Archive for gun control

Gun Control Distraction

Posted in uncategorized with tags , on June 30, 2022 by andelino

It’s never been about safety. It’s about power.

“I have never believed that additional gun control or federal registration of guns would reduce crime. I am convinced that a criminal who wants a firearm can get one through illegal, untraceable, unregistered sources, with or without gun control.” These aren’t the words of a Republican politician or conservative commentator. These are the words of Sen. Joe Biden before the Senate in July 1985.

Following the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr., Congress passed the Gun Control Act in 1968. But less than two decades later, many politicians had noted that this most restrictive gun law in American history largely failed to solve any problems.

Read more at “The Gun Control Distraction”

Biden Gun Advise

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on August 25, 2016 by andelino

Biden Gun Advise 02

In light of the media “feeding” frenzy which twisted Donald Trump’s words to allege he was urging “violence” against Hillary Clinton, it is interesting to note words “uttered” by Vice President Joe Biden in 2008, that need no twisting: “that Obama would have a problem if he tried to take away Biden’s gun.”

Biden made the statement while campaigning in Virginia. According to Bloomberg Politics, Biden said, “I’ll guarantee, Barack Obama ain’t taking my shotgun. So don’t buy that malarkey. They’re going to start peddling that to you.” 

He added, “I’ve got two, and if he tries to pull my Beretta he’s got a problem.” Biden’s message was clear: “Mess with my guns and you’ll have a problem.”

“Mensa” Joe Biden has always been known for “spouting” gaffes, but some of the “absurd” comments he’s made about guns and firearms owners have landed him in the most “hot” water.

Following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, the Obama administration has “touted” some controversial “gun control” measures.

Biden Gun Advise 05

In driving home the White House’s message, the vice-president has spoken out “fervently” about his contentions — but sometimes his comments have created “firestorms, furor and head-scratching.”

Here are Biden’s five most “comical, inaccurate and cringe-worthy” quotes about guns: “Buy a shotgun.”

“If you want to protect yourself, get a double-barrel shotgun.You don’t need an AR-15. It’s harder to aim, it’s harder to use, and in fact, you don’t need 30 rounds to protect yourself. Buy a shotgun. Buy a shotgun.”

Not everyone “agreed” with this assessment. Jesse Bonner, owner of Jesse’s Gun Shop in Corsicana, Texas, smacked down Biden’s claim saying “our vice president is inaccurate.”

“That would not be true. I’ve taught enough ladies to shoot all different types of firearms and I can tell you that the AR-15 is going to be better suited for a lady. It would be better for all-around home defense and it’s one of the most accurate guns out there.”

“The AR-15 is now a mainstream weapon because of its quality design and accuracy,” he added, saying that a shotgun, especially a 12-gauge, can be “difficult” to use for many people. Smaller women could have even more “trouble” firing a 12-gauge shotgun due to the “recoil.”

So it seems, at least according to some, Biden’s “advise” on the matter isn’t necessarily “rooted” in accuracy.

After giving his advice to go out and “buy a shotgun” rather than an AR-15, Biden issued, perhaps, his most “controversial” gun comment to date.

During an interview with Field and Stream, an outdoors magazine, the vice-president gave additional advice to those looking to protect themselves against would-be intruders: “Just fire the shotgun through the door.”

And, again, he said that most can ”handle a shotgun a hell of a lot better than they can a semi-automatic weapon.”

Here’s a full transcript of his comments:

Well, the way in which we measure it is—I think most scholars would say—is that as long as you have a weapon sufficient to be able to provide your self-defense. I did one of these town-hall meetings on the Internet and one guy said, “Well, what happens when the end days come? What happens when there’s the earthquake? I live in California, and I have to protect myself.”

I said, “Well, you know, my shotgun will do better for you than your AR-15, because you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door.” Most people can handle a shotgun a hell of a lot better than they can a semi-automatic weapon in terms of both their aim and in terms of their ability to deter people coming. We can argue whether that’s true or not, but it is no argument that, for example, a shotgun could do the same job of protecting you. Now, granted, you can come back and say, “Well, a machine gun could do a better job of protecting me.” No one’s arguing we should make machine guns legal.

Just shooting through a door isn’t necessarily the “best foot forward in terms of ensuring self-protection.”

Actually, this could be “criminal.” If someone told you it was perfectly “acceptable” to fire a round through a door at a “target you had not identified,” how do you think that would go over?

Biden Gun Advise 04

Only “Mensa” Biden would say best “defense” is to fire a traditional double barreled shotgun into the “air” twice.

“Now your gun is empty,” what a moron.

Earlier, Biden, once again, touted proposed “gun control” measures and took aim at the National Rifle Association (NRA).

He dismissed the “black helicopter crowd” and mocked gun owners who have “concerns” about potential government “overreach” in regulating firearms.

“Kinda scary man, the black helicopter crowd is really upset. No way that Uncle Sam can go find out whether you own a gun because we’re about to really take away all your rights and you’re not going to be able to defend yourself and we’re going to swoop down with Special Forces folks and gather up every gun in America. It’s bizarre. But that’s what’s being sold out there.”

