Even Democrat Media Can See Through Nancy Pelosi’s Gun Control Lies

Here’s a basic truism: If you’re a far-left Democrat who can’t even get the Washington Post on board with your ridiculous anti-gun agenda, you have spun yourself right off the territory of the sane and into the land of Kooksville. And make no mistake about it, that’s exactly where House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi found herself this week after handing social media this gem of nonsense on Twitter:

“Inviting violent criminals to carry concealed weapons doesn’t save lives. Inviting domestic abusers to carry concealed weapons doesn’t save lives. Inviting convicted stalkers to carry concealed weapons doesn’t save lives. Yet the @HouseGOP just voted to do exactly that.”

Pelosi wrote that bag of lies on December 6, just after House Republicans passed a bill that would require states to recognize concealed carry licenses and laws from every other state in the country. Now, one would expect conservative media, the NRA, and Republican politicians to push back on the obvious deception included in this tweet, but it came as quite the shock to us when the Washington Post fact-check squad decided to hand her their dreaded rating of Three Pinnocchios. After all, this is the paper that gladly carried water for Obama’s anti-gun agenda for the last four years of his misbegotten presidency. How badly do you have to lie when even Democrat-run media turns on you?

Well, pretty badly.

From WaPo:

The reality is that most states already allow for reciprocity agreements with other states. Federal law also already prohibits violent criminals, abusers and stalkers from having guns; the issue is that some states already have tougher laws than at the federal level that could be overridden by permits from more lenient states. Still, the differences among most states may loom larger in the gun debate than in reality.

Pelosi’s tweet inspired such anger because responsible gun owners believe their rights are being curtailed, even if they follow the concealed-carry rules — while violent criminals who want to have a gun are not going to be bothered with following such rules in the first place.

We wavered between Two and Three Pinocchios but ultimately settled on Three because her last line — “the @HouseGOP just voted to do exactly that” — is so over the top and exaggerated. One can have a respectful political debate, raising the issue of a lower common denominator for concealed-weapons permits, without accusing the other side of voting to let violent criminals and stalkers have guns.

The entire article is worth a read because it’s the kind of thoughtful analysis mostly absent from the mainstream media when it comes to gun legislation. It’s certainly the kind of thought that you don’t see – ever – from today’s Democratic Party, which seems to labor under the belief that the majority of their voters want to do away with the Second Amendment (to say nothing of common sense.) They see waging war against the NRA as a winning issue, and they’re apparently going to keep seeing it that way no matter how many elections prove them wrong.

If you’ve got the facts on your side, you don’t have to lie. Yet another reason why no one should trust Democrats with our basic freedoms.

About Admin

212 comments

  1. Google is paying 97$ per hour,with weekly payouts.You can also avail this.
    On tuesday I got a great New Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $11752 this last four weeks..with-out any doubt it’s the most-comfortable job I have ever done .. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
    !da284d:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleNewNetJobsSaleOpportunities/earn/hourly ★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫:::::!da284luuuu

  2. Poor Nan. That was just her cerebral hemorrhoids acting up. But look at her good points: She WAS awarded the coveted title, “Miss Lube Rack 1959”, and has been basking in the glory of that ever since.

  3. And we still need to debate “TERM LIMITS” ? She is the poster child!!

    • She’s what her constituents voted for. While you advocate term limits, consider this: They mean that you cannot vote in a good legislator that you want if he’s term limited. Another consideration: As I said, her constituents voted for her. They voted for her over another candidate. Given what a nutcase Peolsi has been, can you imagine what the alternative might have been like? Blame the candidates on the parties that nominate them. And a system that makes political office a highly unattractive job to anyone not suffering from a pathological controlling personality – like Pelosi – or those with a prostitute’s profit motive who will sell themselves (and our country) to make themselves multi millionaires – like Hillary. Not that she doesn’t have a controlling personality also.

      • Francisco..excellent post..however..think about this…anyone..who has been in office for more than three terms with no limits…is a liability..because getting re-elected is the NUMBER one priority…valuable politicians can be emeritus advisers without holding office for 6 terms….your thoughts?

        • I agree – I used to think like Francisco you should not punish good people with term limits – but from what we have been seeing lately – without term limits they obtain too much power and run roughshod over the new representatives and in a to of cases corrupt them. Also when you look at how many of these people have become so wealthy as so called “public servants” – that should be investigated. When someone who makes $170,000 -180,000 a year and is maintaining two households – the one at home and the one in D,C. and still become millionaires there should be a lot of questions.

          • It’s the corporate-political connection. The system is so oriented toward politicians relying on corporations for funding their campaigns & keeping them in office, which is also why their legislation is always so favorable toward corporations at the expense of the little guy. We need separation of corporation & state the same way as we’re supposed to have separation of church & state.

          • Lobbyist and fund-raisers get into see “Your” representative anytime they want – you try it and see how far you get. That tells you who is being represented.

          • You could ask Maxine Waters that question!! However, be ready to block your ears and ‘DUCK’!! She gets really ‘pi**ed’ off and hasn’t answered it yet!! Meanwhile, screaming ‘Racist’ at the top of her lungs!! Think we could hire her as a ‘sonic weapon’ at some point??? LOL

          • Maxine Waters is a failed Affirmative Action project. His biggest accomplishment is getting the Feds to bailout the failed bank her husband sat on the board of.

