But it's for the children

I could have used that one on my post yesterday as well, as that phrase is used for pretty much every Statist/Progressive policy put in place. It's also the last refuge of a scoundrel. When backed into a corner, Progressives will whip this one out there and you're supposed to cower. Why? If you don't, "You hate children!"

What I find ironic is they even use this to justify abortion. I may be of the conservative libertarian/classic liberal persuasion, but abortion is taking a life. Sorry if you don't like it, but my blog, my rules. Don't like it, go outside and play hide and go fuck yourself. Like all manner of killing, there are various degrees and levels of "justification". Because you couldn't take a pill, wrap it up, or just not fuck (heaven forbid, right) isn't one of them. If you're dying or they (the baby) are, that's a whole'nother matter. If you were raped, whole'nother matter. But because you couldn't deal with the concept that the primary purpose of sex is procreation, then it sucks to be you, deal with it.
To that end, Progressives, like King Barry I, make the excuse that abortion is okay because that child wouldn't be cared for or loved. Again, "It's for the children." So you're going to kill it because the birthing machine is too much of a fucking loser to take care of something it created? Sure, that makes sense. Somewhere. Maybe. Or not.

Mandatory states sponsored education - It's for the children.
Federally controlled student loads - It's for the children.
Ban on transfats in cooking - It's for the children.
Ban on salt - It's for the children.
Ban on sugary drinks - It's for the children.
Gun bans, magazine bans, ammo bans - It's for the children.
Federal subsidies for failing green energy companies - It's for the children.
Difficulty getting quality porn - It's for the children.
Poorly edited movies on TV - It's for the children.
FUCK THE CHILDREN!!!
Hey, hey, HEY!!! Pederast!!! Get back here before I beat you with a bicycle chain.
Anyways...

I have a wonderful daughter that has been the biggest blessing of my life. She's grown now, has a house, a husband, and is thinking of having her own. But when she was growing up, my wife and I were responsible for how she was raised, what she ate, what she watched, where she went and with whom, her education, etc... If some parents aren't doing this, too fucking bad. That's life. Some people suck at it and if they spawn, they will make it sucky for their children. I have a niece that is going to be pretty fucked up because her parents are screwed in the head. Not too much I can do about it, other than maybe be there when she falls.

The concepts of "It's for the children" and "It's for your own good" are simply to control you. The people implementing them believe they know how to live your life better than you and so they're going to pass a law to make sure you do it, making you subservient to them. In this country, we have happily welcomed this because it sounded good:
Seat belt laws
Car seat laws
Helmet laws - motorcycle and bicycle
Drinking ages
Drug laws
Sex laws (prostitution, stripping, etc...) 
All the shit in NYC
State education laws
Warning label laws
And so forth and so on
Somewhere along the way, you voted "Yes" on one of these or agreed with the idea, because you thought "Well yeah, that makes sense. I mean, come on, you've gotta be pretty stupid to go diving in a quarry, so I don't have a problem with it."
First 1, then 2, then 5, then 10, then 1000. It doesn't end.

No one wants children to be harmed when action could be taken to prevent it. But 95 times out of 100, it's because A) The parent is a tard or B) The child is a tard (not literally). As the picture yesterday said, "You can't fix stupid". Your parent tells you not to put your hand on the stove because it's hot. You do. You burn yourself. Should there be a law against hot stoves? Give'em time, they'll make one. But what if you did it again? Sorry, you're a fucking retard! This is the problem we're dealing with and why "It's for the children" is allowed to rule the direction of the country.

Statists think of us as children. They're there to help guide us to what is right, in their eyes. This is the utopia of the Progressive because they never want to grow up. As I mentioned before, they want to remain in that college aged "adolescences" all their lives. Someone else pays for their existence, they get to do whatever they please, and they don't have to do much beyond "making good grades"; I.E., do just enough to get by.

The level of stupidity is staggering

I don't know why I read comments on articles anymore. People make my eyes bleed, they really do. And it's not even just the comments anymore. Some of the articles are as daffy as fuck.

The common argument used to defend restrictions on the Natural right to defend ones self from oppression, protected federally by the 2nd Amendment is "restrictions" on the 1st:
"You can't yell fire in a crowded theater." Or as one assmonkey in a comment said, "Child pornography is illegal. So no restrictions on speech would make child porn legal. You want child porn legal."

Fuckin' hell!!! In what way does A have to do with B? And I'm not even comparing the two "freedom of speech" items.
In what manner does my possession of firearms harm you? Single shot guns, revolvers, semi-auto guns, bolt action rifles, lever action guns, shotguns, automatic firearms, "high capacity magazines" 1,000's of rounds of ammunition... in what manner do any of these affect your life unless/until I decide to use them against another human being? Even if used in a way that causes an "accidental firing", the chances of you being hurt by them is miniscule at best, zilch at average.
The "restrictions" on the 1st amendment (and it's not a free speech issue at all) are because they cause direct harm to others. The "fire in a theater" is attempting to prevent causing a riot. Unless there is a fire, the only action your scream such would cause is a rush to exit, possibly resulting in people being trampled or otherwise injured. There is no other outcome to be expected.
As for the fucknut's suggestion of child porn: You're raping a child and filming it. The thought of that alone is enough to make people nauseous. I don't think I have to explain the concept of direct harm here.

It would be like saying "My religion requires that I kidnap and sacrifice a virgin to appease my deity." Really, Skippy? So the rights of this virgin are subservient to your needs?

My possession of guns, ammunition, and accessories in no way detracts from your Natural rights to live unmolested. It's not until you decide to purposely cross into my life with the intent on harming me or restricting my Natural rights will they be used against you. If I attempted to do so without provocation, then I should be punished. Pretty simple.

Now this line of reasoning often leads the average Sheeple to bleat "So people should be able to own rockets and tanks and nuclear weapons, huh???"
Shake your head with a chuckle, sigh, and walk away. They're not going to listen to you anyways. However... if they're doing this just to be contrarian, then the retort is:
If I use any manner of firearm, up to and including automatic weapons, in the proper way, I will only affect my intended target. Even if used sloppily, my chances of harming others beyond my target is minimal. If I'm using it for slaughter, if you'll excuse the term but it fits, then a single person with a .22LR ends my actions.
As for, shall we say, high end ordinance: Proper usage means multiple casualties. Period. End of discussion. Accidental discharge creates a whole new world of shit. "Misuse" a nuke and there goes Vegas. Even properly used... get the idea, kids?

Yes, trying to speak rationally with an irrational person is like trying to have sex with a virgin 19 year old girl who's doing kegal exercises and you have whiskey dick. May sound like a great idea at the start, but you're not going to get anywhere but frustrated.

THIS is the level of moron we're dealing with in the struggle for liberty. They don't want it because it's too hard and requires them to think for themselves. Their numbers are growing. Ours may be as well, but I don't think it'll be fast enough. People who claim to be for liberty still vote for John McCain, Lindsey Graham, John Boehner, and Mittens Romney.

In 1776, the men who declared that we were a free republic knew the consequences of their actions "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately." And if it weren't for a key battle or two turning the tides, they certainly would have. With assmonkey's out there having the beliefs above and the rank-and-file Republicans considering a Yea vote for "universal background checks", what chance does freedom have in our time?

Sorry to be a downer on a Monday, but the sky is dark and the light keeps fading.

I sue you, you sue me...

...We're litigious as can be
With my lawyer here
And a suit from me to you
Consider this
A big fuck you.

Part of the societal collapse that's occurring includes the fact that no one takes "Sorry" for an answer and everyone is out to screw everyone else. It's part of the ME culture that's solidifying. All actions revolve around The Self. If it doesn't benefit me, then fuck you all.
Now, even when we were a more honest, compassionate, and seemingly selfless people, everyone acts in their own interest. It's why we give to charity - we want to do something good for other people because it makes us feel better. That's not a bad thing. But it's gone from "making me feel good" to "how does it benefit me". It seems like semantics, but there's a definitive difference between those two.
And The System has perpetuated the ability for us to be suing the crap out of each other. While I like the fact that we're (well, we were) different than other countries, but we're the only country where whomever we sue has to pay court costs, even if they're right. Because of this, people can bring a suit against someone, usually a company, and that company now has to mobilize their legal team to defend themselves. Even if they were in the right, they still have to pay for the court costs. This is complete bullshit. If you're found liable, then fine, costs could and should be levied. But if you're found to be cleared, then the person bringing the suit should pay out the ass.
And before someone gets their panties in a twist: Yes, large corporations have stockpiles of cash where they could, in essence, drag a court case out for months, if not years. But that becomes the responsibility of the court to see that this is happening and put a stop to it. Our system of laws shouldn't be allowed to benefit any one person or entity. That is where all entities should be equal. And I'm sure that's why the "winner still pays up the fuckhole" rule was in place; to prevent someone from dragging out a lawsuit because they have the money to.

Government tends to be the single point of failure in how people interact with people, with businesses, businesses with other businesses and so on. Once a law is put in place, like the ADA, it opens up individuals and businesses for lawsuits because they didn't comply with the rules laid out. There's fucktards across the country who see it as their sole mission in life to harass and extort (make no mistake about it, that's what it is) businesses who sinks are 36 inches off the ground, not 36.252897495727 inches. They file a suit, then tell the business owner, who is usually a small business, that if they pay this person $10,000 and fix the problem, they'll drop the suit, which if it went through the whole court process, could cost the owner thousands more in fees and fines. What the fuck?!?!

And on TV every night, you see dozens of adds for sheisters who will take a drug company to court if you took some drug and it fucked you up. Guess what, kids? Pharmaceuticals mess with your body. They screw with the chemical make up of your biology in order to produce a different outcome than what you're seeing right now. No two people have the same chemical make up so a drug that makes me feel great could cause your penis to fall of. Which sucks even more if you didn't have one before, the drug causes you to grow one, and then it falls off. If you don't understand that this is how drugs work, then you're a fucking 'tard.
So, because we're a society of moochers and want what other people have (I.E., we're greedy motherfuckers), if that new skin cream gives me a rash, LAWSUITLAWSUITLAWSUIT!!!!!
The liability insurance these drug makers have to carry is enormous. This is why it takes forever for a new drug to come to market and why they charge so much for it. The R&D alone, to protect themselves from every possible douchenozzle who could sue them, takes up millions. Then the FDA testing. Then the money to cover the insurance. Fuck...
AND, here's one for you. There is a decreasing supply of prescription painkillers. This isn't only attributed to the DEA arresting any doctor who gives you 2 pills too many. This is because it's no longer profitable for the pharma to make that drug. The liability they have to hold on that drug line is too great. So they stop making them. Think this will get any better?

And the fucking disclaimers and warnings. Oh my holy fuck this is out of control.  EVERY T.V. ad has a disclaimer. I stop the DVR and read each of these because they've become so annoyingly stupid. The "Professional driver. Closed course." ones on car ads are the worst. They ACTUALLY had one on that car ad where it showed astronauts driving some car on the moon. Along with "Do not try this". What?!?!
Warning labels and instructions on things like boxes of toothpicks are absurd. A warning label on a hammer. A fucking hammer!?!?! FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And this is ALL because someone sued. It has nothing to do with being safe, it has to do with covering your ass.

Hospitals... oh dear. We are losing obstetricians annually because new doctors refuse to go into the specialty. and existing ones are quitting the field. Why? The liability and malpractice insurance they have to carry is too oppressive. The risks involved in child birth are real. Babies die regularly. It's sad, it's tragic, but 99 times out of 100, it's no ones fault. But people feel slighted, so they have to sue. This obviously isn't restricted to OB's, as all nurses and doctors need to carry this or they could lose their homes and more, but for OB's, it's become too much to deal with and they're saying "Fuck it, I'm done." Think this won't hurt in the future? Think it's not hurting now?

All this came to mind in hearing that Colorado has a bill in their legislature that could hold gun dealers and manufacturers liable in the event the gun is used to harm someone (which is what they're supposed to do, but you get the point). Now, let me say that for a dealer, if they sell a gun to a known criminal (it's important to say that) then they should be able to be held criminally liable. Criminally, not civilly. But these laws are to allow families to sue in case some asshole shoots someone. FUCK YOU!!! This is why the civilian air industry is decimated. There used to be plenty of producers of civilian aircraft like Cessna and Piper. But too many accidents happened because the pilots were fucking assholes, families sued, and viola, the manufacturer goes out of business. I read of an incident where a guy crashed the plane, killing himself. When they found the plane, there were booze in the plane. They tested his blood and he was so fucking drunk it was surprising how he got the plane off the ground. His family sued the manufacturer and they fucking won!!!! If this goes through across the country, expect lawsuits to be filed against companies with big time cash reserves like Sterm Ruger or Smith & Wesson and that will be the beginning of the end of the civilian firearms market because THAT will crush the industry.

In "The Running Man", a lawyer is basically reading a contract to a condemned man, whose execution is going to be televised. Let's get to the meat of that, shall we? This is what we have right now! We're making disclaimers for cars, drinks, food, cell phones, toys, BAGS OF FUCKING NUTS!!! I shit you not! Next time you're on a plane, if they by chance have peanuts, read the bag. It will say "This product contains nuts"
DO NOT MISUNDERSTAND ME. There are plenty of times where companies or people are wantonly negligent and don't give a shit, resulting in someone getting injured or killed because they just didn't give a shit. Fuck them. Fuck them in the ass with a big rubber dick. BUT... I would fathom a guess that this is only the case about 10% of the time.

When America finally collapses, which it will soon enough, this will all turn real fuckin' ugly. I'll let your imagination run with that.

Progressives: Your safety is their... fifth concern

During my morning browsing of news and information sites, I came across this article on The Blaze:
This Colorado Democrat Thinks Women Shouldn’t Have Guns on College Campuses — The Reason Why Is Causing a Stir
The list I refer to is further down the page where the University of Colorado - Colorado Springs put forth a list on what to do if you're attacked. Oh it's rich...

1.    Be realistic about your ability to protect yourself.
2.    Your instinct may be to scream, go ahead!  It may startle your attacker and give you an opportunity to run away.
3.    Kick off your shoes if you have time and can’t run in them.
4.    Don’t take time to look back; just get away.
5.    If your life is in danger, passive resistance may be your best defense.
6.    Tell your attacker that you have a disease or are menstruating.
7.    Vomiting or urinating may also convince the attacker to leave you alone.
8.    Yelling, hitting or biting may give you a chance to escape, do it!
9.    Understand that some actions on your part might lead to more harm.
10.    Remember, every emergency situation is different.  Only you can decide which action is most appropriate.

