When: Tuesday, June 11th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Confederate Corner with George Neat on Blog Talk Radio

What: Yes there are Confederates north of the Mason-Dixon line, and George Neat is one of them. And we’re happy to bring his views to you in the “Confederate Corner” radio show.

For more information on George and his political views, please drop by the Confederate Corner at GoldwaterGal.com. (http://goldwatergal.com/goldwater-gal-media/confederate-corner/)

Tonight: George will be talking about Islam, National Security, Star Wars, TSA, NSA, and the liberals keeping up their war on guns. Of course there will also be a Soldier Salute, and a “nearly-infamous” Crack Pipe Moment.

When: Tuesday, June 4th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Confederate Corner with George Neat on Blog Talk Radio

What: Yes there are Confederates north of the Mason-Dixon line, and George Neat is one of them. And we’re happy to bring his views to you in the “Confederate Corner” radio show.

For more information on George and his political views, please drop by the Confederate Corner at GoldwaterGal.com. (http://goldwatergal.com/goldwater-gal-media/confederate-corner/)

Tonight: George will be talking about public education, guns, freedom of speech, and sharia law. Of course there will also be a Soldier Salute, and a “nearly-infamous” Crack Pipe Moment.

When:Thursday May 9th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: In Deep with Michelle Ray on Blog Talk Radio

What: Join Social Media Director of ConservativeDailyNews.com, Michelle Ray (@GaltsGirl) as she discusses the issues that impact America.

Tonight: Benghazi, the 3D Gun Grab, and the libertarian chick talks about libertarianism

Special thanks to TJ Thompson for putting my thoughts into video format.

Colorado’s Secretary of state has approved language for petitions to recall Senate President John Morse and state Rep. Mike McLachian. Both democrats are from hotly contested districts and their anti-gun votes will likely cost them their seats.

Voters are also pursuing recalls for Sen Evie Hudak and state Rep. Rhonda Fields and considering filing a petition to recall governor John Hickenlooper.

Rep. Fields sponsored the very unpopular 15 round magazine limit legislation. She is notorious for her outright gun-grabbing stance on the second amendment. During the push for the anti-gun bills, Fields remarked, ”The objective is to get the guns out of the home.”

Sen. Hudak had an equally troubling public event during the democrat-pushed anti-gun effort. During a hearing on concealed carry on college campuses, Hudak told a rape victim that her attack would likely have been worse if she had tried to defend herself by carrying a concealed firearm. Then stating a now proven false statistic, Hudak argued with the rape victim “I just want to say that actually statistics are not on your side…the Colorado Coalition Against Gun Violence says that for every one woman who used a handgun to kill someone in self-defense, 83 were murdered by them.”

Of course, the way Hudak expressed the statistic, she makes it sound as though the victims own guns were turned on them. As several news agencies have reported, Hudak contorted 1998 FBI statistics to say something they actually didn’t say at all.

Colorado voters have come together to form the Basic Freedom Defense Fund to coordinate the recall effort. Headquartered in Grand Junction, CO, the group’s website says, “The Basic Freedom Defense Fund is a non-profit dedicated to holding our elected representatives here in the state of Colorado RESPONSIBLE and ACCOUNTABLE for the things they do in office, and to ensure the defense of our freedoms and civil rights.”

Colorado voters aren’t the only ones organizing. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been spending millions during the 2013 anti-gun effort and is likely to fund groups like “A Whole Lot of People for John Morse” which is hoping to defend Sen. Morse during the recall.

Evan Westrup, a spokesman Governor Brown said that the bill “makes our communities safer by giving law enforcement the resources they need to get guns out of the hands of potentially dangerous individuals.”

The state has always had laws allowing them to take weapons from those who obtained them legally but have since committed a crime or been diagnosed with a psychological condition. This new legislation puts $24 million behind the law so that confiscations can happen faster.

The first of many gun restriction bills to head to the governor, this measure hires dozens of new agents specifically for the task of firearms confiscation.

