Foolishness from Obama: Gun Confiscation & Immigration

Gun Confiscation:

Obama says ‘it’s about the families’ after Oregon meeting


So Obama has flown to Oregon to visit the families of the latest highly publicized shooting.  I don’t know if he met with all of them or not, but if it were me, the last thing I would want to add to my grief would be a meeting with the Muslim in Chief.  Obama isn’t sad that they lost their kids, and he doesn’t grieve with them.  He is happy when incidents like this occur because they are politically useful for him and his party.  Everything that Obama and the Democrats do is about more government, less freedom, and working toward undisputed Democrat hegemony.

“We’re going to have to come together as a country to see how we can prevent these issues from taking place” so regularly, Obama told reporters following the approximately hour-long, private meeting with grieving relatives of those who were killed and injured. “But today, it’s about the families, their grief and the love we feel for them.” The White House did not say how many people Obama met with.

“We” are doing no such thing.  I am not willingly going to adopt or approve of any leftist positions.  Obama may have gone to visit the families (strictly PR) but he wasted no time calling for gun control.  I suppose that the reason why Obama did not say how many people he met with was because a lot of those people did not want to see him.

If the Democrats were really serious about dealing with such violent attacks (really it is not possible to end violence, only reduce and respond to it), then they ought to consider other options beyond taking guns away from law abiding citizens.  They always want to take the guns, but they never consider other options like banning the drugs many of these crazies are on, or closing down public schools.

Regarding the Democrat’s end game; I would not at all feel safer knowing that the only people who own guns (legally) are government forces.  Also, assuming that I get to be old and weak, I wouldn’t feel better being beaten to death by younger hoodlums vs. being shot to death by them, when I could have dispatched them in either case if I’d been allowed to have a gun.


Obama denouces ‘inflammatory’ Trump immigration policies


I believe the reason why the Democrats and the Establishment GOP are leery of Trump is because they know his policies are good for the US, and that he is serious about saving the US.

That being said, what initially sold me on Trump was his comments about the illegals and the proposal to build a wall.  Without a secure border between the US and Mexico, the US is as good as dead.

Washington (AFP) – President Barack Obama denounced the immigration policies of leading Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump Thursday, without naming him directly, in a speech to Latino political leaders.

Anyone following “Latino political leaders” is most likely not assimilated into the US culture.  Out of one side of their mouth, the left will carry on about how all immigrants are the same with their “nation of immigrants” nonsense, while out of the other side of their mouth they carry on with victim narratives and insist that white people are more endemically evil than other groups.  If all immigrants are the same then where are the Irish leaders, German leaders, English leaders, and Italian leaders?  There aren’t any, because all those groups assimilated into the mainstream culture.

I find it interesting how the overton window allows for mestizos to remain ethno-nationalists, and even form their own KKK style group, while other groups are stigmatized for acting in such a way.

“The greatness of America comes not from building walls,” Obama told the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute anniversary awards gala.

True that it doesn’t come from walls, but walls can prevent it from being undermined by hostile invaders.  The US was originally a product of European ingenuity.  That is not to say that other people cannot contribute in a positive fashion, but not everyone will.  Immigration ought to be regulated in terms of how it is beneficial to us, not to the Democrat party.

“The anti-immigrant sentiment that has infected our politics is not new, but it is wrong,” he said, before adding that “economists agree that immigration does not hurt our economy; it grows our economy.”

It’s not wrong, and I don’t see the relevance of what Obama’s paid “economists” have to say.  The fact is that no one asked me if I wanted to be submerged into Mexico, and most of us, in fact, do not want to be submerged into Mexico.  Trump’s popularity is a testament to that.  We have nothing to gain from the US becoming Mexico.  If the Democrats want to be politicians over Mexicans then they should go to Mexico and run for elections there.  Most of the Mexican government is white, so it should not (logically) be an issue.

The politicians have the money to insulate themselves from the immigrants they bring in.  It’s the low-income white people who will suffer the most from 3rd world immigration, as they cannot afford to escape it.  But even those of us who are rich will suffer, because the poor 3rd worlders will vote money out the rich people’s pockets and into theirs.  I would rather have the rich people keep their money and invest it in the economy, than some 3rd world baby momma’s kids.  Or at the very least the government ought to do something productive with the money like set up a colony on the moon or Mars.

Trump, a billionaire real estate developer who has never held elected office, has promised, if he wins the White House, to expel immigrants in the United States illegally and to build a wall on the US-Mexico border.

He has also proposed repealing the constitutional right to citizenship of anyone born on US soil.

Both of which will preserve the United States (for a bit longer), and cut into the Democrat voting base.  I fully agree with him.

His incendiary comments on immigration and other issues have dominated the nascent 2016 election campaign, and on Thursday the president condemned the logic of “saying clearly inflammatory things and then saying, ‘Well that’s not what I meant’ — until you do it again and again.”

That is not what Trump does.  One of the reasons he is so popular is because he does not backtrack or apologize.  He does have to clarify things when the media cuts and spin-doctors his comments.

The fundamental problem I have with the left is not so much what they do, although I do disapprove of that, but the fact that they force it on everyone.  While I personally want nothing to do with things like homosexuality, Islam, or socialism, I have no problem with other people voluntarily engaging in those behaviors provided that they keep it to themselves.

Published by:


I could be described as a libertarian monarchist with religious leanings and sympathies towards anarchy and nationalism. I have realized that a lot of my views are reactionary. Most of the time it's when I see something I don't like that I feel inspired to write. I'm basically like a badger being poked with a stick. I'm fairly ornery when poked, but I don't wish people harm provided that they don't seek to harm me either directly or indirectly. I don't at all care for the left, and I am not at all happy that they are out to destroy my way of life and undermine my freedom. But one of my goals is to spread awareness as much as I can. My Manifesto in Short.: 1. Dejure rights and positive liberty are invalid concepts. Man in his natural state is free. He is free to create what he wants, occupy and defend a territory he exists in, associate with who he wants, wear what he wants, say what he wants, follow whatever religion he wants, and essentially do whatever he pleases. Government is an artificial imposition which requires force both to come into existence and to exist. Therefore, government is not in a position to grant freedom or rights, as those already exist prior to the institution of government. Government can curtail freedoms, but it can never give them. The only fully legitimate function of government is to protect the natural rights of others from being violated by forces which they are incapable of combating, for example, protecting a farmer from the Mongol invasion. Protecting someone from having their feelings hurt is not a legitimate function, as never having hurt feelings is not a natural right. 2. Freedom of association and speech are more important than anyone's feelings. Feelings are subjective, and there is no reason why one person's feelings are any more valid than anyone else's. A law to protect one person's feelings from being hurt is certain to harm another person's, therefore, feelings cannot be a basis for law. My freedoms do not end where another person's feelings begin. 3. Democracy is a failure, and it is predicated on faulty premises. In order for Democracy to work, two criterion must be fulfilled, 1) those who tally the votes must do so honestly, and 2) those who vote must be moral and intelligent enough to make wise and proper decisions. The first premise is impossible to prove, and the second is not true of most people, therefore, Democracy is a questionable endeavor at best, and ultimately doomed to failure. In fact, under the best of circumstances Democracy is mob rule, but aside from that it also opens the door to demagoguery, tribal politics, and lobbying. 4. Communism and Islam are no less evil than Nazism. Communism has killed more people than Nazism, and in fact Stalin alone killed more people than Hitler. Islam has killed, and continues to kill more people than Communism and Nazism together. The only reason why communism and Islam are given a free pass is because Cultural Marxists are in charge of education, the media, and entertainment. Cultural Marxists have decided to institute communism by attacking the culture, and they have recognized Islam as something which they can use as an ally (for the time being). That is why both of those toxic ideologies get a free pass, but really they should not. Hitler worked with both Communists AND Muslims before the allies entered the war, and during the war he continued to work with Muslims. If some guy were to go around in a Nazi uniform and goose-step and Sieg hiel as he walked down the street he would never be able to get a job. His life would be over, and he might even be met with physical violence. If a white guy did it then things would be even worse. However, Muslims are able to walk down our streets wearing their terrorist clothing, their robes and hijabs, which represent thousands of years of slaughter, antisemitism, and persecution of religious and ethnic minorities (not to mention violence against women), and people just let them go. I want a complete and indefinite hiatus on Muslim immigration, and I want us to start repatriating the Muslims that are already here. 5. I utterly reject the concept of the "social contract." I did not ask to exist, nor did I have any control over what part of the world I was born in, which people group I was born into, or what other groups might happen to exist around me. Since my existence is entirely involuntary, I cannot be held responsible for the fact that I exist, nor is my existence sufficient grounds to argue that I owe something to someone else. I do not owe anyone money, goods, or services simply on the basis that I exist or that they exist. 6. Collective guild is a rubbish concept. No one can help what group they are born into, and no one is born owing anyone else anything. Debt is the result of borrowing resources on some level, and having just entered in the world one does not have the capacity to borrow, or really do anything beyond the most basic biological functions. Therefore, the notion that one baby is born owing something to another baby is absurd at best. 7. I thoroughly support Israel. I fully admit to supporting Israel for religious reasons, but if those were not in place I would still support Israel out of enlightened self-interest. Israel fulfills the real world equivalent of the function Gondor serves in Tolkien's Middle Earth. By that I mean they are close to the evil army, and draw a lot of it's attention and focus, and in doing so they protect the west. The difference is, that in Tolkien's world the west does not actively seek to import orcs and other members of the evil army, behind Gondor's back, whereas our moron leaders in real life do constantly import the evil army. Also, Jews are not a monolithic group, There are both left wing and right wing Jews. Those who are on the left are not motivated by religion to do what they do, but by the perverse Marxist ideology which they have adopted in place of their religion.

Categories UncategorizedLeave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s