 I think 1 and 10 are pretty good. Everything else is laughable, if it weren't that these people are weapons grade stupid.  Obviously, these are directed at women on a college campus and being that colleges demand that you be a defenseless sheep, these are painfully the only things you can do. If someone means to do you harm, they're going to do it unless you can physically stop them; either through action or intimidation.
What I found funny was watching a video on YouTube pro concealed carry, someone commented that "I'm 6 foot 2, 250 pounds. A loud yell and a menacing look is all I need." By which the 5 foot, 120 pound 14 year old gang banger with an illegal 1911 pops him in the head and steals his wallet. Or the 6 foot 3 inch, 300 pound thief hits him in the head with a brick, steals his wallet, watch, and rings, and shoves a pipe up his ass just for the fun of it. OR... what about does the 5 foot 10, 170 pound 70 year old do when they're being harassed, threatened, or intimidated? "I'm gonna call the cops on you!" he/she shouts before they're assaulted by the thugs. Or what does my 5 foot 9, 140 pound daughter (she's older) do? Some people are as dumb as a bowl of wet mice.
"I'm a man! I don't need a gun!" You're an asshole and a 9 year old with a .22 will make you cry like a baby with diaper rash. Or the 'wimp' you step up to with your "menacing" look may be carrying a knife or pepperspray and when you yell at him, he's gonna fuck you up.

Obviously, people deserve to walk the streets without being harassed or harmed. But we live in a violent world. The human animal is a pretty shitty creature when left without a conscience or care about anyone but Itself. We (the greater) need to accept that fact that some people are scum and we need to protect ourselves from them. The young girl  who follows all the steps laid out above could still find herself raped, beaten, and possibly even dead, because she believed in The System and the defensive powers of The State. And the young girl who brings a firearm into the situation, with the training behind it? She too could still wind up raped, beaten, or dead, but she at least leveled the odds and said, "I will not comply."

I support the Second Amendment, but...

How many times have you heard that one? Especially as of late. Or "I'm all for freedom of speech, but..." That one's surprisingly popular as well.
If you say you're for freedom and then add "...but,..." then you're not. In truth, when you make a statement and through in a "But" in the middle, whatever you said before the 'but' is bullshit.
"I think you're a great guy, Tom, but I've heard you can be a cunt sometimes." = "Tom, you're a cunt."
"I don't have a problem with black people, but they do cause the majority of crimes." = "Black people cause the majority of crimes and I don't like them."
"I believe in the Second Amendment, but we should ban assault rifles." = "I believe we should ban guns."
"I'm all for freedom of speech, but we shouldn't allow hate speech." = "I want to restrict speech."

Freedom is painful. The movie is mainly filled with Progressive tripe, but Michael Douglas' soliloquy at the end of "American President" has some truth to it.
"America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then, you can stand up and sing about the "land of the free"."
What freedom means is suffering the consequences of your failures. If you want to be free to ride your motorcycle without a helmet, then when you wreck and crack your skull, the bills are on you. Your family can't sue the motorcycle company or the city or the state. You're the one responsible for it.
The same for businesses. Right now, we're living through the results of "shared liability, private profits." GM, Citibank, Bank Of America, Solyndra, and probably thousands of others who, thanks to politicians, hoist their failures upon the American taxpayer, but when they make a profit, that's all for them, their unions, etc... FUCK YOU!!! If you want to be free from government regulations (Trust me, these large government connected companies LOVE regulations. They help write them to keep away the competition) then you are solely responsible for the actions of your business.
As a gun owner, you are responsible for the control of that weapon. If someone gets killed because of a 'misfire', "I thought it was unloaded", "It was an accident", it gets stolen, then it's on you. Yes, you can do your best to secure it and these things can happen, but YOU are responsible for it. If it's stolen, then report it as such. Welcome to reality.
But the same goes for the people around us.
If you've agreed to the terms of a drivers license, then you've agreed to be responsible for the rolling mass of death thundering down the road, with you behind the wheel. If you crash into a motorcyclist while texting, you're the asshole and no amount of helmet laws will have cured your stupidity.
If you're continuing to buy the products produced by a company who you feel has shitty business practices (Apple, Bank Of America, Levi Strauss, etc...) then guess who's responsible for that company staying in business? Yup, you guessed it, you're the cocksucker. How's it taste?
I could go on, but hopefully, you get the point.

We (The Collective) have all but agreed that We can't deal with freedom. Sure, there's some of us who understand that our actions have reprecussions and we're ready to deal with that, but the greater populace of the US has determined that it just can't handle their own lives and has turned to The State for care and feeding. It shouldn't come as a surprise as this is the way most of the world has gone and, being an open immigration country (unlike the rest of the world), we get these ideas imported and they begin to fester. It's like my current state, North Carolina. Entry way to The South. However, there's been such an influx of "Northerners" here, fleeing their high-tax, high-regulation states, that the politics are beginning o reflect that. Hell, there's a town down here called "Cary", which the locals refer to as Containment Area for Relocated Yankees. It has higher property taxes than the surrounding communities. There's tons of ordinances restricting business facades, what signs you can have in your yards, etc... Progressives are like cancer, aren't they? They pick a place, attack it, ruin it, move on, do it all over again.

There is a sliver of hope that people are beginning to realize that the chains of The State are heavy and are trying to shrug them off. But if the "Freedom Movement" has any chance of growing, people need to be ready to accept some pain; mainly mental, but there could be some physical hardship. But it's the only way it can happen. If We keep trying to deaden the pain, we'll continue to be asleep and be subservient to The State.

Say what you mean

Something a little lighter for today.

We have become such a "Gotcha!" culture that every word you say is scrutinized. In truth, this isn't a new phenomenon.  Back in the 70's Jimmy "The Greek" Snyder made a comment that blacks are better athletes because in slave times, they were bred to be bigger and stronger, which is 100% verifiable true, and he got fired because of it.
Now though, this sociopolitical sensitivity has produced the professional apology. And it's truly reached the point of insanity. If your comment offends ANYONE, you are immediately to come out with an apology, detailing how insensitive it was, or how you didn't think about what you were saying, or how, as King Barry I does constantly, explain how your comments were taken out of context.
Opie & Anthony, 2 radio DJ's who've probably gotten fired or suspended more times than anyone else on the radio medium today, have explained on their show numerous times how the 'apology' is always, 100% pure bullshit. They've done it themselves, having replayed their apologies on air, and explained exactly where in the 'apology' they're lying through their teeth. And then they've played other professional apologies and when you stop, listen, replay, listen, replay, you start to see where the person is just trying to cover their ass.
CYA is the name of the game and at some level, I get it. And I also understand the company these people are working for, getting ansy when one of their 'talent' says something "offensive". They're trying to portray their product in a certain light and they don't want anyone fucking that up. When someone does, they often want to put distance between themselves and that person, so to try and avoid that distance, the person who couldn't keep their mouth shut (or clothes on or liquor in check, etc...) tries to, in truth, play off what  they said or did, giving the business an out to say "See, they're sorry for what they did."
But We need to stop playing this game and realize that some people say dumb shit. For some, it really is a mistake or in no way meant to offend. Don Imus comes to mind. Yes, for some people, it's really what they mean. This overly-sensitive culture is just fucking ridiculous.
It's one of the reasons I don't mind Ann Coulter. On some things, she can be as annoying as Jehovah's Witness's, but the one thing you have to truly love about Ann is she will say what she means and does not give one fuck as to what you think about it. The media blow up of her calling John Edwards a faggot was hysterical to watch because you could see in her eyes that she didn't care what they said. I know why, but the fact that she's not held in high regard by the "Womens Movement" for being a bold, charismatic, outspoken, and successful opinion writer is a crime.
I understand that this whole post can be seen as sort of hypocritical, as I'm doing my own form of CYA by not using my real name or face, yet I'm saying what I mean. The difference here is, if my information were to "come out", about who I was, I wouldn't pull the "Oh, what I really meant was..." or "I was being insensitive when I referred to Barrack Obama as King Barry I and I called him a cocksucking cuntwad. I didn't mean it the way it came out."

There's a reason it's called the Idiot Box

I've always been a TV junkie. Sure, when I was younger, I found a balance (forced by parents, but accepted once outside) and it worked out in the end, but a standard punishment for me was no TV for a week or something.
My parents, when they weren't working, protected me from a lot of the nonsense on the tube. More concerned about violence than the occasional boob shot, my father even kicked us out of the living room when "The Deer Hunter" was on because he wanted to watch it and he didn't want us to.
Saturday morning cartoons were alright, which is funny because the amount of 'violence' in old Warner Brothers and the like cartoons is staggering. But it was fake and our parents explained this to us. But temper those with Bob Ross and his "happy little trees" and episodes of "David & Goliath", along with the vast amount of classical music used in the scores of Looney Toon cartoons and it tended to be alright.
Along with that, while we watched shows like "Emergency!", "The Dukes Of Hazzard", "Buck Rogers", or "Battlestar Galactica", our parents were around to watch those shows with us and tried to strike the right balance between letting us watch these and knowing when the violence or sexual innuendos are going too far.
As I got older, Dad controlled the TV at night. My sister and I used to get miffed and would try to argue with him to watch something, which was a 50/50 chance, but it seemed we lost more than we won and wound up watching the History Channel or Discovery. To a young teenager, this is as boring as whale snot. How I long for those days.

Now... network TV is absolute shit. There's one or two shows that actually have decent writing, along with acting, but everything else is just... blah. Watch "The Big Bang Theory" and be mindful of the laugh track. Yes, that's not a studio audience; it's a recording. But once you know it's fake, pay attention to the 'jokes' that precede it and you'll probably find that 9 out of 10 are stupid.
How many "Law & Order"'s did they go through? 3? "CSI"? Shit, they added a second "NCIS" and watching it is like "Eh... not worthless, but do you really need 2?"

Cable networks aren't that much better. I'll get to my gripe with 'reality' shows, but just the series on them... a few pearls in an ocean of shit. Even some that start good go to hell because they start taking on things that are 'happening'. Nothing takes me out of a TV show like real life problems that currently affect me.

The cable 'reality' show: This fucking steaming pile.... son of a bitch! Each of these should get 1 season to expose people to this aspect of other people lives or try something new and then leave it the fuck alone. The idea for these came from having no-talent writers and actors who do a better job sucking dick and snorting coke than acting. These have ALL turned into soap operas. Every last one of them. Even with themes that are interesting to 'the workin' man' (Deadliest Catch, Sons Of Guns), the directors and producers always turn it into a drama about this guy or that relationship or something totally outside the realm of the original focus. Fuck me, that show "Gunsmoke"? Try and tell me that they didn't dress up the daughter in half-shirts and short-shorts to get ratings. Dare you to. And every station has 10 of them, pushing out shows that actually teach things. I remember when The Learning Channel used to have medical procedure shows. Or the History Channel showed history. Now, both these entities have spun up secondary channels to show the things that they were originally setup to show. Just like MTV2 (initially).
MTV2 used to show the weird videos that the regular MTV viewers didn't like. The non-pop music. Then, as MTV started with the reality shows and game shows, they actually promoted that MTV2 was all about the music videos. Now, they're both piles of pig shit.

Speaking of "game shows": This includes shit like "Survivor", "American Idol", and so on. One and done would have kept them interesting. Now? Same as the rest of the 'reality' bullshit. It's all about the drama or absolute failures; the human animals obsession with seeing others in pain and misery. William Hung - he was such a big deal because he sucked so fucking bad. He was carted out for the public's amusement "Look at the freak, mommy!" Don't give me the "He was trying his hardest and that's what people wanted to see" excuse. People loved him because it made them laugh at his failure, taking the focus away from their miserable lives.

Going real long form here, so bear with me.

Commercials - Always the bane of watching TV, they have both gotten absurd and useless. The DVR have made them quasi-obsolete, but they also make it so you don't watch things 'when they happen.' Along with that, they add a holy fuckload of them so a normal show or movie now runs forever. A&E had "Braveheart" on the other night. This is a long movie, no doubt. Runtime is 177 minutes; so basically 3 hours. Broadcast time was 4 hours. A solid hour of commercials. FUCK YOU!!! With this they add so many commercials that the credits (which I know are pointless, but if you worked hard on the show or movie, you'd want some credit, yes?) now run past the screen in a flash or they play them in split screen with... MORE FUCKING COMMERCIALS! And sports... holy fuck in a bucket... I was trying to watch a college football game and they had so many fucking commercials that they missed one or two play every time they went to break. What the fuck?!?!

The Scrolling Ticker - Thanks to the cable news channels for this piece of fuck. It's everywhere and the word 'distracting' does not even begin to describe this monstrosity. A close relative to this sphincter clinger is the Logo. The station, the show, the next show, the movie playing next Wednesday at 3:32am... It's like playing hide & seek with the show/movie. "I see you... where'd you go? Oh, there you are! Nope, gone again!"

It's no wonder why internet streams like Hulu or Netflix are so popular, but even though you're paying for it, I will all but guarantee that they'll find a way to inject more commercials and bullshit into these services. Many people have given up on cable or satellite, get a receiver for over-the-air local channels (many paid for by us taxpayers - Once again, fucked by The State), and are streaming TV shows. With that, they'll find a way to force-feed you commercials and shitty shows, just watch and wait.

You could try and turn it all off and 'go outside', but with every single aspect of life becoming more and more regulated, the minute you step out your door, it's like you're risking arrest. Fucking pathetic what we've become, isn't it?

COME AND TAKE IT! Sure, why not.

Update at bottom: 1/27

What if they do?
This is something you see a lot now. The "COME AND TAKE IT" or "Molon Labe" shirts, flags, hats, etc... Sounds good. Sounds right. But what if they do?
When the TSA was put in place and the thyroid killers were installed in airports, people stomped and cried, "Everyone should opt out. We'll overload them and they'll have to listen to us." And for a while, some people did. Now? I travel regularly and while I'm only in that area for a short time, 99 times out of 100, I'm the only person standing off to the side, hands out, pants holding on, threatening to fall, while the equivalent of a mall security guard pats me down.
Bush and pals not only implemented some of the most heinous violations of Natural rights (only to be outdone by King Barry I with the NDAA), but they spent money like the drunken fucktards they are and setup the stage for Madame Plasticface and Prince Harry to keep on going. The Left cried and rallied and marched and what happened? What did they change? Nothing.
2010 - The year of the Tea Party, we're told. They're gonna win back Congress and stop this out of control government! Only got the House and, low and behold, still spending like whores with stolen credit cards AND, passed the NDAA, AND, allowed King Barry I to kill whomever he felt like with 'drone strikes'. But... there's the 2012 election. AH-HA!!!!
Mitt fucking Romney. What more needs to be said?
Right now, another liberty is threatened. Being that the spunkmonkey's in DC don't give two shits about the rest of us, it'll probably be crossed, new regs will be implemented and then what?
I predict that the majority who kick and scream and wear their shirts and hats will be Johnny Tyler, from the movie "Tombstone".

Not only does he get beat down after threatening action, but then when he goes to "resist", he's 'scared' of the men he's up against, backs down, lays down his weapon and walks away, tail tucked up nicely. And like Johnny, it's because they want to live another day. I get it. I completely understand. But then, don't puff your chest. Drop the bravado. Accept who you are inside and live that way.

As the years go on, more and more about the men once held to such a high regard comes out and the shine really comes off the apple. John F. Kennedy is remembered fondly for standing up to the Soviets. Cuban Missile Crisis. Yeah! He drew a line and dared them to cross it! They backed down! USA!USA!USA!USA! Well, recent stories have come out, particularly from a former lover of his, who says that Kennedy said during that time “I’d rather my children be red than dead.”
Now obviously, you have to give some latitude to trust as that could be true or false. She's the only one who claimed to hear it. But it shows the situation differently, doesn't it.

The human animals natural sense is to live. It prioritizes this above all else. This is why, when threatened, the natural instinct is to run. To stand and fight is unnatural. It's uncomfortable. Your whole purpose for being, Life, could be snuffed out. So it's understandable that people back down. But, how do you measure yourself after?
We look back at the War For Independence now and think of these men fondly. Well, some of us. But how long did the injustice go on before they acted? How many of them who signed that Declaration Of Independence did so reluctantly? 1/3 of the citizens were said to support the war. 1/3 wanted to remain loyal to the crown. And 1/3 didn't care either way. On top of this, it's said that only 3% of the population at the time actually fought for independence. What about us? Our culture is collapsing into shit, the concept of honor has long since died, and we can't even organize a simple tax revolt. What do We do when the King imposes another edict?

This isn't a "Call To Arms!" This is a Call To Truth. To stand in front of a mirror and ask yourself where you truly stand. No bravado. No slogans. No t-shirts. Martin Luther King, Jr. did. As Malcolm X did. Fighting for the same cause, but in different ways. Both killed for what they believed. How many hundreds or thousands of others said they did, but when faced with jail or death, they turned and saved themselves. Or like some others, they embraced the enemy. Sharpton. Jackson. How many million are dead because people like this embraced the eugenicists who decades before openly hoped to solve "the negro problem" with abortion.
Know where you stand and more importantly, who truly stands with you.

I don't know what the future holds. I've made bold claims on this blog and while I think they'll come to fruition, I obviously have no idea. But I at least know where I stand. My fear is, as I look around me, to friends and neighbors, I believe I stand alone. There's nothing I can do about that, but it's less than comforting.

Update:
And it looks like I'm not the only one having this thought lately. Posted this, went about my day, hit up some favorites this morning and it seems Eric Peters is having the exact same thoughts. He's a bit more eloquent in his writings, so I suggest reading his post. 

Market driven economy

Thanks to the assclowns in Washington... okay... around the country... the cost of anything having to do with guns has gone up dramatically. A mere 3 months ago, I could get a box of 50 .223 rounds for about $20. Now? I saw them recently going for as high as $35 for 20. AR based rifles, if you can find them, are at least $300 more than 3 months ago.
Because of this, the shouts of price gouging can be heard everywhere. "Those greedy fuckers are trying to rip me off!" says the sheep, who has no understanding of economics, yet believes what he's told by his 'masters'. We've been conditioned to think that when the price of a product goes up dramatically like now, it's because people are greedy. And I will concede there's definitely some of that, but the greater forces at work are the market responding to demand.

Unless you live in a hollow, removed from society, you've probably heard the phrase "supply & demand". See below:

When you have a high supply of a product, .22LR ammo, and the demand is low, you can get 500 rounds for $15 or so. Last summer, I bought two bricks totaling 1,000 rounds of it for about $35. I bought AR mags at about $15-20, depending on quality. I bought a Del-Ton AR for $700. Demand was low. But then, as November approached, the prices of these things began climbing. Why? Demand increased because it looked like King Barry I was going to be selected again. Nothing ridiculous, but more demand.
Why does this affect price? Greedy business person is just trying to rip me off!
Actually, you're to blame. I walk into a store and say "I want to buy that Pepsi for $.50." It's the only one. You want that Pepsi more than I do. You offer them $.60. I come back with $.65. You say $.70. I give up the fight. Does the store sell you the Pepsi for the original $.50 that the store was offering it at? No. You offered them $.70 so they'll take it. You affected the price of it because the supply was low and you felt that the Pepsi was worth $.70. I didn't, so I walked away. This allows the product to remain on the market, but then it's up to the consumers to determine what they value more; that product whose price is higher because of more demand or something else.
Now here's the funny thing. Unless affected by government (it's all affected by government, but...), these higher prices will open up the market for more competition because other people will see a benefit in offering their comparable products. This should increase supply and this should bring the price down. Demand could increase more because there's now more supply, so more people enter the market, but that should also increase the suppliers. While in theory, you can reach a level of market saturation, where the amount of suppliers can't increase anymore and demand doesn't recede, but the chances of that are small. External factors (like government) are usually to blame for that; why aren't more and more gun manufacturers coming to market, for example.

If the price is artificially kept low, whether by government or by the businesses themselves, there are a couple outcomes.
1) Limited supply - Because the price is lower, you'll buy a crap load of them when you don't need them, making them unavailable to others. During Hurricane Katrina, there were people buying shelf-loads of flashlights, multiple generators, 500 rolls of toilet paper. Why? Because the government implemented "price controls" to keep them lower than the market demanded, people bought more than they needed right now. AND, it kept new producers from entering the market or the current producers from adding to the market because they didn't see any value in it. There were people in surrounding states that had generators and supplies to sell. They didn't bring them to Mississippi or Louisiana because they were told "You have to sell them at the same price they were at before the hurricane." Why am I going to drive hundreds of miles out of my way to sell a product at the same price I bought it at? If I can't make a profit on it, fuck that.
2) Rationing - Again, by government or the business, they restrict your access to supply. Not by market, but by 'force'. "You can only buy 2 of those." "Limit 1 per customer." There's a gun shop nearby and they're my go-to shop for my gun purchases. Prices are usually low, stock is usually high, staff is knowledgeable and the owners are just good people. They have limited the ability of people to purchase products (limit 1 per customer) because they want to keep the price low. On their Facebook page, people are praising them for not 'price gouging' like the other stores in the area, but they've corrupted the market by denying your access to the product. The stock is still gone in minutes, it just means more people are going there for it. How many people ran out and bought AR's, AK's, pistols, ammo, etc... who generally didn't buy them before?