The money does not come from the state’s general fund. Instead, the $24 million will be taken from a fund intended to strengthen California’s background check system.

The fees are known as DROS fees or “Dealer’s Record of Sale”. While other states collect no additional fees from dealer’s, California set up the DROS fee telling constituents that the fees would go to enhance the background check system. Instead, it appears that the fees will be used to confiscate firearms.

No good fee goes unpilfered.

The firearms background check system has been the focus of gun debate for the past few months. Supposedly, 90% of Americans wanted to see improved background checks. Now California believes that funds intended for such actions should be used to collect firearms that were legally bought instead.

Many ask where the money will come from to improve the background check system? How else will the large community of retail firearms-purchasing criminals be caught when they buy “assault rifles” at a gun store?

The good news is that California already has a registry of its gun owners which makes finding the current gun owners easier. The state has a database containing all those owning guns that the NRA and gun rights activists have long said would lead to confiscation.

Now, Governor Brown has proven that those registries are used to find gun owners for the purpose of taking their firearms. While the reasons may or may not make sense to different groups, the purpose of the database is now obvious.

What happens when the gun ownership bar is lowered next time? Will traffic tickets be enough? Spitting on the sidewalk? Shooting a double-barreled shotgun out the back door for home defense? Hey, don’t blame me, that was the Vice-President’s idea. Or what if the local law decides that your attitude on government is troubling? The Palm Beach Post reports that Palm Beach, Florida Sheriff Ric Bradshaw has been given the power to investigate people that disagree with their government.

The Florida state legislature gave the Sheriff $1 million dollars which he intends to use to fund an intervention unit.

The Sheriff says the new unit is important and that he wants ”

people to call us if the guy down the street says he hates the government.”

Sheriff Bradshaw replied to concerns saying “We know how to sift through frivolous complaints.”, but many are not convinced.

“We don’t want to take away people’s civil liberties just because people aren’t behaving the way we think they should be,” said Liz Downey of the National Alliance on Mental Illness.

It appears that the California legislature is ignoring their constituents, the will of the people, public sentiment or all those other words Obama uses to tell us that Congress is doing it wrong.

When asked if this program should be a model for the nation, a Los Angeles Times poll had these results as of 9:00pm on Thursday (you can vote in it HERE):

“…your side of the aisle keeps trying to make ploys instead of dealing with the real issue. Keep playing games!”

A Democrat Replies:

“We don’t want someone like that carrying a concealed weapon.”

From Conservative Videos:

In the end, House members voted 76-31 against a proposal, pushed by Chicago-area Democrats, that would have allowed county sheriffs and other government officials to weigh in on whether a person should be allowed to have a concealed-carry permit. The “may issue” proposal, House Bill 831, was modeled after a highly restrictive New York gun law.

The suspects were informed were informed by Yuma Justice of the Peace Greg Stewart that there were each being held on in allegations of attempted murder, armed robbery and aggravated assault. The victim has so far been held harmless in for defending himself.

Prosecutor William Katz told the court that “The victim was in town visiting a family member and was standing outside a residence when he was approached by two males. They demanded his wallet, when he didn’t comply, they demanded his wallet again. It was at that point that they brandished a weapon and [the victim] took out his own .45-caliber weapon. Refusing to be a victim, he fired and struck one of the assailants in the neck.”

According to reports, the intended victim had a legally concealed firearm and is likely to be uncharged in the case.

The victim was neither shot nor otherwise injured in the attempted robbery. He is also in full possession of his wallet and its contents.

The suspect who was shot is being treated for a life-threatening gunshot wound.

When: Tuesday, April 30th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Confederate Corner with George Neat on Blog Talk Radio

What: Yes there are Confederates north of the Mason-Dixon line, and George Neat is one of them. And we’re happy to bring his views to you in the “Confederate Corner” radio show.

