Last week this country marked 40 years since the Roe v. Wade decision which legalized abortion in this country. Last week also marked the 40th Annual March for Life protesting this landmark decision. At this point it is widely agreed that at least 500,000 people participated in the 2013 March for Life and some sources put the figure at 600,000 or more. By some estimates the March for Life drew more people than did the inauguration held just days earlier! Yet where was the media?! Where were all the stories covering this massive event?! No mainstream media network even bothered to devote "legitimate" coverage to the march and the few newspaper stories that were run simply said that "thousands" or "tens of thousands" came out.
Yet the VERY NEXT DAY, less then 5,000 people, including 100 from Newtown, Connecticut, showed up to march on the Capitol for tighter gun control and the media was everywhere! CNN, Yahoo, MSNBC, if you were a liberal main stream media outlet then you were there with all kinds of cameras giving the issue all kinds of coverage.
Regardless of your views on the issue of abortion, this information should be incredibly disconcerting. A pro-gun control march drew less than 1 percent of the total number of people who showed up to March for Life and yet that march was front page, top of the hour news while the March for Life was buried deep within papers and news shows if it was even mentioned at all. The New York Times did actually give "serious" coverage to the march for the first time in six years by writing, for the online version at least, its first full story on the march since 2007. What's worse though is that the media doesn't even describe the march correctly.
According to the AP, news outlets aren't supposed to call marchers in the March for Life "pro-life". Instead, they are to be referred to as "anti-abortion activists". As I was typing this post, I opened my own copy of the AP Style Book and confirmed this. This has even led to major pro-life activists being misrepresented in news stories. I read the article last week and regretfully could not find it again, but in one story from the MSM, the Director of Pro-Life Activities here in the Archdiocese of Washington was cited as the Director for "Anti-Abortion" Activities.
Why is that? Why can't the media be honest and use the term pro-life? There is nothing negative about that title, nothing offensive about that title. And those who are pro-life support much more than an end to abortion. To varying degrees, pro-lifers may also support an end to terrorism, war, violence and capital punishment. In the interest of full disclosure I am pro-life but I am still a staunch supporter of the death penalty.
After the stunning general silence about the March for Life 2013 and the subsequent almost blanket media coverage of the gun control march the next day, it has become very obvious that the media at large has a clear liberal agenda. The MSM only wants to provide coverage to stories which promote that agenda. If you will also notice, the media is also ignoring a new and growing group of people who identify as "pro-life and pro-gay"
If you still think the MSM is "fair and balanced" with its coverage after reading this, then you may need to seek expert help. If the media were truly fair and balanced then not only would the March for Life have gotten the media coverage it deserved, but there's a good chance Obama would have lost the election like he deserved.
Jimmy Williams
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Monday, January 28, 2013
The Society We Live In
Just last week while I was still on winter break I went to visit and catch up with a good friend of mine whom I hadn't seen in a while. She is a strong Republican just like me who was admittedly very distraught by the results of the election in November. While I was visiting, I gave her a new bumper sticker that I had also gotten for my car which reads, "Don't blame me, I voted for Romney!". It certainly gave us a good laugh to ease the gloom we both have been feeling when it comes to the state of our national and state politics.
When I'm home again, I'm planning to put my sticker on the back of my car. My friend, however, was very hesitant about doing the same and instead has elected to put hers on her laptop bag instead, where it won't necessarily be as public. Given where we both live, in the heart of deep-blue Maryland, I can't say I blame her at all. Over the last 18 months my car, which prominently displays several anti-Obama bumper stickers, has been egged by immature idiots at least 3 times, but fortunately not for the last several months.
My friend's decision about where to put her bumper sticker really got us both thinking about the society in which we live. As much as we stick to our values, it can be hard at times to publicly express those values without being attacked from all sides. In addition to having my car egged, I've been given the bird repeatedly out on the roads, had people driving around me tailgate me and really make it more dangerous out there than it has to be.
