Any more doubts on media bias?

ABC and NBC did not have a problem running an hour long piece of White House propaganda that is pro B.O.Care last June, but they are refusing to run a commercial that is critical of B.O.Care. Just in case any of you liberals are in denial about media bias leaning towards the left, what would you call this? Liberals go on and on about freedom of speech and a free press and blah, blah, blah. But if they truly cared about those things, I think little red flags should be going up in the back of their liberal brains. A "free press" that only totes the line of the White House. I'm sure I'll be called a whacko for saying this, but doesn't this smack of dictatorial regimes, such as Stalin, Hussein, Mussolini, etc.? In case you don't get it; ABC and NBC are attempting to control the information that goes out about this administration. They only want you to hear information that is flattering or suits their liberal agenda. They have lost all sense of objectivity, and are certainly not for a free will of the people. These networks are merely arms of the democrat party. That is what something is, if it's pro-something, and anti-something else, and these networks are without a doubt pro-liberal causes, and anti-conservative cause.

This is just one more thing that exposes Democrats and liberals for what they are. They claim to be for individual freedoms, but the truth is, they only care for their own, liberal freedoms. They don't really want freedom of speech, they only want freedom of liberal speech. ABC and NBC tote the line for B.O., yet liberals want to shut down A.M. talk radio with Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives. Just the same with gun rights. Liberals are always pointing to the Bill of Rights, yet the Second Amendment is constantly under fire from liberals. I guess it just doesn't count as a right. It gets a little tiresome to constantly have to justify my rights, while Liberals just assume their rights are sacred.

ABC, NBC Won't Air Ad Critical of Obama's Health Care Plan - Political News - FOXNews.com

Posted using ShareThis

Thursday at the Range

Today was a good day for blasting. The above target is the FN Five-seveN at 50 yards. Not bad; Two Xs, two 10s and three 9s. The pasties are from the Browning Buckmark .22. I shot about 40 rounds of 7.62 NATO reloads through the FNAR. Sweet. I love that gun. I would have posted that target, but it started to rain, and I didn't feel like running downrange to retrieve it. It was shot up pretty good, and not pretty. I did a little blasting with the .357, too. It's an EAA Windicator that I just got back from getting some warranty work done, and since it's my bedside gun, I wanted to test fire it, to make sure it was running smoothly.

Funny thing about the name, Windicator -- It's made in Germany, and I'm thinking it was probably supposed to be Vindicator -- which makes a lot more sense than Windicator, which doesn't mean anything. I'm wondering if this was a "lost in translation" moment between the Germans and their US distributors, since Germans pronounce their Ws like Vs.

Disenfranchising the CIA not such a great idea

Those that know best in the B.O. administration have decided it would be a good idea to persecute members of the CIA who interrogate terrorists. Eric Holder most specifically, but don't fool yourself, it goes all the way to the top, the "second coming" himself. We have entrusted member of the military, defense, CIA and other agencies to protect us and keep us safe. There is a bond, a trust between our defenders and our government. It goes something like this, "we are going to send you in harms way, ask you to risk your life, and ask you to do horrible things that even if you survive, will haunt you every day for the rest of your lives. In return, we have your back." errr.... apparently, not so much. What happens when that trust is broken and those valiant men and women cannot trust the government? In the medical profession, it's called defensive medicine. Some doctors are so afraid of being sued for malpractice that they practice medicine defensively. Everything they do and every decision they make is based on not being sued, and covering their butt in a court room. As you can imagine, this is not the best way to practice medicine. Care is not always what it should be. Now the CIA is going to be asked to practice defensive defense. When collecting intelligence, their actions won't be guided by what is the best way to collect, it will be based on protecting their butts from Eric Holder and B.O.

This is just one more reason why the B.O. administration is not going to make it to a second term. He is stripping the powers from our intelligence collectors at a time when it's need most. He's making a crusade against other Americans, when he should be focusing on the enemy (just as he asked Americans to turn in other Americans for "fishy" emails that spoke out against B.O.Care.) All it is going to take is one significant terrorist attack that could have been prevented by the CIA interrogating terrorists, and B.O. and his people are finished in the next elections. Theoretically, anyway. We all know the Democrats can spin and twist words to the point that the average American -- especially their liberal puppy-dog followers -- will forget or become confused about what happened. We have all seen them do it before. No one blames Bill Clinton, for example, for stripping our HUMINT (Human Intelligence -- the operatives "on the ground." These are what you associate with the term "spy.") assets dry, which very well could have prevented 9/11 and the 2 war we are in now.

What are some of the things Holder will be going after? It is not even about torturing prisoners. It is about threatening to torture prisoners. It is about cocking the pistol in front of them and pointing it to their head as if you are going to shoot them, even if you don't shoot them. It's about turning on the drill in front of them to scare them. OK, for one thing, if they threaten someone to get info, and get info without even harming them, I'm good with that. If they have to burn out someone's eyeballs and cut off their 'nads to get info, I'm good with that, too. It's as simple as this: These are bad people. These bad people have information. This information is about other bad people. These other bad people want to kill Americans and other innocent people. As far as I'm concerned, do what you have to do to protect us. But, I'm not in charge. What this says, to liberals like B.O. and Eric Holder, the lives of little children and other innocent people who would be killed in another terrorist attack are not worth the cost of properly torturing terrorists. Or, I guess even the threat of torture.

