Biden Starves Poor Kids To Push Transgender Agenda

No, this isn’t authoritarian at all! Everything is totally fine here :)

Gun Control Activist Says it “Makes Sense” to Avoid Talk of Gun Ban… “ For Now.”

If you want a depressing look at how politics is trumping policy in the congressional response to the shooting in Uvalde, Texas, look no further than this report from The Hill on the current state of the gun control debate in Washington, D.C.

While the headline rightly notes that Joe Biden and congressional Democrats are not on the same page in their anti-gun talking points, with Biden pushing for a ban on so-called assault weapons (and maybe even 9mm handguns) and Senate Democrats focused on expanding background checks and giving grants to states to implement “red flag” gun seizure laws (House Democrats have their own legislative package that they’re teeing up, which includes a ban on “large capacity” magazines but no ban on modern sporting rifles), my big takeaway is that even the anti-gun senators hoping to use the horrific events in Uvalde to impose new restrictions on gun owners aren’t pretending that what they’re working on would have prevented that atrocity from taking place.

“It’s really a study of incrementalism, I think that’s what [Sen.] Chris Murphy is doing,” said Ross K. Baker, a professor of political science at Rutgers University, referring to the lead Democratic negotiator on gun control.

“He’s come to the realization that if he leads with an assault weapons ban, it’s not going to go anywhere. To get the 10 Republicans you need to break the filibuster, you can’t lead with a strong right hand. You’ve got to spar a little bit,” he said.

Murphy (D-Conn.) says he wants to get something done that saves lives, even if it doesn’t directly respond to the recent mass shootings in Buffalo, N.Y., and Uvalde, where in each incident 18-year-old shooters deployed AR-15–style rifles.

“Republicans are not willing to support everything that I support, like banning assault weapons. But I really think that we could pass something that saves lives and breaks this logjam that we’ve had for 30 years,” Murphy said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday.

Even some gun control activists are willing to hush up about their desire for a gun ban for fear of scuttling the current talks that are underway.

Alex Barrio, the director of advocacy for gun violence prevention policy at the Center for American Progress, pointed out that keeping a proposed assault weapons ban on the back burner keeps Democratic divisions out of the spotlight.

“There are also Democrats that do not support an assault weapons ban. We know that [Sen.] Joe Manchin is one of them. That being said, keeping off the table for now makes sense,” he said.

Sens. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Angus King (I-Maine), Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.) voted with Manchin (D-W.Va.) and every Senate Republican against Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-Calif.) proposal to ban assault weapons during the Senate’s last extended gun control debate, in 2013.

You know who else hasn’t signed on to the current “assault weapons” ban bill gathering dust in the Senate? Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, the husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and the co-founder of the gun control group that bears her name. There’s no doubt that Kelly and Giffords back a ban, but Kelly is also running for re-election to a full six-year term this fall and has been very quiet about pushing for more gun control legislation since he won a special election to fill the remaining term of the late John McCain in 2020.

Kelly might not be able to keep his anti-gun opinions to himself for long, however. Anti-gun activists, including Barrio, say they’ll push for a performative vote on banning modern sporting rifles if the Senate doesn’t pass something that the gun control lobby can call a win.

“If Republicans pull back from these negotiations … if the Republicans refuse to do anything and they decide at the end that they’re going to be 50 votes ‘no’ on everything,” even proposals to encourage red flag laws, “then I do think the assault weapons [ban] does need to go on the floor, there does need to be a vote,” Barrio said.

Christian Heyne, vice president of policy at Brady, a group that advocates for gun control, said, “I certainly think the responsible call to action right now is to call for an assault weapons ban vote.”

“These are weapons with tactical features designed for the battlefield to make these weapons more lethal, which is why they are the connective tissue between so many of these mass-casualty shootings,” he said.

Yeah, about that. According to the FBI’s recent report on 61 active shooter incidents in 2021, 48 of them involved the use of a handgun, while just 10 involved the use of a rifle (several incidents involved suspects with both rifles and handguns, and there were a few instances of a shotgun being used by the attacker as well).

Rifles just aren’t used in a lot of crimes, period. The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report for 2019 documented 364 homicides in which a rifle of any kind was used as a murder weapon. That’s less than the 1,476 homicides in which knives or cutting weapons were used, the 397 homicides committed with the use of blunt objects like hammers, and the 600 homicides committed by individuals using hands, fists, and feet.

Not that any of that matters to anti-gun politicians hoping to use the tragedy in Uvalde to chalk up a win of some sort. What we’re watching play out in Washington, D.C. is a strategy based on the politics of the moment, with public safety a secondary concern at best.

Gun control activist says it “makes sense” to avoid talk of gun ban… “for now.”

Not Getting Easier! Prep Like Your LIFE Depends On it!

Why We Should Never Apologize For Our RACE

I’m being heavily censored on social media right now so I’d appreciate your follow on the pages below if you’re on any of them! Also, if you enjoy my videos, please share them! Every bit helps spread the message.

Hillary Clinton: ‘No One Actually Needs an AR-15’

After enjoying years of taxpayer-funded protection from agencies and departments, many of which avail themselves of AR-15 rifles, Hillary Clinton tweeted Friday, “No one actually needs an AR-15.”