If we express our political views in class with a liberal professor we could suffer unfair penalties when it comes to grading. That happened to me in 11th grade English and it almost happened again in my freshmen year of college when I was almost made to rewrite an entire paper for "disturbing the peace" in a lecture hall. Last time I checked, presenting documented facts that disprove everything your lecturer is saying about "global warming" isn't disturbing the peace.
If we express our views on Facebook or other social media, we're automatically "wrong", "racist" or "bigoted" depending on what we're advocating for. No matter that liberals and Democrats can say whatever they want on Facebook and Twitter, that's freedom of speech according to our society. But whenever Republicans and Conservatives want to express their beliefs and opinions using social media, that's not freedom of speech and we shouldn't be allowed to say what we believe in. The "party of tolerance" isn't very tolerant. And Facebook seems to agree because I've seen many of my Facebook friends have their pages censored, temporarily deactivated and even deleted for advocating various Republican ideas.
Where does the blame for this society fall? It starts with the public school system, which is more and more pushing a liberal agenda on our younger generation. Colleges and universities, public and private, help to finish the job. The media is also at fault. The job of the media is not to cheer lead for the administration, it is to find and present the truth! And the only media outlets who seek out the truth and report fairly anymore are the "evil Conservatives" at Fox News, The Daily Caller, Breitbart, etc. This society we live in needs a major change and soon or we're all in serious trouble.
Jimmy Williams
When I'm home again, I'm planning to put my sticker on the back of my car. My friend, however, was very hesitant about doing the same and instead has elected to put hers on her laptop bag instead, where it won't necessarily be as public. Given where we both live, in the heart of deep-blue Maryland, I can't say I blame her at all. Over the last 18 months my car, which prominently displays several anti-Obama bumper stickers, has been egged by immature idiots at least 3 times, but fortunately not for the last several months.
My friend's decision about where to put her bumper sticker really got us both thinking about the society in which we live. As much as we stick to our values, it can be hard at times to publicly express those values without being attacked from all sides. In addition to having my car egged, I've been given the bird repeatedly out on the roads, had people driving around me tailgate me and really make it more dangerous out there than it has to be.
If we express our political views in class with a liberal professor we could suffer unfair penalties when it comes to grading. That happened to me in 11th grade English and it almost happened again in my freshmen year of college when I was almost made to rewrite an entire paper for "disturbing the peace" in a lecture hall. Last time I checked, presenting documented facts that disprove everything your lecturer is saying about "global warming" isn't disturbing the peace.
If we express our views on Facebook or other social media, we're automatically "wrong", "racist" or "bigoted" depending on what we're advocating for. No matter that liberals and Democrats can say whatever they want on Facebook and Twitter, that's freedom of speech according to our society. But whenever Republicans and Conservatives want to express their beliefs and opinions using social media, that's not freedom of speech and we shouldn't be allowed to say what we believe in. The "party of tolerance" isn't very tolerant. And Facebook seems to agree because I've seen many of my Facebook friends have their pages censored, temporarily deactivated and even deleted for advocating various Republican ideas.
Where does the blame for this society fall? It starts with the public school system, which is more and more pushing a liberal agenda on our younger generation. Colleges and universities, public and private, help to finish the job. The media is also at fault. The job of the media is not to cheer lead for the administration, it is to find and present the truth! And the only media outlets who seek out the truth and report fairly anymore are the "evil Conservatives" at Fox News, The Daily Caller, Breitbart, etc. This society we live in needs a major change and soon or we're all in serious trouble.
Jimmy Williams
Monday, January 21, 2013
I Sure Hope Those Dems are Happy
So today I'll give a sort of "Inauguration Bonus" edition for the blog, mostly because I'm ignoring all late-night news for obvious reasons. My local ABC affiliate posted a picture to its Facebook account of the Obamas dancing at the Commander-In-Chief Ball and captioned it talking about how cute they were and listed the song they picked to dance to. So I let them have it in the comments section, not that I'll get a response. But I'm sick of this media fawning all over the man! Run a real news story! Who gives two cents about the song he and his wife danced to? Instead run a story about how he's added $5.8 trillion to the national debt since Inauguration 2009 and yet the unemployment rate is STILL 7.8 percent, exactly the same as the day he took office.
