Connect with us

Democrats

Why the NRA is in trouble

Published

on

Why the NRA is in trouble

The plight of the NRA should be a cautionary tale for any Civil Rights organization that compromises on its fundamental beliefs.

Let’s be blunt about it, compromising with evil is a fool’s errand. It should be painfully obvious that making a deal with the enemies of liberty on the left will only see them redouble their efforts in pushing for their final solution to the freedom problem.

There can be no compromise with the gun confiscation agenda of the left

There should be no doubt as to the left’s ultimate goal of gun confiscation. This should be clear since Eric ‘Nukem’ Swalwell has made gun confiscation the central tenet of his candidacy along with the over 70 instances and counting of the liberty grabber left demanding gun confiscation.

However, in the face of this onslaught, the NRA decided to throw some of our fundamental human rights under the bus. It can’t be a coincidence that their latest troubles began with a willingness to compromise by acquiescing to the ‘regulation’ [read confiscation or destruction] of ‘bump stocks’ or the knuckling under to the idea of gun confiscation SWATing [aka ERPO’s or ‘Red Flag’ laws].

While the national socialist media loves to report at length on the troubles within the NRA, they are very careful in avoiding the subject as to why this is the case. This is also a reminder that there are many who prefer the Gun Owners of America [GOA] or local civil rights organisations such as Rocky Mountain Gun Owners  simply because they do not compromise on our fundamental human rights.

The liberty grabber left never compromises in their assault on freedom

The liberty grabber left is known for many things, but compromise isn’t one of them. In fact, one would be hard pressed to cite a case where they have compromised. For the folks who oppose liberty whilst parading around with the self-proclaimed label of liberal, their idea of compromise is that we give up on a bit of our fundamental freedom while at most, they temporarily applaud the move.

Thus when the NRA made these stunning announcements, everyone on the pro-liberty right cringed because we knew that the socialist-left would see this as weakness and try to exploit it to the hilt. The past year or so has seen a relentless effort on the part of the liberty grabber left in going after our fundamental human rights on a local, state and national level. Each success by them has seen them simply turn around and demand more.

They merely scoffed at the ‘bump-stock’ compromise [read confiscation or destruction] as a ‘meaningless’ gesture, letting the President nonsensically re-write the definition of the term machine gun that could easily be used to apply to ban every semi-automatic firearm in existence.

In a situation like frat house initiation scene in the 1978 movie ‘Animal House’, Trump and the NRA responded to the pushing of gun confiscation SWATing as though they were saying ‘Thank you, sir! May I have another?’. Crossing a legal Rubicon destroying the Constitutional principle of due process for gun owners and those alleged to be gun owners.

What changed in the defense of Liberty?

The paradigm used to be that the liberty grabber left would work to exploit the latest ‘serious crisis’ to further their gun confiscation agenda by first lying about the ‘easy access to guns’. Getting what ever compromise they could muster after which they would wait for the next ‘serious crisis’ to do it all over again. Those of us on the pro-liberty right would work to conserve liberty, working to maintain our basic civil and human rights.

But something changed last year, the NRA and Trump signaled a willingness to compromise on our basic human rights. The result was that the liberty grabber left ‘pounced’ seeing this as weakness, and they are still at it as though school shootings were taking place every 5 minutes despite the fact that even they’ve admitted to their rarity.

The Takeaway

Recent events have made it clear that one cannot placate with those who never compromise. Those who would dearly love to control liberty only see this practice as weakness, which they will seek to exploit to maximum effect.

There is only one way to confront those averse to liberty, and that is to resist their efforts and never compromise. That is the lesson that has to be learned and never forgotten.

Advertisement

0

Culture and Religion

Two weeks after Benghazi attack, Ilhan Omar Tweeted ‘Allahu Akbar’

Published

on

Two weeks after Benghazi attack Ilhan Omar Tweeted Allahu Akbar

This is old news, of course, but bears repeating at this time. Representative Ilhan Omar has been doing everything she can over the last couple of weeks to paint herself as the victim of bigotry and someone who loves our country. And while there’s definitely some substance to the notion that crowds of Republicans shouldn’t be chanting “send her back,” it’s also understandable why so many Americans are opposed to her presence on Capitol Hill.

Even if we dismiss reports that she married her brother, called for CBP to be eliminated, said this is “not going to be the country of white people,” referred to 9/11 as “some people did something,” and is regularly praised by former KKK leader David Duke, it’s difficult to dismiss her reaction to the Benghazi attacks that took the lives of four American heroes in 2012.

I’m not going to dignify her Tweet with an opinion. She’s the one who needs to explain it. But despite her celebration, life isn’t good for the four men who lost there’s in Benghazi. Remember this, folks, as Democrats embrace her wholeheartedly.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Funny how nobody mentioned AOC interned for Ted Kennedy

Published

on

Funny how nobody mentioned AOC interned for Ted Kennedy

Yesterday was the 50th anniversary of the Chappaquiddick incident when a drunken Senator Ted Kennedy drove his car off a bridge. He escaped, but his passenger, Mary Jo Kopechne, drowned. He didn’t report the accident for 12 hours.

Mainstream media has spent the last half-century covering up the tragedy to give the popular Senator from Massachusetts political cover. They’re continuing to do it even today.

Associated Press On Chappaquiddick: 50 Years Ago Today, Kennedy’s Car Did Something

Give the Associated Press credit for media consistency. News outlets have spent the last 50 years attempting to distance Ted Kennedy from Chappaquiddick, and this passive-voice remembrance is … perfect.

As Twitter pal Jeff Dobbs puts it, the real crime is that the car got away with it:

Let’s start this in reverse, as it’s the best way to put this in perspective. It’s not true that Kopechne “drowned.” The coroner never autopsied the body, itself a curious omission when dealing with an unattended death of a healthy young woman. Eyewitness testimony by the person who recovered her body at the scene, as well as the position of the body, strongly suggests she suffocated after spending a significant amount of time exhausting the oxygen in the air bubble of the submerged car.

The continuous downplaying of the tragic events by mainstream media is awful. But there’s another angle that nobody is covering. Even as many Democrats, especially far-left progressives, are starting to finally denounce the Senator for his actions all those decades ago, there seems to be no concern that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez chose to intern for the Senator as she began her political career.

Kennedy was a Democratic icon, not because of his accomplishments but because of his name. He let Mary Jo Kopechne die at Chappaquiddick, but that’s been forgiven by everyone, including his former intern Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. How woke.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Kyrsten Sinema’s ‘Operation Safe Return’ is a good effort but won’t work to slow migrants

Published

on

Kyrsten Sinemas Operation Safe Return is a good effort but wont work to slow migrants

Any time a Democrat makes an effort to do something tangible to stop illegal immigration, it’s praiseworthy. Today’s Democratic Party is not only devoid of a plan to slow the migrant surge or end the border crisis. Many are doing what they can to make the problem bigger by pretending it isn’t a problem at all. This is why it’s refreshing to see Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema psuh for “Operation Safe Return.”

The proposal would set rules that would expedite the removal of migrant family units who do not demonstrate a “credible fear” of persecution. It’s a complex, multi-stage plan that sets time limits on how soon migrant families are interviewed and tightens the criteria for them to be released to the interior.

What it does not do is make changes to the Flores Agreement, which enables family units to be released quickly from detention once they file for asylum. This rule is dangerous to the children involved because it makes them a hot commodity for those wanting to move quickly into the interior of the country. Children are being used as “tickets” and are being sold to or rented by illegal immigrants.

Sinema’s plan doesn’t address this, but does go after “economic migrants” which likely accounts for the vast majority of those crossing the border illegally. Our asylum rules do not allow for those seeking better opportunities in America to claim asylum simply because they cannot get a good job in their home country.

According to The Arizona Republic:

The program would allow the Department of Homeland Security to deport certain migrants within 15 days, according to the letter, and would help alleviate overcrowding at border facilities, Sinema said.

“This pilot program would apply to families who aren’t claiming ‘credible fear,’ which of course is the first threshold in seeking asylum,” Sinema told The Arizona Republic. “If someone says ‘I left my country because I can’t make a living,’ (or) ‘it’s hard to take care of my family’ — that’s what we call an economic migrant.”

Sinema is one of the main architects behind the proposed program, along with Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee.

Sinema said she came up with the idea for the pilot program in response to a meeting with White House and Trump administration officials who she said were focused on changing asylum laws and challenging court rulings like the Flores Settlement Agreement, dictating how the government treats certain migrants.

“I just felt those weren’t the right answers,” Sinema added. “We wanted to solve the problem. We wanted to protect the asylum process for valid applicants … and we want to respect the Flores decision.”

This is a nice attempt, but here’s the problem. Word will continue to spread that migrants should not claim economic hardship as their reason for filing for asylum. They are being given talking points about their status that include saying they’re being persecuted because of their beliefs. This is easy to say and difficult to prove, making it the easy path through which migrant families can come to America and be released to the interior three weeks later.

The proposal has been delivered to acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan for review. It was signed by Sinema and Johnson as well as five Republican and two Democratic Senators.

This is a stopgap plan that may slow the migrant surge and expedite deportations on a small scale, but eventually it will become worthless. Sinema deserves credit for trying, but we need bolder measures if we’re going to make a dent in the border crisis.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending