The American Ruling Class

[rickoff]

my 'side' has been holding out, emphasising 'border security' before any 'amnesty' or 'path to citesenship'; thing is, the MAIN flaw of the 1986 'Comprehensive' Immigration law was not that the border security wasn't increased, (although that WAS a problem). The MAIN way that the law 'fell apart' was in WORKPLACE enforcement; THAT is the INCENTIVE for illegal immigration.

Barry and his administration have made it clear that they don't want any kind of enforcement rules tied to immigration "reform." Of course that's why the 10 ICE agents sued administration officials in the first place. They were being told not to enforce the laws that already exist, and were threatened with reprisal if they did enforce those laws. You're right, in that illegal aliens only come here for the incentives offered to do so - incentives such as jobs, welfare, anchor babies, etc. The simple reformative cure-all for this problem is to take all those incentives away, deport all those who came here illegally, and not to offer any kind of amnesty. Those who came here illegally should be barred from ever becoming US citizens, rather than given a pathway to citizenship. They didn't care about obeying US laws when they came here illegally, so why would we think they would care now? Why should they be granted work permits when 20 million Americans are jobless? Why should they be allowed to stay a single day longer than they already have, while those legally seeking to gain work permits and/or immigrate here have to go through all the hurdles and wait their turn in line? It's all such a farce.

[rickoff]

Feinstein's gun ban surprise

We keep hearing how Feinstein's proposed assault weapon ban would end up banning perhaps 150 or so gun models, particularly those semi-automatics which feature a magazine and a "pistol grip." What the media hasn't told us, though, is that page 13 of Feinstein's proposed legislation defines a "pistol grip" as "a grip, a thumb-hole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip." So, in other words, any semi-automatic firearm, with anything on it you can grip, would be banned under Feinstein's gun ban legislation.

To add to this insulting assault on Second Amendment rights, Feinstein's gun ban would only affect law abiding citizens. Government bureaucrats and criminals (hmmm, is there really a difference?) would remain unaffected by this legislation. And as the effort to disarm law abiding citizens goes ahead full force, we see government agencies actually thinking that they need more armament for themselves. It's utter hypocrisy. Right now, for example, the DHS is requesting an extra 7,000 "personal defense weapons" - which Feinstein calls "assault weapons" if held by anyone outside of government - for their own officials. And that's not all. These weapons have clips that hold 30-rounds, three times the size of those that Feinstein wants to consider as the maximum allowable under law! Furthermore, these are "select-fire" weapons, which means they can either be used as semi-automatics or as fully automatic. Think about it - if all the "bad and scary" guns are removed from public hands, then isn't this supposed to make everyone safer? Isn't that what they claim this is all about? And if everyone would be safer, and therefore feel safer, then why would DHS need more personal defense than they already have? Shouldn't all laws which apply to the public also apply to those in government? Why the double standard?

[aljhoa]

It often SEEMS to be the case, that 'we' (humans) accuse our 'opposition' of that which 'we' ourselves, are doing.
Don't know WHY this is so,....(subconscious?), but it certainly seems common.

So, accuse your 'enemy' of that which you, yourself, are doing. Is it a deliberate 'tactic', or unconscious, or some of each? I don't know, (or care, really) but it certainly is common.

And then the question facing our generation will be, can the Jewish people survive without an external enemy? Give me war, give me pogrom, give me disaster, and I know what to do; give me peace and tranquility, and I'm lost.

My idea of Judaism can be represented through a classic Talmudic dilemma: You are walking along by the river and there are two people drowning.
One is Rabbi [Meir] Kahane, and the other is the Dalai Lama.
You can only save one of them. For whom will you jump?
If you jump for Rabbi Kahane because genetically he's Jewish, you belong to a different camp than mine, because I would jump for the Dalai Lama.
As much as he's not genetically Jewish, he's my Jewish brother when it comes to my value system.
That's the difference between me and the Jewish establishment in Israel and America.
Can the Jewish People Survive Without an Enemy? - TIME

[FuzzyTomCat]

We keep hearing how Feinstein's proposed assault weapon ban would end up banning perhaps 150 or so gun models, particularly those semi-automatics which feature a magazine and a "pistol grip." What the media hasn't told us, though, is that page 13 of Feinstein's proposed legislation defines a "pistol grip" as "a grip, a thumb-hole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip." So, in other words, any semi-automatic firearm, with anything on it you can grip, would be banned under Feinstein's gun ban legislation.