Let's talk instead about how this man has started the process of killing America as we know it. About how he circumnavigates the Constitution whenever he sees fit on issues ranging from executive privilege (Fast and Furious) to gun-control (23 "executive actions"). Let's talk about how from January 20, 2009 to now, the cost of a gallon of gas has gone up 79 percent. Let's talk about 46 percent more people are on food stamps, about how poverty has increased by double digits, about how 2.1 MILLION more Americans are listed as out of the labor force than on this day four years ago. Let's see the media run a story on that on not another damned puff piece!
Can we Americans get an answer for why $4 trillion in new debt in 8 years is unpatriotic but $5.8 trillion in 4 years is totally okay? Can we get an answer as to why when Obama was a senator in 2006 raising the debt ceiling was "weak leadership" but now if we don't do it, it would be "absurd" and "irresponsible"? I wish I could make that up but those were statements right from the horse's mouth!
The final countdown clock has finally started, 1461 more awful days to go according to Drudge Report's banner headline today. I sure hope you Democrats and other Obama supporters know what you're getting into, but I doubt you do. For the rest of us, we'll keep on fighting to preserve the real America way of life that the man you've voted for wants to take away.
Jimmy Williams
Let's talk instead about how this man has started the process of killing America as we know it. About how he circumnavigates the Constitution whenever he sees fit on issues ranging from executive privilege (Fast and Furious) to gun-control (23 "executive actions"). Let's talk about how from January 20, 2009 to now, the cost of a gallon of gas has gone up 79 percent. Let's talk about 46 percent more people are on food stamps, about how poverty has increased by double digits, about how 2.1 MILLION more Americans are listed as out of the labor force than on this day four years ago. Let's see the media run a story on that on not another damned puff piece!
Can we Americans get an answer for why $4 trillion in new debt in 8 years is unpatriotic but $5.8 trillion in 4 years is totally okay? Can we get an answer as to why when Obama was a senator in 2006 raising the debt ceiling was "weak leadership" but now if we don't do it, it would be "absurd" and "irresponsible"? I wish I could make that up but those were statements right from the horse's mouth!
The final countdown clock has finally started, 1461 more awful days to go according to Drudge Report's banner headline today. I sure hope you Democrats and other Obama supporters know what you're getting into, but I doubt you do. For the rest of us, we'll keep on fighting to preserve the real America way of life that the man you've voted for wants to take away.
Jimmy Williams
The Destruction of Personal Liberties
Well ladies and gentlemen, it's "public" Inauguration Day and with the start of Barack Obama's second term comes the destruction of personal liberties in this country as Barack Obama, who has sworn to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America" has decided to instead "pervert, twist and destroy" the Constitution.
With the signing of his 23 "executive actions" on gun-control just last week, Obama has now reminded the country that it is apparently not illegal for doctors to ask you if you or your family own firearms in the house. That is 100 percent a violation of our privacy, but Obama doesn't seem to care. The "Affordable Care Act" makes it totally legal for your doctor to question you about owning firearms. If this question comes up at your next doctor's appointment, and I can almost guarantee it will, refuse to answer it. Who cares what the law says? That's none of my (or your) doctor's business.
Soon we will no longer be able to even drive where we want without "big brother" monitoring it. The federal government is pushing for "black boxes" to be installed in all new cars to make it easier to analyze data in the event of a crash. What they fail to tell you is that same black box can collect information at all times on when you are driving, where you are driving and how fast you are driving. The other driving initiative, known as pay-as-you-drive insurance, seeks to make people pay for insurance based on how far they drive instead of just charging flat rates. Doesn't that just sound like a "good" idea on the surface? Of course it does, most liberal scams seem like that.