When the price goes up, a vendor who believes in the market will take the "extra" profit, reach back to their distributors and try to get more stock. Or they'll search for new distributors to find new sources for that product. They'll now have the money to go down those new avenues that may have been restricted to them before. After the first coronation of King Barry I, the prices of ammo shot up. But, within a couple months, the market became saturated because new manufacturers came to town, vendors now had access to overseas makers, and the price settled back down.
As long as the Corky's in Congress don't forget to wipe their asses and remember they're 'heads are on the chopping block', the market should settle back down, the availability of products will increase and the prices will drop.

Thanks to Wirecutter for getting my head thinking about this.

One more on the Coronation

By the way, one aspect of the speech annoyed me because of its factual ignorance. Okay. It was all ignorant. BUT... this one is a recent annoyance.

On a trip out to my mothers, I was reading Larry Elder's book "The Ten Things You Can't Say In America." It was the physical book, so when I was done, I left it around her house. She looked at the blurb and one of his points is the "glass ceiling", which supposedly keeps women down, doesn't exist and she had a problem with that. My mother is the consummate feminist, so it's no surprise that it pissed her off. King Barry I brought it up in his declaration, hence it jumped to the front of my thoughts.

Why is the glass ceiling bullshit? It doesn't work on an economic sense. Here's what I mean.

"Women are paid less than men for the same work!" If this were true, then why would a business hire anyone BUT women? If I could get the same amount of work done by women as done by men, but cheaper, holy shit... I'd kick all the guys out and have wall to wall women. I'd sell my products for less than anyone else, ALONG WITH, making a bigger profit. Plus I could probably get government kickbacks because I hired only women. I wouldn't, but I'm sure I could.
Pick the most chauvinistic asshole you know and ask him if he had verifiable proof that an all-female workforce was just as productive as men, but he could pay them less, would he do it and I'll guarantee he would.

By and large, the reason women are paid less is because they are less reliable for consistent work. Before the woman perusing this site get their panties in a twist, read. It's not a knock, it's an analysis of facts.
Women are usually the primary care givers for children. If a child is sick, out of school, not even in school yet, it is usually the woman who cares for them. Hence, out of work.
Speaking of kids... when they're on the way, she's gonna be out. How long is a personal preference, but she's not at work and not productive.
Women tend to have more medical issues or the ones they have affect them harder. Yes, as males, we're taught to fight through pain and discomfort, as stupid as it may be. I had a shop teacher missing most of a finger (who didn't, right?) and he said he lost it on a job. Cut it off, wrapped it tight and stopped the bleeding, went back to light work for the rest of the day and then got it taken care of at the hospital. Ladies? Not so much.
In the jobs that tend to draw in the big money, women generally aren't keen on those.

Now with all that, it's been found that the women who set aside all those typical aspects of women and "act like a man", they make more than the men in the same field.

If I could break down each hyperbolic statement he made yesterday, I would. However, I have a job to get to, so I'll let others break them down.

HA HA HA HA HA

From The Blaze: There’s a Slight Problem With NY’s Hastily-Made New Gun Laws: They Forgot to Exempt Cops!

This is rich! Oh I chuckled endlessly when I heard that one. Because the nanny's in New York had to do something, they not only fucked over their own every day mere mortals, they fucked over their sanctimonious supermen known as the NYPD. What's more hilarious is where Sen. Eric Adams says “You can’t give more ammo to the criminals.” Wait, wait, wait... let me make sure I understand you, Senator. By definition, a criminal is someone who breaks the law. So you assmonkey's in New York are passing another law, this one attempting to restrict how much ammo they can carry in a gun. If they didn't follow the first one (whatever it is), they're now magically going to follow the second? What?!

As far as the cops go: fuck'em. As the Social Distortion song says, "That's the way that it goes when you're down here with the rest of us." Try living by the same rules us mere mortals have to for a change.

I've always had a sort of frothing contempt for cops, even though I've had and have friends who are them. But my friends have always been on the "peace officer" side of the cop slider, not the "law enforcement" side.

A peace officer is just that. They know the laws and while they're bound to uphold them, they know when to leave something alone because it'll do no good. You're outside at night, drinking, having fun with friends, playing some music. A peace officer is the one who roles up, depending on where you are, maybe even stays in the car. They call you over and say, "Looks like you're having a good time. Do me a favor? Turn down the music a bit. A couple folks called and I don't wanna be an ass, but I could hear it up the street. Just turn it down some, alright? Thanks." and then leaves.

Law enforcement? They're the assholes. They will pull up with 2 cars. The cops will get out and come right up to where you're standing. "This party ends now!" will say the cock-in-costume who's probably even wearing sunglasses, even though it's 1:00am. If you try and 'reason' with said prick, he'll stand right up to you, maybe even poke your chest and say, "You wanna spend the night in the hole?" I'll even be 'fair' and say they're not cock biting fucktards. They're not rude, but for any infraction, they're writing a ticket, or pulling out the cuffs, or otherwise ruining your day and they're excuse is "That's the law". So was sending Jews, gypsy's, and gays to the gas chamber, but hey, why split hairs.

Thinking back to 'peace officers' for a moment: I understand they can have a rough job. Walking through Sandy Hook, trying to piece together what happened? That shit has to stay with you for a long time. You're dealing with people when they're often being assholes. Occasionally, you risk being shot at. I get it, it sucks. But more and more, you see Office "G.I. Joe" with his buzz cut, barking orders like he owns you, is more than happy to break out a taser or pepperspray because you're being "uncooperative", happily slings his M4 because it makes him think he has a big dick, and he looks down on you because you're a civilian. Supper-nanny Bloomberg sent city cops out of the fucking state to not only 'go undercover' at gun shows in Arizona, but to spy on 'potential terrorists' in New Jersey. Didn't hear about that one, did you? Go look it up. What 'peace officer' looks at these cases and says "That's within the authority and trust the people put in me"? No, no it isn't.

Oh well. Just obey and it'll all be fine.

Where is that exactly?

23 Executive Orders trying to "curb gun violence". Beyond the simple ignorance that they won't do jack shit except turn more citizens into government snitches...

Okay, aside here. By "ordering" doctors and mental health workers to report to the government (I.E. be a snitch) any violent thoughts a patient may be having or if there are guns in the home, what will be the outcome of that? Will more or less people talk to their doctors about how their feeling? If I know that a doctor will call a government official and tell them I own guns or am feeling depressed or say something like "I'm just under so much stress right now, I feel like going postal" when I really have no intention of harming anyone, am I going to talk to my doctor about anything??? Fuck that! Back to the post.

... define for me where Barry has the legal authority to issue "Executive Orders". Where is that privilege detailed and approved by the other two EQUAL branches of government as well as the people who actually authorize government actions, The People? Eat my sweaty asshole about "Well, Bush did it!!" I don't fucking care who did it before. They all violated the restrictions placed on them and they're all cocks.

Below is the limit of his authority. Stop, read slowly, and then we'll come back:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

Where is the "Executive Orders" clause?

