In my previous post on "Why the 2nd Amendment does not mention muskets" I talk about how vague the Bill of Rights is and why. After posting it I realized that a similar argument for our access to certain kinds of guns (note: they never talk about stopping the use of such guns or the manufacture of such guns) could be made for our access to the internet. We have all heard the stories of "cyber-bullying" where some 11 or 12 year-old bullies another student by pretending to be someone the know or care about and in the end the person being bullied commits suicide. Not that I condone such behavior, but often these stories are followed by endless regulations instituted to "prevent such atrocities from ever happening again".
The question I have for you today is this:
Could the government make the argument that the Internet is the "assault-rifle of Free Speech" ?
The arguments are strikingly similar.
Argument #1: 2nd Amendment is only for trained "militias" therefore guns don't belong in everyday citizens hands. It's okay for military, police and other trained federal agents to have guns but not your average citizen.
Argument #2: The Founding Fathers never saw the day when one gun could shoot 20 rounds a second and be reloaded in less than 2 seconds. Clearly such guns should be kept out of everyday citizens hands as they are too dangerous and could fall into the wrong hands.
Let's look at these arguments and apply them to the 1st Amendment and the Internet.
Argument #1: Freedom of the "press" was clearly meant only for "trained press agents" and not for "everyday citizens". Clearly the Internet gives too much power to untrained "press agents" who have no education in how to properly disseminate "truth to the masses" in a way that keeps them from rioting or voting in ways that are not in their basic self interest.
Argument #2: The Founding Fathers never saw the day when 1 letter/video/web-site could be viewed by millions of people in less than a second. Clearly they would never have given an individual this immense power to inform the masses as such communications could inflict countless losses (at the voting booth) and cause serious harm to the people (who want such information to remain secret). Oh the humanity! This "assault-rifle" must be controlled at all cost!!
I think when you see things in this light, you understand better why protecting the 2nd Amendment is key to protecting all the others..
Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your MIND
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Why the 2nd Amendment does not mention muskets!
When one reads the Bill of Rights, one often sees that the Founding Fathers were extremely "vague" in their details. They often talked in generalities rather than specifics. And for good reason too! They knew that the world was changing and changing FAST! They knew that being too specific would lead to the downfall of the Bill of Rights because future lawmakers could argue that the "new" was not mentioned in the "old" Constitution and therefore was not applicable.
Take for example, the freedom of the press does not go into detail of the kind of "press" used for making the newspapers, or pamphlets. It does not go into how the information is distributed whether its from a newspaper, a book, a magazine or even just a poster. It just says :
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That is all. No less. No more.
Had they given MORE detail such as the use of a "metal fixed type manual printing press" then one would argue that other forms of information such as the internet, email, television, radio were not mentioned and therefore not legitimately covered by the Constitution and therefore must be "regulated". They could argue that "Clearly the Founding Fathers never saw the day when every person could have access to the ability to send information to thousands of people at the same time over the internet".
It is the same reason why the Founding Fathers made no mention of "muskets" in the Bill of Rights. Instead all they wrote was:
A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
That is all. No less. No more.
The lack of details was their genius in writing the Bill of Rights for had they mentioned "muskets", then newer guns like , rifles, pistols , semi-automatic and automatic guns could be regulated as well since they too do not meet the specific wording. We would each be left with the right to own a single shot musket gun (most likely not rifled) similar to what the Revolutionary War soldiers used. No less... No more.
Beware of those who argue that automatic rifles were not mentioned in the Constitution and therefore they MUST BE CONTROLLED for there are a lot of things not mentioned in the Constitution as well that they could use as an argument for controlling.
Here are just a few:
1) Websites - Freedom of Speech
2) Email - Freedom of the Press
3) Television/Radio - Freedom of the Press, Speech and Religion
4) Speaker and Amplifiers - Freedom of Speech
5) Twitter/Facebook - Freedom of Speech
6) Electronic Books - Freedom of the Press, Speech, Religion
7) Electronic Body Scanners - not mentioned in searches and seizures.
8) Drones - Freedom of Warrant-less Searches
9) Cars, Cell-phones, Computers - not mentioned when discussing searches and seizures.
If you allow them to control the types of guns allowed under the 2nd Amendment, then you will also be opening up the door to arguments for limiting our Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press and Freedom of Religion as well.
Like I always say: Be careful what you ask for... you might just get MORE than you asked for.
Take for example, the freedom of the press does not go into detail of the kind of "press" used for making the newspapers, or pamphlets. It does not go into how the information is distributed whether its from a newspaper, a book, a magazine or even just a poster. It just says :
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That is all. No less. No more.
Had they given MORE detail such as the use of a "metal fixed type manual printing press" then one would argue that other forms of information such as the internet, email, television, radio were not mentioned and therefore not legitimately covered by the Constitution and therefore must be "regulated". They could argue that "Clearly the Founding Fathers never saw the day when every person could have access to the ability to send information to thousands of people at the same time over the internet".
It is the same reason why the Founding Fathers made no mention of "muskets" in the Bill of Rights. Instead all they wrote was:
A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
That is all. No less. No more.
The lack of details was their genius in writing the Bill of Rights for had they mentioned "muskets", then newer guns like , rifles, pistols , semi-automatic and automatic guns could be regulated as well since they too do not meet the specific wording. We would each be left with the right to own a single shot musket gun (most likely not rifled) similar to what the Revolutionary War soldiers used. No less... No more.
Beware of those who argue that automatic rifles were not mentioned in the Constitution and therefore they MUST BE CONTROLLED for there are a lot of things not mentioned in the Constitution as well that they could use as an argument for controlling.
Here are just a few:
1) Websites - Freedom of Speech
2) Email - Freedom of the Press
3) Television/Radio - Freedom of the Press, Speech and Religion
4) Speaker and Amplifiers - Freedom of Speech
5) Twitter/Facebook - Freedom of Speech
6) Electronic Books - Freedom of the Press, Speech, Religion
7) Electronic Body Scanners - not mentioned in searches and seizures.
8) Drones - Freedom of Warrant-less Searches
9) Cars, Cell-phones, Computers - not mentioned when discussing searches and seizures.
If you allow them to control the types of guns allowed under the 2nd Amendment, then you will also be opening up the door to arguments for limiting our Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press and Freedom of Religion as well.