Hi Rick, members and guests,

For those whom don't have a copy of Feinstein's proposed assault weapon ban here it is .....



Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. WHITEHOUSE,
Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. ROCKEFELLER, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mrs.
BOXER, Mr. REED, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. CARDIN,
Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mr. SCHATZ, Mr. MURPHY, and Ms. WARREN)

Here is a

Summary of 2013 Feinstein Assault Weapons Legislation

Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
o 120 specifically-named firearms
o Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic
o Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept
more than 10 rounds

Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
o Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test
o Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test
o

Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds. Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
o Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment
o Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes and
o Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons

Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
o Background check of owner and any transferee;
o Type and serial number of the firearm;
o Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
o Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
o Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration

This is what I call a "GUN GRAB" and a total violation of our Constitutional rights under the "Second Amendment"

Glen

[sampojo]

It often SEEMS to be the case, that 'we' (humans) accuse our 'opposition' of that which 'we' ourselves, are doing.
Don't know WHY this is so,....(subconscious?), but it certainly seems common.

Notice the recent comments by Shumer, etc., that the NRA is using this issue to raise $, by causing 'unrealistic' fear in Gun owners, that 'we want to take away their guns'; in fact, its obvious that GC 'advocates' like Schumer, are using Sandy hook as a 'fund-raiser', by instilling FEAR in non-gun owners, in order to raise 'enough $ to counter-act the 'unbelievble amount of influence' of the NRA.

So, accuse your 'enemy' of that which you, yourself, are doing. Is it a deliberate 'tactic', or unconscious, or some of each? I don't know, (or care, really) but it certainly is common.

This technique is known as "projection". Hitler's Mein Kampf quote was a perfect example a few posts back. Statist, socialist and communists all use this. And I have heard it is a tactic taught in Saul Aulinksy's Rules For Radicals,which our president uses every day with his lies. He taught it in his communist, er, community, organizing too. How about the one where he is all of a sudden a gun user himself. So how could he want to limit American's gun rights, is the obvious message. Of course this will just assuage a large percentage of those who aren't "watching the other hand", those who don't understand the healthy tension between a govt and it's armed citizenry somewhat able to protect itself from a tyrannical government that it provides. And what will those who wish to enslave us completely do next, but move surreptitiously to finish the job. How about the executive order that said the government can move in and commandeer property by a block representative under direct authority of the president released around February last year, the same weekend the media attacked the Zimmerman Martin incident. That's called a distraction. And who is the father of all lies but who Saul Aulinsky dedicated his book to, Lucifer. Why do supposed atheist's admire God's antagonist so much?

The concept of projection is simple. Accuse your opponents of the very thing your are trying to do before they do. That makes it almost impossible for opponents to then try to expose the truth, because it sounds like your a kid in the playground going "No you did it", and everyone thinks "how silly". The press never gives his opponents a forum unless its limited and disadvantageous anyway. We are in big trouble.

[john_g]

In the UK, the conservative party (main part of government) is now inspired also by Saul Alinsky - makes you wonder what the hell is really going on:

David Cameron's Big Society is a grotesque fantasy inspired by leftist subversive Saul Alinsky – Telegraph Blogs

[aljhoa]

Rules for Radicals:
A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals is the last book written by community organizer Saul D. Alinsky, published in 1971

In the UK, the conservative party (main part of government) is now inspired also by Saul Alinsky - makes you wonder what the hell is really going on:

.

Rules for Radicals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Al

[rickoff]

[5150]

Ex-Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle died pursuing his passion - U.S. News

[dutchdivco]

What/why

This 'obsession' with 'pistol grips' on rifles? How does haveing a 'pistol grip' enable you till kill 'lots of people in a short period of time', whereas NOT having a 'pistol grip' doesn't?
The 'istol grip' came about as a result of 'ergonomics'; the study of how the body works,and designing things, (tools, furniture, etc) to take this knowledge into account.
One only has to look at the 'shot SEEN round the world', i.e. the picture of o'bummer shooting a rifle. His LEFT hand, (yeah, he's LEFT handed, ironic, but a LOT of Presidents have been) you can see how its 'gripping' the shotgun stock. Ergonomics tells us this isn't the BEST way, and for repetitive motion, can lead tothings like 'carpal tunnel'. Its BETTER to have the hand gripping something at 90 degrees to the forarm, like with a 'pistol grip', which is why MODERN rifle design, initially adopted by the military, encorporated 'pistol' grips.
Ahhhhh, its so rediculous! And yes, this definetly IS a big push, and I am beginning to believe a LOT of this is deliberate; Fast and Furious WAS intending to get lots of weapons into the drug cartels hands, sotheir would be a 'push' to control guns, media is definetly 'on board', etc.

