Flash back to 2007... senator Obama is promising the "most transparent administration in history". His presidency will be an "open book" for all to see... no scandals, no lies, a pillar of open communication with the public! Flash forward to 2013... The Obama administration is mired in scandal. New scandals seem to erupt on a weekly basis. The Obamas hide behind an army of lawyers and red tape. They regularly use "presidential privilege" as an excuse to hide information and to shield their appointees from prosecution. They engage in regular "spin" and disinformation campaigns. All who serve Obama are limited to using "talking points"... carefully crafted legalese statements that shield them from potential prosecution and that keep anyone from revealing anything damaging. Flash back to 2007... senator Obama is promising unprecedented bipartisanship and cooperation. He will reach across the aisle and get things done. He will "end the partisan politics", and will foster a new era in Washington... he will unite America! Flash forward to 2013... Obama has shut out all dissenting opinions from both the right... AND the left. He's made so many enemies that even his own party largely despise him. Bills and budgets he has submitted to congress have been shot down in UNANIMOUS votes (another historical first). Obama has promoted stark divisions between rich and poor, young and old, black and white, conservative and liberal. He will forever be known as the most divisive president in history.

Flash back to 2007... Obama is a junior senator and presidential candidate. He is all for "bringing home the troops". He is a "no blood for oil" anti-war activist. He is promising to get us out of the "quagmire" of the middle east. He is going to close Guantanamo, and untangle us from overseas politics. In his rhetoric, we have "no business" there and we are "interfering" in things we shouldn't be involved with. Flash forward to 2013... we're mired in Obama's second presidential term. We have troops deployed all over the middle east and beyond. Guantanamo has done nothing but grow in capacity. We're actively arming various muslim militant groups (most of whom are demonstrably anti American). We're far more tangled up in middle eastern politics than we ever were before Obama. Flash back to 2007... senator Obama is promising to stop the "unfettered spending" of the Bush administration. He has grand plans to fix the economy which has begun to suffer. Unemployment has risen above 5%, but Obama promises he will put a stop to that... he's got "shovel-ready" projects ready to go! Flash forward to 2013... The definition of "unfettered spending" has taken on a whole new meaning. We've spent more money under Obama than under all previous presidents COMBINED. The economy has not been fixed, and in fact has stagnated and suffered since the moment Obama was elected. Unemployment has grown to 1920's Great Depression levels and beyond (though Obama's published numbers falsify this by publishing ONLY those who are receiving unemployment benefits, and NOT actual employment numbers). His "shovel-ready" projects have flopped, trillions of dollars have largely disappeared, and nobody seems to know where that money went. The government is PRINTING hundreds of billions of dollars per year (ie: stealing money from everyone who has savings).

The leftist media would have you believe that they have an absolute constitutional right to PRINT anything they want with total impunity. That is akin to saying that the second amendment allows me to SHOOT anything I want with total impunity. In point of fact, ALL rights are absolute ONLY to that point in which you cause demonstrable harm to others. A newspaper may largely print what they like, and they may use whatever form of press, broadcast, internet or other media they choose. However, they may NOT engage in libelous or slanderous behavior, nor are they allowed to incite violence. If they cause financial harm to a person by printing false and slanderous material, the harmed individual may seek financial redress through civil court. If a newspaper were to incite a riot that results in physical harm to people, the justice system may choose to seek criminal redress, and the publishers of the inciteful material may be held accountable. Likewise, the constitution allows me to keep and bear (own and use) the arms I see fit. There is no limitation that says that black guns are not included, or that a 30 round magazine is unconstitutional. I am protected by the constitution up to the point where I shoot at other people or their property. At that point, it would be up to civil or criminal courts to decide what damage I've caused and to whom and to decide my penalties, whether civil restitution or criminal penalties. Outlawing certain types of arms because I COULD choose to use them in an unlawful fashion is EXACTLY like outlawing certain types of printing presses or broadcast antennas because they COULD be used to incite violence or to slander.

I think it's funny how the press was backing liberals 100% on gun control. When confronted with the constitution and the 2nd amendment, they gave typical liberal responses... the constitution is "open to interpretation", it's an "ever changing and malleable document", it's an "outdated parchment written by slave owners" etc etc. Now they're under investigation, and they're screaming foul. They're citing their first amendment protections, and suddenly the constitution is a stone fortress that is incontrovertible and must never be tampered with.

The left has a strong grass roots voting organization. They bring bus-loads of union goons from polling place to polling place with marching orders to vote for the left leaning Republicans. They also have their media hacks frothing at the mouth during every primary, painting true conservatives as 'radicals'. They give us loads of false polling info showing how the conservative could not possibly win, and how the "mainstream" Republican candidate has a good chance. Even with all that going on, we the people have spoken loud and clear. We have managed to pack congress with enough strong Tea Party candidates to at least stop the madness. We've watched a LOT of bad legislation fail miserably because of this.

Let's be perfectly clear here... the Republican party is NOT at fault for the batch of RINO's that have emerged over the last couple decades. In almost every primary, there have been suitably conservative candidates running. However, Democrats have successfully bastardized the primary voting processes in many states such that EVERYONE can vote in the primaries. They did this under the guise of 'fairness', but their chief goal was to water down the primaries and to weed out actual conservatives.

I highly doubt the NYT "went to one church in one town". They likely sent dozens of reporters to hundreds of churches, collecting thousands of quotes. Then they waded through them and hand picked those few quotes that supported their position. The NYT is famous for this special brand of "reporting". If none of those churches had supported their position, they'd have quoted someone out of context... OR... simply falsified some quotes from "un-named sources". Any time liberals quote "un-named sources", it means they're making up whoppers to back an otherwise unsupportable position.

According to leftist, moonbat politicians....... - We must NEVER judge Muslims based on the acts of a few "crazies”. At least 90% of all Muslims are perfectly peaceful, well-mannered people. Besides, their activities and views are guaranteed under the First Amendment. - We must ALWAYS judge gun owners based on the acts of a few "crazies". The 0.00001% of gun owners who are violent, are perfect justification for knee-jerk legislation to ban their activities. There’s no way that their activities and views should be protected under the Second Amendment.

...and create socialism. They get to decide who 'gives' and who 'gets', and they accomplish this by force. Over a hundred million people have been murdered in the name of Socialism over the last hundred years. Socialism DOES deliver on some promises. It makes everyone financially equal... by making everyone equally poor (except the ruling elite). It turns huddled masses into social counterparts... all equally powerless against the ruling party.

Communism is an empty promise used to lure dimwitted people, but socialism is ALWAYS the result. Communism is everyone being equal in all things, everyone being paid the same, everyone working towards the same goals and sharing everything equally. It SOUNDS nice... especially if you have nothing to 'share'. On a side note, the only time communism has ever operated successfully is in beehives and ant colonies. The 'share everything' part does NOT sound very good to those who've worked hard all their life and are suddenly expected to give up possessions and 'share' with those who didn't work hard. The 'everyone is equal' part doesn't sound very nice to the 'ruling elite'. The ruling elite always hijack this system and create...