Like I always say: Be careful what you ask for... you might just get MORE than you asked for.
Some advice for young people looking for a job
I recently went home to see family back in Southern Illinois (note: anyone about 100 miles from Chicago refers to them being from "Southern" Illinois). There I heard old stories recounted about the family which I relish even though I have heard many of them over a dozen times. I heard the story of how my great-grandfather Karl Vogel came over to America when his uncle, who was already here, paid for his voyage and gave him a job working on his farm. I heard the story about how he slowly earned land from his uncle and eventually had over 120 acres. I heard about how my grandfather Henry Vogel, eventually took over the farm and he employed a man named Jerry Rockers as a hired hand. Jerry would later get his own land and become one of the areas wealthier farmers.
Then I heard the story of "Hinky". Growing up (the youngest of the cousins) I never met Hinky but often heard about him. He was a hired hand that my uncle, Carl Vogel, took on to help on the farm. Carl had taken over the farm after grandpa had retired (although he never really retired fully and kept working on the farm). I asked how he met Hinky and I was told the story of Uncle Carl was driving down the road from Centralia one day when he saw a young man walking on the road. Hinky was one of 16 children and he survived by eating out of trash cans and begging for food. Carl pulled up and asked if he needed a lift to somewhere. Hinky replied, "No. I need a job". Carl asked him if he ever worked on a farm and Hinky replied "No". Carl then asked him if he would like to work on a farm and Hinky replied "Yes" , whereby Carl answered him, "Get in the truck". Hinky came home and became almost one of the family. He ate at the dinner table (it took him a few days to realize that they ate 3 meals EVERY day and he didn't have to shovel down all the food in front of him) and slept in the spare room upstairs. Hinky never asked how much he was going to get paid, or how many hours or days he was going to work, or if the work was dangerous or difficult. He just got in the truck. He never asked about a pension or healthcare or vacation days... he just got in the truck. He never asked about job security or who he was going to work for... he just got in the truck.
Hinky worked for several years for Carl and became a very good farm-hand. Later, he went on to the Air Force where he worked for many years and moved to Oklahoma. But it was Carl driving down the road who picked Hinky up and gave him his first taste of work that got him started. To this day, when Hinky comes to visit his old stomping grounds, he doesn't visit any of his 15 siblings, but instead only comes and visits the Vogel family.
We can learn a lot from Hinky. He shows us the value of work and taking that first step. Too many of our youth are waiting for that "dream job" to appear before them which gives them money, security, healthcare, 3 weeks vacation, retirement plans and stock options. They often pass on that "first job" and fail to "get in the truck". They then wonder why no one will hire them and how they are supposed to get started.
My answer to them is simple: GET IN THE TRUCK!
Then I heard the story of "Hinky". Growing up (the youngest of the cousins) I never met Hinky but often heard about him. He was a hired hand that my uncle, Carl Vogel, took on to help on the farm. Carl had taken over the farm after grandpa had retired (although he never really retired fully and kept working on the farm). I asked how he met Hinky and I was told the story of Uncle Carl was driving down the road from Centralia one day when he saw a young man walking on the road. Hinky was one of 16 children and he survived by eating out of trash cans and begging for food. Carl pulled up and asked if he needed a lift to somewhere. Hinky replied, "No. I need a job". Carl asked him if he ever worked on a farm and Hinky replied "No". Carl then asked him if he would like to work on a farm and Hinky replied "Yes" , whereby Carl answered him, "Get in the truck". Hinky came home and became almost one of the family. He ate at the dinner table (it took him a few days to realize that they ate 3 meals EVERY day and he didn't have to shovel down all the food in front of him) and slept in the spare room upstairs. Hinky never asked how much he was going to get paid, or how many hours or days he was going to work, or if the work was dangerous or difficult. He just got in the truck. He never asked about a pension or healthcare or vacation days... he just got in the truck. He never asked about job security or who he was going to work for... he just got in the truck.
Hinky worked for several years for Carl and became a very good farm-hand. Later, he went on to the Air Force where he worked for many years and moved to Oklahoma. But it was Carl driving down the road who picked Hinky up and gave him his first taste of work that got him started. To this day, when Hinky comes to visit his old stomping grounds, he doesn't visit any of his 15 siblings, but instead only comes and visits the Vogel family.
We can learn a lot from Hinky. He shows us the value of work and taking that first step. Too many of our youth are waiting for that "dream job" to appear before them which gives them money, security, healthcare, 3 weeks vacation, retirement plans and stock options. They often pass on that "first job" and fail to "get in the truck". They then wonder why no one will hire them and how they are supposed to get started.
My answer to them is simple: GET IN THE TRUCK!
Friday, July 20, 2012
The Tale of Two Crimes
In the past week we have seen two different crimes with dramatically different outcomes. The first occurred in Florida at an internet-bar where TWO masked men came in with one brandishing a gun and the other a baseball bat. The two came in smashing computer screens and demanding the people there to hand over their money. But the robbery was cut short when a 71 year-old man with a Concealed-Weapon-Permit took out his gun and shot the would-be robber holding gun. He then chased the two suspects out and managed to hit both of them.These two hoodlums were later apprehended at a local hospital when they sought medical attention for their gun wounds. The man was called a "hero" but he said he was just protecting his wife who was with him at the time.
The second case happened last night when a 24 year-old wearing a gas mask entered a movie theater and began to shoot at the crowd. Over 12 are dead and many more injured. Sadly, no one was in the crowd at the time with a CWP to take down this lunatic and so he was free to rampage until he ran out of bullets because it took several minutes before the police could respond.
Yet, knowing the media and our President, they will paint this story as a reason for MORE gun control. "How did he get those guns? Why wasn't there a 90 day waiting period instead of a mere 10 day waiting period? Why do we need hand guns and rifles anyway? .... and on and on and on...". Obama, who never likes to waste a good crisis will most likely make use of this to his advantage. Our only hope is that because this is an election year he will lay low on the gun-control-parade.
I believe that rather than restricting guns we need to arm more of our citizens so that when things like this happen, WE THE PEOPLE can prevent such madmen from harming anymore than they are allowed.
ON A SIDE NOTE:
The media took no time in trying to connect this madman with the Tea Party. They checked the local Tea Party registry and found a Jim Holmes listed, but later had to retract it as it was not the same person. Great reporting ABC! You show how unprofessional you all are every day we get closer to the election.