Oh, nowhere? Really? Wow, shocking isn't it?
We have become Rome. We applaud violence and the debasement of society. We pay to watch bloody sports and we laugh and cheer when someone gets hurt. Americas Funniest Home Videos - the parts that got the most attention were where people were kicked in the nuts, beaned in the head with a blunt object, fall off a roof, etc... The "Senate" (Congress) is simply a voicebox; they have given up their true power and have allowed the Emperor to rule as they please (This goes back for YEARS). As long as the people are given panem et circenses (bread and circuses), they will happily vote away their own rights, as well as those of others, denounce those who attempt to exercise their Natural rights, and follow blindly into submission because "It's for the greater good."

Baaaahhhh... Baaaahhhh...

The right to shut the f#ck up!

There's a title for ya.

So, on the book of Face, a friend posted an article titled "What journalists need to know about guns and gun control". I'm not going to link it because I'm not going to give them credence. If you want to read it yourself, have at it. Search the phrase and you'll find it.

In there, the chode who wrote the article (yes, I'm being insulting. They're an asshat and I really don't care if you think my insulting someone is childish or 'lets me lose the argument'. Blow me) says "...the Constitution gave the people the right to bear arms..." That was all I needed to know about this writers position on the topics of guns and government. The whole thing is littered with other signals, but that was the kicker for me. I could dive into many other things that are wrong or skewed, but that one is a critically important issue that everyone needs to understand.

I brought it up in my level setting posts, but there seems to be a lot of confusion in this country, if not the world, on what is a "right". How you see them and explain them to people says a lot about who you are and your position on the roles of the citizen and the government.

What is a right?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
Beautiful words. When I watched the HBO series "John Adams" and listened to these words being read, I welled up.
A "right" is natural. It comes from our Creator; G-d if you will. If you're an atheist, then just as we see G-d as being the Creator of nature, you would see nature itself as being the originator of rights. Because you exist, these belong to you. If you remove the boundaries of government or even modern civilization, these rights do not go away.
You have a right to speak, in whatever way you choose. If you're around others, you may say things that they don't like. That's fine. They can leave. But for them to attempt to force you to be quiet would violate the natural right of free speech AND your right to be free from harm from others to whom you've done nothing more than offend.
On that, many believe they have a right to be free from anything they find offensive. How does that work? Many people find dogs fucking to be offensive. Yet a dog is simply doing what is natural. Where do you get off telling them they can't? Now, this would obviously lead to "So people can walk down the street naked?!" You're now injecting society into a discussion about rights. When you move into a social setting, things can change because of something called decorum. We may get there.

Okay, logic may dictate (who follows logic anymore, but...) that if you've come this far and are at least understanding what I'm saying, then you'll be up for more.Your rights, all of them, being Natural, mean you only have to answer to their provider for any action you take with these rights. This is what is critically important. If you only have to answer to G-d or Nature for your right to speak, be secure in your person and property, and any other Natural right, then as long as you don't violate anyone else' rights in the process, you're all good. So while my speech may offend you, while you may not approve of my "hording" of food, water, guns, ammunition, while I may have committed a crime and you WANT me to come out and tell everything I did, etc... you have no legitimate right to prevent me from doing so because it doesn't affect you! If you feel you are affected, walk away. Problem solved.

So now we come to the fun portion of our program and tackle specifics.
Heathcare:
Is the ubiquitous term "heathcare" a right? Follow logic and you know the answer. No. Why is it no? In order for you to have a "right" to healthcare, that would mean you have a G-d given right to the goods and services of others. You can demand of them these items and they have to give it to you. It's a right, isn't it? If that were the case, why don't you have a right to an iPod? If this were the case, clinicians, hospitals, pharmaceutical makers, device manufacturers, et al would be no more than slaves. But they're not. These people have chosen to perform a service and if they choose to allow you to purchase them, that is up to them. The second you demand these goods and services, you are attempting to make them slaves, even if you plan on paying for them. Many slaves received a "wage". It's just it was so miniscule that the slave could never get out of bondage.
Speech:
Is it a right? Yes. "But you can't yell 'Fire' in a crowded theater!", shouts a friend of mine while discussing these things. Actually, you can. If there is a fire, you bet your ass you can. However, what the common phrase is suggesting is that it has been determined, by society, that it is illegal to attempt to incite public unrest, I.E. a riot. Think of the rights that you hold dear and those protected by the US Constitution and ask how these rights somehow violate another's right to exist.
Guns:
You believe you have me, because based on the layout and the example given, I don't have a right to a gun because that would mean enslaving a firearms manufacturer into making me guns. Ooo... my very own gun shop. Hmm, you progressives may be onto something here. Kidding.
Our natural right is to defend ourselves from those who wish to violate our rights, even if they are our government. The 'arms' protected by our Second Amendment could be anything from a sharpened stick to a firearm. It just so happens that the best way to repel an oppressor is with the same tools they have or better. "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight."

Now, the minute a government attempts to violate Natural rights, they are becoming oppressive. This doesn't mean that everyone should rush for their muskets, but it is what it is. As a society, we have chosen to come together and live within and around each other. Because of this, there are some things that we have decided, as a majority, that just shouldn't be done. This doesn't mean that the rights of the minority should be violated, but we have allowed some restrictions to "keep the peace". BUT, this "slope" is a tricky one and there is a fine line between peace and tyranny. The more government violates our rights and the slower they do it, the easier it is for us to lose everything. In truth, we are not a free people, as we have allowed The State to violate our rights and restrict our liberties to the point that if you live an average life, every day you are breaking the law. Try as you might, you will violate some rule, statute, ordinance, regulation, or law and could find yourself in jail.

As a whole, we need to return to an understanding of what rights are, and more importantly, are not, and begin pushing back The State. If we don't (either because of fear, indifference, or because we support The State when it does things we like) then we will end up like a China, Venezuela, or worse. And YES, it can happen here and is already happening slowly. PATRIOT Act and NDAA mean anything to you?

2013, the year it all begins to fall

Depressing enough title for you?
Truth sucks and no one wants to hear it, but explain to me what is there to be optimistic about.

Congress is going to continue to increase taxes and spend more. I don't have a party affiliation, so you can suck a dick with that bullshit argument. Both of them bite it and want to spend, spend, spend, stealing the money from those who produce and give it away to the moochers and looters. I don't care if it's a corporation like GE, GM, Citibank, or Archer Daniels or the people who've been on unemployment for over a year+, who spit out bastard child after bastard child, or the people who didn't plan for their older years when working wouldn't be as easy as it was when you were younger.
Yes, I'm blaming old people here, too. The federal government STOLE YOUR MONEY! It's gone! The money these people are using for Social Security and Medicare is the money currently being taken from those who are working. YOU'RE A LEECH! Define for me where you're somehow entitled to retire. If you can afford to stop working, because you've put money aside to live without working, have at it. More power to you. But if you haven't, your "retirement" is being paid for by the rest of the country who're working. You're telling them "I'm done, take care of me." I have no obligation to your life, so why do I have pay for it?
"These people have worked all their life. We owe it to them!" WHY?!?! They worked to pay for their life! That's why we all work! Because I provide goods and services to others, they are somehow responsible for me once I get old?!
"You just want old people to die when they get old! You want them to eat dog food!" The argument that it's nihilism or statism and there are no other choices is hilarious. Communities always found a way to take care of those who truly cannot care for themselves. Families used to care for their elders. This was all before the GOVERNMENT stepped in and said, "You people live like the children we see you as. We'll take care of the old, infirmed, and those who need us. Which will eventually be you all. So just give us your money and we'll care for you."
I fully expect to work into my 70's or until I'm dead, whichever comes first. I'm setting aside money to care for myself and my family, but yes, it could all evaporate in a blink. So I'll have to work to provide for myself. If this means I have a coronary on the job, then that's life. 
So, because Congress keeps spending money it doesn't have, jacking up the debt, I say the check will come due this year, as other countries who've loaned us money see the negative return on their "investments", as the fallacy that is the Federal Reserve comes to light, and the economy continues its downward spiral. By about June, we'll have a Greece moment where it all comes apart at the seams.