For more information on George and his political views, please drop by the Confederate Corner at GoldwaterGal.com. (http://goldwatergal.com/goldwater-gal-media/confederate-corner/)

Tonight: It’s been a crazy week, and George is on the warpath. More gun talk, of course. Plus, some talk about the ATF, military, the Boston Bombing suspects’ family, and wait for it…. PORN. So, be sure to join us for an interesting ride, and of course, there will be the Soldier Salute, and the infamous “Crack Pipe Moment”!

While most Conservatives could care less what celebs think about the constitution, we should. Why do you think liberals have pranced the unthinking stars and starlets out in front of the media to enhance the progressive agenda? Well, because exposure works and there is no such thing as bad press.

The notably pro gun are truly .. notable.

Brad Pitt was interviewed by British Magazine where he said, “I feel better having a gun.”

Chuck Norris is a no-brainer. Constitutional rights ads, outspoken positions and … well, he’s Chuck Norris.

An obvious pick for the celeb-de-arm is Uncle Ted. Ted Nugent is a mighty supporter of gun rights, the second amendment and liberties overall.

Country Western diva Miranda Lambert carries regularly after having received serious death threats. As she puts it, “I am my own security.”

Die Hard’s Bruce Willis also understands how firearms restrictions work as he says. “If you take guns away from legal gun aowners, then the only people who have guns are the bad guys.”

Angelina Jolie has her own shooting range and told The Daily Mail, “If anybody comes into my home and tries to hurt my kids, I’ve no problem shooting them.” Exactly the sentiment expressed by everyday gun owners.

You see, gun ownership isn’t just about hunting or collecting. Most own for defensive purposes. Aggressors typically have numerical, age or strength advantages. A firearm evens the playing field, to use an Obama term, for everyone.

Aerosmith’s Joe Perry said, “I grew up in America so granted, it is part of our heritage and it is written into the laws of how this country is run.”

Clint Eastwood is an obvious addition to the list. Quoting a famous gun rights saying, Clint said, “I have a very strict gun control policy: if there’s a gun around, I want to be in control of it.”

James Earl Jones put the base gun right’s argument into succinct terms:

“The world is filled with violence. Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent people will lose.”

Members of the NRA:

- Clint Eastwood

- James Earl Jones

- Ted Nugent

- Tom Selleck (board member)

Other notables:
- Gary Sinise

- Johnny Depp

- Ice-T

Yesterday I wrote about government dictating how illegal aliens are going to be legalized by the “Gang of 8” scheme.  It matters not to Congress or the regime what We the People or the Constitution say.  They will decide how it is going to be and We the People will just have to accept it because it is “fair”.  Today I write about gun control and how government intends to impose their will on We the People, disregarding the Constitution and the rights of said People.  How does fairness and public safety figure into the latest dictates on firearms?

Gun control is being handled exactly the same way they have handled the illegal alien problem.  A nut goes out and shoots some people, so they pass laws to stop it from happening again.  Except that it happened again because they haven’t enforced the “new” laws they passed the last time this came up.  Gun control has been such a raging success everywhere it has been tried hasn’t it?  Gang violence with firearms is rampant in the major gun free zones in our nation.  Sen. Ted Cruz recently gave out 2010 figures  that show 15,700 attempts by criminals to legally access firearms, in one year: 2010.  They were caught by the background check system in effect right now.  The Obama regime has prosecuted 44.  Clintonesque isn’t it???

So, the Obama regime prosecuted just 44 out of 15,700 background check cases that the current law caught, in one year, and we need more restrictions on firearms???  You have got to be kidding me, AGAIN!!  Chicago is a stellar case for gun free zones.  Is it fair that Chicago’s “gun free zone” is more dangerous to poor black children than Afghanistan is to our soldiers?  And the gun free Mecca of Washington D. C. (De Cesspool) is right on Chicago’s heels.

