Posts
Scrape the paint off a liberal and you'll find an undercoating of denial thicker than Michael Moore's bacon, lettuce, tomato, more bacon, ham and cheese sandwich. I'm talking about their denial about guns, and the people who kill people with guns. But they aren't the only ones who make a case that gun violence is the result of the opposing political party. Conservatives can also be guilty of making artificial claims that it's the liberals who are the lunatics who actually do the shooting of the innocents., but not only is this not always the case, it isn't even the issue. Let's look at a document I got from a conservative with all the right intentions regarding the Second Amendment. I am going to quote it directly but I cannot provide a source for the original as it appears as a jpeg in her posted photos:
--In 1863 a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States.
--In 1964 a communist turned Democrat killed John F. Kennedy.
--In 1983 a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan.
--In 2007 a registered Democrat named Seung-Hui Cho shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech.
--In 2010 a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner shot Representative Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.
--In 2011 a registered Democrat named James Holmes went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.
--In 2013 a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza shot and killed 26 people in a school.
You can't swing a dead cat over your head at a DNC meeting without a liberal blaming a right wing nut job for the cat's demise. But still, you need to be skeptical about what you read on the Internet. Do not believe that just because a post was written or posted by someone of your political beliefs that it must be true; nor believe that just because a post was written by an "idiot" of the other party that it must be a lie. Do some checking. I did, and below is what I found (on the Internet, so please take it with a grain of salt, because more than a grain might anger those nanny state liberals who want to limit our salt intake and eat and drink the way they say we should):
1865, not 1863 (the Civil War hadn't ended yet), John Wilkes Booth, a Democrat (often referred to as Dixiecrats) killed Abraham Lincoln, the Republican president who freed the slaves. Freeing slaves angered Booth so badly, that he could not control his hatred for Lincoln. Booth escaped capture for a while but was killed by the Army troops who were in pursuit. Okay yes, Booth actually was a Democrat but so what? More on the "so what" later.
1964. I was coming out of school when I learned that President John F. Kennedy was shot. It was soon learned that his assassin was Lee Harvey Oswald, a 24 year old Marxist who was also a member of the Young People's Socialist League, which is the closest one can come to being a Democrat by today's standards. Oswald was definitely not a GOPer but to call him a Democrat is falsely labelling him.
On April 16,2007 Seung-Hui Cho, a South Korean Virginia Tech student went on a killing spree, killed 32 and wounded 17 others. When security officers came close to encountering him, Cho committed suicide. He suffered an anxiety disorder and selective mutism and was being treated for both, and in his last two years in school, there were indications that something was amiss with his mind as he displayed abnormal behavior. Cho's family moved to the US when Cho was 8 years old. They were religious Christians, but according to CNN.com (Shooter: "You have blood on your hands," retrieved May 23, 2010), a note found in Cho's dorm room stated: "Thanks to you I died like Jesus Christ, to inspire generations of the weak and defenseless people." In other words, Cho was crazy and if his family leaned conservative, he definitely seemed to lean the other way. However, I could find no other evidence that Cho was a liberal or a conservative. The evidence points clearly to mental illness and there is no proof that I know of that indicates he was "registered Democrat." In fact, I don't believe Cho was even eligible to vote as he was not a US citizen.
January 8, 2011 (not 2010) Jared Loughner pleaded guilty to 19 charges of murder and attempted murder. He was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic while the left diagnosed him as a conservative. He killed 6 people, one of whom was a 9 year old girl, and wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, (D-AZ). Those on the left immediately said it was politically motivated and called for gun control because a conservative wanted to put an end to Democrats, and conservatives later claimed Loughner is a liberal and may have worked for Giffords in the past. One actual fact, besides his mental diagnosis, is that Laughner began using drugs and alcohol, which has no political bearing. He was also deemed incompetent to stand trial and is now serving life in prison. To imply that he was either a Democrat or Republican is ridiculous--the dude is mentally ill and his political party wears pointy hats and live on Deneb.
On July 20, 2012, not 2011, James Eagan Holmes walked to the front of the Century Movie Theater in Aurora, Colorado, and began shooting people at his leisure. He killed 12 and wounded many more--in all, 82 people were shot. Prior to the massacre, CBS News reported that Holmes had met with at least three mental health professionals at the University of Colorado. In other words, Holmes was a mentally ill, dangerous "time bomb," with a fuse shorter than Anthony's weiner, but the left kept insisting that if we only had gun control in place, this would never have happened. They didn't go into too much rant about how the theater was a gun-free zone and Holmes just simply didn't comply with the law. Killers never do. As far as I could tell with my research, Holmes did not refer to himself as a Republican nor a Democrat--he referred to himself as "The Joker."
Adam Lanza went on his killing spree on December 14, 2012, not in 2013 as the other document stated. He fatally shot 20 children, 6 staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT. Before he got to the school, he had killed his mother, Nancy, at their Newtown home. Before his capture by authorities, he blew out his mentally ill brain and died instantly. Lanza's brother told authorities that Adam was believed to have a "personality disorder," and may have been "somewhat autistic," which is like being "a little pregnant." His parents were divorced.
President Obama ordered flags to be flown at half mast and Connecticut Governor Dan Malloy spoke to the media. Malloy said, "Evil visited this community today, and it is too early to speak of recover, but each parent, each sibling, each member of the family has to understand that Connecticut, we are all in this together, we will do whatever we can to overcome this event, we will get through it."
As predicted, the shooting led to the old gun control debate, as if this would have made a difference. Neither the President nor Malloy ever mentioned the issue of mental health, rather, Malloy chalked Lanza's behavior up to "evil."