The second case happened last night when a 24 year-old wearing a gas mask entered a movie theater and began to shoot at the crowd. Over 12 are dead and many more injured. Sadly, no one was in the crowd at the time with a CWP to take down this lunatic and so he was free to rampage until he ran out of bullets because it took several minutes before the police could respond.
Yet, knowing the media and our President, they will paint this story as a reason for MORE gun control. "How did he get those guns? Why wasn't there a 90 day waiting period instead of a mere 10 day waiting period? Why do we need hand guns and rifles anyway? .... and on and on and on...". Obama, who never likes to waste a good crisis will most likely make use of this to his advantage. Our only hope is that because this is an election year he will lay low on the gun-control-parade.
I believe that rather than restricting guns we need to arm more of our citizens so that when things like this happen, WE THE PEOPLE can prevent such madmen from harming anymore than they are allowed.
ON A SIDE NOTE:
The media took no time in trying to connect this madman with the Tea Party. They checked the local Tea Party registry and found a Jim Holmes listed, but later had to retract it as it was not the same person. Great reporting ABC! You show how unprofessional you all are every day we get closer to the election.
Thursday, July 19, 2012
Are we breeding our brains out?
This thought came to as we were driving past a herd of cows and my kids were talking about how stupid cows were because you scare one cow and they all take off running. They asked me if cows were always this stupid and I replied, "No. they were quite smart animals, but over the years we have bread their brains out of them..
I began to wonder if we are doing the same in our country. The reason I say this is because with all of our societies focus on BEAUTY and NOT BRAINS are we become a more stupid nation? I am not saying that in the past beauty and sexual attraction were not factors, but clearly our society placed high importance on a persons ability to earn a living and support a family in what people looked for in a spouse (and if you look at some of their wedding photos you often come away feeling like "looks" were not a major factor). Today we put so much importance on personal outward beauty that we are prone to overlook other factors such as intelligence and inner-strength. Over a long period of time this can have a genetic effect on a society or country.
Much of this has to do with our media and its promotion of what to look for in a spouse. Through programs like "The Bachelor" and "The Bachelorette" we give our youth the view that all they have to look for in a mate is someone who is "good-looking" and not someone who has character, inner-strength, faith, good work ethic and trustworthiness. (although I have to say from the 2 shows of the Bachelorette I saw this year I have hope, because this girl seems to have her head on straight and is looking for someone who has strength of character and opted-out of the "fantasy room").
Too often I feel our young men and women opt for the good-looking spouse on their "first marriage" and create good-looking but less intelligent and weaker children. Later on their "second marriage" they wake up and realize there is more to a spouse than big-"you know whats" or a tight-butt. But by that time they have had their kids (the good looking stupid ones) and they have no desire to procreate with their new "smarter" and "stronger" spouse.
Eventually I think we will become a nation of TV anchors with all looks and no brains...
Just a thought for consideration...
I began to wonder if we are doing the same in our country. The reason I say this is because with all of our societies focus on BEAUTY and NOT BRAINS are we become a more stupid nation? I am not saying that in the past beauty and sexual attraction were not factors, but clearly our society placed high importance on a persons ability to earn a living and support a family in what people looked for in a spouse (and if you look at some of their wedding photos you often come away feeling like "looks" were not a major factor). Today we put so much importance on personal outward beauty that we are prone to overlook other factors such as intelligence and inner-strength. Over a long period of time this can have a genetic effect on a society or country.
Much of this has to do with our media and its promotion of what to look for in a spouse. Through programs like "The Bachelor" and "The Bachelorette" we give our youth the view that all they have to look for in a mate is someone who is "good-looking" and not someone who has character, inner-strength, faith, good work ethic and trustworthiness. (although I have to say from the 2 shows of the Bachelorette I saw this year I have hope, because this girl seems to have her head on straight and is looking for someone who has strength of character and opted-out of the "fantasy room").
Too often I feel our young men and women opt for the good-looking spouse on their "first marriage" and create good-looking but less intelligent and weaker children. Later on their "second marriage" they wake up and realize there is more to a spouse than big-"you know whats" or a tight-butt. But by that time they have had their kids (the good looking stupid ones) and they have no desire to procreate with their new "smarter" and "stronger" spouse.
Eventually I think we will become a nation of TV anchors with all looks and no brains...
Just a thought for consideration...
DEAL WITH IT!
I am tired of all the whining that I see today around me!
Life ain't perfect... DEAL WITH IT!
- Thank God it's short and doesn't go on for an eternity!
You made bad choices in the past..... DEAL WITH IT!
- The choices were yours. Own them!
You got caught up in the mortgage bubble and you are upside down now?.... DEAL WITH IT!
- Pay off your mortgage and don't be a weeny and "walk away"
You can't get the HIGH PAYING dream job you want? ..... DEAL WITH IT!
- Take the job that PAYS THE BILLS and PUTS FOOD ON THE TABLE!
You can't be as happy and fulfilled as those around "seem to be"? ..... DEAL WITH IT!
- It's all a mirage. They are just as miserable as you!
You can't do all the things your friends/family are able to do? .... DEAL WITH IT!
- We all have 24 hours a day to spend the same amount of energy. Stop wasting your time and
energy looking at how your friends and family are spending their time and energy!
You can't afford the same medical care as the rich guy? .... DEAL WITH IT!
- At least you HAVE a doctor. So many in this world DON'T!
You can't go on European vacations like all your friends?.... DEAL WITH IT!
- Europe is overrated (and collapsing). Go camping!
You might have to put off your plans to retire at age 55 or 65? .... DEAL WITH IT!
- When Social Security was passed the average life-expectancy was 59 years! Only a small
fraction of people were expected to collect Social Security. Now are life expectancy is 79!
You got sucked into going to college to get a worthless degree and no job? .... DEAL WITH IT!
- Put your diploma in a nice little frame and accept it. Then educate yourself! Read, Go to
Lectures. Go to your Junior College and take some meaningful classes. Also, pay off your
loans and make good on your promise.
You don't like what I or others have to say? .... DEAL WITH IT!
Freedom of speech is a two way road. You can't tell others to shut up if you don't want them
to shut you up! You don't like what I have to say? You don't have to listen! It makes you
sad or upset? Then the problem is with you. You never grew up out of childhood and learned
to be an adult.
