Never mind the pajamas … We blog in the nude!

Archive for October, 2007

Thompson on Gun Control

Posted by RightWingRocker on October 30, 2007

David over at The Gun Nut was able to get this statement from Fred Thompson on gun control, specifically the UN’s position with regard to it:

Last year, the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights declared that international human rights law requires all nations to adopt strict gun control laws. These “minimum” provisions are much more restrictive than any of those on the books anywhere in the U.S. and would almost certainly violate the Second Amendment of our Constitution.

Besides concluding that all nations are obligated under international human rights law to control the small arms and light weapons to which its civilian population has access, the UN report remarkably denied the existence of any human right to self-defense, evidently overlooking the work of Hugo Grotius, the 17th century scholar credited as the founder of international law, who wrote, “It is to be observed that [the] Right of Self-Defence, arises directly and immediately from the Care of our own Preservation, which Nature recommends to every one. . . ,” and that this right is so primary, that it cannot be denied on the basis that it is not “expressly set forth.”

There is another disturbing aspect to this call for international global gun control. Throughout modern history, the forced disarmament of people by its government has often been accompanied or followed by that government’s commission of often massive human rights abuses. In fact, no genocide in the 20th century occurred when the victim population still possessed small arms, legally or illegally, with which to defend themselves.

So now the UN wants to disarm civilians? Where was the UN when the massacres in Rwanda occurred? What did the UN do to protect the victims of ethnic massacres in Bosnia? Disarming civilians under the guise of international human rights law will only lead to more such genocides by ensuring that civilians can never defend themselves! It would be funny if it weren’t so perverse.

Thankfully, the Framers of our Constitution recognized this potential peril to our liberty, and enshrined in our Second Amendment the more basic right of self-defense. The U.N. can say what it likes about other countries’ citizens’ possession of small arms being a violation of human rights law, but so long as the United States is a sovereign nation governed by its Constitution, its words will have no effect here. And I am glad for it.

I don’t care who you support for the presidency. This position is precisely correct, and as such is, and of right ought to be, a MINIMUM requirement for anyone wishing to hold the office of President of the United States.

America will be wise to accept no less.



Posted in Border SecuRWRity, Confronting Libs, Liberal Bullshit, New FedeRWRalism | Leave a Comment »

Who Said It?

Posted by RightWingRocker on October 20, 2007

April, one of the newer readers here, recently asked me to do this, and voila!, Delfts puts it up.

Now he’s been quiet lately – dealing with some big-time health issues – to the point that he’s now listed in the “Silent MajoRWRity” section (which does need to be worked on, as there are other voiced that have returned), but this quiz should give you really good insight into the mind of the Left. No cheating. I’ll post the answers in the near future. Leave your guesses in the comment area.

1) “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above

2) “It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few…and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity.”

A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C. Idi Amin
D. None of the Above

3) “(We)…can’t just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people.”

A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Josef Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above

4) “We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own…in order to create this common ground.”

A. Mao Tse Dung
B. Hugo Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above

5) “I certainly think the free-market has failed.”

A. Karl Marx
B. Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above

6) “I think it’s time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched.”

A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above

Good luck!


Posted in Alternative Media, Confronting Libs, Liberal Bullshit, RWR in the 'Sphere | Leave a Comment »

A Reasonable Liberal

Posted by RightWingRocker on October 19, 2007

OK, so I bait the hook for the trolls and they don’t show up. Guess the heat in the kitchen was too hot for them.

Instead, I get a reasonable liberal (read the thread on the last post). Reasonable meaning one who’s willing to actually come here and have a debate instead of just being a dickhead and a loser.

Someone has actually decided to try taking TripleNeck’s challenge.


First of all, let me say that Matt has done a great job in trying to get me to understand that there’s nothing wrong with what he believes. He has failed, though, because he hasn’t shown me that what he believes is in any way good for America, friendly to the philosophy of the Founders, or even legal under the Constitution to begin with.

Matt has admitted to being in favor of:

* Nationalized socialized healthcare
* Nationalized socialized education
* Nationalized socialized Socialist Security
* Nationalized socialized MediScare
* Illegal gun control laws
* Restricting the religious freedoms of some Christians

He has NOT:

* Encouraged race-baiting
* Championed non-existent rights for illegal aliens
* Engaged in Bush Derangement Syndrome-like bullshit
* Made any false accusations with regard to the War on Terror
* Invoked children

Areas we just can’t be sure about:

* Whether all-out socialism is really what he’s about. He said he doesn’t advocate socialism, but somehow found it quite all right to say he’s for much of the socialist agenda.
* Whether he believes the federal government should be responsible for the well-being and livelihood of the people living in the United States of America.
* Whether he holds any disdain for people with money.

I got a chuckle out of his idea that I shouldn’t refer to his party’s likely standard-bearer as “Hitlery”. My fusion of her name with that of ol’ Uncle Adolf is DELIBERATE. I do it to illustrate the truth about her ideology. If she’s allowed to do everything she wants to do (and the American people had better stand firmly in her way), you’re looking at Nazi Germany all over again. Exactly where do you think she gets away thinking stuff like Hitlerycare is ok? Even Matt, the “reasonable” liberal, supports that Nazi scheme.

I won’t beat up too terribly on Matt, though. He was a good sport and defended his positions without the usual liberal name-calling. Of course, his defense of these positions was flimsy at best, and reflected much of the usual “people shouldn’t have to be swamped with bills just because they got sick” kind of drivel. The idea that people get so swamped with bills because oppressive government regulation (largely from the fed) has made doctors so expensive seems to h ave never occurred to him.

As for the trolls, the hook remains baited. Any idiots care to take a taste??


Posted in Confronting Libs, Conservative Wins, Liberal Bullshit | Leave a Comment »

You’d Think They’d Be Proud

Posted by RightWingRocker on October 3, 2007

I have been silent since Saturday on purpose.

My last post was intended to give liberal commentators the opportunity to defend or substantively deny a number of allegations I often make about their beliefs.  Specifically, I asserted that liberals:

  • Encourage race-baiting, giving their full support to racist statements and diatribes that come from the likes of Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, and Robert Byrd.
  • Champion the “rights” of millions of illegal aliens who refuse to obey our laws, organize violent gangs in our country, and have openly asserted that America is part of THEIR country that they are going to take back.
  • Openly believe that the purpose of government is to provide the opportunity for a livelihood and way of life for the citizens.
  • Are so completely taken over with Bush Derangement Syndrome that they can’t help but blame this President for everything that they see as wrong, including high gas prices.
  • Openly try to accuse the president of starting a war for personal gain (implying that any gains should be redistributed to the people).
  • Openly advocate nationalizing everything from health care to the price of milk.
  • Openly advocate high taxes so that they can decide who to give the money to.
  • Expect the rest of us to assume that everything can and should be done by the federal government.
  • Treat wealthy people and their money with disdain.
  • Expect the federal government to run all of the schools.
  • Justify the imposition of their socialist agenda by invoking children.
  • Constantly bemoan anyone’s practice of religious freedom.
  • Want a centralized government to run all of the above.

Not a single liberal, including the loudmouth who’s been hanging around here lately, has challenged a single one of these assertions.  Why?  Most likely because they know two things: (1) That I am right in asserting that these are their beliefs, and (2) That these beliefs are indefensible.  Otherwise, they’d be commenting in droves about how I was either wrong or that these beliefs were the right and proper course for America.

So, instead of defending their positions or demonstrating where I have erred, they either stand silent or call me a Nazi.

Yeah right.


Posted in Confronting Libs, Liberal Bullshit, New FedeRWRalism | Leave a Comment »