Now we're talking about Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood jihadist. The Obama administration is calling the shooting by Hasan "workplace violence." Obama is very clever how he uses words. But even if you want to agree with this crap, if the soldiers at the site of the shooting were allowed to carry firearms, Hasan would be one dead mother of allah.
We conservatives have got it wrong, just like those liberals got it wrong. It isn't about what political party you belong to that predicts one's statistical likelihood of going on a shooting spree, it's one's mental health, and yes, with Hasan, one's religion. Gun control gives the advantage to the insane individual or jihadist--it offers no protection from a person bent on killing you. The problem isn't gun control, it isn't guns, it's mental health laws in this country and devising a system of checks to ensure the mentally ill are taken care of and cannot get their hands on these weapons. Every firearm is an assault weapon by definition--it's just a question of what kind of assault is it designed for. Liberals will not talk about the real issues and conservatives keep falling into the liberal's debate about defending the Second Amendment.
Tweet
--In 1863 a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States.
--In 1964 a communist turned Democrat killed John F. Kennedy.
--In 1983 a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan.
--In 2007 a registered Democrat named Seung-Hui Cho shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech.
--In 2010 a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner shot Representative Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.
--In 2011 a registered Democrat named James Holmes went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.
--In 2013 a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza shot and killed 26 people in a school.
You can't swing a dead cat over your head at a DNC meeting without a liberal blaming a right wing nut job for the cat's demise. But still, you need to be skeptical about what you read on the Internet. Do not believe that just because a post was written or posted by someone of your political beliefs that it must be true; nor believe that just because a post was written by an "idiot" of the other party that it must be a lie. Do some checking. I did, and below is what I found (on the Internet, so please take it with a grain of salt, because more than a grain might anger those nanny state liberals who want to limit our salt intake and eat and drink the way they say we should):
1865, not 1863 (the Civil War hadn't ended yet), John Wilkes Booth, a Democrat (often referred to as Dixiecrats) killed Abraham Lincoln, the Republican president who freed the slaves. Freeing slaves angered Booth so badly, that he could not control his hatred for Lincoln. Booth escaped capture for a while but was killed by the Army troops who were in pursuit. Okay yes, Booth actually was a Democrat but so what? More on the "so what" later.
1964. I was coming out of school when I learned that President John F. Kennedy was shot. It was soon learned that his assassin was Lee Harvey Oswald, a 24 year old Marxist who was also a member of the Young People's Socialist League, which is the closest one can come to being a Democrat by today's standards. Oswald was definitely not a GOPer but to call him a Democrat is falsely labelling him.
On April 16,2007 Seung-Hui Cho, a South Korean Virginia Tech student went on a killing spree, killed 32 and wounded 17 others. When security officers came close to encountering him, Cho committed suicide. He suffered an anxiety disorder and selective mutism and was being treated for both, and in his last two years in school, there were indications that something was amiss with his mind as he displayed abnormal behavior. Cho's family moved to the US when Cho was 8 years old. They were religious Christians, but according to CNN.com (Shooter: "You have blood on your hands," retrieved May 23, 2010), a note found in Cho's dorm room stated: "Thanks to you I died like Jesus Christ, to inspire generations of the weak and defenseless people." In other words, Cho was crazy and if his family leaned conservative, he definitely seemed to lean the other way. However, I could find no other evidence that Cho was a liberal or a conservative. The evidence points clearly to mental illness and there is no proof that I know of that indicates he was "registered Democrat." In fact, I don't believe Cho was even eligible to vote as he was not a US citizen.
January 8, 2011 (not 2010) Jared Loughner pleaded guilty to 19 charges of murder and attempted murder. He was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic while the left diagnosed him as a conservative. He killed 6 people, one of whom was a 9 year old girl, and wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, (D-AZ). Those on the left immediately said it was politically motivated and called for gun control because a conservative wanted to put an end to Democrats, and conservatives later claimed Loughner is a liberal and may have worked for Giffords in the past. One actual fact, besides his mental diagnosis, is that Laughner began using drugs and alcohol, which has no political bearing. He was also deemed incompetent to stand trial and is now serving life in prison. To imply that he was either a Democrat or Republican is ridiculous--the dude is mentally ill and his political party wears pointy hats and live on Deneb.Adam Lanza went on his killing spree on December 14, 2012, not in 2013 as the other document stated. He fatally shot 20 children, 6 staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT. Before he got to the school, he had killed his mother, Nancy, at their Newtown home. Before his capture by authorities, he blew out his mentally ill brain and died instantly. Lanza's brother told authorities that Adam was believed to have a "personality disorder," and may have been "somewhat autistic," which is like being "a little pregnant." His parents were divorced.
As predicted, the shooting led to the old gun control debate, as if this would have made a difference. Neither the President nor Malloy ever mentioned the issue of mental health, rather, Malloy chalked Lanza's behavior up to "evil."
Now we're talking about Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood jihadist. The Obama administration is calling the shooting by Hasan "workplace violence." Obama is very clever how he uses words. But even if you want to agree with this crap, if the soldiers at the site of the shooting were allowed to carry firearms, Hasan would be one dead mother of allah.
We conservatives have got it wrong, just like those liberals got it wrong. It isn't about what political party you belong to that predicts one's statistical likelihood of going on a shooting spree, it's one's mental health, and yes, with Hasan, one's religion. Gun control gives the advantage to the insane individual or jihadist--it offers no protection from a person bent on killing you. The problem isn't gun control, it isn't guns, it's mental health laws in this country and devising a system of checks to ensure the mentally ill are taken care of and cannot get their hands on these weapons. Every firearm is an assault weapon by definition--it's just a question of what kind of assault is it designed for. Liberals will not talk about the real issues and conservatives keep falling into the liberal's debate about defending the Second Amendment.
No comments:
Post a Comment