Obama's and Hillary's Ideological Roots

If we are to understand these two politicians and the origin of their ideology, it's necessary to examine their early years.

To do so, I offer this video from last summer's Freedom Fest in Las Vegas where some of the well known conservative speakers and analysts spoke.

One of those key individuals who factored into both Obama and Clinton was Saul Alinsky. 

What makes this debate at this conference is that Saul's son, David, was present to counter the conservative's remarks about Saul's influence on today's Democrat Party.

What I find most interesting is how Ralph Benko, President of the Alynski Center, and David Alinsky uses counter points to fend off the agruements by Dinesh D'Souza.

But Dinesh's response is PRICELESS!!! Don't miss it!

Why Liberals Are Freaking Out!

We're now witnessing the leftist coming out of the closet in full rage mode and hijacking the Democrat Party.

After the unexpected win by Trump in 2016 they immediately began saying things about him that maligned and assassinated his character because they know how to use the media. (This is a sad statement about our media's impact on the nation.)

Now, they've gone to the level of inciting violence against those who support him. We've seen this in news reports and videos captured across the country.

Why?

Here's why... they underestimated the ability of his drive, commitment, patriotism and skills as one who has been outside the political circles of Washington, D.C.; a.k.a. "THE SWAMP."

He's kept his promises to the people who heard, understood his message, and elected him.

Watch this video and you'll better understand it.

Why Clinton Should Be In Prison

Having acquired Gregg Jarrett's new book "The Russian Hoax - The Illicit Scheme To Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump" I went through the first chapter titled, "Hillary Clinton's Email Server" which sets up the rest of his account and became more and more infuriated as to the specific information he lays out.

Most of us have a foggy recollection of just all of what happened so many years ago, so I've compiled what I see as the more pertinent points in that chapter here for my readers to go through themselves. If this array of evidence doesn't make one upset and disappointed in our two tiered justice system we now seem to have for those who are considered too important to prosecute, then I don't know what will.

Chapter 1 - Hillary Clinton's Email Server

Page 6

New York Times broke the story wide open on March 2, 2016, creating a firestorm of controversy with immense political consequences for Clinton, just as she prepared to launch another bid for president of the United States in the next month. Her actions, decried by many as irresponsible and reckless, called into question both her judgment and competency to hold the highest public office in the land. More important, Clinton's unmitigated disregard for the law quickly metastasized into allegations of criminal wrongdoing.

Attempts to Cover Up

First press response: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email.”

Second press response: “I am confident that I never sent or received any information that was classified at the time it was sent.” … the FBI confirmed that 110 of her emails contained classified information at the time they were sent or received.

Page 7

Third press response: “I never sent or received any email that was marked classified.” Many of Clinton's emails were, indeed, marked classified, as the FBI later revealed. While testifying before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Director Comey called Clinton's statement “not true.” Morever, the markings were irrelevant under the law, since the content – not the markings – made them classified.

… Clinton seemed to be arguing her own incompetence. That is, she should not be held legally liable because she was too uninformed or inept to recognize classified materials without their markings. But ignorance and maladroitness are not defenses under the law. This rendered Clinton's explanations of her actions all the more unconvincing.

Page 9

First, the IG found that Clinton “did not comply with the Federal Records Act.”

Second, the IG determined that Clinton never sought the approval for her server and, had she done so, it would have been rejected as a risk to national security.

Third, the IG learned that employees who voiced concerns about the private server were instructed “to never speak of the Secretary's personal email system again.

Fourth, the IG concluded that any classified material “never should have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.”

Page 10

On January 22, 2009, the day after she was sworn into office, she signed a document titled “Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement,” which stated the following:

I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation or violations, of US criminal laws.

Page 11

Clinton could hardly claim amnesia as a defense, since she sent an order to every State Department employee two years later, on June 28, 2011, cautioning them not to do what she was doing covertly in violating the law. Clinton's order warned: Avoid conducting official Department business from your personal email accounts.

On March 4, 2015, Congress sent a letter to Clinton instructing her to preserve all her emails. Subpoenas were sent immediately thereafter. The request included both work-related emails and any of those she had previously withheld as “personal.”

Three weeks later, on March 25, more than thirty thousand of Clinton's emails were deleted. It is unclear how many of those emails might have been relevant to the subpoenas since they have vanished. Her server was wiped clean by using a file-deleting software program called BleachBit.