The same assmonkey's in Washington D.C. will also try and implement 'gun control' and the Republicans will bend over and take a fist in the ass because "We have to do something" and they have no idea how to control their own press. This will blow up in their faces, literally.
In the 3 weeks since Sandy Hook, I would guess that the amount of semi-auto rifles sold will be pretty close to the amount sold since the 'assault weapons ban' expired in 2004. Many manufacturers have said they've sold out of their current and future stock for the next 6 months of production. Magazines? Brownell said they sold out of a 3 years supply in 3 days. Ammo? Sold out or prices are skyrocketing again. So, will all these people capitulate to their federal masters on the proposed legislation/regulation or will someone resist and will blood run? European nations erupted in violence when people were told they will have to pay more for their own retirement or their healthcare or their education. There are enough people in this country who are so dyed in the wool resistors that an act like that would set them off. I wish it wouldn't happen on either side, but I see it. What then? Martial law? More violence?

We're already heading toward a police state. Local police departments are more militarized. More no-knock warrants for minor infractions or drug violations. We have to give ID and have our purchases tracked to get relief from a cold. We subject ourselves to intrusive, unconstitutional searches when we wish to travel by air and it's now coming to those who want to travel by train or bus. Random stops on the road are already springing up in states around the country to check for ID and where people are going. You will comply or you will go to jail!
PLUS... the government can spy on your communications without warrants because "It's for your own safety." They can imprison you without trial because "It's for your own safety." The common good mean obey or be broken. 

With all this starting to fall apart, society itself is falling down. A man took pictures while a person was pushed in front of a subway train. When a fight erupts in a restaurant, people break out their phones to take a picture or video so it can "go viral". History Channel doesn't show history. The Learning Channel is all about learning how emotional women get when choosing a wedding dress or how pedo's leer at children dressed up like high-end hookers or how one of those pint-sized trollops is a loud-mouth, fat little brat. People are going into incredible levels of debt for TV's, iPads, new cars and houses they can't afford, trips all over the world, sports tickets, etc... Hell, our sports "stars" are reacting in a violent manner to being pushed a little too much, or a bad call and we applaud them while those who lead virtuous lives are mocked incessantly. Our 'leaders' are liars and philanderers. Business leaders are corrupt thieves. And we all just shrug or shake our fists in anger, yet we continue to vote for these jackals or buy their products.

I said it in a couple posts back, but I say it again: The future is black. It will all begin to fall apart in 2013. It wouldn't have mattered if Mitt Romney or going back 4 more years, John McCain were elected. Both are useless slugs and wouldn't have stopped this progression of madness. We've become a vulture society, happy to see the pain and suffering of others as long as we get a chuckle or get to feed off their effort. It's coming back at us at full speed and we're too fucking stupid to get out of the way.

Is that a gun in your pocket...

...or are you happy to see me.
Yeah, silly, but I need something like that to help change my mood. I'm pissed, depressed, aggravated, frustrated, and all manner of flummoxed by the massive level of stupidity that has taken hold, especially around guns.

In general, the brain power of the American society has fallen by leaps and bounds. I blame this on my biggest pet peeve; the lack of responsibility that has taken place. We don't hold others responsible for their actions or hold ourselves responsible for what we do. Someone or something else is always to blame. Drunk driver kills someone; the bartender over-served them. A young man joins a street gang; he's from a poor neighborhood. A child is obese; fast food makers are the problem. A young man shoots up a crowd of people; we need to ban guns. Our children are stupid; more money is needed for schools. The true problems in these cases: The drunk who gets in the car, the young man who took the "easy" way out, the parents who don't control what their child eats, the young man himself, and once again, the parents who don't truly care for their offspring.

The progressive mindset (I try to avoid the term 'liberal' because these people have no idea what liberty means) wants to stay in college forever. They want to have a place to live at their level of comfort, to be able to 'party' as they please, to attempt to show others how intellectual they are by protesting, marching, and shouting down those they don't like, but again, to not be responsible for the backlash that is prone to come, and to have no true responsibility in any of it. They want it provided to them.
They are not responsible to produce anything, other than a semi-positive grade on a piece of paper, which the way many schools are now, you can do that by showing up. They want to be cared for, but not have to answer to anyone for it. They want to be protected from violence, but applaud when violence is perpetrated against "those who deserve it." It's because of this mindset that I can see why they're so opposed to private citizens owning guns and being responsible for their own safety.

The modern progressive (and so many others) wanders around the Earth without a care. They drive their cars mindlessly, talking on the phone, texting, doing their hair, reading, shaving, talking with friends, or anything that takes them away from the fact that they're wielding a 1-2 ton vehicle capable of inflicting death or carnage upon anyone in their path. They 'play' with drugs, prescription and non, because "It makes me feel creative/able to cope/motivated/happy/etc..." yet these can kill in minutes. Sex has long since past its purpose to them, that being reproduction, and it's simply a way to feel good, or empowered, or a way to express their feelings, or just something to do, yet to deal with the outcome, whether it being pregnancy or a disease, is beneath them. Someone else needs to deal with these problems; not them.
So when faced with something whose sole purpose was to actually kill, they panic. They call those of us who own or wield such things "Nuts! Idiots! Pathetic! Terrorists!" Because we're willing to take responsibility for our own safety or the safety of our families, we're "Less of a man".
Slight aside, but that one always amuses me. I'm somehow less of a man because I bring a gun to a fistfight. Ask any real fighter; not someone who thinks they're a tough guy, but someone who has gotten into many fights time after time and they will use whatever means at their disposal to either get out of or win that fight. Glasses, chairs, tables, pipes, bricks, bats, knives, or even guns. If it stops the fight before it even begins, letting both people walk away or at least I get to walk away, I'll bring a nuclear weapon to a fist fight. "Fair fights" are for a ring or when two people want to see who has the bigger balls and if you're comparing balls, that's kinda gay.
Gun owners know they're dealing with something that can kill. That's the purpose of it. And the overwhelming majority do their best to treat their gun(s) with the respect and fear that they deserve. 

Now without fail, someone would invariably argue about "rednecks" (the term only became derogatory a couple decades ago. Before then, it meant someone who worked outside for a living and always found a way to solve a problem, even if it was with duct tape, a garden hose, a pillow case full of goose feathers and bacon grease) who get drunk and play 'William Tell' with shotguns and these are gun owners who aren't responsible. Fair enough. In response, I give you National Socialists, aka Nazi's. They believe in the same socialist ideals as their progressive brethren, but they throw in a whole heaping of racism. All groups have their fringe elements. If you blame the whole for the fringe then we might as well truly end it all because as a species, we're no longer worthwhile keeping around.