Life ain't perfect... DEAL WITH IT!
- Thank God it's short and doesn't go on for an eternity!
You made bad choices in the past..... DEAL WITH IT!
- The choices were yours. Own them!
You got caught up in the mortgage bubble and you are upside down now?.... DEAL WITH IT!
- Pay off your mortgage and don't be a weeny and "walk away"
You can't get the HIGH PAYING dream job you want? ..... DEAL WITH IT!
- Take the job that PAYS THE BILLS and PUTS FOOD ON THE TABLE!
You can't be as happy and fulfilled as those around "seem to be"? ..... DEAL WITH IT!
- It's all a mirage. They are just as miserable as you!
You can't do all the things your friends/family are able to do? .... DEAL WITH IT!
- We all have 24 hours a day to spend the same amount of energy. Stop wasting your time and
energy looking at how your friends and family are spending their time and energy!
You can't afford the same medical care as the rich guy? .... DEAL WITH IT!
- At least you HAVE a doctor. So many in this world DON'T!
You can't go on European vacations like all your friends?.... DEAL WITH IT!
- Europe is overrated (and collapsing). Go camping!
You might have to put off your plans to retire at age 55 or 65? .... DEAL WITH IT!
- When Social Security was passed the average life-expectancy was 59 years! Only a small
fraction of people were expected to collect Social Security. Now are life expectancy is 79!
You got sucked into going to college to get a worthless degree and no job? .... DEAL WITH IT!
- Put your diploma in a nice little frame and accept it. Then educate yourself! Read, Go to
Lectures. Go to your Junior College and take some meaningful classes. Also, pay off your
loans and make good on your promise.
You don't like what I or others have to say? .... DEAL WITH IT!
Freedom of speech is a two way road. You can't tell others to shut up if you don't want them
to shut you up! You don't like what I have to say? You don't have to listen! It makes you
sad or upset? Then the problem is with you. You never grew up out of childhood and learned
to be an adult.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Interesting trend of Obama's Job Approval
As I have mentioned before I like to check out the polls at RealClearPolitics.com regularly. The people at this website take polls from a variety of sources and averages them together. However, you must understand that not all polls are equal. When polling the public pollsters will ask the person if they are a registered voter (or not) or if they are likely to be voting this election (or not). Normally we don't really concern ourselves with these differences, but in an election year they become more and more important.
I did some compiling of some poll data and found an interesting trend in the President's Job Approval Rating poll that I think is being missed by many of the news sites by only looking at the LIKELY VOTER polls.
What I found was that the Presidents numbers are much worse and also trending to even worse. Below is a graph showing the running average of all poll numbers from January 2012 of "Likely Voters".
As you can see the President's Job Approval Number among those who will most likely be voting is not good and is trending towards lower and lower. I think this shows how most Americans REALLY feel about what he is doing.
I did some compiling of some poll data and found an interesting trend in the President's Job Approval Rating poll that I think is being missed by many of the news sites by only looking at the LIKELY VOTER polls.
What I found was that the Presidents numbers are much worse and also trending to even worse. Below is a graph showing the running average of all poll numbers from January 2012 of "Likely Voters".
As you can see the President's Job Approval Number among those who will most likely be voting is not good and is trending towards lower and lower. I think this shows how most Americans REALLY feel about what he is doing.
Friday, July 13, 2012
Polling data: unsure and outliers
I often go to Real Clear Politics website to get the latest opinion polls on Obama's approval rating. I think they do an admiral job at trying to remain bi-partisan in their reporting of the many polls taken on politics and the president. However, there are two things I have come to conclude:
1) Some polling groups come out with some WILDLY out of norm responses.
2) There are still a lot of "not sure" people out there.
Out of norm polling data
As to the out of norm responses, what I mean here is that in the world of statistics you have what if commonly referred to as "outliers". These are statistical anomalies that should be thrown out if their are outside of the statistical norm. Let me first say, there is no mathematical algorithm for determining an outlier and it can be quite subjective (you know it when you see it). For example, lets say we have the following numbers reported: +2, +1,0,-2,-3,+10. The statistical variation of the first 5 is 14/6 = 2.33 so therefore +10 is outside of the variation since its closes neighbor is a difference of 7 (10-3). It should be considered to be outlier and therefore rejected as a acceptable poll. About a month ago, such an anomaly did occur as MOST of the polls for Obama were negative (or trending negative), yet out of the blue, Bloomberg showed a +9 rating for the president.
Below is a screenshot from RealClearPolitics website showing a sampling of the various polls taken around the 6/15-6/18 time frame.
As you can see, most of the polls at that time showed approximately a -1 rating for Obama. But LO AND BEHOLD, Bloomberg comes to the rescue and gives Obama a +9 bump, sending the average from a negative (-2/5 or -0.4) to a positive level of +7/6 ( 1.16 ). (Personally, I hope someone in the Obama administration sent the Bloomberg polling group some flowers and candy in thanks for their gift to the president)
Not sure ??
The next issue I see that is not taken into account is the high number of "not sure". Frankly at this point (3.5 years into his administration) we as Americans should have SOME OPINION as to how we think the President is doing. To me, you get a WHOLE different view when you take into account the "not sure" and place them in the "disapprove" category.
Below is a snapshot from www.realclearpolitics.com on Friday 7/13/2012 at 10:00 am PST
If you took at missing "not sure" as "Disapprove" you would get a rating of -5.5 instead of -1.3 (a much more clearer view on how the President is REALLY doing).
Note: In my opinion, all Presidential polls should only offer Approve or Disapprove as their only two choices. We cannot be all "mamby-pamby" when it comes to the direction our country is going. Either you are FOR HIM or you are AGAINST HIM. So .... MAKE A CHOICE!
In conclusion, let me say I am not putting down Real Clear Politics fr their coverage of the President's approval rating. Like I said in the beginning, overall I think they do some good work and try not be partisan in their approach. and so they just take the numbers that are given them. But we as citizens need to understand statistics better and see that there is often more to the numbers than just averages and spreads. We need to use also our gut instincts as well
1) Some polling groups come out with some WILDLY out of norm responses.
2) There are still a lot of "not sure" people out there.