 

Page 12

It is revealing that Clinton spent five months refusing to turn over her email server to either the Benghazi Committee or the FBI, despite repeated demands to do so. In the end, she relented when faced with the likelihood that Bureau agents would begin serving search warrants to seize it on their own. Fearing a knock on the door of her private residence, Clinton finally capitulated. [According to Sean Hannity her server has disappeared and no one knows where it went to.]

Page 18

Although Clinton is a trained lawyer who graduated from Yale Law School, she seemed oblivious to the law. Or, more likely, she felt that the law did not apply to her. Yet there is no station in life or standing in government that absolves someone from criminal conduct. In this way, we are all creatures of the law and are bound to obey it. An orderly society cannot function if it permits individuals to disregard the law with impunity.

While it is true that some government officials had in the past used private email accounts for some official business, that practice was rare. None of Clinton's predecessors created a private server for all their communications as secretary of state. The law imposes strict rules limiting such use. 

First, the emails must be carefully preserved by the employee's agency. 

Second, the comminications cannot be destroyed by the employee. 

Third, and most significantly, no classified material can be maintained on any private account.

= = = = = = = = = = = =

Chapter 2 covers how FBI Director James Comey contorted the law and did what was clearly not within his job to do; exonerate Hillary of any criminal acts.

The following list is the various laws which Clinton should have been prosecuted on:

• 18 U.S.C. 641
• 18 U.S.C. 207(b)
• 18 U.S.C. 1001
• 18 U.S.C. 1505
• 18 U.S.C. 1515(b)
• 18 U.S.C. 793(d,e. & f)
• 18 U.S.C. 1924(a)
• 18 U.S.C. 371
• 18 U.S.C. 286

Unintended Consequences

By now the nation has heard so much about the Clinton server and how it might have been hacked by another country that most everyone is sick and tired of hearing about it.

What they're not aware of, yet, is the unintended conse-quences of the high possibility a foreign entity may have gained secret information from having had access to her server while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State because nothing seems to have come from it. 

Secrets obtained by them could well be used in the future to undermine our nation's efforts under the current President to deal with a critical issue which may result in our inability to avert a looming disaster.

While most might scoff at such a possibility, it turns out this may be more true and sever than we think. Take, for instance, this report which reveals that such a problem may be looming in the future than we care to believe.

And yet, she has been exonerated by the Obama DOS/FBI during the run up to the election of 2016. And why, you ask, would Comey, Strzok, Paige, and McCabe want to do that? Simple, look at the mountain of evidence that's already been exposed from those players in this fiasco.

Public Education Today

Forty years ago when I graduated from college with my teaching degree and was hired to teach in an elementary school things were considerably different compared to what I went through as a student in the late '50s and all of the '60s.

An online friend sent me a link to a great video about what the state of public education has evolved to today. Don't miss watching it. I'd like to share with you my perspective on what it conveys, along with my first-hand experiences related to it.

My first shock was that, in my state, I was required - in order to teach - to become a dues paying member of the national, state, and local teacher's union. I wasn't happy, but as a newly married person, I found myself forced to consent despite my objection.

I find it interesting that this video includes nothing about the teachers union's role in the scenario which takes place in it. Personally, I would think that it would've added an even greater dynamic to the story, but it seems to have excluded it because everyone else involved is filling its role as the defender of the politically correct attitude of the matter.

While the portrayals of the parents in this video are pretty close to accurate, my personal experience with one parent was when I was having a conference with both the mother and the student. The student remarked that something was not fair and I responded that sometimes things in life aren't fair. The mother suddenly became irate and insisted that such a statement was inappropriate and the I should be working to make life fair. My response to her was that it wasn't fair that my brother had been killed by a gang member when only 39 years old, which shut her up.

My wife, who just retired this year, experienced much of the same frustrations. However, for our district - we both taught in the same one - after I retired while she continued, her biggest frustration was that the administration kept changing the district curriculum which turned out to be completely inadequate in so many ways.

As a consequence, and because she was so much more concerned than I about doing the best job possible in her school, she spent uncounted extra hours correcting the material in the curriculum which needed adjustments to work best with her students because it was so poorly written and designed.

Furthermore, the curriculum kept being narrowed down over the years to now only Math, Reading and Writing were being taught. History (Social Studies was the new name given to it by the liberals.), Science, and Art have been abandon, while Music and P.E. have been maintained, but only with a fight by parents.