          • Banning the lobbyist would solve a lot of the problems!

        • Getting rid of corporate funding of elections & substituting with public funding would eliminate the pull for politicians to spend so much time soliciting funds, & make a more even playing field for candidates so that the incumbent doesn’t have such an advantage.

          The idea of “emeritus advisors” is appealing, since a lot of newbies would do well to have some experience & expertise to rely on, but I’m wondering how feasible an idea that is.

        • Not only that allen, but the longer a legislater is in office the more strings he or she can pull. It’s cheaper and easier to buy a veteran Senator or Representative than a freshman! No, the only way will be to make a turn over after two terms in any office. The longer they’re there, the richer they get because they know who will pay them for their votes! It should also be illegal to give them trips or gifts worth more than a certain figure.

          • Honestly now—- Do any of you think that any Congressman or Senator would vote for term limits on a national basis. Not even one of them would put it on a national ballot and let the voters decide. You cannot reasonably expect a bird to tare down his own nest now can you?

          • Not up to them/ They only think it is.

          • Agree totally!!

      • Pelosi is reoptedly worth $105,000,000 – how can anyone else compete against such probably ill gotten political wealth – this is why we need term limits. There can be a gap of several years before permitting any former politicians from running again for any office. There should be an iron clad rule that no Politicians can pass any legislation giving themselves special terms and programs for 100%pensions, health care, salary increases etc. etc. that do not equally apply to all the citizens they claim to represent. Members of Congress get full 100% of their Salaries as a pension for life even if they only serve one term, or part thereof. This is often why they nominate their spouses or or other relatives to complete their term in office if they are unable to complete that term themselves for any reason such as imprisonment for fraud, or any other grave illnesses.

        • If their husband or wife were imprisoned or fined that would be an end to their pay. Back when I was a lot younger, the President made a hundred thousand a year, senators got something less than that and representatives got less than the Senators. Look at the salaries they’re drawing now as well as all the perks! They aren’t advertising their salaries now a days like they did back in my day when they made about what a skilled journeyman made!

      • Exactly: term limits limit freedom of choice. However, I would take steps to even out the playing field, not making it so difficult to defeat an incumbent. Ranked choice voting would help [it would also help alleviate the stranglehold the corporatist Duopoly (Democratic & Republican parties) have on our electoral system].

        I also like your idea of making public service less attractive for sociopaths. This means reducing salary & other benefits & reducing the political/corporate revolving door they have when they finish office (job in big company awaiting them due to their service to corporations while in office). Separate corporation from state the way we’re supposed to have separation of church & state.

      • Nancy’s made herself rich as she’s turned a lot of governmental contracts to her husband’s business in addition to all she’s able to get from her own business. (that would taking anyone who wanted a favor’s order) Bet she doesn’t claim that on her tax report!

  4. Pelosi is the dumbest person on the planet! Still cannot understand how she gets on the election ballots in California! She is totally misrepresenting the voters!

    • Sadly too many of her constituents(SF area) agree with her. It just goes to show that stupidity is contagious.

    • The voters she is representing Are the ones that keep her in office it tells a lot about the many snowflakes that live in california. Pelosi is a discusting dried up mummy that doesn`t know she has been dead for many years.

  5. geeze louise if this $luts lips are moving she is A: eating, B: giving head, or C: lying..

  6. I think Nancy Pelosi should put a gun in her big mouth and pull the trigger to see what’s in it.

  7. She wasn’t lying…she is just unbelievably stupid.

    • sorry Bishop, the hore is lying…criminals do NOT need an invite to carry concealed or otherwise….only honest law abiding citizens take the effort at purchasing weapons through legitimate channels and then, when they feel the need to carry, take the course and test to pass…

      • There are virtually no CCW Permits in California for ordinary citizens – Democratic Politicians yes – to protect them from their constituents ?

    • No she is lying and yes she is stupid. Shes a democrat.

  8. Liberal dem bloodsuckers we have heard all of this before.We have heard it many times in History
    We have heard all of this from Kim Il Jung, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Fidel Castro, Il Duce, Adolph Hitler, Hirohito, Josef Stalin, Josef Tito and Mao Tse Tung
    They all wanted to take all of the weapons in the name of public safety.
    They did, with in three years they have confiscated all weapons.
    Within a year of that they had passed laws that made it illegal to say nasty things about the governnent,
    This group was responsible for the death of 200 million people , mostly their own citizens.
    In more recent times, Australia, Canada England France Italy Greece, Spain and Portugal have all confiscated all weapons.
    In an astounding coincidence all of thse coutries have passed laws that make it illegal to say nasty things about their government
    These are all known as democratic government.
    Looking at Venzueala and the Europeans states that call them selves democracies, socialists seem to want to disarm their citizenry first, don’t they?
    Liberal scum,our founding father gave us the Bill of Rights.
    Then they nailed them to the wall of every government office with the 2nd Amendment.
    Leave them alone liberal scum,
    If you continue to trifle with them, it is at your own considerable peril.

  9. It’s INSANITY, a particular ugly lefturd idiot disease!!

  10. DirtyDaveyDownEast

    This is why I call N. P. Nasty Polecat!

    Ayuh

  11. The reason that nancy is still in office is CA said they had no one else. Then the statements that she makes shows the lack of knowledge of the subject matter, shows that she has no clue in what it takes to get a firearm (as a few others from the democrap side have shown they have no clue to the laws on the books either). For a country that has over 300 million firearms in the publics hands and you you get maybe 1% of gun related deaths for the year I think we do well. You have the UK that firearm related crimes including death have increased 27% over the year and they are a gun free country. You do the math.

    • you are asking the impossible of the democrapo hore snowflakes…their math skills are non existent….well except for the morons that have been very successful in a freedom inspired capitalist society that they continue to elect aholes that look to turn something great into another socialist/communist cesspool….

      • Google is paying 97$ per hour,with weekly payouts.You can also avail this.
        On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $11752 this last four weeks..with-out any doubt it’s the most-comfortable job I have ever done .. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
        !da279d:
        ➽➽
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleWageOfficeJobsFromHomeJobs/computer/jobs ★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫:::::!da279luuu

    • The U.K. has had almost total gun confiscation gradually creeping in from the 1920 Firearms Act. I believe even Air Guns are limited to 350 p.s.i. & are probably subjected to being “Licensed.” Any guns used in any killings in the
      U.K. are more than likely with illegally owned firearms – which I believe are smuggled in from the E.U. Open Borders Policy.

      • The UK already stated that they know they are smuggled in as they are an island and all borders are open for that kind of thing. Then again we have same issue with open borders.

    • Yeah, and Nan refers to herself as a “Master Legislator”, but somehow has no clue of what the laws are. (“We’ve go to pass it to see what is in it”). But then, if she worked at a bait shop on the beach, she’d be a “Master Baiter”.

    • At a time when her command of facts seems to be waning, Pelosi seems more eager than ever to express her feelings, & therefore on issue after issue, she’s been getting a lot of pushback lately for needlessly stirring up drama with dubious statements. The Democrats would be well-advised to find someone new (& more competent) for their House leadership spot.

      • The Dems have ‘politely’ asked Nancy to ‘step down’ but she refuses. She’s so ‘delusional’ she believes she still has an important job ‘saving’ the Democratic Party!! Actually, she’s the ‘final leak’ that will sink the already ‘leaking’ ship!! Perhaps they’d be advised to be a little less ‘politically correct’ and ‘demand’ that she step down!! The most unbelievable thing is that Hillary thinks she’s a ‘female Paul Revere’ and Nancy thinks she’s ‘Joan D’Arc’!! Maybe they could share the same ‘padded cell’??

      • Pelousy’s congressional district is San Francisco. Fruits & nuts elected a fruit and a nut.

    • Don’t forget to add SHITCAGO a democommie-run “gun free sanctuary city” that is the murder capital of the U.S. (and oscumbag’s “home town”) NOW I see they are begging for the UN to come in and “protect” the people.
      Apparently OSCUMBAG’S “best bud” the “mayor” can’t handle the “heat”.

      • Your name-calling really does bring your point across. So brilliant!

        • Just using the same kind of “tactics” as the DEMOCOMMIES. Do you have a different name for SHITCAGO? I think it kind of sums it up. Because it is a SHITHOLE full of CORRUPT democommie CRIMINALS “running the”‘government” and the people that live there down the shitter for their own “enjoyment”.

          • You certainly do have a way with words.

          • Sometimes in order to get the “point” across, you have to speak in a language only DEMOCOMMIE corrupt CRIMINALS can understand. The only language our corrupt “governor” in N.Y. understands is the language of CRIMINAL DICTATOR wanna-be’s (like HE IS). The only way SCUM LIKE HE, can take over, is to disarm the Law-abiding citizens.( Like has been PROVED time and Time again throughout history.) An ARMED POPULACE is the ONLY deterrent against A TYRANNICAL “government”. (otherwise we are considered “subjects” that can be easily “ruled” or “eliminated” as the “king” sees fit)
            The second amendment was NOT included in the BILL OF RIGHTS for the purpose of “hunting” and “Target practice”.

      • That`s Shtticago, And that Mayor needs to be recalled..

    • There’s lots of laws on the books about guns, but it always seems possible for any miscreant to lays hands of a gun if he/she really wants one. The laws don’t seem to apply for some people. I never understood why we actually NEED guns.

  12. How about the Republicans lie that a ‘well armed public’ is a deterrent to oppression?
    You know a country that deregulated their gun laws? Nazi Germany.

    • Have you found your sanity yet? It seems to be missing. You don’t see anyone oppressing gun owners cause we won’t put up with your krazyness!

      • Can you give any examples of who gun owners are being oppressed?

        • Not in the USA, but Mexico and Canada would be two.

          • Mexico has armed cartels that aren’t afraid of private gun owners, and Canada has less crime and mass shootings.

