giffords (2)

4063679178?profile=original            Former Astronaut Mark Kelly and NRA VP  & CEO Wayne LaPierre

                     Battle at U.S. Senate Hearing over Gun Control

Legitimate gun owners and supporters of the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment have good reason to be outraged by Mark Kelly’s publicity trick to further gun control efforts in America. According to published Fox News reports, the former astronaut and husband of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, a shooting victim 2 years ago in Tucson, Arizona purchased an AR-15-style rifle and a 45.-caliber handgun.

This comes on the heels of his highly publicized efforts in both Congress as well as in Colorado to assault the U.S. Constitutional rights of legal gun owners to own weapons. In fact, his comments which he posted on Facebook, according to published reports seem disingenuous, when he states that people could easily buy similar guns at gun shows or over the internet without background checks.

The fact is, Kelly did actually do exactly what other law-abiding citizens in Arizona or any other state in the union have done beforehand. The Diamondback Police Supply gun shop where he reportedly purchased the weapons from, followed state law and had him undergo the mandatory background check.

Well, surprise, surprise he passed without any hiccups. So what was his point?

Many supporters of gun rights have weighed in on his open display of reactionary theater, by correctly pointing out that his entire stunt accomplished was to bring attention to his and his wife’s newly formed gun control organization named, Americans for Responsible Solutions.

It appears that the organization’s leader, Kelly, was actually seeking to create irresponsible reactions from fellow gun control sympathizers who would somehow rise up in hysteria and join up or gin up more donations to his national gun control cause.

What Kelly does not seem to want to accept, is that as tragic and woefully unfortunate the mass shooting of his wife and others on that horrendous day in the Tucson area shopping center, it was not performed by law abiding citizens going on a rampage.

Her attempted assassination was due to largely in part to relaxed mental health laws dealing with mentally unbalanced and severely disturbed individuals that the mental health system in Arizona and other states have not be responsible for.

Kelly, instead resorted to the quick, the easy, and the attention-headline grabbing techniques which are assured to raise the ire of mainstream media liberal heads. The goal of course is to place greater pressure on states like Colorado, which was recently caught up in a monumental gun control pitched battle in their democrat controlled state legislature. That highly restrictive gun control legislation has now been signed into law.  What states are next to fall victim?

( click to read more )

Read more…

“Left-wing Lies Tie Slain Judge to 'Hateful Radio Talk Shows'”  


Slain Judge Roll (Target of Death Threats

for Sensible Immigration Rulings)

Personally Applauded by Talk Radio


            The word “assassin” is a derivative of the word “hashish” due to the fact that the original Arabian “assassins” did their work influenced by an ultra-THC-laden drug which steadied their nerves.   “Leftist pot smoker” Jared Loughner (who killed Federal Judge John M. Roll, a nine-year old girl and four other innocent victims; and wounded a U.S. Representative and thirteen other unlucky standers-by) according to the latest left-wing propaganda would have shot Judge Roll on purpose rather than incidentally because hate-filled right-wing talk show hosts were harassing him . . . WOW! That may be the LIE OF THE YEAR. Here’s the background and the truth . . . .

            There seems only mild doubt that the deranged Tucson, AZ, shooter Loughner’s intended assassination target was Gabrielle “Gabby” Giffords, a popular Democrat elected three times to the United States House of Representatives. It was after all Giffords who was conducting her “Congress on the Corner” event and Giffords he shot at point-blank range and presumably whom he shot first (the details are still not clear). Nevertheless, Loughner’s surprise harvest was the killing of federal judge John M. Roll, a conservative who has long been the target of death threats particularly for his immigration rulings over the years. John M. Roll, the chief federal judge in Arizona who was killed in the attack near Tucson, was described as “a tireless advocate for his district and no stranger to the risks of public service;” risks which included numerous death threats. The most famous of Roll’s decisions has angered many sympathetic to the “rights” of illegal immigrants.

            In this highly publicized appeals trial, Roll (the presiding judge in the Ninth District Court of Appeals) found himself twice in an unusual illegal immigrant case wherein sixteen illegal immigrants were suing an Arizona rancher, Roger Barnett -- a Clint Eastwood wannabe -- who apparently had rounded up at least 12,000 illegals on his land since 1998 and turned them over to the U.S. Border Patrol. Barnett’s Cross Rail Ranch lies upon a major corridor for illegal crossings and Barnett has a very large dog and a very large gun. In the case in question, Barnett accosted eleven men and five women on his land in 2009 . . . .

