The Progressive War on Anything but Islamic Terrorism

I can’t say we’ve entered a new realm of silliness after the Orlando terrorist attack. There’s nothing new about the silliness that has been making the rounds from those on the progressive side of the cultural and political spectrum.

How to lay blame for what happened? If you listen to most Democrats/progressives/mainstream media (these are synonymous terms), you have a choice of targets: Christians (for not endorsing homosexual acceptance in society); Republicans in general (because they are naturally in favor of anything the “Christian Right” wants, right?); the NRA (those bloodthirsty gun owners who can’t wait to conduct their version of the Valentine’s Day Massacre); any combination of the above.

Never mind that the shooter boldly claimed allegiance to ISIS. Forget his history of radicalism, even to the point of rejoicing over 9/11. No, the blame for this attack must not be laid at the feet of Islamism. As President Obama famously stated in one of his autobiographies (more to come?), he will always take the side of Islam if he perceives it being under attack.

That’s why the words “radical Islam” or “Islamic terrorism” must never be uttered.

Not Saying

You can make too much of words, our Ideologue-in-Chief instructs us. Funny, but I remember him saying pretty much the opposite when he was first running for the highest office in the land:

Just Words

How does a mind like Obama’s perceive reality? This illustration might offer a clue:

Dangerous Part

And that’s why he has once again focused laser-like on what he believes is the crux of the problem:

At War

And the solution is what?

Disarm

If you think some logic might be lacking here, that might be because you are a logical person:

Gun Control for Dummies

But if the president can convince enough people to think as he does, he can accomplish his goal of protecting those poor, oppressed Islamists. I’m certain he will have their undying gratitude:

Infidel Scum

Meanwhile, more of his fellow citizens will be dying—literally.

Obama’s Response to Orlando

Orlando StatementHe did it again. Although, to be honest, I expected nothing less. What am I talking about? President Obama’s statement after the terrorist rampage in Orlando this weekend. Once more, he ignored what was staring him in the face. He refused to call what happened Islamic terrorism.

Yes, he said it was an act of terror, but, as always, he hid behind the old mantra of not really knowing what was behind it. We don’t have all the facts, you see. Never mind that the perpetrator called police and said he was doing this in solidarity with ISIS. Never mind that he shouted that typical “allahu akbar” phrase as he murdered 50 people.

No, this had nothing to do with Islam.

Don't Have a Clue

Then he did what he always does best: switch the subject to gun control. Again, never mind that this terrorist passed a background check and bought his guns legally. Never mind that no law will ever stop a lawbreaker from obtaining a weapon. Never mind that the penalty for this action will now fall on innocent gun owners who are responsible citizens and merely want a means of self-defense.

This is pure emotion, disconnected from reality. Unfortunately, some courts are willing to go along with it, such as the nefarious Ninth Circuit, well known for its “progressive” decisions.

Bear Arms

President Obama learns all the wrong lessons from events. That’s because his ideology blinds him.

For those of us who refuse to be blinded, let’s take this away from the horror in Orlando: Islamic terrorism must be dealt with forcefully; regardless of the target of that terrorism, we must stand firmly against it. The terrorists want to destroy America. We must not allow that to happen.

It’s going to take leadership to turn that tide. I’m sad that the choices being put forward by the political parties are not the leaders we need. When I say we must pray for the future of our nation, I’m not just using a cliché. God is our refuge and our hope.

Obama & the Constitution . . . Again

Tonight is President Obama’s final State of the Union Address. Finally.

I expect the viewing audience will be comprised of his eager followers and those who are political junkies only. I won’t be one of them. That may surprise some of you who think I live and breathe politics. I don’t. I love the Biblical approach to governing but am just as turned off by politics-as-usual as the majority of our citizens.

