Monday, March 31, 2014
A Country Founded by Geniuses But Run By Idiots
A Country Founded by Geniuses but Run by Idiots
> by Jeff Foxworthy
>
> If you can get arrested for hunting or fishing without a license, but not for entering and remaining in the country illegally - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If you have to get your parents' permission to go on a field trip or to take an aspirin in school, but not to get an abortion - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If you MUST show your identification to board an airplane, cash a check, buy liquor, or check out a library book and rent a video, but not to vote for who runs the government - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If the government wants to prevent stable, law-abiding citizens from owning gun magazines that hold more than ten rounds, but gives twenty F-16 fighter jets to the crazy new leaders in Egypt - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If, in the nation's largest city, you can buy two 16-ounce sodas, but not one 24-ounce soda, because 24-ounces of a sugary drink might make you fat - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If an 80-year-old woman or a three-year-old girl who is confined to a wheelchair can be strip-searched by the TSA at the airport, but a woman in a burka or a hijab is only subject to having her neck and head searched - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If a seven-year-old boy can be thrown out of school for saying his teacher is "cute," but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class in grade school is perfectly acceptable - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If hard work and success are met with higher taxes and more government regulation and intrusion, while not working is rewarded with Food Stamps, WIC checks, Medicaid benefits, subsidized housing, and free cell phones - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If the government's plan for getting people back to work is to provide incentives for not working, by granting 99 weeks of unemployment checks, without any requirement to prove that gainful employment was diligently sought, but couldn't be found - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If you pay your mortgage faithfully, denying yourself the newest big-screen TV, while your neighbor buys iPhones, time shares, a wall-sized do-it-all plasma screen TV and new cars, and the government forgives his debt when he defaults on his mortgage - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If being stripped of your Constitutional right to defend yourself makes you more "safe" according to the government - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> What a country!
> by Jeff Foxworthy
>
> If you can get arrested for hunting or fishing without a license, but not for entering and remaining in the country illegally - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If you have to get your parents' permission to go on a field trip or to take an aspirin in school, but not to get an abortion - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If you MUST show your identification to board an airplane, cash a check, buy liquor, or check out a library book and rent a video, but not to vote for who runs the government - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If the government wants to prevent stable, law-abiding citizens from owning gun magazines that hold more than ten rounds, but gives twenty F-16 fighter jets to the crazy new leaders in Egypt - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If, in the nation's largest city, you can buy two 16-ounce sodas, but not one 24-ounce soda, because 24-ounces of a sugary drink might make you fat - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If an 80-year-old woman or a three-year-old girl who is confined to a wheelchair can be strip-searched by the TSA at the airport, but a woman in a burka or a hijab is only subject to having her neck and head searched - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If a seven-year-old boy can be thrown out of school for saying his teacher is "cute," but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class in grade school is perfectly acceptable - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If hard work and success are met with higher taxes and more government regulation and intrusion, while not working is rewarded with Food Stamps, WIC checks, Medicaid benefits, subsidized housing, and free cell phones - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If the government's plan for getting people back to work is to provide incentives for not working, by granting 99 weeks of unemployment checks, without any requirement to prove that gainful employment was diligently sought, but couldn't be found - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If you pay your mortgage faithfully, denying yourself the newest big-screen TV, while your neighbor buys iPhones, time shares, a wall-sized do-it-all plasma screen TV and new cars, and the government forgives his debt when he defaults on his mortgage - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> If being stripped of your Constitutional right to defend yourself makes you more "safe" according to the government - you might live in a nation that was founded by geniuses but is run by idiots.
>
> What a country!
Sunday, March 30, 2014
Saturday, March 29, 2014
The Gun In Civilization
As the Supreme Court hears arguments for and against the Chicago, IL, Gun
Ban, I offer you another stellar example of a letter (written by a Marine),
that places the proper perspective on what a gun means to a civilized
society. Interesting take and one you don't hear much... Read this eloquent and profound letter and pay close attention to the last paragraph of the
letter.....written by a Marine!
THE GUN IN CIVILIZATION
Ban, I offer you another stellar example of a letter (written by a Marine),
that places the proper perspective on what a gun means to a civilized
society. Interesting take and one you don't hear much... Read this eloquent and profound letter and pay close attention to the last paragraph of the
letter.....written by a Marine!
THE GUN IN CIVILIZATION
Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force .
If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either
convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of
force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories,
without exception. Reason or force, that's it .
In a truly moral and civilized society , people exclusively interact through
persuasion Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and
the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as
paradoxical as it may sound to some.