            The resulting suit from the trespassers was frivolous to say the least. The illegals wanted $32 million from Barnett for “violating their civil rights.” In his first contact with the case Judge Roll ruled in favor of the illegals’ lawyers who wanted the case to be tried before an American jury rather than handled administratively by the Border Patrol. The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) which represented the illegal border-crossers aimed to make an example of Barnett for his “citizens' arrest tactics” which they said was dangerous and clearly stomped upon the illegals’ rights. After the jury trial was lost, the MALDEF lawyers appealed the case. 

            Again, Judge Roll found himself adjudicating “Barnett vs. the Illegal 16.” Judge Roll's decision against the illegals explained that “illegal aliens have no constitutionally protected right to travel in the U.S. and that people, like the Barnetts, who live in close proximity to the border can make a reasonable assumption that large groups of people they encounter hiding or trespassing on their land are doing so with the aid of smugglers, a federal felony for which private action is authorized under Arizona citizens' arrest and criminal trespass law."  Thus the Barnetts who were represented by the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) won the case which is then tried to appeal to a higher court. IRLI lawyers easily dismantled the MALDEF argument that the sixteen illegal immigrant plaintiffs were detained by Barnett only because of their ethnicity, in this case all sixteen were Hispanics. 

A notable side-effect of the case was the revelation that the Mexican government was using these impoverished illegals to further its agenda which acknowledges that $50 billion a year in that country’s income arrives courtesy of illegal aliens sending money orders home to Mexico.  Since on the one hand Mexican authorities are fighting a to the death battle against drug cartels and people-traffickers headed north and American guns headed south . . . conflicted interest is clearly on display here . . . .

Judge Roll who under ordinary times might have rejected the MALDEF maneuvering right from the git-go by allowing the Border Patrol to continue with normal administrative functions . . . erred on the side of political correctness and put himself literally inside the crosshairs. Four death threats were received by Roll from Hispanics upset by the case and he was advised by Federal Marshall David Gonzalez not to file charges against the men who’d threatened him.   Jared Loughner, of course, enters the situation here . . . .

Loughner’s listed his two favorite books as the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf and posted a very strange internet video depicting a wandering illegal alien Arab burning the flag. On top of all this, it’s believed that Loughner is the Daily Kos blogger “BoyBlue” who wrote two days before the shooting that “Rep. Giffords “was dead to me.” If so here’s what we know about BoyBlue: 

1.       He’s an online supporter of gay activism . . . .

2.     He purportedly helped raise money for Giffords’ re-election.

3.     He felt betrayed by Giffords’ vote against Nancy Pelosi (ex-Speaker of the House) for Minority Leader following the 2010 elections which turned the House to Republican control. Most of us have seen the weird video of Pelosi hugging and kissing John Boehner. The vote was meaningless; Pelosi won the Minority Leader post easily.

4.    Online it went down like this . . . BoyBlue’s original posting, dated Jan. 6, 2011, "My Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords voted against Pelosi and is now dead to me" was scrubbed hours after the massacre on January 8, then reposted when someone at the Daily Kos, impersonating "BoyBlue" made an apology. Obviously trying to keep the Daily Kos from being the supportive element of the vitriolic element that led to the tragedy . . . which made it easier to blame “the TEA Party and other hate-groups and their violent rhetoric” and made it easier to cover-up BoyBlue being Loughner, IF, indeed that is the case.

5.     Loughner as BoyBlue says he raised $100,000 for Giffords.  This needs to be verified. This seems highly dubious; Loughner doesn’t appear to have had the organization skills for any long-term commitment such as this.

6.     Undeniable, however, is that Loughner had been a frequent visitor at Giffords’ Congress on the Corner events over the last three and a half years. “Stalking” may be too strong a word, 

 but from a creepy fellow like this:  support and affection can be a dangerous thing.

7.     IF Loughner is the BoyBlue blogger, then the Jan. 6, posting sounds very much like the words of a jilted or scorned “lover.” Perhaps we’ll find out more since the FBI is involved and Pima Sheriff Clarence Dupnik doesn’t have the final say in the investigation . . . .

You've seen left-wing statements (shall we call them "lies?") that tie Judge Roll's death threats to "hateful right-wing" talk shows and the Giffords' assassination attempt to "conservative politics as usual" . . . how impressed are you now with these arguments?   As Paul Harvey loved to say, “Now you know the rest of the story,” well at least part of it.


Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Read more…