• Category Archives Politics
  • Progressive Racism: The Hidden Motive Driving Modern Politics (Gun Control)

    Progressive politics is rooted in racism. Look carefully at most social or fiscal policies advocated by progressives and you’ll see that underneath their false public rationales lie hidden racist fears and assumptions — some of which the progressives may be too embarrassed to admit even to themselves, much less to the world.

    In modern politics, everyone doubts everyone else’s sincerity. Each side automatically presumes that the other side presents a false public justification for its political views. And in most cases it is wise to doubt, because most public justifications are indeed lies — sometimes unconscious lies. But surprisingly often the hypothesized alternative “true” motivation guessed at by the opposing side is itself completely incorrect. Especially when conservatives come up with theories attempting to explain what to them are mystifying progressive obsessions. What conservatives don’t (yet) know is that under the surface, most progressive positions are motivated by racist attitudes and assumptions felt by white progressives, usually against African-Americans. Progressive positions often seem inexplicable to outsiders because the proposals emanating from them usually manifest as colossal social engineering experiments, which the progressives have only devised as a distraction from the shameful racist motivations at the core.

    This essay will likely be eye-opening for conservatives, and infuriating for progressives, who often don’t know their own history and never contemplated the origins of their own belief system. But it’s time to finally bring the uncomfortable truth out in the open.

    Below you will find eight separate entries, each focusing on a different policy pushed by progressives. Each entry follows the same format:

    BOLD: Name of topic.

    In yellow: A neutral description of the exact proposal which progressives champion.
    In red: The progressives’ stated justification or explanation behind their position, which hides their real purpose.

    In red: The inaccurate theory which conservatives mistakenly assume must be the actual progressive motivation.

    In green: The true racist reason underlying the progressive policy.
    Plain text: Additional notes on the origins of the progressives’ racist attitude and how it led to this specific policy proposal.

    If you want to just skim the essay and only read the highlights, then simply look for the green sections and skip the rest. Otherwise, read the whole thing to get a clear step-by-step explanation of the actual racist motivations driving each progressive position.


    GUN CONTROL

    Progressive position:
    Restrict access to guns as much as possible; ultimately ban and confiscate them all.
    False public rationale offered by progressives to justify their position:
    Gun violence is a scourge on society; easy access to killing machines unnecessarily facilitates murder and crime.
    Conservatives’ inaccurate theory of progressives’ real intent:
    Progressives want to disarm the populace to prevent armed resistance to the eventual imposition of a leftist totalitarian police state.
    The actual racist origins of the progressive stance:
    White urban liberals are deathly afraid of black gangbangers with guns, but are ashamed to admit this publicly, so to mask their racist fears they try to ban guns for everyone, as a way of warding off the perception that their real goal is to target blacks specifically.

    The basic dividing line in American politics is not (as it once was ) North vs. South, nor is it (as many people now assume) Coasts vs. Flyover Country, but rather Urban vs. Rural:

    The new political divide is a stark division between cities and what remains of the countryside. Not just some cities and some rural areas, either — virtually every major city (100,000-plus population) in the United States of America has a different outlook from the less populous areas that are closest to it. The difference is no longer about where people live, it’s about how people live: in spread-out, open, low-density privacy — or amid rough-and-tumble, in-your-face population density and diverse communities that enforce a lower-common denominator of tolerance among inhabitants. …The only major cities that voted Republican in the 2012 presidential election were Phoenix, Oklahoma City, Fort Worth, and Salt Lake City.

    Or put more simply: In modern America, liberals live in cities; conservatives live in rural areas. And what else is concentrated in cities? African-Americans, and gun violence:

    The 62 center cities of America’s 50 largest metro areas account for 15 percent of the population but 39 percent of gun-related murders.