Our national mind set is to throw more money at whatever problem we face and it will improve. My experience in the field of education over the decades I taught is that whenever an increase in funds came to the district, middle-management grew by leaps and bounds with the creation of new departments with added managers who sucked up the big bucks with six figure salaries.

It's my assertion that today's public schools don't teach children how to think for themselves, but that they demand that they think the way they believe they should. Critical thinking is no longer taught and the result is a sinister form of fascism which is only inclusive of the left's way of thinking about social issues.

Taking Advantage of Ignorance

As a retired educator and a student of history, this issue is near and dear to me.

While there are other examples to cite, this one is often used by leftists to argue that our Founding Fathers were racist white slave owners.

The 3/5 clause, which was part of an agreement during the 1787 Constitutional Convention, is favorite issue used to support the leftists' argument of how our nation has always been oppressive to minorities. Nothing could be further from the truth of the matter. The truth is it was used as means against the continuance of slavery by the abolitionists.

To understand the true reason the 3/5 clause was used in the negotiations, it is necessary to watch this video from Prager University on the topic. If it doesn't make sense after watching it the first time through, I urge you to watch it a second, or third time. Perhaps the repetition will help clarify the intricacies of what had to be used in order to achieve a compromise between the two groups of opposing factions during their negotiations on the amendment.

Hopefully, this will provide an understanding sufficient to those who make the assertion of racism, while ignoring the facts behind the reasoning for such language.

Footnote: If you've not yet watched, or it's been a few years since you have watched it, I highly recommend the most recent movie titled "Lincoln" by Steven Spielberg. It provides an excellent window into the circumstances surrounding that period during and at the end of the Civil War in which both black and white northerners fought to end slavery; sacrificing their lives by the millions to do so.

The Current State of Our Justice System

Since the founding of our nation generations were educated in school to understand that our nation's justice system was structured to be fair and impartial; the statue of lady justice was blind folded.

This means that when laws established were broken it didn't matter whether an individual who was proven guilty of braking it, or them, was someone at the pinnacle of power in our government, or some working stiff from a factory or company office. Prosecution and sentencing was to be applied equally to either individual.

However, our current crisis reveals otherwise. It became apparent to me in a glaring fashion that the blindfolds of lady justice were fully off during the last administration of the Obama presidency.

When Obama by-passed Congress to rig an agreement with Iran - recognized by our own government as the country responsible for the greatest state sponsored terrorist support and repeatedly call for the death of America - to develop a nuclear defense program and sent pallets of cash and other foreign currency on an unmarked aircraft at the very same time hostages were being released by that same country, the news media treated it as though it was no big deal; standard foreign relations procedure and practice. 

Never mind that it is illegal for a President to send payments to a foreign country while by-passing the branch of government that handles the budget of the country. And, just where did this plane load of money come from? Has there been any official investigation into this act by Obama?

And, what about Obama meddling in Israel's election to oust Netanyahu? Has there been any official investigation into this act by Obama? And the media was all-in with Obama on this!

On the other hand, after two years of special prosecutor Mueller's investigation into claims by the left wing liberals of the DNC and the MSM, there is still not one shred of evidence implicating candidate and president-elect Trump of any collusion with Russia, or Pres. Putin.

All of the Intelligence Community - Brennan, Comey, Clapper, to name a few, who are all Obama lackeys - have used the complicit MSM to try and convince the public masses that there's something there.

The recent spectacle of the FBI agent Strzok testifying before the Congressional Committee investigating evidence of bias to overthrow our nation's electoral process was an over the top display of the arrogance of government employees hellbent on taking out an elected president simply because he hated Trump's guts.

Then, there's the conservatives in Trump's own administration who've either recused themselves, or failed to carry out their duty as government officials; Sessions, Gowdy, Wrey, to name a few, who are all Trump lackeys.

The people of the country, however, are still supportive of Trump's handling of things due to the fact that he's making changes which impact the country in a positive fashion. Yet, they are also frustrated that our DOJ appears impotent in handling the growing evidence which reveals that the left's bias against Trump is not adequately being dealt with.

Business as usual in the swamp! However, I have faith in the people of the nation that the blindfold of lady justice will return to its place in time. Trump's approval numbers during these recent periods of uncertainty have risen, which has made them bonkers, despite all of this media circus and calls by some members of the leftist/socialist party to increase the level of resistance to a violent level.