Out of norm polling data
As to the out of norm responses, what I mean here is that in the world of statistics you have what if commonly referred to as "outliers". These are statistical anomalies that should be thrown out if their are outside of the statistical norm. Let me first say, there is no mathematical algorithm for determining an outlier and it can be quite subjective (you know it when you see it). For example, lets say we have the following numbers reported: +2, +1,0,-2,-3,+10. The statistical variation of the first 5 is 14/6 = 2.33 so therefore +10 is outside of the variation since its closes neighbor is a difference of 7 (10-3). It should be considered to be outlier and therefore rejected as a acceptable poll. About a month ago, such an anomaly did occur as MOST of the polls for Obama were negative (or trending negative), yet out of the blue, Bloomberg showed a +9 rating for the president.
Below is a screenshot from RealClearPolitics website showing a sampling of the various polls taken around the 6/15-6/18 time frame.
As you can see, most of the polls at that time showed approximately a -1 rating for Obama. But LO AND BEHOLD, Bloomberg comes to the rescue and gives Obama a +9 bump, sending the average from a negative (-2/5 or -0.4) to a positive level of +7/6 ( 1.16 ). (Personally, I hope someone in the Obama administration sent the Bloomberg polling group some flowers and candy in thanks for their gift to the president)
Not sure ??
The next issue I see that is not taken into account is the high number of "not sure". Frankly at this point (3.5 years into his administration) we as Americans should have SOME OPINION as to how we think the President is doing. To me, you get a WHOLE different view when you take into account the "not sure" and place them in the "disapprove" category.
Below is a snapshot from www.realclearpolitics.com on Friday 7/13/2012 at 10:00 am PST
If you took at missing "not sure" as "Disapprove" you would get a rating of -5.5 instead of -1.3 (a much more clearer view on how the President is REALLY doing).
Note: In my opinion, all Presidential polls should only offer Approve or Disapprove as their only two choices. We cannot be all "mamby-pamby" when it comes to the direction our country is going. Either you are FOR HIM or you are AGAINST HIM. So .... MAKE A CHOICE!
In conclusion, let me say I am not putting down Real Clear Politics fr their coverage of the President's approval rating. Like I said in the beginning, overall I think they do some good work and try not be partisan in their approach. and so they just take the numbers that are given them. But we as citizens need to understand statistics better and see that there is often more to the numbers than just averages and spreads. We need to use also our gut instincts as well
Monday, July 9, 2012
Would you vote for an ATHEIST?
There was a survey done by Gallup and the results were very disheartening as 54% said YES they would vote for an atheist.
The idea here is we would vote for atheist if they would return our country to its former level of "prosperity" (i.e. - I have a job, a house , a car, vacations, and all the medicine I need). 54% are willing to sell their souls in return for all of those things fore-mentioned.
Here again we see how Americans have been con-ed into the idea that religion is "worthless" and "unnecessary" in a modern world and all the matters is "the Dow is UP and unemployment is DOWN". We have also been duped by the historians who have re-written history and told us that the founding fathers were all "deists" and that this is synonymous with "atheist" when it was not the case at all. Writers like Richard Dawkins have spewed their ideology that atheists are more trustworthy and moral than the best of the religiously-minded. They believe that they can be "Good without God" and some ancient code handed down by priests and rabbis is unnecessary and ridiculous.
But really! You would rather trust a person who believes that he only has these few short years here on earth to accumulate all that he can and enjoy as much as he can before he dissolves back into dirt only to be used by some flower sitting next to his headstone. You would trust the person who has no one to be held accountable to once he ends this life? A person who believes he can be as immoral as he wants to be and that he only needs to hide his immorality enough to go undetected by those around him until he dies. That he is UN-accountable to anyone?
The word to look at here is : accountable. This words root word is of course "account" and is synonymous with bookkeeping (a tracking of debits and credits). If we know someone is keeping score we have a different outlook on life and it alters the choices we make. Children make different choices if they KNOW Mom and Dad will find out (or might find out). They may walk away from drugs if they know Mom and Dad might drug test them when they get home from a party or a sleep-over. Children might also alter what they say or share on-line if the KNOW Mom and Dad can see what they say and do.
Atheists refute this either of two ways.
The first way is they make the absurd claim that man is basically good and is evolving to becoming even better. We have "evolved" our way to goodness and morality and have no more need for a "God". We have in effect become God. We are all powerful (Have you see what we can do with an atom?). We are all knowing (We've discovered the Higgs-Boson particle!). We can be everywhere at the same time (have you seen all the cameras we have around the world and our drones flying over head?). We can know your thoughts (Okay, we can't read your thoughts, but we can read your emails and your facebook pages and get a good idea of what you are thinking). We are all good (Have you seen how much money we have thrown at defeating poverty?). But the truth is we are not evolving to goodness, but instead we are becoming more and more evil. We can spew more lies to more people than ever before. We can kill more children with more efficiency than Hitler would have imagined possible. We can edit video and make the unreal.. real, a lie into the truth. We can wipe out peoples savings and steal peoples credit with a few clicks of a mouse.
The second argument they use is that we will hold each other accountable and we have no need for an invisible "boogey-man" to hold us in line. Atheists claim that the news media will hold our politicians accountable and make sure we the voters know what they are doing. But looking at this administration and how it treats the mainstream media as its personal lapdogs (attack dogs when they need them) we see this just is not the case. They hide behind terms like "Executive Privilege" and sealed documents labeled "Confidential" and our media complacently bends to their will as if under a "Jedi-mind-control" (these are not the memos you are looking for).
I am not saying that we need to only vote for Bible-thumping-Praise-Jesus-born-again politicians, but we do need to find those individuals who respect faith and have a healthy fear of their future judgment. People who know that no one ever "gets away with murder" (or any other offense for that matter). Maybe they won't ask "What would Jesus do?" but at least they might ask "Will God hold me accountable for this and be pleased with me?"
The idea here is we would vote for atheist if they would return our country to its former level of "prosperity" (i.e. - I have a job, a house , a car, vacations, and all the medicine I need). 54% are willing to sell their souls in return for all of those things fore-mentioned.
Here again we see how Americans have been con-ed into the idea that religion is "worthless" and "unnecessary" in a modern world and all the matters is "the Dow is UP and unemployment is DOWN". We have also been duped by the historians who have re-written history and told us that the founding fathers were all "deists" and that this is synonymous with "atheist" when it was not the case at all. Writers like Richard Dawkins have spewed their ideology that atheists are more trustworthy and moral than the best of the religiously-minded. They believe that they can be "Good without God" and some ancient code handed down by priests and rabbis is unnecessary and ridiculous.
But really! You would rather trust a person who believes that he only has these few short years here on earth to accumulate all that he can and enjoy as much as he can before he dissolves back into dirt only to be used by some flower sitting next to his headstone. You would trust the person who has no one to be held accountable to once he ends this life? A person who believes he can be as immoral as he wants to be and that he only needs to hide his immorality enough to go undetected by those around him until he dies. That he is UN-accountable to anyone?
The word to look at here is : accountable. This words root word is of course "account" and is synonymous with bookkeeping (a tracking of debits and credits). If we know someone is keeping score we have a different outlook on life and it alters the choices we make. Children make different choices if they KNOW Mom and Dad will find out (or might find out). They may walk away from drugs if they know Mom and Dad might drug test them when they get home from a party or a sleep-over. Children might also alter what they say or share on-line if the KNOW Mom and Dad can see what they say and do.
Atheists refute this either of two ways.
The first way is they make the absurd claim that man is basically good and is evolving to becoming even better. We have "evolved" our way to goodness and morality and have no more need for a "God". We have in effect become God. We are all powerful (Have you see what we can do with an atom?). We are all knowing (We've discovered the Higgs-Boson particle!). We can be everywhere at the same time (have you seen all the cameras we have around the world and our drones flying over head?). We can know your thoughts (Okay, we can't read your thoughts, but we can read your emails and your facebook pages and get a good idea of what you are thinking). We are all good (Have you seen how much money we have thrown at defeating poverty?). But the truth is we are not evolving to goodness, but instead we are becoming more and more evil. We can spew more lies to more people than ever before. We can kill more children with more efficiency than Hitler would have imagined possible. We can edit video and make the unreal.. real, a lie into the truth. We can wipe out peoples savings and steal peoples credit with a few clicks of a mouse.
The second argument they use is that we will hold each other accountable and we have no need for an invisible "boogey-man" to hold us in line. Atheists claim that the news media will hold our politicians accountable and make sure we the voters know what they are doing. But looking at this administration and how it treats the mainstream media as its personal lapdogs (attack dogs when they need them) we see this just is not the case. They hide behind terms like "Executive Privilege" and sealed documents labeled "Confidential" and our media complacently bends to their will as if under a "Jedi-mind-control" (these are not the memos you are looking for).
I am not saying that we need to only vote for Bible-thumping-Praise-Jesus-born-again politicians, but we do need to find those individuals who respect faith and have a healthy fear of their future judgment. People who know that no one ever "gets away with murder" (or any other offense for that matter). Maybe they won't ask "What would Jesus do?" but at least they might ask "Will God hold me accountable for this and be pleased with me?"
This is a test... this is ONLY a test...
Kids today no longer have to sit through the 10 seconds of irritating off-key notes with a person telling them that "this is a test ... this is ONLY a test..." as the FCC no longer requires TV stations to participate in this protocol.
I bring this up because as we watch the lies coming out of the White House lately we wonder how they can be so bald-faced in their approach. For example, recently a White House official claimed on the air that they "never used the word TAX when making their argument to the Supreme Court", yet the court record is FILLED with them referring to it as a TAX and NOT A PENALTY. In another example, they were confronted with making false statements about Mitt Romney that had been debunked by CNN and the Washington Post, they continued in their lie and would not admit they made a mistake.
How can they be so audacious and blatant in their lying?
Because back in 2008 they TESTED the media to see how COMPLACENT they would be if confronted with an absolute bald-faced-lie. See the following video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7QxgN5YegE
(go to 1:50 in the video)
So Obama claimed that his parents getting together was because of the Selma Alabama marches. But there's a big problem with his story. The Selma marches occurred in 1965 and Obama was born in 1961.. 4 years EARLIER!
What reporter watching this was thinking ... "Wait a minute! That can't be possible!". Yet no one reported it. ABC,CBC, NBC all went silent. They knew it was a lie and divulging it would end the Obama campaign and they were not going to do it... no matter how much coverage they would get by showing it to the public.
This was a TEST of the media convictions (or lack thereof), and their complacency with lies and corruption and sadly enough, they passed the with flying colors. Having shown that they would not make an issue of a lie so black as black, they knew the media would not reveal any lie of lighter shades of gray. To me, I don't see how today's "reporters" (they should be called "talking-point-messengers") can look themselves in the mirror and have any sense of self-respect. If I were in their shoes I would be saying "I am nothing more than a mouth piece for the DNC and the radical left" and I would need to be kept away from guns and objects with sharp points out of fear of a giving myself a self-inflicted-mortal-wound.
Let's hope that some reporters somewhere regains their self-respect and decides to report the truth no matter where it leads.
I bring this up because as we watch the lies coming out of the White House lately we wonder how they can be so bald-faced in their approach. For example, recently a White House official claimed on the air that they "never used the word TAX when making their argument to the Supreme Court", yet the court record is FILLED with them referring to it as a TAX and NOT A PENALTY. In another example, they were confronted with making false statements about Mitt Romney that had been debunked by CNN and the Washington Post, they continued in their lie and would not admit they made a mistake.
How can they be so audacious and blatant in their lying?
Because back in 2008 they TESTED the media to see how COMPLACENT they would be if confronted with an absolute bald-faced-lie. See the following video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7QxgN5YegE
(go to 1:50 in the video)
So Obama claimed that his parents getting together was because of the Selma Alabama marches. But there's a big problem with his story. The Selma marches occurred in 1965 and Obama was born in 1961.. 4 years EARLIER!
What reporter watching this was thinking ... "Wait a minute! That can't be possible!". Yet no one reported it. ABC,CBC, NBC all went silent. They knew it was a lie and divulging it would end the Obama campaign and they were not going to do it... no matter how much coverage they would get by showing it to the public.
This was a TEST of the media convictions (or lack thereof), and their complacency with lies and corruption and sadly enough, they passed the with flying colors. Having shown that they would not make an issue of a lie so black as black, they knew the media would not reveal any lie of lighter shades of gray. To me, I don't see how today's "reporters" (they should be called "talking-point-messengers") can look themselves in the mirror and have any sense of self-respect. If I were in their shoes I would be saying "I am nothing more than a mouth piece for the DNC and the radical left" and I would need to be kept away from guns and objects with sharp points out of fear of a giving myself a self-inflicted-mortal-wound.
Let's hope that some reporters somewhere regains their self-respect and decides to report the truth no matter where it leads.
When pigs fly....
Well 2012 might be the year that everything that was impossible ... will become possible! I say this not because of the upcoming election or the Myan calendar, but instead because of a recent change in the Department of Transportation (DOT) to allow PIGS to fly commercial airlines.
See article:
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/dot-wants-to-allow-pigs-horses-onboard-jetliners.html
Now all those times when we would say something would happen....WHEN PIGS FLY! are about to all come true at once.
But of course not all of those predictions will be bad either:
1) We will have a Mormom president ... WHEN PIGS FLY!
2) We will cut entitlements ... WHEN PIGS FLY!
3) We will get rid of the IRS .. WHEN PIGS FLY!
4) We will get a Balanced Budget Amendment passed ... WHEN PIGS FLY!
5) We will overthrow Roe-vs-Wade ... WHEN PIGS FLY!
6) Hollywood would become a bastion of conservatism .... WHEN PIGS FLY!
But on a serious note, just what is the DOT doing allowing HORSES and PIGS on commercial airlines? Have you seen the rates for flying commercial today? Does the DOT think that making airlines provide services to accommodate passengers with pigs or horses to board these flights will NOT affect the price we all pay? The airline industry as a whole already is depressed and having troubles and now to add this to their list of requirements will only cause more harm than good.
See article:
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/dot-wants-to-allow-pigs-horses-onboard-jetliners.html
Now all those times when we would say something would happen....WHEN PIGS FLY! are about to all come true at once.
But of course not all of those predictions will be bad either:
1) We will have a Mormom president ... WHEN PIGS FLY!
2) We will cut entitlements ... WHEN PIGS FLY!
3) We will get rid of the IRS .. WHEN PIGS FLY!
4) We will get a Balanced Budget Amendment passed ... WHEN PIGS FLY!
5) We will overthrow Roe-vs-Wade ... WHEN PIGS FLY!
6) Hollywood would become a bastion of conservatism .... WHEN PIGS FLY!
But on a serious note, just what is the DOT doing allowing HORSES and PIGS on commercial airlines? Have you seen the rates for flying commercial today? Does the DOT think that making airlines provide services to accommodate passengers with pigs or horses to board these flights will NOT affect the price we all pay? The airline industry as a whole already is depressed and having troubles and now to add this to their list of requirements will only cause more harm than good.
Thursday, July 5, 2012
Freedom is our ONLY natural resource
When you look at the United States of America and compare it to other countries you realize that FREEDOM is the only "natural resource" that WE HAVE that other countries simply don't have. We have embodied in our Constitution that the INDIVIDUAL is more important than the government. Other forms of government (socialism and communism) put society and the "community" over the individual, but not here. That is why our Declaration of Independence says, "all men are created equal", and lays that belief at the feet of "the creator".
Other countries have oil, gas, coal, iron, copper, gold, diamonds, etc all in great supply. But all of that doesn't matter which is why so many flock from those countries of "wealth of material" to our country with its "wealth of freedom". The freedom to believe what you want to believe, say what you want you want to say, own what you want what you want to own.
But sadly, that freedom is being squandered by some and destroyed by others. Some are trading in their freedom for comfort. As Ben Franklin said, "Those desire security over freedom deserve neither freedom or security". Many would rather receive a handout from the government and become their slaves rather than work their own way and provide their own security. Many others would rather receive "free healthcare" that will ultimately reduce the length of their own life rather than pay for their own.
Let's not squander the one resource our country has: FREEDOM. Let us reclaim that freedom and take back our country from those who fear and loath it. But remember, FREEDOM IS NOT FREE! We cannot wait on the sidelines for someone else to contribute money to the candidates we support. We cannot wait for the public schools and our public school teachers to change their ways and teach our child to love our country. If we must pay money to send them to private schools and forgo trips to Hawaii or Florida then that is what we must do. Our kids may want to spend the summer on the beach, but if they will get a better appreciation for our country by visiting historical sites, then that we must do too. If talking to our "friends and neighbors" about the corruption in Washington and why we must not re-elect Obama to a second term will cause you to lose "friends and neighbors" then SO BE IT!
Our Founding Fathers put their lives and the lives of their children on the line because by signing the Declaration of Independence they were signing their own death warrants. If we lost, they would have been executed by being drawn-and-quartered (disemboweled while still alive) for high treason against the king. Their families would have lost all their property and would have been destitute for the rest of their lives. They risked everything to give us what we have today.
So we must also.
Other countries have oil, gas, coal, iron, copper, gold, diamonds, etc all in great supply. But all of that doesn't matter which is why so many flock from those countries of "wealth of material" to our country with its "wealth of freedom". The freedom to believe what you want to believe, say what you want you want to say, own what you want what you want to own.
But sadly, that freedom is being squandered by some and destroyed by others. Some are trading in their freedom for comfort. As Ben Franklin said, "Those desire security over freedom deserve neither freedom or security". Many would rather receive a handout from the government and become their slaves rather than work their own way and provide their own security. Many others would rather receive "free healthcare" that will ultimately reduce the length of their own life rather than pay for their own.
Let's not squander the one resource our country has: FREEDOM. Let us reclaim that freedom and take back our country from those who fear and loath it. But remember, FREEDOM IS NOT FREE! We cannot wait on the sidelines for someone else to contribute money to the candidates we support. We cannot wait for the public schools and our public school teachers to change their ways and teach our child to love our country. If we must pay money to send them to private schools and forgo trips to Hawaii or Florida then that is what we must do. Our kids may want to spend the summer on the beach, but if they will get a better appreciation for our country by visiting historical sites, then that we must do too. If talking to our "friends and neighbors" about the corruption in Washington and why we must not re-elect Obama to a second term will cause you to lose "friends and neighbors" then SO BE IT!
Our Founding Fathers put their lives and the lives of their children on the line because by signing the Declaration of Independence they were signing their own death warrants. If we lost, they would have been executed by being drawn-and-quartered (disemboweled while still alive) for high treason against the king. Their families would have lost all their property and would have been destitute for the rest of their lives. They risked everything to give us what we have today.