The real, hidden goal, behind PAYD insurance is to force everyone living in suburbs and rural areas to move into cities. Programs like Progressive's "Snapshot" are optional for now, but just give it some time. Don't be surprised if PAYD soon becomes mandatory. Once that happens, everyone living in rural areas will be subjected to skyrocketing insurance rates because of how much further these people how to commute to go to work, go to the store, etc. The ultimate liberal agenda is to force these people, who are generally Conservative and Republican, to have to give up their rural lives and move into cities. They don't even want me living where I'm living in the "suburbs". Liberals want everyone concentrated into cities. At first you might think I sound crazy, but just think about it for a second and add all the pieces together. You will realize I'm right.
God bless America and all of you and thank you for reading. These next four years are going to be a huge challenge for all of us in this country.
Jimmy Williams
With the signing of his 23 "executive actions" on gun-control just last week, Obama has now reminded the country that it is apparently not illegal for doctors to ask you if you or your family own firearms in the house. That is 100 percent a violation of our privacy, but Obama doesn't seem to care. The "Affordable Care Act" makes it totally legal for your doctor to question you about owning firearms. If this question comes up at your next doctor's appointment, and I can almost guarantee it will, refuse to answer it. Who cares what the law says? That's none of my (or your) doctor's business.
Soon we will no longer be able to even drive where we want without "big brother" monitoring it. The federal government is pushing for "black boxes" to be installed in all new cars to make it easier to analyze data in the event of a crash. What they fail to tell you is that same black box can collect information at all times on when you are driving, where you are driving and how fast you are driving. The other driving initiative, known as pay-as-you-drive insurance, seeks to make people pay for insurance based on how far they drive instead of just charging flat rates. Doesn't that just sound like a "good" idea on the surface? Of course it does, most liberal scams seem like that.
The real, hidden goal, behind PAYD insurance is to force everyone living in suburbs and rural areas to move into cities. Programs like Progressive's "Snapshot" are optional for now, but just give it some time. Don't be surprised if PAYD soon becomes mandatory. Once that happens, everyone living in rural areas will be subjected to skyrocketing insurance rates because of how much further these people how to commute to go to work, go to the store, etc. The ultimate liberal agenda is to force these people, who are generally Conservative and Republican, to have to give up their rural lives and move into cities. They don't even want me living where I'm living in the "suburbs". Liberals want everyone concentrated into cities. At first you might think I sound crazy, but just think about it for a second and add all the pieces together. You will realize I'm right.
God bless America and all of you and thank you for reading. These next four years are going to be a huge challenge for all of us in this country.
Jimmy Williams
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Coming for Our Guns
NOTE: I started working on this post before Obama took his executive action but I was unable to finish it. My original post will appear below an updated posting.
Update after signing of executive orders: Well folks, he did it. Obama has signed not 19, but 23 executive orders in his first side-step of Congress in regards to gun-control. Legally, Congress still has to vote on the "assault weapons ban", the size of magazines, etc. but if they don't take action over on the Hill, don't be surprised if Obama takes a run at it himself.
Doctors can now legally ask you if you have access to guns in your house; one of the executive orders reminds doctors that they can do that. If you are asked that at your next check-up, refuse to answer. It is none of your doctor's damn business if you have guns in your house. That is a violation of your privacy and it is something that will almost certainly be headed to court soon.
Obama says we must take whatever actions we can take keep children safe, so that's why he did this. Well Mr. Obama, if you want to take any action that keeps children safe, then do something that will actually save he lives of millions of children and stop federal funding of Planned Parenthood. Over one million abortions were performed last year while less than 2,000 children died as a result of gun violence. Yet our rights are taken away and Planned Parenthood can continue to menace society.
Original Post: With new legislative sessions beginning in both Washington, D.C., and Annapolis, Maryland within the last week and a half or so, I've been waiting to do any posts about guns until I could see how the landscape appears to be playing out. Now that we see where our "leaders" are planning to go, I feel like I can finally write this post.
After the tragedy at Sandy Hook, gun-control became the number two issue in national politics besides the Fiscal Cliff. And now that the cliff issue has been "solved" (for more on that debacle, see my last post from January 3rd), gun-control seems to be the hot-button issue for Obama and his loons. Not the debt-limit, not the spending problem.
Here's Obama's problem, a problem we are all well aware of but I don't want to skip over it. He can't pass gun-control legislation through Congress and he never will be able to because Republicans and many Democrats won't allow it. If voting for the fiscal cliff deal wasn't already political suicide for many of these House Republicans, allowing gun-control legislation to pass certainly would be. So instead, Obama is going to circumvent the Constitution and use executive orders to make gun-control stricter.
Doing something completely unconstitutional has never stopped Obama before. It didn't stop him from using executive privilege to illegally cover up Fast and Furious and cover Eric Holder's ass. It didn't stop him from signing Obamacare into law. And it probably won't stop him from doing something incredibly unconstitutional to restrict our rights to own guns. Cuomo already did it in New York and I'm almost certain O'Malley is going to at the very least get very close to doing the same thing to my family and others here in Maryland.
Update after signing of executive orders: Well folks, he did it. Obama has signed not 19, but 23 executive orders in his first side-step of Congress in regards to gun-control. Legally, Congress still has to vote on the "assault weapons ban", the size of magazines, etc. but if they don't take action over on the Hill, don't be surprised if Obama takes a run at it himself.
Doctors can now legally ask you if you have access to guns in your house; one of the executive orders reminds doctors that they can do that. If you are asked that at your next check-up, refuse to answer. It is none of your doctor's damn business if you have guns in your house. That is a violation of your privacy and it is something that will almost certainly be headed to court soon.
Obama says we must take whatever actions we can take keep children safe, so that's why he did this. Well Mr. Obama, if you want to take any action that keeps children safe, then do something that will actually save he lives of millions of children and stop federal funding of Planned Parenthood. Over one million abortions were performed last year while less than 2,000 children died as a result of gun violence. Yet our rights are taken away and Planned Parenthood can continue to menace society.
Original Post: With new legislative sessions beginning in both Washington, D.C., and Annapolis, Maryland within the last week and a half or so, I've been waiting to do any posts about guns until I could see how the landscape appears to be playing out. Now that we see where our "leaders" are planning to go, I feel like I can finally write this post.
After the tragedy at Sandy Hook, gun-control became the number two issue in national politics besides the Fiscal Cliff. And now that the cliff issue has been "solved" (for more on that debacle, see my last post from January 3rd), gun-control seems to be the hot-button issue for Obama and his loons. Not the debt-limit, not the spending problem.
Here's Obama's problem, a problem we are all well aware of but I don't want to skip over it. He can't pass gun-control legislation through Congress and he never will be able to because Republicans and many Democrats won't allow it. If voting for the fiscal cliff deal wasn't already political suicide for many of these House Republicans, allowing gun-control legislation to pass certainly would be. So instead, Obama is going to circumvent the Constitution and use executive orders to make gun-control stricter.
Doing something completely unconstitutional has never stopped Obama before. It didn't stop him from using executive privilege to illegally cover up Fast and Furious and cover Eric Holder's ass. It didn't stop him from signing Obamacare into law. And it probably won't stop him from doing something incredibly unconstitutional to restrict our rights to own guns. Cuomo already did it in New York and I'm almost certain O'Malley is going to at the very least get very close to doing the same thing to my family and others here in Maryland.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Finally a new post!: The "Fiscal Cliff" Deal
Hello Everyone,
First of all, I lied. Regular blog posts did not resume when I got home. It's been about a month now since I updated with anything meaningful, but that will change. I hope everyone had a safe and blessed Christmas and New Year.
We as a nation have certainly experienced a lot since I last published a post. We experienced the tragedy of the mass shooting in Newtown, we have seen constant fighting and bullshitting over the nation's finances and we have (from my perspective at least) fallen over the fiscal cliff. Actually that's not entirely true. We avoided the "worst" of the cliff, but I think I would've rather gone over instead of taking the "deal" we as a nation now face. That's just my personal feeling on it, feel free to disagree with me.
So what does this "deal" on the fiscal cliff mean? Well for one thing, I think it means the Republican Party has lost a lot of backbone. I think Boehner needs to do some serious soul searching to figure out why he made the decisions he made in deciding to go with this deal which is, essentially, yet another spending bill. A bill that the CBO says will add ANOTHER $3.9 trillion to the national debt over the next decade. I applaud Sens. Marco Rubio and Rand Paul for standing up for Republican values and for this nation and voting no to this deal that doesn't do anything to help our country in the long term.
I wonder if Congress as a whole wonders why its approval rating is so low these days? While I do firmly believe the fiscal cliff was artificially created during the summer of 2011 by President Obama and Harry Reid's refusal to get serious about our spending problem and actually pass a viable budget, here in early 2013 House Republicans have become complacent in passing a "deal" that raises taxes on at least 77% of households, a "deal" that adds $41 in taxes for every $1 in cuts!
On top of that, this "deal" gives Congress another two months before they have to even consider making cuts to the budget! That means at least two more months of the Harry Reid not allowing the Senate to pass a budget that will fix this country's problems! And for all we know, two months will pass and Obama and Reid will find some other way to put off dealing with actually reducing spending.
We may not have "gone off the cliff," but this country is still in very sad shape. I hate being so negative but it's the reality of the times we live in. Thanks for reading and God Bless America, she's going to need all the blessings she can get.
Jimmy Williams
First of all, I lied. Regular blog posts did not resume when I got home. It's been about a month now since I updated with anything meaningful, but that will change. I hope everyone had a safe and blessed Christmas and New Year.
We as a nation have certainly experienced a lot since I last published a post. We experienced the tragedy of the mass shooting in Newtown, we have seen constant fighting and bullshitting over the nation's finances and we have (from my perspective at least) fallen over the fiscal cliff. Actually that's not entirely true. We avoided the "worst" of the cliff, but I think I would've rather gone over instead of taking the "deal" we as a nation now face. That's just my personal feeling on it, feel free to disagree with me.
So what does this "deal" on the fiscal cliff mean? Well for one thing, I think it means the Republican Party has lost a lot of backbone. I think Boehner needs to do some serious soul searching to figure out why he made the decisions he made in deciding to go with this deal which is, essentially, yet another spending bill. A bill that the CBO says will add ANOTHER $3.9 trillion to the national debt over the next decade. I applaud Sens. Marco Rubio and Rand Paul for standing up for Republican values and for this nation and voting no to this deal that doesn't do anything to help our country in the long term.
I wonder if Congress as a whole wonders why its approval rating is so low these days? While I do firmly believe the fiscal cliff was artificially created during the summer of 2011 by President Obama and Harry Reid's refusal to get serious about our spending problem and actually pass a viable budget, here in early 2013 House Republicans have become complacent in passing a "deal" that raises taxes on at least 77% of households, a "deal" that adds $41 in taxes for every $1 in cuts!
On top of that, this "deal" gives Congress another two months before they have to even consider making cuts to the budget! That means at least two more months of the Harry Reid not allowing the Senate to pass a budget that will fix this country's problems! And for all we know, two months will pass and Obama and Reid will find some other way to put off dealing with actually reducing spending.
We may not have "gone off the cliff," but this country is still in very sad shape. I hate being so negative but it's the reality of the times we live in. Thanks for reading and God Bless America, she's going to need all the blessings she can get.
Jimmy Williams
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)