In an MSNBC round table discussion, Biden issued a number of “controversial” quotes. Among them, he repeated familiar “attack” lines against the NRA, accusing the group of spouting “disinformation” and “paranoia.”

He also issued an “odd and fascinating” comparison, saying that some gun owners are only interested in the “feel” of a firearm in their hands.

“There is a paranoia out there. The facts are, there’s not a single solitary thing that we have proposed…this argument that there’s absolutely any constitutional violation is absolutely not there.”

Of course, Biden’s comments about gun owners who simply “like the feel of that AR-15″ will likely draw the most “ire” from gun owners.

“There is a whole new sort of group of individuals now…that never hunt at all. But they own guns for one of two reasons — self-protection, or they just like the feel of that AR-15 at the range.They like the way it feels. It’s like driving a Ferrari, you know.”

During the same MSNBC panel, Biden continued to offer up his “views” on shotguns versus AR-15s despite getting some “push back” months  before.

Acknowledging that critics have “lambasted” his assertions, he “doubled down” on them anyway, this time “warning” that AR-15’s could end up “killing” American children.

“You know, they make fun of my saying about use a shotgun if someone’s invading your home – guess what, use a shotgun on someone invading your home and you don’t kill your kids – use an AR-15, it goes through your wall and it can kill your kid in the bedroom” Biden said.

But, as CNS News pointed out, “Biden made no mention of self-defense ammunition designed for the AR-15 in order to prevent wall penetration.”


Don’t Take Legal Advice from Joe Biden

Plagiarist Fareed Zakaria

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , on January 19, 2016 by andelino

Fareed Zakaria 01

CNN host Fareed Zakaria is calling to censor social media because he was offended by The People’s Cube satire about his writings without mentioning that the satire was a “hyperbolic buildup on his own recent blog writings.”

Zakaria “cries” for government protection of his “hurt” feelings, making it clear that he “can dish it out but can’t take it.”

Taste your “own” medicine, Fareed!

Progressives have “trolled, ridiculed, satirized, maligned, insulted, bullied, and lied” about conservatives since the “inception” of the Internet. But once they see the signs of oncoming traffic, they “cry” and run to mommy – “or to the nanny state in this case” – asking to make it a “one-way” street once again, where only they can “ride their tricycles, wear funny hats, and fling poop at those whom they consider inferiors.”

Watch Fareed Zakaria on camera “wiping” his face from the poop “flung” at him.

Open letter to Fareed Zakaria from The People’s Cube

Dear Fareed,

There have been studies showing that a foreign-born author’s unique perspective can help the natives to boost their own creative thinking through the so-called “schema violation,” which occurs when our world is turned upside-down. You may argue that your “otherness” benefits and enlightens this country, with an implication that those unwilling to be enlightened by you are bigots who resent your “otherness” and won’t have their old schema to be violated by a newcomer.

Like you, I am a foreign-born author whose English is a second, or, rather, a third language; I know what it feels to be “the other.” I also like to help the natives to boost their creative thinking by turning their reality upside-down and sending their temporal and spatial cues off-kilter (my website, The People’s Cube, is one such big schema violation). I don’t resent anyone’s “otherness” as long as they don’t attempt to make me comply to theirs. In sum, I am not concerned with your ethnic or cultural “otherness.” It is your ideological “otherness” that bothers me, which you happen to share with native-born misguided “progressives.”

Now that we got the implication of bigotry out of the way, let’s get down to business.

On January 2, one of our contributors posted a satirical response to your Washington Post article where you apparently gloated over the premature deaths of white males in America. Our author took your argument to its logical conclusion, adding the need to exterminate white females as well – through Jihad, rape, and sex slavery as recently seen in Europe and elsewhere. This parody wasn’t meant to be taken as factual reporting, given the context of our website and especially considering the author’s credentials at the top: Chedoh, Kommissar of Viral Infections, Hero of Change, Prophet of the Future Truth.

On January 14, you responded to our satire in your Washington Post article titled, Bile, venom and lies: How I was trolled on the Internet, and today you started your show on CNN with a segment titled, Fareed’s Take: I was the target of Internet trolling, in which you were mostly reading your earlier article from the teleprompter. Among other things you claimed that our story “was cleverly written to provide conspiracy theorists with enough ammunition to ignore evidence” and complained that some people took our “reporting” seriously and re-posted it in social media with impolite comments, all of which led you to conclude that someone must create a mechanism in social media “to distinguish between fact and falsehood.” And since that someone can only be the government, your statement can only be understood as a vague call for the government censorship of the Internet.

However, neither your article, nor the CNN segment mentioned that our grotesque fiction was based on your own controversial ideas that many Americans found insulting and grotesque. Why? Was it because such an admission would have undermined your argument that people were angry at you over nothing?

And why in the world, Fareed, did you decide to bring up the term “radicalization,” which in today’s world is mostly associated with Islam? Do you have such a tin ear – or do you really think that if you broaden the definition and talk about “American radicalization,” people will begin to see the two as morally equivalent? Do you think they are morally equivalent, Fareed?

Fine, let’s talk about radicalization.

For you, sitting on the top floors of your well-protected media establishment’s ivory tower, it’s easy to downplay the threat of Islamic radicalization and throw the “Islamophobia” labels at all those little people down at the street level. The only radicalization to which your skewed radar is attuned is the faintest sound of protest from the little people, when they get fed up with your condescending elitism and begin to rebel against the “progressive” establishment. That’s what scares you the most, doesn’t it, Fareed? That’s when you mouth off your grave concerns on CNN and write in WaPo about the threat of radicalization.

But who is at fault that Americans no longer trust the establishment and its media? Have you considered the possibility that none of this would be happening if you and your colleagues weren’t so radical yourselves, feeding the people with half-truths, distortions, propaganda, and outright lies, placing your Utopian “progressive” ideology above facts, smug and secure in your impenetrable media castle? Did it occur to you that you and your media establishment may be the very reason why so many people suddenly like Donald Trump, whom you so despise, and nothing you say on the subject can change their minds because no one trusts you anymore?

Fareed Zakaria 02

When you talked about a study where “simply by talking to one another, the bigoted students had become more bigoted,” has it even occurred to you how perfectly this describes your “progressive” echo chamber, where tolerance towards opposing philosophical viewpoints is nonexistent? If you think that calling those who disagree with you “bigots” makes you an anti-bigot, let me share a little secret. There are two kinds of bigots today: the bigots and the anti-bigots, and it’s hard to say which kind is worse.

A good example of “group polarization” involving radical “anti-bigots” is JournoList – a highly biased group of about 400 left-wing journalists and political activists who for three years (2007-2010) participated in a private online echo chamber where they, in violation of public trust and professional ethics, conspired to coordinate media attacks on conservatives, to promote certain issues while burying others, and to influence the 2008 elections in favor of Barack Obama. To paraphrase Kolbert’s study, “Simply by talking to one another, the radical left-wing journalists had become more radical left-wing journalists.” To use your exact quote, “It is how radicalization happens and extremism spreads.” Say, were you just as worried about “group polarization” then as you are now?

Another example of such “group polarization” and radicalization is a knee-jerk impulse of allegedly mainstream journalists to describe anyone who doesn’t lean left as “far-right,” as you have demonstrated in your CNN segment, or “ultra-right-wing,” as you have demonstrated in your segment.

Isn’t it a little too late to complain about America’s radicalization, Fareed? Where were you during the George W. Bush years, when your fellow “progressives” trolled, ridiculed, and slandered the U.S. President and his supporters, with full support of the mainstream media? When there no longer was any distinction between a drug-fueled street protester and a media commentator?

Did you complain when “progressive” satirists collectively created a false, hyperbolic reality around Bush, conservatives, Fox News, and America in general, which was then regularly disseminated as the truth around the world, translated into many languages, and contributing to the anti-American sentiment? Some of my own family members in Russia and Ukraine still honestly believe that those “facts” really happened. As you so eloquently stated,” the people spreading this story were not interested in the facts; they were interested in feeding prejudice.” Did you complain then, or did it feel too good to let go?

You refer to a scientific study of Facebook users, which found that “people mainly shared information that confirmed their prejudices, paying little attention to facts and veracity.” That sounds reasonable. For example, even without a scientific study I know that an overwhelming majority of your fellow “progressives” believe that Sarah Palin has actually said “I can see Russia from my house,” paying little attention to the fact that it originated as an SNL skit. Did you complain about that in 2008? Were you at all concerned that Tina Fey’s “Palin” videos might confuse voters and skew the election? Probably not; it was just satirical hyperbole.

What if social media encourage misinformation, rumors, and lies, you ask. But did you ask the same question when misinformation, rumors, and lies were coming not from social media but from a seasoned mainstream journalist named Dan Rather – or, more recently, The Rolling Stone Magazine? Or, worse yet, from the nation’s political leaders whom you support and admire? Wasn’t the entire debate on and implementation of ObamaCare based on misinformation and lies? Were you alarmed when Joe Biden told a black audience that the Republicans would put them back in chains?

Did you speak against radicalization when the “hands up don’t shoot” movement, based on misinformation, rumors, and lies, and encouraged by the mainstream media, resulted in looting and the destruction of property, followed by the murders of innocent police officers?

The answer to all those question is “no.” You have never violated the “progressive” schema, Fareed. You’ve been a loyal Party soldier, albeit a mediocre creative thinker, having traded your “otherness” for “group-think” and sacrificing your unique perspective to what you thought was “progress.”

Examples are plenty; more can be provided upon request. Now let’s talk about victim-hood.

You say you are the victim because you have received some hateful messages and comments. I have also received many hateful messages and comments from your fellow “progressives” over the years. Now what? You claim you have received a late-night phone call that woke up and threatened your little daughters. Indeed, Fareed, making threatening calls is a crime. Did you file a police report? Did the police trace the number and find the perpetrators, who are hardly a sophisticated organization behind an impenetrable firewall? If not, I can’t believe every claim that comes from a confirmed plagiarist. You may as well claim that someone kicked your three-legged puppy and it made you cry.

While you played the world’s saddest song on the world’s smallest violin, I was the one who took the real hit., a “fact-checking” website rooting for the “progressive” team, has not only debunked our satire as they’ve done it many times in the past – this time they also made an unsourced and slanderous allegation that our site is “known for spreading malware.”

Next, some busybody contacted one of our advertising providers,, which then declined to pay our advertising earnings due to “serious quality issues.” The money we lost as a result may be small change compared to your CNN contract, but if you were penalized for your writings in the same proportional amount, I’m sure your righteous indignation would go well beyond just one article in WaPo and a five-minute segment on CNN.

There is only one victim of lies, prejudice, and institutionalized bias here – and it ain’t you, Fareed. But don’t let this stop you from playing your upside-down game of “victims and radicals” while you still can.

So you think your opponents are radicals? Here’s a news tip: down here in the streets below you, it’s the other way around. Growing numbers of Americans see you and your media colleagues as radical ideological hacks. You can call them any name you want, adding ultra-, far-, uber-, and other hyphenated insults; that won’t change the fact that their thinking is the norm and yours is not. Like all normal people on this planet, they don’t respond well to insults. But they are also the ones who make sure you have the freedom to call them radicals.

Oleg Atbashian
AKA Red Square
People’s Director,
Department of Visual Agitation and Unanimity

Zakaria said that it is not obvious that “The People’s Cube” is a satire page to paraphrase. Yet the Washington Post declared them as “Arguably one of the Internet’s most satirical websites”. And if “that” isn’t enough maybe the author, a “cheeto dressed as Che Guevara,” might have been another dead giveaway.

Really this whole “episode” reminded me of two “clips” I’ve seen from another “satirical” source. Although it may not be “clear satire” if we were to use the “racist plagiarist” Fareed Zakaria’s standards.

To underscore Zakaria’s call to “censor social media” he was suspended by CNN and Time magazine after he admitted that he had “plagiarized” portions of an article he wrote on “gun control” for Time, from the New Yorker magazine.

He issued an apology saying he had made a “terrible mistake” and his lifting a paragraph from the article by Harvard University professor of American history Jill Lepore was an “ethical lapse.”

Zakaria, 48, a Yale and Harvard graduate, had written the column on gun control that appeared in the August 20 issue of Time magazine.

Newsweek adds “plagiarism” warning to all Fareed Zakaria “articles”

And here Zakaria “slams” Sarah Palin as being “retarded”

The wrongs of Fareed Zakaria
America’s self-destructive whites
Fareed Zakaria seems fine with white people killing themselves
This Country Has Had To Give Classes To Teach Muslim Immigrants NOT To Rape Women
CNN’s Fareed Zakaria Calls For Jihadist Rape Of White Women

The Mentally Ill

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , on January 11, 2016 by andelino

The Mentally Ill 05

Are Climate skeptics too “mentally ill” to buy guns under Obama’s “new” rules?

Obama announced new executive orders on “gun control” designed to keep “mentally ill” people from buying guns, but will they be used to prevent “climate skeptics” from buying firearms?

The Mentally Ill 08

Under Obama’s new rules, “doctors” can now “report” people deemed “mentally ill” to the FBI so they can be “denied” gun licenses.

The Mentally Ill 03

As the official White House fact sheet on the new gun control “regulations” states (emphasis added):

“Current law prohibits individuals from buying a gun if, because of a mental health issue, they are either a danger to themselves or others or are unable to manage their own affairs. The Social Security Administration (SSA) has indicated that it will begin the rule-making process to ensure that appropriate information in its records is reported to NICS.”

If, as Obama has “repeatedly” claimed, climate change is a greater “threat than terrorism,” then aren’t people who “deny” the climate threat “a danger to themselves or others” and unfit to own guns?

The idea that climate skeptics are “mentally ill” is nothing new:

Oregon-based professor of “sociology and environmental studies” Kari Norgaard has declared climate “skepticism” a mental illness that must be “treated.”

The Mentally Ill 07

Psychology Today published an article listing three warning signs that you are in “climate change” denial:

“You think climate change is bad, but not that bad.”
“You don’t have an emotional reaction to climate change.”
“You aren’t getting political.”

Thus, if you don’t think the climate “threat” is great enough, or you’re not “furious” about it, or you’re not politically “active” in the climate fight, then you’ve got “mental issues” like these mass murderers.

The Mentally Ill 04

The Telegraph’s “Climate ‘denial’ is now a mental disorder” explains how so-call “eco-psychologists” convened at the University of the West of England in Bristol to explore classifying “climate change denial” as a “mental disorder.”

Mental Illness 01 published an article warning about “high-carbon addiction” using central heating, etc.

And remember when Obama’s EPA Chief Gina McCarthy declared that climate skeptics aren’t “normal” people?

The Mentally Ill 02

So, you might want to think “twice” before discussing the nearly two-decade pause in global warming with your doctor the “next” time you go in for your “annual” check-up. reports that one NYU professor even wants to “genetically alter humans” to make them more “Eco-friendly.”

