is the Hummer of houses, sucking more energy up than some small cities.

Just another example of a Democrat telling us that we must do as they say, not as they do.

VW

Is The Party Over?

Interestingly, as I set out to write this, Newsbusters posted a poll asking who is to blame for the collapse of the Republican Party.  There were several possible responses listed here:

• George W. Bush's "compassionate conservatism"
• Expanding Medicare with prescription drugs for seniors
• Overspending while in control of Congress and White House
• Failure to reform Social Security
• Not capturing bin Laden
• Length of the war in Iraq
• Failure to stop illegal immigration
• The resignation of Tom DeLay
• Horrible leadership by Hastert and Frist
• Bush Derangement Syndrome in the media
• Other (please comment)

A case could be made for every one of these.  Certainly they have all contributed to the collapse.  As a conservative, I usually try to take the position of self-responsibility and I won't dispute the fact that we placed a loaded gun to our own head.  The first nine reasons listed are proof that we weren't all that interested in breathing in the first place.  Let's be honest.  When Republicans start acting like Democrats: engaging in debauchery, spending taxes like there is no tomorrow and engaging in various forms of corruption, what choice are we offering people?

As much as we need to take responsibility for our own classless act, we have help.  This is an assisted suicide and our own Doctor Kevorkian is the mainstream media.

Day after day in the papers and minute by minute on the networks, the press pounds out the message that the Republicans are racist, homophobic, corrupt, warmongering, child and elderly hating, sexist, environment raping oil company lovers.  When ninety percent of the press are left of center and usually vote for Democrats, we have very little voice.  When all that the public hears is vitriol against one side, the propaganda will eventually work.  People want to be nice and when you keep telling people how hateful Republicans are, they start getting the message.  Truth loses.

Sure, there's conservative talk radio, but frankly, there are relatively few voices and most people don't listen to it.  Limbaugh and Hannity have their audience, but in the scheme of things, it just isn't as effective as we think.  It's like blogging.  There are millions of bloggers, and a lot of conservative bloggers are out there.  By and large, I got the feeling that most of us were pushing Fred Thompson, but he didn't last very long at all.  Our least favorite candidate (with the exception of MoRon Paul) is the presumptive nominee.  As much as we like to think otherwise, talk radio and blogging are no match for the mainstream media. 

We also talk of the demise of the MSM like it's a done deal and frankly, it ain't!  The NYT and the WaPo may be losing subscribers, but their influence is still out there.  Look at the out and out lie promulgated by the WaPo this last week concerning McCain and Hamas.  Every major MSM outlet ran with it and after it was corrected by bloggers and the WaPo was notified, no retraction or attempt to rectify the wrong has been made.  It lends credence to the old Mark Twain truism: A lie gets half way around the world before the truth gets its pants on.

Ann Coulter is some how the devil in long legs, but Keith Olbermann is a moderate reincarnation of Edward Murrow.  Rush Limbaugh is a hate-filled bigot, but Randi Rhodes is a compassionate talker.  Fox News is run by the RNC, but CNN, MSNBC ABC and CBS are somehow nonpartisan - except when they ask Obama tough questions.

Movies are constantly portraying conservatives, military people, and businessmen as evil and contemptible figures bent on subjugating or destroying innocents.  Add to this the left's stranglehold on public education and higher education, is it any wonder we are dying? 

We are dying because we seem to not have the will to fight it.  We've allowed everyone to define us and we take it lying down.  The DNC and the Democrats can run some of the nastiest ads against us, yet when President Bush tells the truth about appeasement, the press and the Democrats cast us as liars and then lie to prove their point.

We aren't dead yet and death is not inevitable if we don't want it to be.  We need to stop trying to play nice.  I don't advocate breaking laws and I certainly don't want my party to do that, but when it comes to politics, we need to fight back just as hard and just as viciously.  Being nice is not going to win us any friends in the press.  They perceive that as weakness on our part and consider it to be a victory for them.  Take off the gloves for heaven's sake!  Hit them where they are vulnerable. 

Take this most recent incident concerning appeasement.  The Democrats really didn't deny it, they accused us of playing dirty.  They accused us of being mean.  They even had to make stuff up to show that McCain was for appeasement.