I have a deep devotion to the rule of law and the Constitution that established it in our nation. That’s one reason why I have ceased being interested in what our president has to say—he has no such respect for those concepts:

Kind of an Expert

He never tires of reminding us that he taught constitutional law. Unfortunately, teaching constitutional law is no indication that the teacher has any knowledge of how it is supposed to work. Well, perhaps he does know how it’s supposed to work; he just doesn’t like that approach. He’s far more comfortable being a law unto himself:

Shot Constitution

Why bother with that document when one has, as he has stated, a different way of governing?

Assaul Weapon

His latest foray into government-by-executive-only is his attempt to curb the Second Amendment, Constitution notwithstanding:

Ain't Big Enough

He has a different worldview, to say the least:

Kind of Suspicious

Why is he so concerned about guns? Watch his tears and you will be informed that it stems from a deep, abiding love for the safety of children:

Never Mind

Right. And that’s another reason why I won’t be wasting my time this evening watching the State of the Union Address. I will see plenty of excerpts later; meanwhile, I can use my time far more productively.

Gun-Control Politics

When I wrote about the Oregon campus shootings last week, my emphasis was on the faith exhibited by the victims. Their Christian steadfastness as they faced death was a witness to the genuineness of their faith. It also was a challenge to those of us who name the name of Christ that we be as firm in our faith as they were.

I avoided the politics of the situation because that should not have been the focus. Since then, the politics have become obnoxious and deserve some comment.

President Obama’s immediate response was to blame a gun culture and try to shame those who believe in the right of self-defense as enshrined in the Constitution. He even admitted he was politicizing the issue.

Commentators, on both sides, have declared that at least his belief in what he was saying was heartfelt. He truly thinks stricter gun control laws will somehow reduce gun violence. I grant he was sincere; there are probably people who sincerely believe in the existence of unicorns, but they are living in a fantasy world.

That’s where Obama lives also.

All he has to do is look at his hometown of Chicago to know that strict gun control laws don’t work. When you try to create “gun-free” zones, those zones automatically become havens for those who want to carry out their plans for killing as many people as they can.

Welcome Mass Killers

After the deed is done, those gun-free zones take on a new character:

Gun-Free Zone

Yet the fantasy thinking knows no bounds:

Now You're Safe

As “sincere” as Obama may have been, let’s be honest about the real goal here:

Shooting Victims

Hillary Clinton, struggling to regain her balance in the wake of her myriad scandals and robotic personality, has now taken the lead in declaring she, as president, would push for shooting victims to sue gun manufacturers, and, she says, if Congress won’t pass new gun control legislation, she will do it herself by executive order.

Yes, she has learned at the feet of her guru, Barack Obama.

Fewer people would have died in Oregon last week if the campus had allowed others to carry guns, whether the students themselves or the security force. Most gun owners are responsible; they should not suffer for the crimes of others. We are guaranteed in the Constitution our means for self-defense. What Obama, Hillary, and others are seeking is to overturn that guarantee.

All the focus on the guns themselves diverts us from the real problem for any and all crimes—the evil heart of man. We’re also being diverted from the hard fact that many of these mass killings are the result of either radical ideology (usually Muslim in nature) and/or the absence of a father in the home.

Some of the latest atrocities have been committed by young men raised in single-parent homes. The family structure is being destroyed, and we are seeing the fruits of that destruction. What we have is a parenting problem.

Parenting Crisis

We’re not supposed to mention that, though. That would make us “judgmental” and “haters.” No, it would make us discerning and clear-eyed—qualities in short supply at this time.

Tragedy & Farce in Washington

The murder of twelve people at the Washington Navy Yard earlier this week was tragic enough; we didn’t need the media/progressive/Democrat machine [I use those terms interchangeably] to combine the tragedy with farce. Media reporting on the incident went astray almost immediately, the victim of an ideology that sees guns as the number one problem in America. We were told quite confidently that the shooter used an “assault rifle,” the AR-15. Leaving aside for now the mislabeling of such weapons, the real focus should be on the media’s spreading of disinformation, since that wasn’t the weapon used by the perpetrator. But that’s to be expected; the media is already well practiced at mislabeling in other areas as well:

Media's Guide

The clamor for gun-free zones, pushed by both the media and progressive politicians, doesn’t abate, regardless of the foolishness of the reasoning behind the push. Ft. Hood was a gun-free zone when Nidal Hasan opened fire; the Washington Navy Yard was also. In fact, that seems to be the policy on military bases, contrary to all common sense. Declaring some place a gun-free zone is not exactly a deterrent to those who are bent on using their guns for mayhem:

Gun-Free Zone

If we’re really serious about safeguarding the public, we should allow all the responsible gun owners—the clear majority—to be armed, if they wish. That, by itself, would make assailants think twice before proceeding.

The other illogical aspect of all this is the attempt to avoid talking about the real problem—man’s sinfulness—and to deflect blame toward the guns themselves. I wouldn’t be surprised someday to hear a report like this:

Deranged Man

The administration seems to be quite selective with respect to its acceptance of people who can have guns. Unfortunately, its acceptance doesn’t extend to the law-abiding citizens:

Obama Gun

Perhaps the greatest farce that occurred shortly after the resolution of the incident came from the very top. President Obama, at a time when he should have been uniting the nation in sympathy for the victims, chose instead to launch a partisan attack on Republicans with regard to the moribund economy. Even many of his supporters in the media were uncomfortable with his choice of topic and his wording:

Horrible

Having a tone-deaf ideologue at the helm is not helpful.

Losing Our Minds–Part II

As I said yesterday, I’ve been meditating on just how foolish we have become as a people. It’s as if our common sense has left us. Another area where this foolishness is on display is with this new round of gun-control mania. New York passed new legislation making it the strictest state against gun ownership, but California is now making a run for the title. According to a recent article, Democrats there have unveiled a new package of legislation that even goes so far as to allow potential confiscation of the state’s 166,000 legally registered semi-automatic rifles.

All of this has been pushed from the top, of course, with Obama’s Biden-led commission. Yet it’s all based on the assumption that guns are the problem, a typical assumption from those who don’t recognize the real problem—the sinfulness of man. External “solutions” don’t solve internal problems. And there are all sorts of contradictions and hypocrisies to point out, such as . . .

Even in the wake of the Newtown killings, there is resistance to posting armed guards at schools. What if teachers could defend themselves? Would a shooter think twice about carrying out his deed? Or would political correctness prevail?

Right now, mass murderer Christopher Dorner is loose in California. Would a disarmed populace feel safer or more threatened in this circumstance? Do I really have to answer that? Have we lost our minds to that extent? There’s a popular picture making the rounds on Facebook that makes the point quite succinctly:

Why is it so hard to understand that criminals don’t really care that a legislature just passed a law putting more restrictions on gun ownership? Every time one of those laws passes, they rejoice. Every time one of those laws passes, we are less safe. You don’t need a Ph.D. to figure that out.

Tomorrow’s topic: immigration.

Battling Ignorance & Foolishness

The gun-control debate is not going to end, although I have trouble believing Congress will do anything drastic. There are simply too many Democrats who are hesitant to go with the flow of the emotional appeal on this subject. The emotional argument is all gun-control advocates have on their side; the statistics and the Constitution stand firmly opposed to the emotional approach. Considering what Congress accomplished with healthcare, I’m relieved by its reluctance to step into uncharted territory this time:

They also have to listen to their constituents, and most Americans recognize the importance of self-defense, even if they are generally ignorant of constitutional guarantees. Still, one never knows if ignorance and foolishness will once again prevail:

Even President Obama seems to be feeling some heat on this one. In an attempt to sound like a regular guy, he commented that he goes shooting “all the time.” We then discovered that meant he has done some skeet shooting at Camp David. One source, though, indicates he was rather uncomfortable doing it and didn’t stay more than five minutes. So we have no knowledge of how good a shot he may be. However, given the appropriate target, I’m sure his accuracy would be excellent:

Battling ignorance and foolishness can be a full-time job. We’ll need to stay on top of this fight for at least another four years.