The Mentally Ill 01

ObamaCare does not Trump the Second Amendment

Top Christmas Gift in 2015

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , on January 1, 2016 by andelino

Top Christmas Gift in 2015-05

Thanks to recent Muslim “terrorist” attacks in Chattanooga, Paris, and San Bernardino, “guns” are the biggest selling items for Christmas 2015

Kudos also goes to Barack Hussein Obama for his never-ending “threats” to issue executive orders which would further “restrict” gun sales.

On the upside, people no longer feel they can “wait” to decide whether or not to get armed to “protect” themselves and their families from that “suspicious” looking Muslim neighbor or the mosque down the street where “jihadists” always seem to be coming and going.

Top Christmas Gift in 2015-03

The convergence of “fears” over terrorism, a perceived “threat” of gun laws being changed and the Christmas holiday have sent gun sales “soaring” in what is already the busiest month of the year for “firearm” purchases.

Guns are at the top of many “Christmas” lists, especially if November is “any” indication.

Sales of “gun accessories” have also spiked as firearm retailers have seen the biggest “demand” since Obama’s re-election in 2012.

Last month, the FBI ran more than 2.2 million firearm “background” checks on potential buyers, a 24 percent “increase” from November 2014.

On “Black Friday,” a record 185,345 background checks were “processed” by the FBI.

Top Christmas Gift in 2015-06

At places like “Adventure Outdoors” in Smyrna, Georgia, business has nearly “doubled” compared to a year ago at this time, according to manager Eric Wallace.

“Ever since the Paris Islamic terrorist attacks, we’ve had a lot of customers coming in,” Wallace told Gabe Gutierrez on TODAY.

“Buying first guns, buying guns to protect their homes, their families, and themselves.”

For many women, the “gift of choice” this year is a “firearm” more than jewelry. More companies have also “tailored” their approach to attract more women.

Top Christmas Gift in 2015-04

Companies like “The Well-Armed Woman” in Scottsdale, Arizona, have done “brisk” business selling accessories like “holsters, concealed carry purses and bullet jewelry targeting female gun owners.”

Wisconsin state representative Bob Gannon posted the following statement on Facebook after a shooting at a mall in Madison.

Top Christmas Gift in 2015-07

“Wisconsin does not have a death penalty law, but with significant practice and careful aim, law abiding citizens can help clean our society of these scum bags. Criminals no longer have any fear of our courts or our prisons, so it’s time that the citizens of this fine state stand up and fight back. A gang banger in the mall with a gun is going to think twice if there could be a law abiding CCW holder standing behind them fully prepared to shoot center mass, as this is how you’re trained to eliminate the threat these creeps pose to you, your family, and all law abiding citizens unwillingly dragged into their public crime spree.”

Top Christmas Gift in 2015-01

“Well, I don’t believe that Obama and his political cronies should have any Secret Service protection since guns are weapons of mass destruction.”

“Gun Control Won’t Stop Terrorists”
‘Gun Lobby’ Has Been Winning Since 1968
Gun Owners Need To Start Shooting Criminals “Center Mass”
Miranda Lambert Gets Guns from Fan for Christmas
Rise of the Female Gun Nut
Top 20 Most Popular Concealed Carry Firearms
These People Are Thrilled They Got A Gun For Christmas


Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on December 2, 2015 by andelino

Chi-Raq 01

In an interview actress Angela Bassett suggested some Chicago “leaders” are having trouble with Spike Lee’s film “Chi-Raq” because they are embarrassed by the “gun” violence in their city.

“Chi-Raq” is a nickname given to Chicago because the “violence” in parts of the city is reminiscent of a “war zone” like Iraq.

According to The Wrap, Bassett said the “bloodshed” in Chicago’s black communities is “completely and utterly wasteful, shameful, hurtful to the core.”

She said that Lee is “trying” to use his movie “to just bring some awareness….it’s a good picture, it’s very positive.”

Bassett said she had not heard “Chi-Raq” used as a nickname for Chicago prior to being involved in the film, but says she now understands it serves a “nickname for Chicago based on what’s been going on in the community with young black men, children…innocent bystanders dying because of gang violence, and…more black folks dying than in the Iraq war.”

Chicago Carnage 05

She indicated that many Chicago leaders are not “happy” with the fact that Lee’s film shines a “light” on Chicago gun violence.

But she said the “truth” must be told.

“Sometimes you don’t want those outside the family to know that’s what’s going on, but it’s something that needs to be known,” she said.

“When you get down to it, Spike loves his community. He loves film making, so it’s going to be a positive thing. It’s for the good.”

Chicago Carnage 07

Lee said Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel made the filming of “Chi-Raq” as difficult as possible.

Emanuel was “a bully” who did not want Lee to “portray” things as they really are in Chicago.

He said Emanuel “summoned” him to City Hall for a meeting, but it did not “dissuade” him.

Instead, Lee said, “He’s not gonna bully me. My tactic with the mayor–any bully–is to come out swinging.”

Chicago Killings 01

As of November 23, there had been 2703 “shootings” which resulted in 440 “deaths” year-to date in heavily “gun-controlled” Chicago.

That is an “increase” of approximately 400 shootings over the same “time” last year.

The Chicago Tribune reported these numbers as part of their “broader” coverage of the 11 people shot, five “killed,” over the course of last weekend alone.