When they level a spurious charge, fight back.  Go for the underbelly.  The concept of compassionate conservatism was a lousy idea.   We need to be as compassionate to the Democrats as they are to us, which is to say - not compassionate at all.

We have a disadvantage.  The press is against us and it is difficult to get our message out, but we need to find new ways to do it.  We need to network better and we need to quit being ashamed of our conservatism.  We need to stop being intimidated by the shrieking left-wing extremists.  We need to start labeling these people as extremists because they are extreme. 

We need to stop thinking that if we use a little harsher rhetoric, they won't love us.   Forget about it because they won't love you anyway.   Who cares?  We need to go after the undecided and we need to show them in the most graphic way how socialism will negatively impact their life.  We need get down and dirty and play the game our way.

In the past few days, there's been some discussion amongst ourselves concerning this topic and as much as I'd like to think my two cents here will make a penny's worth of difference, I'd be under my own delusion.  That said, I hope someone will see this and start thinking on their own.  I hope someone will talk to someone who will talk to someone who might be in a position to actually do something. 

Call it a dream, not a delusion.

VW

The Occasional Eloquence Of George W. Bush

Eloquence and President Bush are usually two mutually exclusive concepts.  Let's be honest.  Bush is not anyone's idea of an orator.  However, every now and then, Mr. Bush nails it.  Of course I'm talking about his speech at the Knesset today.  Speaking about President Ahmadinajahd, he said this:

“Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is - the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history,” the president said.

When you have a regime bent upon conquest of their neighbors, negotiations are usually only done to buy themselves time.  Such was the case with Hitler's signature on the agreement negotiated by Neville Chamberlain.  History is replete with similar "agreements".

An "ingenious argument" will not change a bully's mind.  You can only negotiate with such people only from a position of strength.  They only understand brute force.  They understand that if you try and talk with nothing to back up your talk, they will win, you will lose and winning the larger battle will be that much more difficult.

If you try and buy off the bully by offering him something he values, that may work for the short haul, but soon, our bully will be back and asking for even more. 

Obama and the Democrats are howling because they say it's a mean and nasty thing to say, but Obama has indicated he will try and negotiate with terrorists.  If it didn't hit the mark, Obama wouldn't be squealing.

Everyone wants peace.  I don't want a false peace, giving away the store to bullies.  Negotiations haven't worked with North Korea and they won't work with Iran. 

I'm open, liberals.  Tell me what argument or deal Obama could make that will work with Hamas, Ahmadinajahd, or any other bully you choose. 

(Queue Jeopardy theme here)

VW

Why Obama Should Not Be President II

Last February, I wrote a post titled, "Why Obama Should Not Be President".  In that post, I discussed Obama's view of the military and why that would jeopardize this country's security.  Yesterday, Obama again told us why he should not be President - this time he aimed his remarks at the very heart of America.

At a fundraiser in Terre Haute, IN that was closed to the press (natch!), someone recorded a video of Obama (oops!) saying:

"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them," Obama, an Illinois senator, said.

"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations," he said. (Emphasis added)

This is typical liberal elitism.  You people out there in the small towns and rural areas are considered to be nothing but uneducated rubes who marry your siblings, drink your moonshine and attend your KKK rallies.  You are too stupid to understand your world and the events that shape it.  This drives you into your churches where you burn your sacrifices and crosses.  When you go home to your double-wide, you sit out on your porch with your three dogs, four junk cars in the yard and and knee-high weeds for a lawn, drink your Budweiser and shoot at outsiders (especially if they are a different color)  with your shotgun or assault rifle.

Trust me, that isn't much of an exaggeration of how liberals think.  To many of them, Conservatives and poor white people are not much more than knuckle-dragging, racist rubes.  I admit, I'm generalizing a little myself, but I'll bet I'm a bit closer to the mark.  Trust me, I've gotten comments from some of these people.

Obama's attitude is clear here and his clear disregard for the the values and beliefs of middle America is blatantly on display.

It's just one more reason why Barak Obama does not deserve to be the President of this country.

VW