Quote of the day - 1/17/2012

"I stand against those who would leave me defenseless simply because they do not value their own life enough to defend it."

FAQ: Are Barrett rifles legal to own or possess in my state?

From: http://www.barrett.net/support/faq

Are Barrett rifles legal to own or possess in my state? 

That depends. You may live in a jurisdiction that restricts caliber or magazine capacity. First, we recommend that you elect politicians who will change those laws. If you can’t do that, then we recommend that you move to an area that obeys the United States Constitution. In any case, we don’t offer legal advice on what you can or can’t own. Check with your local law enforcement official.

Here's another good one from one of their prices lists (http://www.barrett.net/pdfs/Price-List.pdf):

The California Legislature has banned the .50 BMG from its good citizens, violating their rights and the constitution of our republic. Therefore, Barrett will not sell to or service any California government agencies.

Ya gotta love Ronnie Barrett for standing up for what's right!

-Bob

More taxes are not the answer

From my cousin via Facebook:

The more we are taxed the less we spend. Stop the handouts and make people succeed first. There is no motivation in USA to work hard anymore because the nation is setup(now) to give you a nice little bit of handouts to keep you moving. We as Americans need to get back to what made this country the great country it is - hard work. Whether that be in a factory, cutting grass, tool and die, or frying fries. We are not above those things however we seem to moving towards thinking we are! If you don't think we are - ask a teenager about working at McD's or cutting grass during the summer for money! They will tell you - Not a chance! Trust me - I educate them for 9 hours a day 5 days a week. They have sense of entitlement and it's only getting worse.

I think he said it very well.

-Bob

Divided Congress Bodes Well for Economy

If the recent past is any indication, the American economy will prosper in the next few years with the new Congress divided between the two parties.


From http://www.aei.org/article/102715:

“Since 1970, the levers of federal government — the White House, Senate and House of Representatives — have been in the hands of one party, whether Republican or Democrat, 30 percent of the time,” observes Bloomberg News columnist Kevin Hassett.  “By most any measure, the U.S. economy has been healthier the other 70 percent of the time.”

Since 1981, median GDP has increased 3.3 percent in years when Washington was divided — as it will be now with Republicans in control of the House and Democrats controlling the Senate and White House — and 2.8 percent when it was unified.

Median unemployment has been 6.1 percent under one-party rule since 1970, and 5.7 percent when rule is divided. Since 1993, the spread is even greater — 6 percent compared to 4.9 percent.

Divided rule has proved a boon for the stock market as well. Since 1970, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index has risen at a median rate of 13.5 percent per year when Washington is divided, and just 9 percent when it is unified. Since 1993, the spread is again greater — 19.5 percent compared to 9 percent.

Hassett, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute and an adviser to John McCain in the 2008 presidential election, offers two possible explanations for the phenomenon:

1. “Under the ‘politicians are idiots’ view, divided governments tend to be gridlocked, and gridlock is good,” he writes. “A paralyzed government is a boon to the economy because the changes that politicians contrive tend to be harmful.
2. “Under the ‘politicians are sensible’ view, divided governments produce better lawmaking because only sensible policies can achieve the necessary bipartisan support. When government is controlled by one party, common sense is cast aside as those in power use their muscle to reward friends and punish enemies.” 

-Bob

Wanna bet the $200 million a day is real?

It's all over the news today: Obama's trip to India will cost $200 Million a day.  Of course, Obama and all his supporters are saying "A Gross Over-Estimation", "the numbers reported have no basis in reality".  Let's see what actually happens.  I for one won't be surprised to find the real number are actually close to $200 Million a day.  Of course this wouldn't be the first time that Obama has claimed that something isn't true when it really is.  Think ObamaCare...

-Bob

It's "We the People", not "Me the President"