Is it fair to the law abiding citizen who reads the Constitution and sees “shall not be infringed” being infringed by both political parties; “for our own well-being and safety”, of course?  Is it fair to the homeowner who hears a group of armed thugs kicking in his door or smashing a window to rob the home in the middle of the night?  The old saying goes, “when seconds count the police are minutes away”!!!  That is not a slap at the police by any stretch.  I salute their dedication and understand their frustration at arresting criminals, only to see the same criminals walking the street before the ink is dry on the arrest report.

Is it fair to the 6 year old murdered in a Chicago gang shooting because she happened to be sitting on the front steps with her sister???  Is it fair to the family that loses a child who has nothing to do with gangs but can neither move out of the neighborhood nor possess a firearm to defend themselves from the gang member?  You know, the gang member who has been arrested a dozen times for gun law violations but is out on bail or parole; the same gang member who finds a full automatic weapon that no law abiding citizen will ever possess???  And he didn’t buy it through any “gun show loophole”!!!

So, do they really need to pass “new” restrictions on the 2^nd Amendment to solve the problems that have been created by not enforcing the “new” restrictions they passed the last time this came up?  “Pass something quick and we can fill in the details later” is the order of the day in government.  Kind of like “we have to pass it so we can find out what is in it”, isn’t it??

Is anyone seeing a pattern here?  There is a problem, any problem; illegal aliens, poverty, murder, gang violence, drug trafficking, terrorism, etc.  The problem has been addressed countless times in the past and new laws and regulations have been passed but not enforced each time, not enforced because those laws will be “unfair” to those breaking the law.   The answer of politicians is always more control over those who actually follow the laws.  Everyone knows, and politicians admit, that absolutely nothing in the current crop of new legislation would do anything to solve the problem of gun violence, or prevent another Sandy Hook from happening.

These last two articles are but two examples of many that show a total disregard for the Constitution, the rule of law, and the well-being and liberty of We the People.  The politicians and the bureaucrats spend all of their time thinking up ways to further restrict the rights of citizens when they should be focusing on enforcing the last set of “new” laws, rules, and regulations they passed.  They admit the new laws won’t matter, yet demand that those of us who do obey the law give up our rights anyway.  They need to pass this idea for a possible outline quick before anyone can look at it.    “We have to pass it so we can find out what is in it”, AGAIN!!!

The political class is destroying our nation.  They never fix anything!!!  They continually put restrictions on what legal citizens can do without so much as a thought of what the Constitution provides for.  That “old and outdated” document means nothing to either political party.

There are a few in the Senate and a few in the House who are fighting the establishments of both parties on behalf of We the People.  They are being beaten down by those who control both political parties and their minions in the media.  The People’s voices are not welcomed by Republicans or Democrats.  They know best and will “debate and tell us where they stand”.  From my reading and studying of the Constitution I thought they were supposed to decide based on the Constitution first and the will of We the People second.

Now on the heels of Boston they want to force background checks before We the People can buy gunpowder, pressure cookers, and ham hocks!!!!!  Never mind that the entire problem is Muslim murderers who have no conscience, and their government enablers who “never let a good crisis go to waste”.  There isn’t any sense in securing our borders or deporting known terrorist sympathizers!!!  The only thing that makes sense to those dictators in Washington is to further restrict the liberty of decent law abiding citizens.

They have their dictatorial oligarchy established and will not turn loose of it easily.  The statists who control both parties are seeing We the People stand up to their treachery and they don’t like it.  They want to get things jammed through as quickly as possible, knowing that time is not on their side.  We the people are fed up, standing up, and demanding they govern by the Constitution first and the will of the people second.  The disarming of We the People and the arming of DHS is government saying; ”NO We will NOT obey the Constitution, YOU will obey us“!!!!!

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

April 22, 2013

When: Tuesday, April 23rd, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Confederate Corner with George Neat on Blog Talk Radio

What: Yes there are Confederates north of the Mason-Dixon line, and George Neat is one of them. And we’re happy to bring his views to you in the “Confederate Corner” radio show.