Brennan and the 2016 Spy Scandal

This is one of WSJ's most important editorial reports in recent months. It sheds a lot of light on Brennan's activity... how the "Russian collusion" meme was started:

POTOMAC WATCH

By Kimberley A. Strassel

The Trump Russia sleuthers have been back in the news, again giving Americans cause to doubt their claims of nonpartisanship. Last week it was Federal Bureau of Investigation agent Peter Strzok testifying to Congress that he harbored no bias against a president he still describes as “horrible” and “disgusting.” This week it was former FBI Director Jim Comey tweet-lecturing Americans on their duty to vote Democratic in November.

But the man who deserves a belated bit of scrutiny is former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan. He’s accused President Trump of “venality, moral turpitude and political corruption,” and berated GOP investigations of the FBI. This week he claimed on Twitter that Mr. Trump’s press conference in Helsinki was “nothing short of treasonous.” This is rough stuff, even for an Obama partisan.That’s what Mr. Brennan is—a partisan—and it is why his role in the 2016 scandal is in some ways more concerning than the FBI’s. Mr. Comey stands accused of flouting the rules, breaking the chain of command, abusing investigatory powers. Yet it seems far likelier that the FBI’s Trump investigation was a function of arrogance and overconfidence than some partisan plot. No such case can be made for Mr.Brennan.

 

\Before his nomination as CIA director, he served as a close Obama adviser. And the record shows he went on to use his position—as head of the most powerful spy agency in the world—to assist Hillary Clinton’s campaign (and keep his job).Mr. Brennan has taken credit for launching the Trump investigation. At a House Intelligence Committee hearing in May 2017, he explained that he became “aware of intelligence and information about contacts between Russian officials and U.S. persons.” The CIA can’t investigate U.S. citizens, but he made sure that “every information and bit of intelligence” was “shared with the bureau,” meaning the FBI. This information, he said, “served as the basis for the FBI investigation.” My sources suggest Mr. Brennan was overstating his initial role, but either way, by his own testimony, he as an Obama-Clinton partisan was pushing information to the FBI and pressuring it to act.

More notable, Mr. Brennan then took the lead on shaping the narrative that Russia was interfering in the election specifically to help Mr. Trump— which quickly evolved into the Trump-collusion narrative. Team Clinton was eager to make the claim, especially in light of the Democratic National Committee server hack. Numerous reports show Mr. Brennan aggressively pushing the same line internally. Their problem was that as of July 2016 even then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper didn’t buy it. He publicly refused to say who was responsible for the hack, or ascribe motivation.

Mr. Brennan also couldn’t get the FBI to sign on to the view; the bureau continued to believe Russian cyberattacks were aimed at disrupting the U.S. political system generally, not aiding Mr. Trump.

The CIA director couldn’t himself go public with his Clinton spin—he lacked the support of the intelligence community and had to be careful not to be seen interfering in U.S. politics. So what to do? He called Harry Reid. In a late August briefing, he told the Senate minority leader that Russia was trying to help Mr. Trump win the election, and that Trump advisers might be colluding with Russia. (Two years later, no public evidence has emerged to support such a claim.)

But the truth was irrelevant. On cue, within a few days of the briefing, Mr. Reid wrote a letter to Mr. Comey, which of course immediately became public. “The evidence of a direct connection between the Russian government and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign continues to mount,” wrote Mr. Reid, going on to float Team Clinton’s Russians are- helping-Trump theory. Mr. Reid publicly divulged at least one of the allegations contained in the infamous Steele dossier, insisting that the FBI use “every resource available to investigate this matter.”The Reid letter marked the first official blast of the Brennan- Clinton collusion narrative into the open. Clinton opposition- research firm Fusion GPS followed up by briefing its media allies about the dossier it had dropped off at the FBI.

On Sept. 23, Yahoo News’s Michael Isikoff ran the headline: “U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump adviser and Kremlin.” Voilà. Not only was the collusion narrative out there, but so was evidence that the FBI was investigating.In their recent book “Russian Roulette,” Mr. Isikoff and David Corn say even Mr. Reid believed Mr. Brennan had an “ulterior motive” with the briefing, and “concluded the CIA chief believed the public needed to know about the Russia operation, including the information about the possible links to the Trump campaign.” (Brennan allies have denied his aim was to leak damaging information.)