Half of those “wounded”were shot on November 22 “between about 12:25 p.m. and 8:40 p.m.” Three of those “killed”were shot on that same day, between those same “hours” as well.

Chicago Carnage 06

It is worth noting that while this violence proves the “impotency” of gun control in general, it is especially “damning” when juxtaposed with some of the most recent “gun control” endeavors in particular.

For example, Chicago implemented a “violence tax” at suburban Cook County gun stores in April 2013. The tax is gathered on “each gun and bullet” sold within the county.

Then, in 2014, the first full calendar year after the “implementation” of the tax, the Chicago Tribune reported 434 deaths, a 19 death “increase” over 2013.

As the “carnage” among black young men in Chicago “escalates” no leftists or race “agitators” seem to care.

The ongoing large scale “slaughter” in Chicago goes largely “unremarked” among the “demonstrators” or “national” media.

Chicago Violence

At least 56 people were shot over Memorial Day weekend between “Friday afternoon and early Tuesday morning,” according to authorities.

Twelve people, including three shot Monday afternoon, “died” from their wounds. Twelve others shot between late Monday morning and early Tuesday morning “survived” their gunshot wounds, bringing the total of “non-fatal” gunshot victims for the weekend to 44.

No “race” is mentioned for any of the “victims,” but based on past data, nearly all are “black,” for it is black neighborhoods that most “shootings” have been occurring.

Chicago Carnage 03

And unlike any police-involved shootings: “No one was in custody for any of the attacks, and police were investigating.”

Make no mistake. Something very “evil” is taking place in Chicago, a city completely “run” by Democrats for two generations.

The evil is on a “larger” scale, but it is similar to what is taking place “across” America among young “black” men raised in mostly “fatherless” homes.

The “rage” that consumes these young males “deprived” of fathers is understandable, and it can be “remedied” only by a society and culture “unafraid” to condemn drive-by “fatherhood” and the women who make it so “easy and attractive” for males to behave this way.

US Government Statistics

While only 13.2 % of the American population is black:

67% of black households are single parent
72% of all black babies born out of wedlock
50% of all black kids don’t finish high school
52% of all violent juvenile crimes are committed by blacks
45% of all drug offenses are committed by blacks
85% of all violent interracial crimes are committed by blacks
79% of all robberies are committed by blacks
80% of all shootings are committed by blacks
59% of all murders are committed by blacks
49% of all murder victims are black
93% of all black murder victims are murdered by another black
33% of all crimes are committed by 3% of the population; blacks between the ages of 16 and 36.

Chicago Carnage 00

But that is not “happening,” because the people “within” the back community who have the “standing and resources” to mobilize demonstrations and outrage prefer a “stance of victim-hood” at the hands of whites, and make a handsome “living” from it.

Now, as of November 23, the Tribune shows “440 deaths” with over a month “left to go” in calendar year 2015.

That means the death toll from “gun violence” in Chicago through November 2015 has already “exceeded” the death toll for all of 2014.

Spike Lee‘s film “Chi-Raq” is set to arrive in theaters just as Chicago makes “headlines” for continuous “horrifying” shootings.

“Chi-Raq,” a modern day adaptation of the ancient Greek play “Lysistrata” by Aristophanes, is set against the backdrop of “soaring” gang violence in Chicago.

The Amazon Studios “release” debuts on December 4th in “select” theaters, and will then be available on Amazon Instant Video shortly thereafter.

Chi-Raq 02

Lee’s satirical take on gun violence stars John Cusack, Nick Cannon, Teyonah Parris, Samuel L. Jackson, Wesley Snipes, Jennifer Hudson and Angela Bassett.

Black Grassroots Activist Call Out Democrats
No Trayvon outcry for Tayshawn
Final Minutes of 9-Year-Old Tyshawn Lee
Five Devastating Facts About Black-on-Black Crime
“Chi-Raq” Obama’s Hometown for Gang Violence
Guns, Money, Death, and the Dude, Welcome to Chiraq
Chiraq And The ‘Sex-Strike’ Myth
What’s Behind Chicago’s Murder Boom?
Confederate Flag Kills Ten in Chicago… Oh, Wait!
Black Lives Matter protesters live down to their reputation
I Hate Chi-Raq

Kass: Rahmbo ‘has lost his grip’ on Chicago and won’t get it back 

PTSD in Combat Veterans

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , on July 2, 2015 by andelino

PTSD in Combat Veterans 00

During an early morning interview on a southern California radio talk show, Senator Dianne Feinstein managed to “outrage” both the conservative and liberal parties when she made a “questionable” statement regarding “medical marijuana” and veterans of the U.S. Armed Forces. As a result, her approval rating has “dropped” an unprecedented amount in only a single day.

Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Lexington, the host of “Morning California” on PBS of southern California, discussed current “hot topic” issues in the American conscious such as “gun control, gay marriage, and marijuana legalization.” However it was Feinstein’s comments at the end of the interview that left the talk show host “utterly” speechless.

“The last thing this country needs is to make a dangerous and addicting drug easily and readily available. What kind of message would that be if we federally allowed people to choose for themselves what they can and can’t put into their body? We have those regulations for a reason It’s bad enough that the American Public can just chow down willy-nilly on fattening foods with little restraint, why should we give them a substance that would make them want to eat even more?