So we must also.
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Other things government should make us purchase
Here are a few other things the government should make us buy and why
1) Home Computer
Why: Eventually we will all gave to use one to make it in this world and our children need to
learn as soon as possible. Also, if everyone had a computer, we can make the fed gov.
more "green" since we could get rid of all paper documents.
2) An American made electric car (ahemm.. GM Volt)
Why: Get us off of ugly fossil fuels (but of course we will still be generating most of the power
from oil/gas burning power plants). and stimulate the US economy.
3) Life Insurance
Why: Just as we all pay taxes,.... we all eventually die and therefore we should all have to make
sure we take care of our families.
4) Buy home safety equipment
Why: We all need to be prepared for ANY kind of emergency. Flood, Fire, Tornado, Hurricane,
Pestilence, Plague, Civil Unrest, Zombies, ...
I would like to hear from you. What other areas do YOU think the government should force us to buy products in for our own good and WHY ?
1) Home Computer
Why: Eventually we will all gave to use one to make it in this world and our children need to
learn as soon as possible. Also, if everyone had a computer, we can make the fed gov.
more "green" since we could get rid of all paper documents.
2) An American made electric car (ahemm.. GM Volt)
Why: Get us off of ugly fossil fuels (but of course we will still be generating most of the power
from oil/gas burning power plants). and stimulate the US economy.
3) Life Insurance
Why: Just as we all pay taxes,.... we all eventually die and therefore we should all have to make
sure we take care of our families.
4) Buy home safety equipment
Why: We all need to be prepared for ANY kind of emergency. Flood, Fire, Tornado, Hurricane,
Pestilence, Plague, Civil Unrest, Zombies, ...
I would like to hear from you. What other areas do YOU think the government should force us to buy products in for our own good and WHY ?
Monday, July 2, 2012
Everyone MUST buy a gun!
To those on the left who think it's okay for the government to tell you that you MUST buy health insurance or pay a tax penalty. Let me pose this idea. How would you feel if Republicans under the 2nd and 10th amendment told you that you HAVE TO BUY A GUN OR PAY A HEFTY TAX PENALTY!
We could argue that with the rise of terrorism and crime, an armed citizenry is the best possible solution to this problem.
The gun industry would LOVE this law since it would force everyone to buy their product. Congress could also:
1) Legislate the exact kind of gun and ammunition to be purchased (we don't have people who know nothing about guns buying the wrong kind of gun). Occasionally the gun style might be changed so citizens would need to purchase new guns and ammo every 5 years. (stale ammo can be bad you know).
2) Require classes to learn how to use the gun so that every citizen is prepared. These classes would need to be re-taken every 3 years (just to make sure you are up on the latest methods). Of course these classes would need to have fully trained government instructors leading them and they must be administered at official government training facilities that are equipped with the latest in target ranges, police-style shoot-no-shoot-training grounds, computer simulators, not to mention swimming pools, sauna's, weight-rooms, fine-dining for the government workers to use.
3) Require all citizens to join the NRA and display their NRA badge proudly at all times on their vehicle.
4) Require all citizens to go to a gun range 2 times a year to show they can hit the broad side of a barn.
5) Require all gun owners to purchase government approved safes for storing the gun in when not in use. These safes will have to be inspected from time to time to insure they are locked and have adequate child safety guards. Lock numbers will need to be registered with the federal government in the small likelihood that the FBI or ATF should need to access said safe in the future.
6) If you cannot afford to buy a gun you will be given one at no cost to you by the federal government. The money to pay for these guns will come from the tax-penalties of those who chose NOT to have a gun on their premises.
7) To insure the public safety of people who would be visiting homes that do NOT have a gun, the owners must have a large sticker applied to their front door informing people entering the home that: "ATTENTION: TO THOSE ENTERING THIS HOUSE, THE OWNER OF THIS HOME IS A LIBERAL AND DOES NOT LIKE HAVING GUNS IN HIS HOME. THIS HOME THEREFORE DOES NOT HAVE ANY GUNS THAT COULD BE USED TO PROTECT YOU IN THE ADVENT OF A BURGLARY OR HOME INVASION"
With that said, how do you feel about ObamaCare and the ability of the Federal Government to force you to buy a product?
We could argue that with the rise of terrorism and crime, an armed citizenry is the best possible solution to this problem.
The gun industry would LOVE this law since it would force everyone to buy their product. Congress could also:
1) Legislate the exact kind of gun and ammunition to be purchased (we don't have people who know nothing about guns buying the wrong kind of gun). Occasionally the gun style might be changed so citizens would need to purchase new guns and ammo every 5 years. (stale ammo can be bad you know).
2) Require classes to learn how to use the gun so that every citizen is prepared. These classes would need to be re-taken every 3 years (just to make sure you are up on the latest methods). Of course these classes would need to have fully trained government instructors leading them and they must be administered at official government training facilities that are equipped with the latest in target ranges, police-style shoot-no-shoot-training grounds, computer simulators, not to mention swimming pools, sauna's, weight-rooms, fine-dining for the government workers to use.
3) Require all citizens to join the NRA and display their NRA badge proudly at all times on their vehicle.
4) Require all citizens to go to a gun range 2 times a year to show they can hit the broad side of a barn.
5) Require all gun owners to purchase government approved safes for storing the gun in when not in use. These safes will have to be inspected from time to time to insure they are locked and have adequate child safety guards. Lock numbers will need to be registered with the federal government in the small likelihood that the FBI or ATF should need to access said safe in the future.
6) If you cannot afford to buy a gun you will be given one at no cost to you by the federal government. The money to pay for these guns will come from the tax-penalties of those who chose NOT to have a gun on their premises.
7) To insure the public safety of people who would be visiting homes that do NOT have a gun, the owners must have a large sticker applied to their front door informing people entering the home that: "ATTENTION: TO THOSE ENTERING THIS HOUSE, THE OWNER OF THIS HOME IS A LIBERAL AND DOES NOT LIKE HAVING GUNS IN HIS HOME. THIS HOME THEREFORE DOES NOT HAVE ANY GUNS THAT COULD BE USED TO PROTECT YOU IN THE ADVENT OF A BURGLARY OR HOME INVASION"
With that said, how do you feel about ObamaCare and the ability of the Federal Government to force you to buy a product?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)