For more information on George and his political views, please drop by the Confederate Corner at GoldwaterGal.com. (http://goldwatergal.com/goldwater-gal-media/confederate-corner/)

Tonight: This administration decided it was a good idea to stay focused on gun issues, so here we go! Well, before we get to the guns, we’ll talk a bit about racism, with someone who’s trying to show that it isn’t wrong to be proud about being white. (And no, it’s not someone from that Democrat organization, the KKK!) Then we’ll have a little chat about guns, and more importantly, the way Facebook deals with gun and ammo companies on their site. So, as usual, don’t expect politically correct talk!

Mark Kelly enjoys shooting his Glock 9mm handgun, the same firearm used to injure his wife in 2012.

While Mr. Kelly’s firearm only has a 17 round magazine at the time the video was shot, it would still have been banned under the Democratic party’s proposed legislation. The same ban Gabrielle Gifford hypocritically expressed anger at not having been passed.

The ban that failed the Senate would have limited Gifford’s husband to 10 rounds. For some reason, Gabby doesn’t seem to mind her own family possessing magazines she feels the average citizen should not own.

If eleven rounds is too many, then why is her family entitled to use magazines that hold seventeen?

The hypocrisy is too much to bear. If the only way gun owners are to buy the guns the way the manufacturer makes them is to be related to a Congressional member, elitism is our near future.

If it is good enough for thee, it is good enough for me.

President Obama made a very interesting decision on Wednesday by not only appealing to people’s emotions, but also openly demonizing and mocking the NRA and the U.S. Senate for not passing the Manchin-Toomey plan. It is several tactics defined by Saul Alinsky in “Rules For Radicals.”

The first is openly ridiculing the NRA, gun owners and the Republicans (and Democrats) who voted against the measure. By saying, “… instead of supporting this compromise, the gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about the bill…but that didn’t matter. And unfortunately, this pattern of spreading untruths about this legislation served a purpose, because those lies upset an intense minority of gun owners, and that in turn intimidated a lot of senators (emphasis mine).”

Obama is trying to put the NRA, the GOP and gun owners into a box. It’s an attempt to make them ‘the bad guy,’ and out of the mainstream. He does this again with the, “90 percent of Americans want background checks.”

This doesn’t tell the entire truth. There are several Quinnipiac polls showing 90 percent surveyed want background checks, but the question is too simple. The survey doesn’t say who should be doing the checks, whether it was national, state or local. It simply asks whether background checks should be done. This is an important distinction supporters of gun control bills aren’t discussing.

However, gun rights advocates haven’t explained this. They are instead going on the defensive, which is what Obama hoped. The NRA is only using the “background checks will do nothing to stop crime,”strategy and raising fears about a national gun registry. These are valid concerns, but won’t work long-term because people will get tired of hearing it. As Alinsky says, “A tactic that drags on too long, becomes a drag.”

It’s also helping Obama marginalize them even further. The President can now use another Alinsky rule of, “pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Obama can now bring out legitimately hurting families, like those in Newtown and Aurora, to have them push gun control. This tactic puts a face on those who have suffered in horrific tragedies. It makes it easier for the President to point at the NRA and say, “these people are keeping children from being safe.”

However, there are ways to use the personalization for gun rights. The best way to do this is bring out the Lone Star College student, who said on live TV, he wished he could have been armed when someone stabbed 14 people. Or have 15-year-old Sarah Merkle talk about gun rights. Or Mark Mattioli who lost his young son at Sandy Hook discuss why new gun laws won’t work. These can be effective push backs against Obama.

Obama isn’t going to back off on the push for gun control. While his original attack may have gotten an alternative he was looking for in the Toomey-Manchin plan, that thankfully failed. He, along with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, are going to come up with new plans.

The NRA and gun rights supporters need to come up with their own plan, using new tactics, to beat it off. Encouraging people to the ballot box is one thing. TV and radio spots work as well. However, it’s important for gun rights supporters to remember to use Twitter, Facebook and other social media sites to get the word out.

It’s not over, and while Obama is president, the fight for gun rights may never end.