    Putting all these statistics together, we see that large cities have high concentrations of white liberals alongside gun-using black criminals. And yet it is specifically in Democrat-voting big cities where most of the gun-control measures are proposed. Why is that? Are the white progressive urban dwellers afraid of rootin’-tootin’ cowboys? Of backwoods deer hunters? Of hillbillies with shotguns? No: the average white progressive has never even met a cowboy, a hunter or a hillbilly. And frankly, progressives couldn’t care less if rednecks own guns, because progressives aren’t physically afraid of rednecks on a daily basis. Instead, they are afraid of gun violence at the hands of their fellow city-dwellers, the urban African-Americans who commit a wildly disproportionate percentage of the gun crimes in America.

    Progressives don’t want to ban guns to disarm resistance to any upcoming police state; that idea has never even occurred to them. Instead, progressives want to ban guns because progressives are afraid of black people.

    But God forbid that progressives’ racist motivations be exposed publicly. So to make the gun-control bans appear even-handed and race-neutral, progressives must try to ban guns for everyone, even though the bans are in reality aimed at one specific group. Rural gun-users are just collateral damage of a policy that actually targets inner-city blacks.

    Read More…


  • Bob Costas: My Armed Security Doesn’t Make Me a Hypocrite on Guns!

    On March 9th NBC’s Bob Costas dismissed criticism of his having armed guards while disparaging “gun culture” by saying his guards were NBC and NFL security, not “personal” bodyguards.

    He did this while being interviewed by Fox News’s Howard Kurtz, who brought up Costas’s December 2012 halftime criticism of “the NFL’s gun culture.”

    Kurtz said, “You were accused of injecting politics into halftime, and Fox News’s Greg Gutfeld said you were ‘a hypocritical buffoon’ because you’re in New York, and you’re surrounded by armed guards, and you don’t have to worry about safety.”

    Costas responded, “In truth, Greg was accurate if you consider one-hundred-eighty degrees from the truth accurate. I have never had a personal bodyguard a single day in my life. There are security people at NFL games that the NFL employs, and there is always massive security at an Olympics, and there… is NBC security.”

    Read More…


  • CT School Shooter’s Father: “I Wish He Was Never Born”

    Conn. shooter's dad: 'You can't get any more evil'

    In his most extensive comments about the 2012 Connecticut school massacre, the father of gunman Adam Lanza describes his struggle to comprehend what his son did — an act that “couldn’t get any more evil” — and how he now wishes that his son had never been born.

    Peter Lanza also told The New Yorker magazine in a series of interviews last fall that he believes Adam would have killed him, too, if he had the chance. And he often contemplates what he could have done differently in his relationship with Adam, although he believes the killings couldn’t have been predicted.

    “Any variation on what I did and how my relationship was had to be good, because no outcome could be worse,” Peter Lanza told the magazine in an article dated March 17. “You can’t get any more evil. … How much do I beat up on myself about the fact that he’s my son? A lot.”

    Read More…


  • Molon Labe: Connecticut’s Terrifying Start Of Gun Confiscation

    The latest gun control law in Connecticut has crossed a very frightening line. A standoff has been created between the government and tens of thousands of gun owners now considered felons. It marks the beginning of an Orwellian new phase. Gun owners saw it coming, as evidenced by their recent adoption in recent years of the defiant expression “molon labe.” The phrase originated from Spartan General-King Leonidas, who reportedly responded with “Come and get them!” to Persian Emperor Xerxes’ demand that the Spartans surrender their weapons at the Battle of Thermopylae. The Spartans fought valiantly, but were ultimately defeated. With the prequel to the Hollywood bestselling movie 300 just released last week, Americans are now even more aware of the phrase.

    Until now, gun control laws hadn’t mandated the confiscation of weapons; generally, banned guns were grandfathered in under previous laws so their current owners could continue to legally own them. The Connecticut law changes all that. Passed last year in response to the Sandy Hook shooting, SB 1160 bans so-called “assault weapons” – certain rifles, more recently known as AR-15s, that have been singled out based on purely cosmetic criteria – and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

    The firearms have been banned based on how “scary” they look, not their actual usage in crimes. According to a study from the BATF that came out a few years ago, none of the top 10 guns used in crimes in the U.S. were so-called assault weapons; they were all pistols or revolvers. In fact, the #5 gun used in crimes was a shotgun, which Vice President Joe Biden advised Americans last year to use for self-defense.

    The only way to legally retain one of these newly banned firearms or magazines in Connecticut now is to register it – but most gun owners do not want their name on a government list. They are well aware that a list of gun owners can someday be used by the government for confiscation. If gun owners didn’t register their firearms or magazines prior to the December 31, 2013 deadline mandated by the legislation, their firearms will be subject to confiscation and the owners considered guilty of a felony.

    So far, it appears that the vast majority of gun owners affected by the legislation did not register their guns prior to the December 31 deadline, making between 50,000 and 350,000 gun owners felons. This is frightening, considering the law doesn’t just make the violation a misdemeanor, it makes it a felony, which could result in a prison sentence. Fewer than 50,000 gun owners registered their firearms by the deadline to comply with the law.

    Read More…


  • CT POLICE REFUSE to Enforce Democrat Gun Bans

    A showdown is developing between a sizable number of Connecticut state police officers and the politicians who passed into law highly restrictive gun control, gun bans, and bans on high capacity magazines.

    Gun rights legal expert and activist David Hardy reported Friday that 250 law enforcement officers in Connecticut have signed an open letter stating that they will not enforce the new anti-gun and magazine laws, which they consider to be a violation of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

    A major news story on these developments is due to be published soon, but Hardy received an advanced notice via email from Tyler Jackson, the head of the Connecticut Peace Officers Association, the organization that sent the open letter.

    According to Hardy,

    Tyler Jackson has emailed me an interesting story, soon to appear online (I’ll link to it once it does)– the gist is that the head of the Connecticut Peace Officers’ Assn has released an open letter stating that the police will not “be party to the oppression of the people of the state by enforcing an unconstitutional law.” So far 250 LEOs have cosigned the letter.

    Gunowners in the state have already ignored the mandate to comply with the new laws, refusing to register with the state government their possession of so-called “assault weapons” and forbidden magazines.

    Read More…


  • Americans rising up against government

    America’s ruling class has been experiencing more pushback than usual lately. It just might be a harbinger of things to come.

    First, in response to widespread protests last week, the Department of Homeland Security canceled plans to build a nationwide license plate database. Many local police departments already use license-plate readers that track every car as it passes traffic signals or pole-mounted cameras. Specially equipped police cars even track cars parked on the street or even in driveways.

    The DHS put out a bid request for a system that would have gone national, letting the federal government track millions of people’s comings and goings just as it tracks data about every phone call we make. But the proposal was suddenly withdrawn last week, with the unconvincing explanation that it was all a mistake. I’m inclined to agree with TechDirt’s Tim Cushing, who wrote: “The most plausible explanation is that someone up top at the DHS or ICE suddenly realized that publicly calling for bids on a nationwide surveillance system while nationwide surveillance systems are being hotly debated was … a horrible idea.”

    Read More…


  • Glenn Reynolds: No militia means more intrusive law enforcement

    The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    For a while, some argued that the so-called “prefatory clause” — “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” — somehow limited the “right of the people” to something having to do with a militia. In its recent opinions of District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago, the Supreme Court has made clear that the Second Amendment does recognize a right of individuals to own guns, and that that right is in no way dependent upon membership in a militia. That seems to me to be entirely correct.

    But there is still that language. If a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, then where is ours? Because if a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state, it follows that a state lacking such a militia is either insecure, or unfree, or possibly both.

    In the time of the Framers, the militia was an armed body consisting of essentially the entire military-age male citizenry. Professional police not having been invented, the militia was the primary tool for enforcing the law in circumstances that went beyond the reach of the town constable, and it was also the primary source of defense against invasions and insurrection.

    Read More…


  • Obama Surgeon General Nominee Wants Doctors to Ask Patients About Guns in Home

    vivek organizer
    Another radical activist is rewarded for his organizing skills.

     

    Barack Obama picked far left 36 year-old organizer Vivek Murthy as the next Surgeon General. Not for his medical expertise but for his activism.