Now we are hearing all this nonsense about how medical marijuana could alleviate the symptoms of PTSD in soldiers coming back from the Middle East. If individuals are having nightmares and panic attacks about the atrocities they have committed over seas while following orders from a war criminal like former President George Bush, then quite honestly they deserve it. We shouldn’t free them from their guilt any more then we should pardon a murderer or rapist for their crimes and free them from their prison cells.”

Almost immediately following her comments there was a public “outcry” over many different forms of social media. Such varied comments made were calling Feinstein “ignorant, tyrannical, idiotic and disgusting.” This does not include the “countless” other comments directed at the Senator that are “too vulgar” to be shown in this article.

PTSD in Combat Veterans 02

“This will be a very interesting case to observe” Said William Kelly, a professor of sociology and political science at the California Institute of Science. “Feinstein has in just a few sentences managed to upset people across the entire political spectrum in a severe way. This includes interest groups from conservatives, progressives, veteran groups, even marijuana advocates are lashing back at Feinstein. For someone like me who studies social sentiments and events, this is like being able to observe a lunar event that only happens once in a millennia.”

Individuals who were “interviewed” on the street were open about their “shock and disbelief” regarding Feinstein’s comments. Many said that it was too difficult to “articulate” their feelings without the use of “obscene” language. One man said “I’m definitely going to start paying more attention to who I vote for” before shaking his head and walking away without giving his name.

At the time of this article, Senator Feinstein’s office has “disconnected” their phones and have not replied to any emails. An inside tip has informed us about how a lot of her staff have immediately “resigned” from their positions attempting to “abandon ship” and to distance themselves as much as humanly possible from the now “‘toxic” Senator.

PTSD in Combat Veterans 01

Wondering what Feinstein “thinks” about our current “war criminal” Barack Obama? Stay tuned.

Heavenly Residence

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , on April 27, 2014 by andelino

Heavenly Residence 00

Former New York City mayor Michael R. Bloomberg believes he’s going “straight” to heaven after working to eliminate “smoking, obesity,” and his efforts to “promote gun control.”

Heavenly Residence 01

Here’s the full context of Bloomberg’s heaven quotation:

“Mr. Bloomberg was introspective as he spoke, and seemed both restless and wistful. When he sat down for the interview, it was a few days before his 50th college reunion. His mortality has started dawning on him, at 72. And he admitted he was a bit taken aback by how many of his former classmates had been appearing in the “in memoriam” pages of his school newsletter. But if he senses that he may not have as much time left as he would like, he has little doubt about what would await him at a Judgment Day. Pointing to his work on gun safety, obesity and smoking cessation, he said with a grin: “I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to heaven I’m not stopping to be interviewed. I am heading straight in. I have earned my place in heaven. It’s not even close.”

As for the “gun control” push, Bloomberg wants gun rights advocates to “fear” him.

He plans to spend $50 million this year building a nationwide “grass-roots network” to motivate low information voters who feel strongly about “curbing” gun violence, an organization he hopes can eventually “out muscle” the National Rifle Association.

“We’ve got to make them afraid of us,” he said.

Bloomberg plans to merge his “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” and “Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America” into a new group called “Every town for Gun Safety.”

Heavenly Residence 03

Maybe the four “blood moons” encouraged Michael to do some “soul” searching of “late” to purchase a “heavenly residence” in the great hereafter.

Has “communism” added a touch of “deism” to its Jewish “atheism” as a sort of “insurance” policy?

Heavenly Residence 05

Since Bloomberg is a “non-believing” Jew he must be “quoting” the Old Testament.

I think the New Testament application is “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven,” unless he donates heavily to gun control.

This should at least dispel the “outdated” belief that you can’t “buy” your way into heaven.

According to the Bible, Jesus died for “sinners” who didn’t have enough money to “purchase” heaven on their own.

Heavenly Residence 02

Sorry Michael, I don’t believe the “Apostle of Affluence” theory.

Heavenly Residence 04

Now, go in “peace” and spread your “gospel” to the “one” percenter.

Willful Liars

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on April 20, 2013 by andelino

gun_controlObama angrily “blamed” the defeat Wednesday of his “centerpiece” gun-control proposal on lies spread by the National Rifle Association, calling it “a pretty shameful day for Washington.”

“The gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about the bill,” Obama said in the White House rose garden about 90 minutes after the vote.

“It came down to politics.”

As he spoke, Obama was “surrounded” by family members of “victims” of the Newtown, Connecticut “school” shooting.

Also with him was former Rep. Gabby Giffords of Arizona, “wounded” in an “assassination” attempt.


Senators “voted” 54-46 late Wednesday to “expand” background checks of gun purchases but were six votes “shy” of the 60 needed for “passage” of the amendment.

The vote was a “huge” blow to the president’s “efforts” to enact a “broad” package of new gun laws.

Obama and his team had considered “background” checks the most likely “gun restriction” to be approved by Congress, with polls showing as much as “90 percent” of the public in favor of the “measure” immediately after the Newtown shootings.