          • Mass shootings are the work of criminals and sick minds, both of which do not obey laws. England, which is supposed to be gun free, has a much higher rate of gun crimes than the USA. Smuggling due to open borders

          • Do criminals in England use guns? And I mentioned Canada.

          • Geez Will, your education serms to be lacking. Yes they use guns. Here’s a factoid for you: criminals can ALWAYS obtain guns, grenades, bomb material, etc . simply because they are criminals and have a huge criminal network. There are people who deal explicitly in illegal arms.

          • Burglars can use knives to. And it the mass shooting numbers people talk about.

          • You are correct and I agree, as they do use them. Knives are a silent weapon and one of the staple weapons of forces. Lookouts can be silenced with a knife and guns saved for the major attack, otherwise the enemy would be forewarned. Do you enjoy reading? There is a number of books both fiction and non-fiction that deals with warfare, fighting, espionage, etc. And often contain interesting facts.

          • I was just saying the point of gun control is cutting down on gun violence.
            I’m trying to read more.

          • Excellent, education is everyone’s responsibility and should never cease. As far as gun control cutting down on gun violence, not gonna happen, because those committing the acts of violence, by and large, are criminals and do not obey laws. The control/laws are in effect infringing on lawful citizens rights to bear arms. That is the problem, we need to control the criminals/bad people not the guns. It is the bad people using guns and other means to harm innocents

          • Gun control just makes it harder to get guns, not impossible, I’m from New York, where the governor ran on gun control, and my uncle had a pretty good gun collection.
            Gun control is more about keeping track of guns.

          • I could tell you were on the east coast because of the time difference, I’m in Texas, probably no surprise there. You see, by keeping track of the guns (registering), government knows where they are, so they know where to go to confiscate them, that’s infringement, which is unconstitutional. Same trick Hitler used. You say your uncle had, past tense, did he get rid of them willingly or did he have to?

          • The government keeps track of cars to, but no one worries about ‘car grabes’.
            And my uncle needed to sell his guns for money.

          • Hope he got a good price. With the attacks using cars trucks and vans, maybe they should. We all need to be more aware of our surroundings, more vigilant, not glued to our phones, etc

          • You can’t over regular cars, people need them on a regular bases, guns have to practical use.

          • Yes, it would be a huge effort, however with electronics in newer cars and trucks, if one is stolen, it can be tracked and disabled. That would be the likely scenario, a stolen vehicle, but if it’s an older model, wouldn’t work.

          • Lowjacks are more of anti-theft the regulation.

          • As a ps to the mexican cartel reply, most of the regular population is too poor to own guns. The cartels, gangs police have most of the weapons. Many times we don’t hear about mass shootings until a mass grave is discovered. My brother was involved in fighting the cartels, they are ruthless.

          • I honestly doubt that gun ownership is that low in Mexico. And the Cartels bring ruthless kinda help my argument.

          • I didn’t say it was low, I doubt it is. It’s the millions of poor who don’t have guns and/or ammunition. As I said earlier, cartels, gangs, police, anyone related to the drug market has guns. I think your argument was about Mexico not having mass shootings?

          • My point about Mexico was they have laws protecting gun ownership, like the U.S. dose, but cartels are afraid of getting shoot by civilians.

          • Interesting, I am not familiar with Mexican law, more so with it’s lawlessness, seems everyone is bribed.

          • Just Google gun laws in Mexico, they do strict laws, and you can’t carry them over from the U.S., it still a constitutional right in Mexico.

          • Thank you, I will. At least the law abiding aren’t supposed to come into USA, but we get the lawless here with guns, MS13, one example.

          • Actually, MS13 was formed in the U.S. and was supposedly ‘exported’ to other countries when its member were deported.

          • Supposedly formed in LA by Hispanics who freely cross border and pay no mind to either countries laws, which was my point.

          • And had not been kept out by stronger border patrol, or physical Barriers.

          • That was before stronger patrols and no barriers, they’ve been at it a while, under previous administration, when they were told to look the other way. Sanctuary cities coddle the criminals.

          • Actually, sanctuary cities have lower crime rates.

          • That’s completely untrue, whoever told you that was speaking with forked tongue. Chicago is a sanctuary city and has some of the strongest gun controls and is the major ranked crime city in America for shootings and murder. LA is another, gangs are a big problem as are drugs. Dallas, not as bad, but still has problems. New York, well you would know there.

          • The police in sanctuary cities say they get more cooperation in solving crimes. As for New York, crime there has be in decline.

          • I find that hard to believe. You will need to give specific instances, otherwise it is just a generalization and opinion rather than a provable fact. Crime is higher in the sanctuary cities. It was in San Francisco, that the 5 time felon and deported illegal killed Kate Steinle, then got off for murder. Yes, that crime got solved, but the criminal got away.

          • You know the guy in San Francisco was one case? If thing were as bad as people claim, every sanctuary city would have a lot more cases like that. And why is so hard to think that guy was not guilty, despite his criminal record, it is possible it walk on to murder scene by accident.
            http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/jul/24/jeff-sessions/jeff-sessions-mischaracterizes-study-sanctuary-cit/

            http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2017/may/10/sally-hernandez/sally-hernandez-says-cities-labeled-sanctuaries-ha/

          • He admitted he had the gun, but said he dropped it and it fired accidentally. However, the type of gun requires significant pressure on the trigger to fire. Maybe not murder 1, but definitely manslaughter. I only used that because recent and prominent case. I suspect, the problem here is not as bad because we have concealed carry and shoot back.

          • I didn’t remember all the details, but I don’t have any reason to think the verdict was political.

          • I suspect ideology was involved which would be political. DOJ is looking into prosecution of other crimes, with jail time and deportation at end. For the 6th time.

          • Back in school, I remember hearing caution tails about gun firing off just from being dropped.
            Again, not saying the guy wasn’t a criminal, just that people should base their opinion of sanctuary cities on just him.

          • Some can, usually older guns. Most are designed today so that it takes more pressure to pull trigger. This example is a good case point. First of all, we are a republic, a nation of laws and rule of law. Sanctuary cities defy the immigration laws and protect illegals. They release illegals even when asked to hold for ICE. That was the case with Mr Zarate. He has been deported 5 times, is a convicted felon and yet managed to obtain a gun, which law prohibits. Then discharges gun, bullet ricochets and hits Kate Steinle, killing her, an American citizen. Because of double jeopardy law he cannot be retried for same crime. If he had been held for ICE, Kate would still be alive. Illegals flock to sanctuary cities and with them crime increases, not good for America and it’s citizens.

          • The whole point of sanctuary cities is that immigration has no authority over city, or state governments. It’s not actually violent criminals are let go because ICE was looking for them. As ICE could just deport criminals after they leave prison.

          • Yes, they do. Immigration is a national/federal agency. States and cities are happy to take federal monies, but don’t want to obey laws? Sorry, but some people need to go to jail, because, yes, they do release criminals, even when ICE asks them to hold them, as in the case stated above.Immigration laws are there to protect us, these people are coming into our home and need to be vetted. To harbor illegals is obstruction of justice.

          • Actually the sanctuary cities are some of the countries biggest money makers. Also, if they could, the DOJ would have punished those cities already.
            Again, by can ICE just wait outside of prisons to pick up the actual dangerous criminals?

    • How aboout Russia and all Communist Satelite countries after WW-2. ?

      • I don’t know, but it’s clear that dictators aren’t afraid of guns.

        • Yeah they are if the common people have them. With the limited amount of ammunition most gun owners have, we couldn’t put up much of a fight, but if there are enough, and the government doesn’t know who has them, it makes things a bit more chancey for an oppressor.

          • Again, Hitler deragulated guns in Germany, he was the worse dictator of the 20th century.

          • Incorrect.

          • I saw and read that a few days ago, but thanks anyway, note it says they disarmed the Jews and in some cases stormed their homes to confiscate weapons.

          • Note that taking guns away happened before the holocaust was planned. And the SS already had the ability to take away guns, they probably could have round people up, even if some of those people had guns.

          • Absolutely, you see it! Before the millions could be shipped to concentration camps, they had to be disarmed so they couldn’t fight back. While Jews were the main group taken to camps, there were other groups as well, gypsies were one, dissenters another, homosexuals, any one who didn’t fit their idea of the Aryan race.

          • You missed my point, I said the SS probably could have round up people, even if they did have guns. They would have just killed whoever resisted.

          • That’s probably true and they did kill resisters. Keep in mind most of those guns in possession were WWI or older, not much of a match for machine guns. I am enjoying this little debate, it is raining here, so good day to sit by the fire and discuss.

          • The military is always better guns. Not even the NRA saying civilians should have the most recent, military firearms.

          • As they should be, civilians, hopefully, have no need for military weapons, but that doesn’t mean everyone else should give up their guns or be hit with a lot of ridiculous laws. Again the problem is guns in the hands of criminals. If you are in a theatre, club, church, or restaurant and some idiot starts shooting, don’t you want to be able to return fire?

          • Would registering gun, and requiring renewal of those registrations be that ridiculous, or not allowing people with a history of violence.
            Also the only example of a ‘good guy with a gun stoping a bad guy with a gun’ was that church shooting in Texas, but that was after that guy shooter up a whole church. And if any of those Church goers had a gun, they probably would have been shot before they would have been able to to shoot back, because the shooter probably would have shoot anyone else with a gun first.

          • At first glance it may sound reasonable, but read the 2nd ammendment. “…shall make no laws infringing on those rights”… when you give government an inch, they take and take and take miles. Case in point, taxation, was allowed to pay for a navy for the newly formed USA, for protection right after the Revolutionary War. Today, look what it has devolved into. I’m sure even a fee is charged to register a gun, which is in effect another tax.

          • And that the problem with using laws written with mid-1700s-ess logic in mind.
            Learning more about The Founding Fathers, I think they figured we would have at least a couple of conventions of states to update the constitution? I know at lest of them thought the constitution should have been rewritten/revisited once a generation.

          • Reading the Constitution, I am amazed at the wisdom, insight, foresight and forethought that went into it. We should have had a couple of Convention of States by now, I agree. Good news, a lot of folks are working on just that right now. We have got to curtail government and get term limits, budget restraints, etc. I support it.

          • Aren’t term limits beside the president a state level decision?

          • Only in the sense of being re-elected. As an incumbent, they have the odds in their favor, also the backing of their party and often financial supporters. So as long as they keep those sources happy, they can stay in office a long time, not necessarily good for the country or their constituents.

          • No, I meant don’t some states have term limits on senators and congressmen?

          • No. That’s the main goal of the current attempt at a Convention of States, along with an ammendment for balanced budget.

          • I really haven’t heard that much for pushes for conversation of states. I only mentioned as evidence that The Founding Fathers didn’t attend their word be followed without question forever.

          • Google it. It is gaining momentum. Texas House has passed it as well as several other states, 12 so far, I think, may be more now.

          • I looked into it. It look like it’s just 11, with Texas being the most recent.

          • I think my last email said Utah was last, I’ll check. Google isn’t always updated as quickly. Anyway, come on board, we need some amendments badly.

          • I was going by their Facebook page. A weird amount of Ben Saphiro quotes to?

        • They are when you have a well armed militia.

          • No, then they just kill the militia men.

          • Wrong again, while there would be casualties, they would be on both sides. It was the militia that won the Revolutionary War! A militia is a group of armed and in most cases has some training. And as an aside, study the French Resistance in WWII, they had a marked effect on the Nazis with their guerrilla tactics, very little armaments.

          • In the American revolution, the revolutionaries were professional soldiers against the British military that was largely dispersed among other colonies, and even that was a hard fight.

          • Granted it was a hard fight, but the trained and professional soldiers were the British, not the Colonists. Farmers, educators, business men, tailors, blacksmiths, apothecaries, you name it, those who wanted freedom took up arms and fought. Many were ill equipped, barely a musket and the clothes on their back, they had to supply their own food, ammunition, whatever was needed. They were not professional soldiers. When you realize what they were up against, you understand God had a hand in America’s birth.

          • Yes, Washington had professional soldiers. There was almost a revolt from unpayed veterans shortly after the revolution.
            Also, the revolution was helped out by the French.

          • Not until later in the war, I believe mercenaries were used by both sides at some point. Yes the French, through Lafayette, did get involved. The French and English had ongoing differences and if memory serves were at war at the same time.

          • The fact still stands that professional soldiers won the revolution, regardless of the romantic idea of average colonial citizens just picking up gun and giving birth to a nation, it much more complicated.

          • Will, we were a British colony, the only professional soldiers here were British, colonists might be considered somewhat “professional” after fighting for some time, but it did not start out that way. Even Washington was new to leading a group of soldiers. The Revolutionary War was won by Colonists who wanted freedom to govern themselves, with the help of others already mentioned, guerilla techniques, learned from the Indians were used, and that was unheard of at the time. That war cost our Founding Fathers dearly, fortunes, homes, families and lives were lost in the pursuit of liberty.

          • I’m just saying, it took more then militias in the end.

          • Ok, I can agree with that. Is it NY state or city, I understand there is a big difference in the viewpoints of those in the city and those in outlying areas of the state.

          • I came from Suffolk county Long Island, it’s right next to the city.

          • Ok, then you probably hear both sides of an argument.

          • What argument?

          • Any argument but mostly the right versus the left. Conservative versus Liberal and the opinions and beliefs of both sides.

          • I don’t see how that connected to my home town?

          • There are areas in the states where freedom of speech is stifled, especially in Democrat held cities. If you live outside those cities you may get more than one side’s opinions.

          • They don’t stifle free speech in New York, or and city, from what I know.

          • Can be tricky sometimes to realize it’s happening. Reporting some stories and ignoring others. Have several sources. And if you are in school, watch out for libs shouting down those they don’t agree with, not allowing them to be heard.

          • Everything kind of political rally from a incompetent politicians reelection rally to a white nationalist rally is allowed.
            People freak out over speakers on college campuses, but the internet is full of conservatives who are not as censorship as the claim they are, and not for the exact reasons they think. If I’m every in college again, I’m avoiding politics best I can anyway.

          • Good idea, if it’s possible. You are there for an education and pay dearly for it. Sounds like there was a fairly good mix of speakers, if they were allowed to speak. The exchange of ideas is what should be important, one can accept or reject as inclined, that’s what helps us decide what we believe and what sounds ridiculous. No conservatives I know want censorship, except pornagraphy, especially children. The only censorship I have encountered has come from the left, not allowing opposing ideas to even be heard. Have you heard about CIA’S help in stopping a terrorist attack in St. Petersburg, Russia today? Putin called POTUS to thank him.

          • There a thine line between thinking controversial speakers shouldn’t speak somewhere, and shouting down ideas. The facts that groups like ‘Turning Point USA’ exist means conservatives are not as censored as some people may think. I do have a theory that the same kinds of who would become SJWs are going to become college conservatives though.
            It also worth noting that not non-political YouTubers are getting videos removed for seemingly no good reason, and have had problems who inconsistent view and like counts. And leftist YouTubers have had whole channels taken down.

          • I believe controversial speakers should be heard by the people who want to hear them. There are 2 sides to every controversy, both sides should be heard for the sake of fairness. Would anyone in court only want one side heard? I think not. Your theory may prove true. When I was a teen and early 20’s, my thinking was more radical, but as I matured and listened, that changed. I am now a staunch conservative, but believe everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and opinions, however, I don’t want them rammed down my throat by zealots. I have noticed with you tube, have been able to access for several days.

          • I think you misunderstood my theory. I meant the kinds of college who fall back on the easiest side to prove right and avoid descenting opinions (that how I think SJWs think) will flock to conservative groups later own. People are already starting to use terms like ‘right-wing SJW’, and ‘conservative snowflake’.

          • Conservative snowflake, that is an oxymoron if ever I heard one, lol, right wing SJW, that’s a new one, but interesting. Most colleges are either liberal or conservative, some more than others.

          • I suggest you look into the terms I mentioned, they started to get some use.
            https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Qix9TJWrCyw

          • What ‘good’ exactly?

    • First of all, that idea and statement came from our founding fathers and has proven to be true. When a country’s citizenry are armed, those who would take over, think twice. It is purported that Hirohito dissuaded fellow Japanese to not invade America, because he said there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass. Hitler did not deregulate in the sense of making it easier to obtain a gun. He forbade Jews to own firearms, thus making it easy to arrest them and confine them. This is true of all countries taken over by dictators.

      • My grandfather joined the Navy the day after Pearl Harbor, I don’t think the Japanese were afraid of guns.

        • Will, thank you to your Grandfather for his service, if he is still with us. If you have studied geography and history, then you will know that Hawaii is in the South Pacific and was not yet a state. America, was the 48 contiguous states and was not attacked, that is the reference to the rifle behind every blade of grass. The Japanese chose to attack Hawaii, Pearl Harbor where the US had many ships in port and they could do the most damage with a surprise attack.

          • My Grandfather passed two years ago.

            I know know a couple of things about geography in WWII. Like that neither side of the war in the Pacific was abile to invade the other because of the size of the sea. The U.S. had a advantage because Hawaii was already half to Japan to it was easier for them to attack Japanese territory, but even then, it was a while before they could think about invading Japan. If the Japanese were to try a land invasion of the U.S., a military force that got passed the navy probably wouldn’t be afraid of civil militias.

          • May he rest in peace. The airplanes at that time would not allow for an air invasion without refuelling. A lot of combat was on the ground, soldier to soldier, gun to gun, today’s technology is a far cry from then. Naval invasion would have difficult too, as the warships would have been spotted. However, had landing occurred, they would have been met with resistance, militarily and/or by civilians. Think again.

          • Thanks.
            My point was any force big enough for a occupation would bring enough fire power to fight a small militia.

          • Point taken and a good point. That is precisely why millions of us bear arms, a small militia would be ineffectve against a large invasion, but a large militia, well armed, is agreat deterrent to an invasion. Take away arms and it becomes a moot point

          • Would a large militia just be army? Each already has a armed national guard that already have guns of their own.

          • Well yes partly, although militia commonly means civilians, but the National Guard is one good example, there are a number of smaller patriot militia throughout the country who stand ready against invasion/takeover.

          • What invasion have Americans civil militias held back? You think they personally fight Isis the way some of them talk.

          • I wouldn’t know. In fact, the only publicity a skirmish between the 2 would be an attack that failed and maybe not then, if indeed they are, I wish them godspeed as I know there are sleeper cells in most states and that was confirmed by the FBI.

          • I just don’t see something like that happening either way, I meant it as a joke.

          • I see, maybe you are clairvoyant? I and my 2 siblings have come across cells, by accident, in different states, so I am hoping those civie militia are sharp as it could come to them being needed.

          • What’s your job? Because unless you think any large group of Muslims is a Isis cell, they would be lard to come by. To be serious, people like there are more Isis fighter in America then the Middle East, and with Isis losing left, right and center in all their Home Counties, what would any cell accomplish anyway.

          • The cells are “sleeper” cells, not large and hidden in plain sight among the islamic community, so it makes them difficult to identify. I am currently free-lancing, I have a brother who was in federal law enforcement, then trained forces in Afghanistan, now in civilian law enforcement. When I came across a small cell near DFW airport, I was a sales rep for an electronics firm. They wanted free sample of electronic parts, when I visited I saw several reasons to suspect, called FBI, they were gone shortly.

          • The fact that the FBI was about to take care of a sleeper cell kinda proof that the war on terror is going good for the U.S..

          • Yes, we seem to be winning more than not. I do hate it when one slips through, so glad the guy last week messed up his bomb and himself and not much else.

          • Also, the Middle Eastern countries that Isis was formed are saying their beting Isis to.

      • And the SS would not have been afraid of a few guns either.

  13. Why is it that kalifornia congress members are so UGLY???

  14. Most of the mainstream media, despite their corporate bias & appetite for sensationalism, do try to, as a matter of duty & self-respect, report as accurately as they can, including sometimes verifying the truth or falsity of statements made by politicians or other media sources.

    The reason that Pelosi’s statements were basically false, I assume, is because there are already laws on the books precluding the things she claimed, that I don’t think this legislation would override.

    • Come on down out of your ivory tower niknar! Some of them do enter the congress with that attitude, but for most it doesn’t last. They act for citizens, for re-election, they make statements for the same reason. Their salary is as high or even higher than many Business officers make, but don’t make any mistakes. Few. if anyone makes more money than they think that they’re worth!

  15. Letting insane. and senile hack politicians continue to sit in the House of Representatives is inviting disaster and mayhem, yet the House Jack@ss Party has done just that!

    • If they were just insane or senile, I wouldn’t worry too much, but the others made deals, collect funds and so forth. After they’ve done all that was wanted of them, they retire to a nice plush office with no duties except to cash good heavy pay checks!

  16. Mental illness is rampant in Cali.

  17. Pelosi is a lying sack of s—. I don’t know why the Democratic party puts up with her. She’s ruined them.

  18. Father Trump this witch belongs In Gitmo or worse !

  19. Nancy’s elevator is stuck near the bottom floor. When will some one in authority have her checked out by a physician? She is after all helping to make the laws of this country.

  20. I would like to slap Nancy Pelosi right on the cheek. One of the things the Democrats have started doing, in an effort to win elections, is to return voting rights to ex-cons-200,000 ex-cons got their rights returned in Virginia during the 2016 presidential election and 100,000 ex-cons had rights returned for the Alabama. While the idoit Democrats intended to return only the voting rights, the game requires the return of all rights-which include second amendment rights. So, Virginia now has 200,000 newly minted gun owners, taken from the state prison, and Alabama has 100,000. Then the idiots want to talk about tougher gun laws-kiss my ass.

  21. PEOPLE LIKE HER IS WHAT HAPPENED TO CALIFORNIA.
    JUST ANOTHER “EAST COAST BALTIMORE CARPETBAGGER LOONEY TUNE”.

  22. DING DONG…. DING DONG………….. Term limts folks……….. she has drank just too much of the leftist KOOL AID…………………

  23. Pelosi’s elevator only goes to the 5th floor in a 26 story building. Geesh–what a putz.

  24. Just more proof that old Nazi Pelosi has lost it completely and should only be locked up in her rubber room as to not hurt herself

  25. And they keep re-electing this nut job, this alone tells me Kookafornia is infected with the stupid bug!!

  26. Why would’nt everyone know that about Pelosi , she has been a liar all her life, a thief and a criminal like her father was back in Maryland , he was removed from office and she should be too, as she is also an America hating bitch when it comes to the Constitution and our Bill of Rights and the pathway that our Founding Fathers created in order to make this the Greatest Country in the world . Kick pelosi out of office and stand up for our 2nd amendment and President Trump , it is time to remove all those jackasses like Pelosi and Schumer and MaCain and the rest of them who are trying to destroy our Rights and freedom !

  27. Thank you for your service Nancy but your ravings indicate you may have lost something. Wait! She is so polarizing she probably helps the Republicans more than democrates. Kinda like Hiliary. Hope she gets her third nomination in 2020, for here third “unfair loss”.

  28. The American people must be under no illusions about 2018. If they allow the party of Pelosi, Schumer and Hodgkinson back into power in Congress, the legitimately-elected President of the United States will be gone within weeks and the Vice-President within months. President Pelosi will then in turn be replaced by either The Mongrel or The Drunken Lesbian Witch as puppet president of a new peoples republic, whatever Soros and Steyer eventually decide, and the new constitution will rescind the Bill of Rights generally and the Second Amendment particularly. Although by then the government-run internet will have closed down sites like this, and anyone reading or wring on it now will be in a re-education camp for deplorables, doors will be being broken down all over the country as the new police agency combining the FBI, CIA and IRS, together with United Nations troops, go door to door seizing firearms.

  29. “Princess” Pelosi is senile and needs to be put out of our misery.

  30. No one should trust Democrats at all. They’ve proven beyond any reasonable doubt again and again and again that they have no ones best interest at heart but their own. They could care less what they’re hypocritical hate and lies and ugly, smug bigotry and constant efforts to divide this nation and bring it down to their apparently bottomless level are doing to it, as long as they regain the power they so rightfully lost for all of the above and more.
    Nancy Pelosi is one of their worst hysterical, screeching fear mongers. She’s made a career out of nonsensical tirades about imaginary things. She is a perfect, shining example of everything that’s wrong with the party.

  31. England/Scotland have very low deaths rates related to guns. By your post, I wonder if they are having more trouble with guns but I have not read anything yet.

  32. How can they even understand what’s going on. Schumer quit school to work for the Dems. Pelosi was a homemaker. How many of these Dems ever had a real job. Both sold their souls to Soros be cause in order to raise money you have to know how to make it. This is what never working hard and only begging gets you. The devils advocate.

  33. if nancy would turn in her and her husbands guns and their body guards guns then there would be “world peace”… right???

  34. I’m glad you PIECES OF SHIT LIBERALS have to deal with her not us. Now you ASSHOLES might wake up now for the NEW YEAR!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*