    Vivek was the co-founder and president of “Doctors for America,” which began as “Doctors for Obama in 2008.”

    Vivek also wants doctors to ask patients, including children, if there are any firearms in their home. This would be included on their file that would be shared with several government agencies under Obamacare.

    Read More…


  • Brooklyn Assemblyman William Boyland Jr. tossed in jail after conviction on bribe charges

    NYC PAPERS OUT. Social media use restricted to low res file max 184 x 128 pixels and 72 dpi

    Assemblyman William Boyland Jr. was convicted of extortion and soliciting bribes by a federal jury Thursday and immediately tossed in jail.

    The corrupt Brooklyn Democrat closed his eyes and held his head with both hands as the jury foreman pronounced him guilty of all 21 counts in the indictment.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Capers then told the judge that Boyland, 43, broke the law even while on trial. FBI agents surveilled him driving in Brooklyn and Manhattan recently despite the suspensions of his license, registration and auto insurance.

    “I have a concern about Mr. Boyland claiming to be one place when he is actually in another,” U.S. District Judge Sandra Townes said before revoking his $100,000 bail.

    There’s no doubt where federal inmate No. 18913-076 is now. He faces up to 30 years in prison.


  • Video: CT Cop to Gun Owning Patriot John Cinque: “I Cannot Wait to Get the Order to Kick Your Door In”

    Then he delivered the bombshell. “I can speak from my own experience, that the video that was posted….in which I said ‘I’m not going to comply’… and I stand by my words… I’ve had contact with a police officer in my home town…I live in Branford, and his words straight out were ‘I Cannot Wait to Get the Order to Kick Your Door In.'”

    A call to the Branford, Connecticut Police Department simply led to me calling on Monday, which I will do, to speak to the Police Chief. Also, an email to John Cinque has not been returned at the time of publishing. The article will be updated with any new information.

    John is among hundreds of thousands of Connecticut citizens who are exercising mass civil disobedience against not only a violation of their rights expressed in the Second Amendment, but also in the Connecticut State Constitution. They are not registering their weapons and they aren’t surrendering them as instructed. As has been pointed out by a Cuban immigrant to America, gun registration is the step immediately before gun confiscation. In fact, the man I’m referencing, Manuel Martinez‘s son, contacted Freedom Outpost to reiterate that we should refer to all “gun control” legislation as a form of “gun confiscation,” which Cinque indicates that is exactly what is on the progressives mind, both Democrat and Republican.

    This is what that people of Connecticut are up against. They are up against tyrants; tyrants that believe they are the master of the citizens, not the other way around.

    Read More…


  • Obama to Dems: It’s time to worry

    The election is coming, the election is coming!

    That’s the message coming from President Obama as he tries desperately to rouse Democrats out of a midterm election stupor that could cost his party control of the Senate — and bury his agenda once and for all.

    Obama has increasingly sounded like the nerdy kid in a bad horror movie constantly warning his friends to stay out of danger as he’s called on the Democratic base to not be complacent in 2014.

    “You’ve got to pay attention to the states,” he begged at a recent fundraiser for the Democratic Governors Association. Obama lamented that Democrats don’t think state-level races in the 2014 midterms are “sexy enough.”

    Raising cash for Senate Democrats in Virginia, Obama said Democrats tend to get “a little sleepy” and “distracted.”

    “We’re good at Senate and House elections during presidential years — it’s something about midterms,” Obama said. “I don’t know what it is about us.”

    And at a Democratic National Committee fundraiser in Boston, Obama said poor turnout could lead the party’s candidates to get “walloped.”


  • War on Boys Attempt to ‘Create Society of Frightened People’ (Pussification of the USA)

    On March 8th, Breitbart News was able to sit down with author and radio host Tammy Bruce to discuss the ongoing war against boys–especially as seen via zero tolerance school policies that result in suspensions for young students who pretend to point their finger like a gun.

    We asked her, “So many times we hear about ‘the war on boys’–of a boy fashioning his hand or breakfast pastry into the shape of gun, then being suspended. What are we to think of this?”

