Gun sales in the US began to soar in October 2008 in anticipation of an Obama presidency, and they have continued at record levels ever since. Gun rights advocates have called Obama the best gun salesman ever, as his radical socialism has inspired citizens to stockpile weapons and ammo. Most folk who understand the American ethos look to the Second Amendment — the right to keep and bear arms — as the last defense against overweening government.

Liberals typically equate more guns with more crime and violence. But now the statistics are out for last year, and the exact opposite is true. Today the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) released the preliminary draft of its annual uniform crime report, Crime in the United States (2009):

Preliminary figures indicate that, as a whole, law enforcement agencies throughout the Nation reported a decrease of 5.5 percent in the number of violent crimes brought to their attention for 2009 when compared with figures reported for 2008. The violent crime category includes murder, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. The number of property crimes in the United States in 2009 decreased 4.9 percent when compared with data from 2008. Property crimes include burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft. Arson is also a property crime, but data for arson are not included in property crime totals. Figures for 2009 indicate that arson decreased 10.4 percent when compared to 2008 figures.

Looking deeper into the included data tables, the National Shooting Sports Foundation focuses on the particular crime for which the capability for self-defense is most helpful, that of homicide:

Since the surge in firearms purchases began in October 2008, if one believes the oft-repeated mantra that ‘Most crime guns are rapidly diverted from retailers to the street via straw purchasers,’ then we should have also seen a surge in homicides and other violent crime. We have not. In fact, statistics from the Preliminary Annual Uniform Crime Report show that all forms of violent crime were down in 2009 from 2008, with homicides showing the greatest percentage decline (7.2 percent).

Related:

Charging Elephant — More guns equal more crime? Not in 2009, FBI crime report shows.

CCRKBA — LATEST FBI CRIME DATA CONTINUES TO REFUTE ANTI-GUN RHETORIC

An ongoing poll by AOL News currently shows that 58% of Americans have doubts about Obama’s citizenship. The poll was started on July 28 and continues — you can go here to vote. And lest you think that this survey is being conducted in a very anti-Obama venue, the title of the article is Birthers, Beer and Stuck on ‘Stupidly’ — it is an environment contemptuous of skeptics. So we can conclude that the results of their poll are not what they were hoping for.

A scant five years ago, Barack Obama was a little known Illinois state politician, aspiring to move up to the United States Senate. Undoubtedly, the Marxist handlers behind this Manchurian candidate had long range plans to capture the US presidency since he was groomed as a youth by Frank Marshall Davis. But the general public and the press were not privy to this information.

At that time, there would have been no reason to fabricate a story about Obama’s birth that would disqualify him for the highest US office. This would be especially true for an African paper that was simply proud of their native son. So it is reasonable to take the press clippings of the day at face value. The following item has been on the web all along, but apparently did not get much attention. It is a June 2004 article from the online version of the East African Standard, an English-language paper published in Nairobi, Kenya, titled Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate. Click on the image to pop up a full size version of the article, which we captured from screenshots of the paper. Depending on your browser, you may need to click the pop-up image again with your “zoom tool” — a little magnifying glass icon.

Another African paper, Modern Ghana, published an article this past July on the occasion of Obama’s trip to Africa — History Beckons – As Prez Obama Arrives Tomorrow. Originally, the article contained the following sentence:

For Ghana, Obama’s visit will be a celebration of another milestone in African history as it hosts the first-ever African-American President on this presidential visit to the continent of his birth.

Responding to external pressure, the paper eventually inserted the possessive “father’s” into the sentence, so that it now reads:

For Ghana, Obama’s visit will be a celebration of another milestone in African history as it hosts the first-ever African-American President on this presidential visit to the continent of his father’s birth.

There are numerous assertions that Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961 at the Coast General Hospital in Mombasa. The situation was not helped by an interview after the election last November with Kenyan Ambassador to the United States, Peter Ogego, conducted by the hosts of the Mike In The Morning talk radio show on WRIF in Detroit, Michigan.

Host: One more quick question — President-elect Obama’s birthplace over in Kenya — is that going to be a national spot to go visit where he was born?

Ambassador: It’s already an assumption. His paternal grandmother is still alive.

Host: But his birthplace, they’ll put up a marker there?

Ambassador: It’s already well-known…

The socialistic Democrats presently controlling the US government and the liberal mainstream media dismiss those who question Obama’s citizenship as irrational “birthers,” “conspiracy theorists,” and “stuck on stupid.” But given the numerous indicators extant, it is a perfectly legitimate question to ask.

During last year’s presidential campaign, the issue of eligibility arose regarding both candidates. John McCain immediately made his original birth certificate available. Barack Obama only made public a state certificate that affirmed his birth was registered in Hawaii, which could have been the result of a foreign birth. He has never shown the original, or “vault copy,” of his birth record.

Not only that, he has spent big bucks on lawyers to prevent anyone from seeing the vault copy of his birth record by having his records sealed. That makes no sense at all, unless he has something to hide. Given the large numbers of constituents who are concerned, any responsible public servant would make the original records available to dispel their worries. (It is an easy thing to do — for heaven’s sake, I just did it myself to renew my Virginia driver’s license.)

So, whatever the truth may be about the status of Obama’s citizenship, there are some facts that are certain based on behavior that is public. Barack Obama is concealing some piece of information, and Barack Obama does not care about the concerns of a large number of Americans.

Source: Online archives of East African Standard

Tail wag: Sentinel Radio

Meet Thomas J. Miller, a Registered Candidate (Rep.) for President of the United States of America in 2012. He’s an interesting fella that I met on a plane trip. His ideas are conservative and he needs help to get his message across. If you are so inclined, spread the word!