Her tweet:

This is not the first time Clinton has a taken a position against guns that runs totally counter to the fact she has spent many years of her life living with the peace of mind that comes from being protected by good guys with guns.

Following the December 2, 2015, San Bernardino attack that killed 14, Clinton said, “Guns, in and of themselves…will not make Americans safer.”

She reacted to push-back against gun-free zones and calls for more citizens armed for self-defense by saying, “…Arming more people–to do what?–I think it’s not the appropriate response to terrorism.”

On January 3, 2016, Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump pushed back against Hillary’s comments, saying, “Hillary said that guns don’t keep you safe. If she really believes that she should demand that her heavily armed bodyguards quickly disarm!”

Amid President Biden’s current gun control push Breitbart News pointed out he is protected by the very guns he wants to bar Americans from owning.

Hillary Clinton: ‘No One Actually Needs an AR-15’

Don’t Bother Me With Your ‘Common Sense’ Gun-Grabbing Ideas, I’m Not Playing the Game

Over the last two weeks, the United States has had three high-profile mass shootings, Buffalo, NY; Uvalde, TX; and Tulsa, OK. So naturally, the gun-grabbers are on the attack, and most Republican politicians are running like scalded dogs from any defense of the Second Amendment and the God-given right of free men and free women to own and carry the means to preserve their lives and the lives of others.

There are reports that a bipartisan group of ten senators is working to come up with a gun-control package that will get 60 votes in the Senate. The Democrat contribution to the group is Chris Murphy (CT), Richard Blumenthal (CT), Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), Joe Manchin (WV) Martin Heinrich (NM). Our Vichy Republicans are Pat Toomey (PA), Susan Collins (ME), Lindsey Graham (SC), and Bill Cassidy (LA). John Cornyn (TX) is leading the GOP effort…that should make you feel really comfortable.

Last night, an obviously addled Joe Biden became a caricature of the old-man-shouting-at-the-clouds as he burbled “Enough” and demanded that we “do something.” See my colleague Bonchie’s post on the speech at Joe Biden’s Gun Control Speech Was Washington in a Nutshell.

WATCH Video:

There are two powerful impulses at work here. The first I would attribute to the modernist heresy and the anti-Christian belief in the perfectability of man and the perfectability of society by using government to eradicate all evils.

Evil is mistaken for mental illness because the SmartSet™ could never bring themselves to believe Evil exists. It does exist. Evil is real. It is not a mere philosophical concept. Evil will find a way of acting out. The denial of the existence of Evil leads to a belief that with enough systems, we can prevent the wrong people from acquiring firearms and using them to commit crimes. We can’t.

The ideas being circulated are as old and tired as the members of the group discussing them: a ban on assault weapons, a limit on magazine capacity, waiting periods, age limits, and Red Flag laws. Based on comments by the Dotard-in-Chief, it seems that outlawing 9mm and .223-caliber ammunition could be on the table. We can’t, you know, have sh** in the hands of mere citizens that could “blow your lungs out.” Mass shootings occur in all jurisdictions, even those like New York, that virtually ban modern sporting rifles. These laws don’t work where they are in place, so there is no reason to assume they will work if we impose them on still more people.

The second impulse is political cowardice.

M. Stanton Evans, journalist and former president of the American Conservative Union, said, “We have two parties here, and only two. One is the evil party, and the other is the stupid party. … I’m very proud to be a member of the stupid party. … Occasionally, the two parties get together to do something that’s both evil and stupid. That’s called bipartisanship.”

The heady combination of evil and stupid is what is being brewed on Capitol Hill. No one actually believes that anyone on the Democrat side of this issue is negotiating in good faith. Their objective is to abolish the right of Americans to own and use firearms. There might be any number of noble motivations lurking behind the scenes, but the common ground they are searching for makes firearms ownership more difficult for those who can’t afford private security guards.

Given the prevalence of “scary black rifles” in the country and the extraordinary rarity of their use in committing crimes, it is difficult to conclude that modern sporting rifles or high-capacity magazines constitute a threat to anything other than the ability of the government to control its citizens. It shouldn’t be hard to stand up and pronounce this truth, but for our so-called leaders, it is. Making this gutlessness more absurd is that, according to a post by my colleague Sister Toldjah, see Democrats Hit Two Massive Roadblocks on the Path to Gun Control Legislation. A majority of Americans believe we have enough restrictions on firearms and their ownership.

Notably, things that could make schools safer, like hardening points of ingress and training teachers or parent volunteers to be proficient in firearms and armed, are not on the table. That, I’m convinced, is no accident.

I’m not interested in discussing any of these “common sense solutions” because, in my view, they are either a greater evil than the Evil they purport to prevent, or they are meaningless acts of virtue signaling. In particular, the “Red Flag laws” place your liberty and property in the hands of the nutbags at the American Psychiatric Association, who literally decide what mental illness is. And, by extension, that makes you vulnerable to anyone who doesn’t like you or your politics. If you don’t want a modern sporting rifle and 30-round magazine, don’t buy them. If you want to know why I need them, I need them because fuck you.

I will not engage in the process of negotiating away my rights and the rights of my children because you don’t like guns and are afraid. I don’t need your approval. I will not play this stupid game.

Don’t Bother Me With Your 'Common Sense’ Gun-Grabbing Ideas, I’m Not Playing the Game