Obama put the “blame” squarely on the NRA, which he accused of spreading “falsehoods” that the legislation would lead to a “national” gun registry.


“They claimed that it would create some sort of big-brother gun registry, even though it did the  opposite,” Obama said.

“This pattern of spreading untruths … served a purpose. A minority in the U.S. Senate decided it wasn’t worth it. They blocked common-sense gun reforms, even while these families looked on from the Senate gallery. It’s not going to happen because 90 percent of Republicans just voted against that idea.”

Obama “vowed” not to give up on seeking more “gun” restrictions.

“You’ve got to send the right people to Washington,” he told voters. “That requires strength and it requires persistence. I see this as just Round One. Sooner or later, we are going to get this right. The memories of these children demand it.”

Ironically, while “accusing” others of “lying,” Obama resorted to false “claims and statistics” about current laws, including the repeatedly debunked argument that 40% of gun sales are private, and that guns can be bought over the Internet without background checks.

It was partly the “dishonesty” of those very “arguments” that had led potential supporters of new “bipartisan” legislation to “doubt” the administration’s “motives” in supporting the bill.

Obama Biden Lecture

Rarely have Americans ever seen a president “attack” his opponents so “viciously,” and expressing and evoking such “visceral” emotions.

Obama’s “tirade” contrasted with his reserved, measured “response” to the Boston Marathon bombings, in which he urged Americans to speak and act with restraint.

If this has been, as he claimed, “a pretty shameful day in Washington,” the president’s immature “tantrum” was the most shameful “moment” of all. 

He did everything “except” throw himself on the ground “kicking and screaming.”

Would I Lie

If there’s been anyone “stringing” along a path of “lies” it’s been this Obama administration “using” their Chicago “politics” and “gangster” tactics led by the “Liar in Chief.”

With Obama’s “lying” record, he’s got a “hell-of-a lot of nerve” calling anyone a “liar” or even “inferring” that they are.

The “look” on these two Great Leader’s face in the “agony of defeat” is absolutely priceless.

Obama Biden weeping for the Children

As Obama and “Mensa” Biden weeping on behalf of the “Children” another great American “hero,” Mark Kelly, is “denouncing” all weapons with great “vigor” as a true progressive “Gun Violence” freedom fighter. 

Mark Kelly

Later “Mensa” Biden told Americans to rest “assured” that Obama will shortly be firing two Executive Blasts into the Bill of Rights.

“Look, I know you’re going to say that I’m just being an optimist and I’m trying to put a good face on this,” choked the vice president, who has been “crying” essentially “non-stop” since the senate vote yesterday.

“But you know I’ve been around here a long time, and this president is articulate and he cleans up nice.

He’s already loading up his Executive Double Barrel Shotgun to fire a couple of blasts at that outdated 2nd Amendment that the right wing extremists all cling to, and when he’s through with that, he will reload and go after the NRA, too”. Executive Double Barrel Shotgun

Congressional Oath

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , on February 14, 2013 by andelino


Nancy Pelosi

Leave it to Nancy Pelosi to rewrite the “swearingin” oath members of Congress take, in order to further the Obama “gun control” agenda.

The House Minority Leader, speaking at a House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee hearing on “Gun Violence Prevention: A Call to Action,” misquoted the actual oath to include the idea the Congress must “protect and defend” the American people.

How does the actual “oath” read? Like this:

“I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

Note: the oath says “support and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Pelosi instead, said this:

executive ordersEarlier this month, shortly after Newtown, all members of Congress took an oath to “protect” and defend the Constitution “and the American people.”  To “protect” and defend?

That is our first responsibility.

Today, members of the House Democratic Caucus have come together to fulfill that “duty” to confront the challenge of “gun violence” in our society and act to ensure the “safety and security” of our communities.

Pelosi noted Obama’s “executive” orders, all 23 of them, and “endorsed” them, including his “desire” for an assault weapons ban, universal background checks and no more magazines with 10 plus rounds.

Once Pelosi is done with “revising” the oaths of office for Congress, the Constitution is “waiting” for her assault.

Of course, she’ll have to stand in line “behind” Barack Obama.

500 million Americans

Next, Pelosi will “claim” that if we do not “initiate” gun control “500 million American’s will die”…

I suspect she has “dementia” or possibly “Alzheimer’s.”  Obama wants “gun owners” to prove they are not “mentally ill” or intellectually “diminished.” 

Shouldn’t members of Congress have a stronger “mandate” to prove they are “competent.”  Did Pelosi go through a mental “competency test” before her last re-election?

She has for some time now exhibited serious “mental lapses” and should be required to have a complete “physical,” including “mental” evaluation.

I just don’t understand people who continue to “vote” for someone who is clearly not “up to the task” and shows signs of serious mental lapses.  Just because she has “name” recognition is not a reason to keep her in office.

We need folks who can handle the ”rigors” of the office.  It’s really hard to sit around and make “decisions” and it is very clear she can no longer meet the “minimum” requirements.

Forget Gun control, it’s Finger control, stupid

Forget Gun Control, it’s Finger Control

%d bloggers like this: