THE PEN IS MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD (GUN)

One argument used by those who support taking away Americans Guns or support restrictions on the right to bear arms is, that our forefathers could not have imagined the types of guns that exist today compared to the firearms they had at that time. They say that the second amendment was never meant to cover machine guns and other such weapons.  And the Lapdog Media utilizes their freedom of speech and the press, to spread Obama's agenda on the subject.

To quote a phrase, “The pen is mightier than the sword.” and not only mightier but far more dangerous than any gun in the hands of a citizen.

Democrats argue that guns today do not fall under the intent of the 2nd amendment, couldn't one make a similar argument for mediums that are used for the expression of the 1st amendment. At the time of the founding the only tools for expressing speech were written or printed word. There was no way our forefathers could have imagined a media that could broadcast instantly to any home across the country. They could not have envisioned the invention of radio, television, or the internet.

They could not have imagined a "News" medium editing video tape to alter what somebody says (as MSNBC has done several times)

The modern media holds great influence over the public and can be misused in the wrong hands to do great harm. The power still exists to spread misinformation and with the ability to disseminate information so quickly wouldn’t it be rational to place restrictions on these mediums that could never have been imagined by men who lived over 200 years ago?

How would you liberals feel if a republican administration said they were going to start making news casters pass background checks?  Have a psychological background check? Or say that only a certain type of news can be aired or printed?  That would be wrong, just as it is wrong with what democrats want to do with guns.  The common denominator is that both are "RIGHTS", and they should not be infringed on.

But because we are becoming a Country of Men and not of Laws, these are the types of things that will continue to happen, and the scary question is, how far are you willing to go?...how many rights are you willing to give up????

WAKE UP AMERICA

WHITE HOUSE.....WE CAN KILL AMERICANS IF WE SEE FIT.....

A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” — even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.

The 16-page memo, a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s most secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects abroad, including those aimed at American citizens, such as the September 2011 strike in Yemen that killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes.

Carney’s response is tailor made for quick filing under “The opposite of what he’d have said if Bush were president”:

Here is the video.

“These strikes are legal, they are ethical and they are wise,” Carney said.  Are you KIDDING!!!

The White House defended the guidelines for targeting Americans in drone strikes as "fully consistent” with the Constitution.  Could somebody tell me where in the Constitutions that it says it's OK for the Government to take out Americans, because they are believed to be part of "an associated force".  Who decides what is an "associated force"??????

If this were George Bush or any Republican President doing this, the lapdaog media and the Democrats would be having anurisims trying to get to a micrphone to tell how much they are outraged at the fact that the President can kill American Citizens.....

WAKE UP AMERICA!!

WHY OBAMA LIED ABOUT BENGHAZI......

From Congressional hearings this week: 

On the night of the terrorist attack on Benghazi, President Obama was briefed only 1 time, about an hour after the terrorist attack started and he was never called again. 

For the next 7 hours of the attack, Obama never called to check and see what was going on, were we sending help to the Americans on the ground, was our Ambassador safe???  Nothing!!! 

Obama is the Commander in Chief, shouldn't he have been at least a little interested???? 

Also, Secretary Panetta and General Dempsey said that they knew that night that it was a terrorist attack.  So why did everybody in the Obama administration lie about the attack with a story about a You-Tube Video?  Why for 2 weeks did Obama continue to say we don't know what happened?  Why did Ms Rice go on the lapdog media 5 days later telling the You-Tube Story? 

Why would they all lie??  Oh wait, there was an election coming up.....if the American people knew that al-Qaeda was not week and on the run, like Obama told us, maybe it would have cost him some votes.  After all it's all about Obama.....

THE LIBERAL VIEW ON KILLING BABIES AND GUNS.....

Liberals are quick to defend and condone killing babies and say that if laws were put in place to stop abortions, girls would be going to the back alleys to get their abortions.

......Conservatives say that all humans have the right to life and we should not be killing babies.

Conservatives are quick to defend and condone the right to "Bear Arms" and say that if laws are put in place to restrict the right to "Bear Arms" criminals would be going to the back alleys to get their guns and bullets.

.......Liberals say that “We the People” don’t have rights to “Bear Arms” and that guns kill people.


Can you see where liberals are out of touch with reality and morality……
In both cases Liberals refuse to deal with the real problem, human responsibility and behavior.