His website is already up and running — Tom in ’12. Says Tom:

What happens if politicians made more decisions based on political correctness, greed and self preservation, than on national interests? What happens if career politicians ruled over the people, instead of governed for the people? What happens if we publicly abandoned the Judeo-Christian foundation that built our country?

The answer is: The United States of America – 2009.

I want to reduce government to a level that will allow individuals and businesses the freedom to grow and prosper, while maintaining our status as the leader of the free world.

Tom is a regular guy, the sort you might meet at a Tea Party. He describes his candidacy as a “grass roots mission.” If you visit his website, you’ll probably agree with everything in his platform. And you’ll get acquainted with a decent American.

Our government will control everything on the Internet, under the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, introduced by Senators John Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe. If enacted, this “big brother” law would allow government scrutiny over everything posted to the Internet, while granting the White House “unprecedented control over computer software and Internet services” and powers “to access private online data, regulate the cyber security industry and even shut down Internet traffic.”

Under the guise of safety, the bill would grant a White House appointed cybersecurity “czar” unprecedented authority to shut down private domestic networks or limit Internet traffic in a “critical” information network during a cybersecurity emergency. What distinguishes a critical information network or constitutes a cybersecurity emergency would be determined by the president. The act would also impart authority to the Commerce Department to track cybersecurity threats and override any existing laws, regulations, rules, or policies restricting access to security data from private networks.

The bill would not only make the president more powerful, but it would also allow the Secretary of Commerce access to all information on a network, which could make the network less safe and more vulnerable to intruders or terrorists. Yet the senators remain resolute to remedy their perceived crisis. Rockefeller insists on protecting “critical infrastructure at all costs” and Snowe demands swift action to avoid “a cyber-Katrina.” Their rhetoric of a looming crisis matches the fearmongering manufactured for the bailout and stimulus bills, given that the bills required drastic intervention and immediate action with little or no consideration for a downside or potential harm.

The proposed legislation “would empower the government to set and enforce security standards for private industry for the first time.” The president could use the authority granted in the proposed law to suspend the effective use of the Internet to circulate information or coordinate activities outside mainstream media outlets or government-approved channels. Such a law could lead to a network police force that would levy fines and shut down private Web sites that government officials determine inappropriate or offensive. The act could also open the door for more Internet censorship legislation, and follow the path taken by Australia and China.

In November, more than half of America’s electorate handed Barack Obama and the progressives carte blanche power to rule over the lives of all Americans, and now they are using that power by attempting to manage and control the flow of information through the only remaining medium capable of resuscitating personal freedom and individual liberty. The Americans who voted for the progressives have put the lives of all Americans in the steely grip of Leviathan, and no Chicago Tea Party, 9-12 Project, or surge in talk radio listeners will prevent the government from wielding its power.

Once again, a host Republican has engaged in parasitism to sacrifice her party for a perceived symbiotic relationship that in fact benefits only the Democrat Party. Snowe and her progressive colleagues in the Republican Party have transformed the party into a sacrificial organism to nourish and support extreme socialist objectives. And the corporate magpies on TV and talk radio seem to be too preoccupied with hawking books, espousing inane, meaningless platitudes, bathing in laudatory praises from fawning sycophants, and acting magnanimous in damning both political parties, to make their listeners aware of this transformation.

Ronald Reagan, Henry David Thoreau, and Thomas Paine understood that a government works best only when it governs least, and that big government inevitably increases servitude, restrains liberty, and destroys freedom. While the Republican Party languishes, the approaching tyranny is poised to lead humanity headlong into what will become a deeply bloodstained century. Yet, there is no outcry from the fourth estate, which was traditionally the guardian of liberty, in opposition to the introduction of the Cybersecurity Law.

Will the media raise its collective voice against this new Orwellian power play as it did when the progressives touted the new Fairness Doctrine and advocated enforced localism? Not likely, because progressives’ outrage reaches a resounding crescendo only when the buttering of their bread is involved.

Open Congress, a project of the Sunlight Foundation, has posted the full text of this bill here. On their website, you can comment on this legislation by line item. You can fight this impending police state control by writing, faxing, emailing, and calling your Senators. Tell them to oppose S.773, the Cybersecurity Act of 2009.

If Sarah Palin had made a gaffe like the one Joe Biden did on Sunday night, it would be front page news. But the biased mainstream media are giving good old Joe Biden a pass. Dan Rather and Madeline Albright agree.

At least the New York Post covered it:

JOE D’OH PUTS O IN ‘CRISIS’ MODE
SAYS WORLD WOULD TEST YOUNG PREZ

Joe Biden warned that America’s enemies would test Barack Obama with an international crisis within six months if he’s elected president….

“Mark my words,” Biden told donors at a Seattle fund-raiser Sunday night.

“It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America.

“Watch. We’re going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.

“And he’s going to need help . . . to stand with him. Because it’s not going to be apparent initially; it’s not going to be apparent that we’re right.”

McCain treated Biden’s comments as a gift….

Oh, and look who agrees! Albright!

Ooooops!! Barack Hussein Obama claims to have visited 57 states. There are not 57 US states, but there are 57 Islamic States (see Organization of the Islamic Conference).

Currently, the OIC has 57 Member … States.

It is very likely, having gone to Islamic school in an Islamic country, that this is what he is referring to. Do we want that type of President who knows all the Islamic States but knows so little about the US? View the video below.

Do we want a President that has, as a colleague, a long-time self-professed terrorist? Do we want a President whose spiritual advisor preaches sedition and the downfall of the US — the same spiritual advisor that was so irrational that Oprah Winfrey dropped him and stopped attending his Chicago church?

For the curious, we include the list of fifty-seven Islamic states below the fold…

Read the rest of this entry »»