Getting aggravated and Ill...

[Rev.Hammer]

Okay, Unless Michelle or Sue or Whomever close this thread, I am going to post things that I find of massive concern to all AMERICANS and what is SO HORRIBLY wrong with this current administration.

Y'all, I am scared of this man. He does NOT care for this country, only getting what he wants.

SO, here goes. Someone HAS to say it. SOMEONE has to take the heat.

[Rev.Hammer]

Does anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ..... during the Carter Administration?


Americans have spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency that it seems that no one can remember.
The Department of Energy was instituted on 8-04-1977 TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.

32 years later
24.2 BILLION a year later
16000 Federal Employees later
100000 Contract Employees later

AND WE HAVE NO RESULTS!!
The government is now going to throw MORE money at a program that has FAILED.


So, how good do you think that they will do with the Banking and Car Business?


And yet.. here we sit... and say nothing and do nothing.

[Rev.Hammer]

Here is the latest Democrat power grab, this time to essentially federalize food production.

http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=14513

I quote:

HR 875 charges the administrator of FSA with developing a national food safety program to protect the public health [Section 201(a)(1)]. In carrying out the program, the administrator must “adopt and implement a national system for regular unannounced inspection of food establishments” [Section 201(c)(2)]. With respect to ‘food production facilities’ (farms), FSA is given the power by the bill to visit and inspect them to determine that they are operating in compliance with the food safety law [Section 206(a)(1)]–under HR 875 ‘food safety law’ refers to provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act, provisions of the Public Health Services Act, and the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009 itself [Section 3(15)]. In addition, the agency would have the power to have access to and copy all records maintained by farms in order to be able to (1) determine whether the food is contaminated, adulterated or otherwise not in compliance with the food safety law or (2) track the food in commerce [Sections 206(b)]. Under Section 210 of the bill which is entitled “Traceback Requirements”, FSA is charged with establishing a national traceability system that requires farmers to keep records that enable FSA to track “the history, use, and location of an item of food” [Section 210(c)].


(14) FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITY- The term ‘food production facility’ means any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal-feeding operation.

No exclusions, no limitations. You grow it, you’re included.

OBAMA KNOWS BETTER AND YOU DONT!

[Sharp Charge]

Hmmmm.....

If I recall, doesn't the DOE over see the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and control the Nuc plants? They may have failed at the intended goal, but have evolved into another.

[Rev.Hammer]

The house today just passed the largest budget in the history of the US. Right now we are in so much debt that it would cost each American (man, woman and child) would owe about $36K. What does the Democratic led house do, pass the largest budget in history at $3.55 Trillion, and yes that is with a T. We are in debt, we have no money, we have to borrow from the Chinese, who essentially own us now, and our elected representatives are going to spend another $3.55 Trillion. Does anyone want to explain to me how this is a smart thing? Can anyone defend this as being responsible? I know some out there will defend this. I just talked to a friend tonight that is still singing "The Obama's" and congresses praises and can't even call a fiend a fiend anymore. So yeah, some out there think that spending our way out of debt is a good thing. I just want an explanation as to how this is a smart and responsible thing for us to do and I can't seem to get one, which tells me that it's not.

Nancy Pelosi is like a giddy school girl in her interviews. It passed 233 to 196 vote (party line vote). 20 democrats had a flash of common sense long enough to vote no.

Wasteful spending is all this is and it can't be explained no other way. I wish I could spend more than I brought in and expect others to pay for it. What a sweet deal that would be. Apparently 233 members of our house think that way. From 95 to 99 the government grew 2% a year, from 2000 to 08 it grew 6.1% a year and I would be willing to bet that it grows by more than 10% this year. Of course none of that means that we aren't headed for socialism and total government control as hard as we can go now does it? But the people wanted Hope and Change and that is exactly what the rest of us will have to stomach for the next 4 years. Were screwed, we are headed to socialism. History has proved that it fails and it will fail this time well. The only problem is that it's happening to my country.

Disagree if you like, it's your right, but when the gov't can start to tell corporations when to fire their president, something is terribly wrong. Jefferson, Adams, Monroe, Madison, Franklin and the rest of our founding fathers would be disgusted by what we call a government today.