In MANY areas, the 'liberals' feel they have the 'conservatives routed, and (either) they are trying to make as much progress in their agenda as they can (Make hay while the sun shines) OR they think they have/are cementing a permanent majority, and are simply going to Dominate from here on out.

Happened before, and USUALLY it works like a pendulum; the party dominating over-reaches, the 'public' responds, and things swing back the other way. IS it 'different' this time?,.....I guess time will tell.Jim

[rickoff]

You make some valid points, 5150. Sure, Chris was a Navy Seal, and the Seals are largely into "black ops" that involve killing the "enemy." This is what he was trained to do, and Seals don't usually question their orders - they just carry them out. Snipers look at a person in the far off distance as merely a target, rather than as a human being, and that makes killing much more palatable than it would be in one-on-one close combat. That human has usually done nothing to personally attack, or threaten to attack, the sniper, and isn't even aware of the sniper's existence, so how can such killings be justifiably thought of as acts of heroism? Chris was really no different than a Mafia hitman, executing whomever he was told to, and earning his pay in this manner. Of course he probably wasn't paid nearly as much as a mafia hitman, but I'll bet that he liked his job just as much. It probably gives someone a huge power trip ego boost to know they have a license to kill, and that may very well be one of the major incentives as to why men like Chris end up on a black ops team.

[rickoff]

I have mentioned several instances where CNN's Soledad Obrien used her morning show, Starting Point, to promote the Ruling Class/liberal agenda, and to attack opposing viewpoints. She often ended up looking foolish, and with "egg on her face," after being taken down a notch or two by people she was interviewing, such as in this bit with John Sununu, who told her that she might as well put an Obama bumper sticker on her forehead.

As a news show, Starting Point sucked, because it wasn't really news reporting at all. It was always slanted, and directed towards Obamites. It's no wonder that her show was at the bottom of the heap in viewer numbers, and no surprise that CNN management decided last week to cancel Soledad's show. CNN Vice President Bart Federer said that Starting Point's audience was too small and happened to be predominately comprised of minorities. Chris Cuomo and Erin Burnett are said to be scheduled to replace Obrien as co-anchors on a new morning show aimed at capturing a much broader audience. If they'd really like to do that then the answer is quite simple - start reporting real news, fairly and unbiased. I doubt that will happen, though.

[5150]

YChris was a Navy Seal, and the Seals are largely into "black ops" that involve killing the "enemy."

In their pursuit of killing the enemy I think what gets lost is that the American people as a whole along with these soldiers who are actually doing the killings end up losing their souls when they participate in these wars and killings.

History has taught us that it repeats itself yet the fact remains humans are often to stupid to prevent history from repeating itself or learning the lessons of the past.

I predict the USA will fall and one day it will be an embarrassment to proclaim you are or were an American. I get laughed at and ridiculed for this opinion but I am sure there were others who faced the same criticism when they told the Nazi Germans they too would one day fall and it would be an embarrassment to proclaim you were a Nazi.

As for the ego and pride of having a license to kill, yes I can see that but then again I see it everyday when I see most LEOs or anyone working in or around the Federal Government. Seems to be a mentality of feeling being above others and having power and authority over others that is what draws such types to those jobs and the military. Some call it the small d**k syndrome

[5150]

[dutchdivco]

Saw something interesting

On the 'News' last night. Today the Senators from Oregon and Colorado are sponsoring legislation which would legalise marajuina, (sp?) at the federal level, and TAX it. Enforcement would therefore transfer from the DEA, to,....wait for it,...the BATF! (which would the become the BATMF. Theywould be 'responsible' for collecting the TAX on M.J. sales.

Perhaps to enable them to pay for all the ammunition they are going to need, for all the weapons they are buying, in order to enforce the gun laws being proposed? Iknow, if O'bummer needs more $, he just tells the treasury or FED to print more. Still, certainly a 'sop' to a significant portion of his BASE; get everyone 'stoned', they are less likely to notice their rights being taken away.

Mind you, as a 'libertarian' I'm not in FAVOR of 'Drug laws', but this stinks. Its been proposed before, many times; "instead of making these drugs illegal, just tax them". "Conservative Icon" Barry Goldwater supported it, for example.But THIS time, I think it MAY 'have legs'. Jim