    Bruce responded:

    Look, there is a culture through the left that wants to emasculate the nation as a whole. It’s through the military, of course, you see Obama trying to do that, as well. We see it through what’s happening in education. Political correctness itself was meant to end the notion that we could have direct conversations, that we could be ambitious, that we could be our own people.Men are seen, of course, by the feminist movement and by the left who are led by the same individuals as those with the feminist-movement mentality. And they see the best way to emasculate the nation–certainly to cut it off at its knees–is to start with the children. And the biggest threat there are little boys.

    If you can change the mentality of little boys, train them from an early age to not be who they are–and that’s, of course, what the left’s general attitude is for everyone in this country… Ironically, I think the most difficult people to train in that way are little boys.

    Read More…


  • Obama Surgeon General Pick Anti-2nd Amendment Radical

    Debo Adegbile testifies at his confirmation hearing on Jan. 8, 2014. -- Getty Images

    The administration’s choice to be the nation’s doctor in chief views gun ownership as a public health issue and not a constitutional right, and wants doctors to query patients about guns in their homes.

    Cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal’s champion, Debo Adegbile, President Obama’s defeated pick to be assistant attorney general for the civil rights division at the Department of Justice, is not the only radical on President Obama’s wish list.

    That list includes gun-grabbing advocate Dr. Vivek Hallegere Murthy, Obama’s nominee to be U.S. Surgeon General.

    Murthy is the 36-year-old president and co-founder of the anti-gun group Doctors for America, which advocates ObamaCare and gun control laws.

    His group, which has been dubbed “Docs vs. Glocks,” has pushed Congress to ban “assault” weapons and “high-capacity” magazines.

    He also wants to spend more tax dollars on more research to prove that fewer guns mean a lower crime rate, despite the fact that a number of reputable studies prove the opposite.


  • Idaho House Passes Campus Carry 50-19

    On March 6th, the Idaho Legislature passed legislation allowing campus carry by a 50-19 vote. In February the state Senate “overwhelmingly” passed the measure, which “now heads to Governor C.L. ‘Butch’ Otter (R) for his signature.”

    According to Reuters, Otter is expected to sign the bill which will make Idaho “the seventh U.S. state that allows guns on campus.”

    Once signed, Idaho citizens with an “enhanced concealed-carry permit” will be able to “carry firearms on campus except in such places as residence halls and public entertainment facilities like football stadiums.”

    Read More…


  • Libs Shut Down Gun Show Because George Zimmerman Wanted to Attend (Florida LibScums)

    A local gun show with about 100 vendors may be canceled after the event space learned the organizers had invited George Zimmerman to be a featured guest.

    The sign outside The Majestic at 801 North John Young Parkway implies this weekend’s gun show is still on. Organizers for “The New Orlando Gun Show” told Local 6 The Majestic canceled their event late Thursday.

    “We’ve had discussions with The Majestic and they decided to cancel the event because George Zimmerman was making an appearance,” said Mike Piwowarski, who organized the gun show.

    The gun show organizers recently posted on their Facebook page a picture posing with Zimmerman, but the online comments that followed the picture sparked a controversial debate. It’s exactly that kind of polarizing debate that caused The Majestic to shy away from allowing Zimmerman at the event.

    A Twitter account that Zimmerman has used before tweeted, “another company bowing to threats of being labeled racist. Americans, give them your opinion.”

    Read More…

    New Orlando Gun Show

    Saturday March 8, 2014 and Sunday March 9, 2014

    CANCELED – CANCELED – CANCELED

    Currently, the Majestic Event Center has canceled the show for this weekend. They requested our special guest, Mr. George Zimmerman, not be allowed entry and we complied for the sake of our vendors. Later, the Majestic “caved” over threats from anti-Zimmerman individuals and completely shut down the event. We recommend you contact the Majestic directly at 407-300-9124, Vikash.MajesticOrlando@gmail.com and Neil.MajesticOrlando@gmail.com to voice your opinion. Vendors, we will be contacting you immediately. Please contact us if you have not heard from us by the time you read this.