We are becoming a very weak minded people.

Probe of CIA Imperils Interagency Trust - Political News - FOXNews.com

Posted using ShareThis

The Bachelor

Last week Brad Pit reiterated that he would not marry Angelina until gays were allowed to legally marry in every state in the US. BRILLIANT! And we thought this guy was a dolt. Every guy who wants to stay a bachelor should be taking note -- and what liberal chick is not just going to eat this stuff up? Just insert your/her favorite cause into the ultimatum, and you are golden.

"Uh, dear...I'm not going to marry you until every baby seal on the planet is saved." Not only will she be OK with it, but she will admire you for not marrying her. She would tell her friends, "Oh, he's so sweet. He refused to marry me. I just love him."

Other "worthwhile" causes: every tree in North America is hugged, cars run on sunlight and not one single carbon-burning vehicle is left, poverty is erased from our planet, no more wars. Think of your own, it's pretty simple.

Travel Icon Says He'll Avoid Arizona Because of Gun Laws - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

What a jerk -- Arthur Frommer says he will not go to Arizona, because of their gun laws. Tell him in Wisconsin we open carry, so maybe he will stay out of our state, too. Actually, most states allow for some type of open carry, so what's a liberal jerk to do? I see from his books, he's been to China, a communist country that is notorious for brutally oppressing its citizens. He's been to Japan, who historically has brutally oppressed all its neighbors. German, who historically... enough said. South Africa (apartheid). Rio de Janeiro, a very violent city, as well as Brazil in general which has one of the largest gun export industries in the world. Not to mention New York and Los Angeles, who of which don't allow open carry, but guns will surely get you killed pretty fast in those places.

Give me an H! Give me a Y! Give me a P! Give me a O! Give me a CRITE! What's that spell?!

Travel Icon Says He'll Avoid Arizona Because of Gun Laws - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

Posted using ShareThis

Tim Pawlenty foresees GOP surge if health plan is rejected - Andy Barr - POLITICO.com

This is a great article. I like Pawlenty's line, "The only thing growing faster than the federal deficit and debt is Chris Matthews' man crush on Obama"

Tim Pawlenty foresees GOP surge if health plan is rejected - Andy Barr - POLITICO.com

Shared via AddThis

The future

Yesterday was a good day -- I helped out at my gun club with a Youth Shoot sponsored by Sierra Club International. I worked at the .22 rifle range. A couple of kids had never even picked up a gun before (one had no idea she was even supposed to look through the sites), and it was very rewarding to help them out. At first they were a bit timid, and missed the first couple of shots (at a iron swing down target). After some coaching, they began to hit the target, and once they locked on, they generally didn't miss again. It was very rewarding to see their smile and to see their excitement. It was pretty cool to see a lot of the kids had done quite a bit of shooting -- that means someone is taking them. And, I have to say, the girls were just as good if not better than the boys. And the crowd was about 50/50 girl/boy. I'm glad to see kids having fun shooting. The bad thing is, there weren't as many kids there as what was planned for. I have a feeling that a lot of that was because the state fair is going this weekend.

B.O.

It used to be that only Illinois stunk, but now the whole country has B.O.

You know, I'm claiming the B.O. thing, I haven't heard anyone else call Barrack Obama that, yet. If they have, they can lay claim. If not, it's mine. LOL

Barack Obama holds a fire sale of America's nuclear defences in Moscow

Barack Obama holds a fire sale of America's nuclear defences in Moscow

Shared via AddThis

Health care debate goes much deeper than Health Care.

When a person speaks out against a Republican president, he/she is made out to be a brave hero by the media and liberals (one could argue that's the same thing) "He's/She's just using their freedom of speech, and they're being Patriotic," I remember hearing.. However, if a person speaks out against a Democrat president, he/she must be a Republican planted operative, or a plant from FoxNews, or a fringe lunatic, or just angry, or in the case of this president, the person must just be a racist who doesn't want a black president.

That seems to be SOP for the left. If you don't like the person's argument, just dismiss the person as someone not worthy of debating. Tear down the person. Discredit them. Now THAT's the new politics were were promised. We were promised open and fair debate. We were promised a transparent administration. However, the ObamaCare bill (I'll call it B.O. Care) is being rushed through, by President B.O., in the hopes that it gets approved BEFORE everyone gets a chance to find out what it's really about. Do you think maybe THAT'S why people are angry about it? This bill is huge. Epic even. Possibly the most important bill in the last half a century. Maybe we should take time to dissect it, debate it, and make sure it's something that will work, and work for everyone. The parts that don't work, should be replaced with parts that do.

It's not like President B.O. has everyone's best interest at heart, either. Like the deal he made with pharmaceutical companies that would double the number of years before a generic would be allowed to enter the market. This doesn't help anyone except the fat money cats. And, let me just say, I'm on the side of the pharmaceutical companies, for the most part. I think these private companies have done an incredible job of getting new and life saving drugs into the market. They spend a lot of money on research. I WANT them to get their just dues. They should be rich. However, I think the current method of regulating generic drugs is fair, and doesn't need to be lengthened.

There are a lot of reasons for people to be angry about B.O. Care, and to be honest, I think people are just as upset about the way it was presented to them, not just what's in it. Once again, B.O. stinks, and he's just proving himself less and less trustworthy.