When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason
and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or
employment of force .
The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal
footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with
a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload
of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical
strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.
There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force
equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all
guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a
[armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's
potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative
fiat - it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.
People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the
young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a
civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful
living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly .
Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that
otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in
several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the
physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.
People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute
lethal force, watch too much TV , where people take beatings and come out of
it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force
easier, works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger
attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.
The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian
as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply would not work as well
as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.
When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but
because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot
be forced, only persuaded . I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because
it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who
would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would
do so by force. It removes force from the equation... And that's why
carrying a gun is a civilized act !!
By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)
convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of
force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories,
without exception. Reason or force, that's it .
In a truly moral and civilized society , people exclusively interact through
persuasion Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and
the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as
paradoxical as it may sound to some.
When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason
and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or
employment of force .
The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal
footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with
a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload
of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical
strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.
There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force
equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all
guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a
[armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's
potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative
fiat - it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.
People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the
young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a
civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful
living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly .
Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that
otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in
several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the
physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.
People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute
lethal force, watch too much TV , where people take beatings and come out of
it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force
easier, works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger
attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.
The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian
as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply would not work as well
as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.
When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but
because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot
be forced, only persuaded . I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because
it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who
would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would
do so by force. It removes force from the equation... And that's why
carrying a gun is a civilized act !!
By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)
Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal
You have two families: "Joe Legal" and "Jose Illegal".Both families have two parents, two children, and live in California"Joe Legal" works in construction, has a Social Security Numberand makes $25.00 per hour with taxes deducted."Jose Illegal" also works in construction, has NO Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash "under the table".Ready? Now pay attention...."Joe Legal": $25.00 per hour x 40 hours = $1000.00 per week, or $52,000.00 per year. Now take 30% away for state and federal tax; "Joe Legal" now has $31,231.00."Jose Illegal:" $15.00 per hour x 40 hours = $600.00 per week, or $31,200.00 per year. "Jose Illegal" pays no taxes. Jose Illegal now has $31,200.00."Joe Legal" pays medical and dental insurance with limited coverage for his family at $600.00 per month, or $7,200.00 per year. "Joe Legal" now has $24,031.00."Jose Illegal" has full medical and dental coverage through the state and local clinics and emergency hospitals at a cost of $0.00 per year. "Jose Illegal" still has $31,200.00."Joe Legal" makes too much money and is not eligible for food stamps or welfare. "Joe Legal" pays $500.00 per month for food, or $6,000.00 per year. Joe Legal now has $18,031.00."Jose Illegal" has no documented income and is eligible for food stamps, WIC and welfare. "Jose Illegal" still has $31,200.00."Joe Legal" pays rent of $1,200.00 per month, or $14,400.00 per year. "Joe Legal" now has 9,631 .00."Jose Illegal" receives a $500.00 per month Federal Rent Subsidy. "Jose Illegal" pays out that $500.00 per month, or $6,000.00 per year. "Jose Illegal" still has $ 31,200.00."Joe Legal" pays $200.00 per month, or $2,400.00 for car insurance. Some of that is uninsured motorist insurance. "Joe Legal" now has $7,231.00."Jose Illegal" says, "We don't need no stinkin' insurance!" and still has $31,200.00."Joe Legal" has to make his $7,231.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, etc."Jose Illegal" has to make his $31,200.00 stretch to pay utilities,gasoline, and what he sends out of the country every month."Joe Legal" now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work."Jose Illegal" has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family."Joe Legal's" and "Jose Illegal's" children both attend the same elementary school. "Joe Legal" pays for his children's lunch, while "Jose Illegal's" children get a government sponsored lunch. "Jose Illegal's" children have an after school ESL program. "Joe Legal's" children go home.Now, when they reach college age, "Joe Legal's" kids may not get into a State School and may not qualify for scholarships, grants or other tuition help, even though "Joe" has been paying for State Schools through his taxes, while "Jose Illegal's "kids "go to the head of the class" because they are a minority."Joe Legal" and "Jose Illegal" both enjoy the same police and fire services, but "Joe" paid for them and "Jose" did not pay.Do you get it now?If you vote for or support any politician that supports illegal aliens, you are part of the problem!We need to keep this going--we need to make changes ASAP!"What are you waiting for? Pass it on."The writer’s comment was “Enjoy Socialism, you are paying for it!”, I suggest a broken immigration policy is the cause.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)