Oh well, here's to my tax dollars being wasted, bigger government, double digit inflation rates, free crappy health care that will probably kill you and me, a debt that our kids kids will have to pay off.



AINT ' HOPE AND CHANGE ' just AWESOME!?!?!?!?!

[Mr. OAM]

I use this analogy to explain to people what I see.

My house might need a new roof, paint or siding, windows, a wall in the basement might be bowed and need shoring up, and maybe water comes up through the basement floor. All of these things need to be repaired, but if I take out a loan to fix them all at once I will not be able to make my house payment and I will lose the house.

This is what Obama is doing. He thinks he is going to fix everything at once and he is breaking the bank.

He stated repeatedly that he is under the weight of having inherited a $1.5 trillion deficit and what does he plan to do? Spend 7 to 9 trillion more over the next 4 years. I need someone with an accounting degree to explain that to me.

He is also using the situation to implement his plan. He will help people when they need help and are willing to take help from the government, and learn that the gov will take care of them, expect more from the government, and get used to it instead of taking a little help when you need it and then standing on your own feet after that.


He has big ideas for people that are looking to the gov for help. He points out situations where people need help and what he is going to do for them. Then people get a "Hey, what about me?" attitude and he talks about things the gov will do for them as well. Now you are getting millions used to the idea that they should be getting from the government. How does the gov pay for this? Where does this magic money come from? Those of us taking care of ourselves, doing what it takes to be successful, and then getting extra taxes for it, so that my money can be given to those that the government owes, at least that's what those people believe.

It's Obama's redistribution of wealth.

It is easiest to win and influence people when they are hurting. When you can provide them with hope. They are already looking to you for "something" they can grab onto. You make more sense to them when you are talking about helping them, what you say sounds appealing, especially when it is about helpful things.......even though they are not in your authority to do, but you want to help so you must be good. Even though there are laws in place that say you can't do what you are saying they will look the other way because it helps them.

....and then the door is open.


We are now getting the message that rich people got their money by stealing it from you. They got their money because of self entitlement. They are rich and as a result you have lost out.

Sure, there has been a percentage of this, we see them on the news. But that is a minority of those that are rich. Most got rich by reasonable means, and a crapload of chance taking, work, and sacrifice. Achieving rich is supposed to be a reward but instead it is being made to look like a crime. And those criminals need to be punished and your money that they have given back to you.......and that is total crap, but millions are being influenced this way.

This is the land of opportunity. You are supposed to be able to get rich, if you choose to do what it takes. That was one of the great freedoms of this country, the pursuit of happiness.....you are not supposed to be punished for it.


We can't let this stuff happen like this. It happened in the 1930's in Europe. Congress is on spring break now so they have plenty of time to read email from their constituents. That's what I'll be doing this weekend.



Steve

[Rev.Hammer]

And now he sets his sights on Hardcore Hardware that has helped keep US free for so long... our Nuclear Arsenal.
Hey, why not invite our enemies in?


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/20901.html



Oddly enough on the same day Kim Jong Il lobs one over Japan!

North Korea launches missile in 'satellite test'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...lite-test.html

[Dr. HEMIwoman]

Trust me Scott, it is a daily conversation in our house about what is happening...very disheartening and scary.

[Rev.Hammer]

[Rev.Hammer]

Why not? every one else is!

[Rev.Hammer]

Mr. Obama,
Isn't it great to have rich guys that will argue your side of ideology?
Especially if they are going to directly reap the rewards!

Billionaire Buffett benefits from bailout he promoted



http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...s/6358451.html

http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/1756261.html

[Mr. OAM]

Originally Posted by Rev.Hammer

And now he sets his sights on Hardcore Hardware that has helped keep US free for so long... our Nuclear Arsenal.
Hey, why not invite our enemies in?


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/20901.html

A guy on our local radio station brought up a good point. Obama wants to rid the world of nukes. Ok, who goes first? And for whoever is last, who can make them get rid of their's?

Carter tried it, Reagan tried it. I don't remember if anyone after them tried it, but since then India and Pakistan gained nukes, and North Korea may have them, aided by President Clinton providing all plans to them for a nuclear power facility believing that was the only reason they wanted nuke technology.