Clinton supporters have a plausible case that Mr. Comey’s late-October announcement that the FBI had reopened its investigation into the candidate affected the election. But Trump supporters have a claim that the public outing of the collusion narrative and FBI investigation took a toll on their candidate. Politics was at the center of that outing, and Mr. Brennan was a ringmaster. Remember that when reading his next“treason”tweet.

Signs of Panic and Desperation

The extreme hysteria of the liberal left mouthpiece - the MSM alphabet soup channels ABC, NBC, CBS  MSNBC & CNN - have all gone bonkers over the presser of the Helsinki summit which recently occurred in Finland between Pres. Trump and Pres. Putin.

It's clear to anyone who's been around for more than just a few decades that they are counting on the ignorance of millennials who don't know their history of actions and relations between the two countries.

Mark Levin - recently spoke to this point on Sean Hannity's FOX station about this history - pointing out how the media is being ridiculous; acting as though Pres. Trump's move to establish good relations with Russia through Putin is "treasonous" only because they are still pissed over his winning the presidency over their preferred candidate, Hillary Clinton.

Another Russia expert, Prof. Stephen Cohen of Princeton, also recently spoke on this matter supporting the point that such actions are usually considered the expected job of a sitting president of the past as an attempt to smooth tensions and foster peace between them.

Only those who watch the alphabet soup channels devotedly are believing this total hypocrisy and inconsistency in the comparison to past administrations as an attempt to stir unrest and fervor against Trump.

Liberals and the Law

With the recent escalating run of events in the news about liberals passing laws which have been, or are being, challenged in the courts it's obvious to me that these people's ideology cares nothing about legal precedent or rule of law.

Here's a perfect case in point; one among hundreds over the past several years.

How anyone on the left, or center, of the political spectrum can argue that this is not what they're doing is apparently devoid of any sensible reason, or logic. Having watched Tucker Carlson's nightly show, for instance, ever since it began a few years ago, has made it clear to me that the left's M.O. is to not answer the question asked, but to use counter points, emotion, and count on the ignorance of the audience about the topic to combat the counter point.

The concept of freedom is bastardized into meaning "I can do whatever I want, with no one telling me I can't, regardless of the action." in their world. In other words, forget any kind of morality in society. The concept of citizenship in our country is one of globalism and a border that does not exist because that would be racist. The idea of law and order are out the window because it is counter to their ideology that nationalism is a positive one that protects the citizens of a country.

Consider the following video of an interview of the Polish Prime Minister answering questions from a European news show about immigration as a comparison:

As Hannity keeps pointing out on his show, the liberal/socialists don't want to propose anything that will improve all citizen's situation. Instead, they want to:

• Rescind the tax cuts
• Impeach President Trump
• Keep Obamacare
• Block Supreme Court Nominees
• Have Open Borders

Major Cities of the U.S.

Finally, someone has pointed out concisely what has been obvious to me and many others for years now.

What do you think the common thread is among the prominent cities in the U.S.?

It's been pointed out using the more obvious city of Detroit in the past; comparing it to the reverse circumstance of Hiroshima, Japan. While Hiroshima was bombed out with the first ever nuclear detonation in 1945 to help end WWII, Detroit was the shining jewel of the mid-west that same year.

Now, Detroit more recently has parts which look as though it was hit with a nuclear detonation of its own, while Hiroshima is the shining jewel.

Nick Kangadis, of MRCTV, explains the common thread between the major cities in the U.S. today and their deplorable condition. I know... I've had to deal with the homeless just getting to work & at where I work downtown; tents, RVs, lean-tos, stench, filth, needles, alcohol, vomit, pan-handling, etc.

Your Tax Dollars Are Paying For THIS!

If this type of advertising by Planned Parenthood, which is funded by our tax dollars, doesn't illustrate the level of depravity our culture has stooped to, then please, show me what is.

Pundit Gateway has posted a video of the ad at this link of their site. Watch - you must scroll down the page to find it - and see if you don't agree that this is outrageous and despicable.

Is the FCC going to allow such a vulgar ad to air in New York?

What's even more infuriating to me is that, as the article points out, Congress fully funded P.P. in its 2018 budget!

Is Trey Gowdy A "Mole"?

This news, especially for me as someone who's considered Rep. Trey Gowdy as A.G. material, is very disturbing because of the points made in this article from Need To Know.

There are two pieces of information on this page which are a video from a recent interview of Gowdy on Face the Nation, and an audio clip from Mark Levin's radio show about him. I urge you to watch the first, then listen to the second of these pieces of information about Gowdy.

After watching and listening to them myself - and I must provide full disclosure here, I am a big fan of "The Great One" as Sean Hannity likes to call him - I'm seeing Gowdy in a different light now because I find it difficult to argue against the points Levin makes about him.

How about you?
= = = = = = = =
Here's what one friend replied with directly to me:

I think Gowdy is "controlled oppostion".  He makes a lot of noise, and people cheer, but nothing ever gets done (Benghazi).The last straw was just recently when he came out AGAINST impeaching Rod Rosenstein, despite lots of GOP wanting to do so.  IMHO, he exists to lead conservative anger and energy away from the targets.

Also, as a "people reader", I think that Gowdy has a very flat affect to his face.  He seems to have only one expression, total.  Also, his eyes seem lifeless, with no spark behind them.

Interesting that after a lifetime of clawing his way up the political ladder, with his party firmly in charge of everything, he suddenly decides to resign and "pursue his legal career".

Uh-huh... 

The Facts Our MSM Refuses to Report

This post Helsinki, Finland madness by both the MSM and our nation's obviously corrupt Intel community is, to say the least, amusing for us who know the truth they refuse to report about and admit exists.

Take Sean Hannity's Opening Monologue for yesterday, July 17th.

If you watched it, you already know what I'm referring to here. For those who've not had the chance to, I provide a link to it here so that you can, and decide for yourself whether the MSM and the Intel community have gone totally berserk. It's well worth the time - 17+ minutes. And... there's also the not so well known truth about former CIA Director, John Brenan who's been saying pretty astounding things about Pres. Trump after the summit in Helsinki.

For a different perspective on this topic, I suggest checking out this video blurb from Lt. Col. Allen West's commentary as well.Then there's Tucker Carlson's opening commentary on his show just yesterday speaking about the direction our democracy is headed if the MSM and the "Deep State" has its way.

Footnote: I highly recommend seeing my previous post on what Putin mentioned in the presser in Helsinki about the $400K in funds sent to the Hillary campaign; it's a real eye opener on why the Intel community is going nuts about Trumps remarks and behavior in Finland.

Putin Reveals Who's Behind Meme of Russian Collusion

Well, it seems that, once this is validated, the "cat is out of the bag" to coin a phrase. This revelation tells us the Intel community/Deep State has been behind this whole "Russian collusion" meme as a way to shift blame to Trump because they are afraid of what he - being unexpectedly elected instead of Hillary - intends to do; dismantle the long standing control of the national policy apparatus on foreign policy... especially with Russia.

Read the details here. 

However, according to Dick Morris, there's more to this story than what Putin has disclosed in Helsinki. It seems there a lot of corruption being disclosed in this story.

America's Hunters

A blogger added up the deer license sales in just a handful of states and arrived at a striking conclusion: There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin...

 

Allow me to restate that number: 600,000!            

         Over the last several months, Wisconsin 's hunters became the 8th largest army in the world.            
(That's more men under arms than in Iran. More than France and Germany combined.)          

These men, deployed to the woods of a single American state, Wisconsin, to hunt with firearms, And NO ONE WAS KILLED.

                That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania's and Michigan's 700,000 hunters,    
ALL OF WHOM HAVE RETURNED HOME SAFELY.          

Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia, and it literally establishes the fact that the hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world.  And then add in the total number of hunters in the other 46 states. It's millions more.

              ________  The point?  ________                             America will forever be safe from foreign invasion with that kind of home-grown firepower!    
Hunting... it's not just a way to fill the freezer.    
    It's also a matter of national security.                       
   That's why all enemies, foreign and domestic, want to see us disarmed.   Food for thought, when next we consider gun control.  Overall it's true, so if we disregard some assumptions that hunters don't possess the same skills as soldiers, the question would still remain...

 

What army of 2 million would want to face 30 million, 40 million, or 50 million armed citizens???   
For the sake of our freedom, don't ever allow gun control or confiscation of guns.                 

 

I feel good that I have an army of millions who would protect our land, and I sure don't want the government taking control of the possession of firearms.     

 

 

AMERICA!    Designed by geniuses.  Now run by idiots.

Armed legal citizens are not the problem!