Obama stated that North Korea must be stopped or encouraged (not sure which sentiment he used) to not pursue obtaining these "illegal" weapons. That was not a very careful word to use because then that means the US has plenty of "illegal" weapons. It seems pretty hypocritical to tell another country it is illegal to have what you yourself have......but your's are not illegal.


Steve

[Rev.Hammer]

Originally Posted by Mr. OAM

A guy on our local radio station brought up a good point. Obama wants to rid the world of nukes. Ok, who goes first? And for whoever is last, who can make them get rid of their's?

Carter tried it, Reagan tried it. I don't remember if anyone after them tried it, but since then India and Pakistan gained nukes, and North Korea may have them, aided by President Clinton providing all plans to them for a nuclear power facility believing that was the only reason they wanted nuke technology.

Obama stated that North Korea must be stopped or encouraged (not sure which sentiment he used) to not pursue obtaining these "illegal" weapons. That was not a very careful word to use because then that means the US has plenty of "illegal" weapons. It seems pretty hypocritical to tell another country it is illegal to have what you yourself have......but your's are not illegal.


Steve

EXCEPTIONALLY good point!

[Rev.Hammer]

WHILE WE ARE ON THE SUBJECT OF WEAPONS:






Subject:The Gun Ban list is out.
Here it is folks, and it is bad news. The framework for legislation is always laid, and the Democrats have the votes to pass anything they want to impose upon us. They really do not believe you need anything more than a brick to defend your home and family. Look at the list and see how many you own. Remember, it is registration, then confiscation. It has happened in the UK, in Australia, in Europe, in China, and what they have found is that for some reason the criminals do not turn in their weapons, but will know that you did. Please send this to everyone you can. It will come up for a vote, and it might even be a secret vote if Madame Pelosi has her way, and then it will be a done deal. ...thanks to Colonel Rus...Hal.





Right to own a gun Remember, The first step in establishing a dictatorship is to disarm the citizens.




Subject: Gun Law Update by Alan Korwin, Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list. Forward or send to every gun owner you know...Gun Law Update by Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America. Jan. 5, 2008. Gun-ban list proposed. Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress) It serves as a framework for the new list the Brady's plan to introduce shortly. I have an outline of the Brady's current plans and targets of opportunity, It's horrific. They're going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They've made little mention of criminals. Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states' rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment. The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):




Rifles (or copies or duplicates):

• M1 Carbine,
• Sturm Ruger Mini-14,
• AR-15,
• Bushmaster XM15,
• Armalite M15,
• AR-10,
• Thompson 1927,
• Thompson M1;
• AK,
• AKM,
• AKS,
• AK-47,
• AK-74,
• ARM,
• MAK90,
• NHM 90,
• NHM 91,
• SA 85,
• SA 93,
• VEPR;
• Olympic Arms PCR;
• AR70,
• Calico Liberty ,
• Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU,
• Fabrique National FN/FAL,
• FN/LAR, or FNC,
• Hi-Point20Carbine,
• HK-91,
• HK-93,
• HK-94,
• HK-PSG-1,
• Thompson 1927 Commando,
• Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;
• Saiga,
• SAR-8,
• SAR-4800,
• SKS with detachable magazine,
• SLG 95,
• SLR 95 or 96,
• Steyr AU,
• Tavor,
• Uzi,
• Galil and Uzi Sporter,
• Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ).

Pistols (or copies or duplicates):

• Calico M-110,
• MAC-10,
• MAC-11, or MPA3,
• Olympic Arms OA,
• TEC-9,
• TEC-DC9,
• TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10,
• Uzi.

Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):

• Armscor 30 BG,
• SPAS 12 or LAW 12,
• Striker 12,
• Streetsweeper. Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):

A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has:


(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below),
(iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.


Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles).


A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has:


(i) a second pistol grip,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a barrel shroud or
(iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and
(v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.


A semiautomatic shotgun with:


(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a pistol grip (see definition below),
(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, and
(iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.


Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.


Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will:


Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any "semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General." Note that Obama's pick for this office (Eric Holder, confirmation hearing set for Jan. 15) wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home.


In making this determination, the bill says, "there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event." In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.


The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn't have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose -- is that devious or what? And of course, "sporting purpose" is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.




Respectfully submitted, Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America http://www.gunlaws.com/gloa.htm




Forward or send to every gun owner you know.

We are on our way to being subjects and not citizens....

[Rev.Hammer]

The UN is finally honest about its intents!

At least they're openly admitted that the purpose of such plans is not environmental protection but rather to complete totalitarian control of both national sovereignty and the individual lives of citizens.

You might ask who comes up with this ****? Scientists? Economists?..:

'In the stultifying language that is normal for important U.N. conclaves, the negotiators are known as the "Ad Hoc Working Group On Further Commitments For Annex I Parties Under the Kyoto Protocol."'


Its djinn like these that give lawyers a bad name.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510937,00.html



And of course our President is absolutlely infatuated with the UN!!!

[Rev.Hammer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WINDtlPXmmE

What the hell is wrong with us? WHEN ARE WE GOING TO GET TIRED OF THIS!?!?! When are we going to remember that we are AMERICANS DAMMIT!?!?!
WHEN ARE WE GOING TO FINALLY GET A GUTFULL OF THE DAILY SEWERAGE BEING PACKED DOWN OUR THROATS THAT WE ARE AN EVIL, IMPERIALISTIC, GREEDY, AND HOMOCIDAL BUNCH OF FAT BASTARDS!!

YES! YES I AM MAD AS HELL AND I AM SICK OF BEING THE ASSTARGET OF THE LIBERALS AND REST OF THE WORLD!


ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! I AND A LOT LIKE ME HAVE HAD MORE THAN ENOUGH!!

[Rev.Hammer]

You STILL THINK IM PARANOID!?!?!

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...cle=1&catnum=3

Pelosi: 'We Want Registration'; Holder: 2A Won't 'Stand In The Way'; SAF: 'Gloves Are Off'


"Holder was asked if the administration might encounter constitutional issues as it tries to crack down on alleged gun trafficking. His response: "I don't think our Second Amendment will stand in the way of efforts we have begun and will expand upon."


Coming soon to a country near you:

AMERIKA

[Ken]

And why is this mess, Obama's fault?

Was he the president for the last eight years?

Did you ever notice- It's always the Democrats fault, The Republicans never accept any responsibility for the mess they cause?

Off my , flamesuit on!
Ken

[Mr. OAM]

Its Obama's fault if he signs it into law. However, the dems have much more confidence to go forward with pursuing their plan for gun bans with Obama in office, which should say something about their confidence that he will sign.



"The administration and Congressional anti-gunners have declared war on gun rights," Gottlieb said. "The press seems deliberately blind to the statements from Pelosi and Holder, who blame our gun rights for their incompetence in dealing with crime. More than 90 million gun owners haven't hurt anybody, and they are tired of being treated like criminals."


That one scares me. This article metions illegal arms sales to Mexico as the reason for all this.


The NRA stated that they are unable to get the serial numbers of the guns confiscated by the Mexcian government from the Mexican drug henchmen. He stated that these are guns that the US Government sold to the Mexican Government for military and Law Enforcement, but are actually in the hands of the criminals. He was suggesting corrupt practices in the Mexican government, selling of the US weapons to the drug lords. The NRA is unable to get these serial numbers from either the Mexican Government or the US government officials that are "aiding" the Mexican government with their "problem". These numbers would prove the origin of who they came from, and would also prove that they are not from the regular citizens of the US.

The Gov. is using what's going on in Mexico as a reason for encroaching upon our gun rights in the US.


Steve

[Rev.Hammer]

Mr.Obama's fault? No, it is his reponsibility to manage.
Before anyone thinks that I am in love with Republicans or Former President Bush, THINK AGAIN.
The Republican party has totally cut off thier own manhood. They are repetively making the mistake of trying to beat the Democrats at their own game by playing their game.
This is failure.

The decisions that Mr.Obama makes are HIS fault.
The decisions that The people that Mr.Obama hires are HIS fault.

THE AFOREMENTIONED POSTS ARE HIS FAULTS....

Oh yeah, so's we can get this out in the open:
I am, if anything, best described as a constituionalist libertarian and a social malcontent.
I absolutely believe that humanity would best served by the Federal and State government getting out of our:

Pockets
Gun cabinets
Bedrooms
Businesses
Cars
Schools

I know how to live my life better than anyone and I damn well dont need Johnny Fed or Sammy State nutgrabbin me every step of the way.