Baltimore, Gun Control, and the Moral Bankruptcy of Liberalism

What does it mean to be a liberal?

It means to be intellectually dyslexic and morally bankrupt.

Here is the view I have from where I sit just outside of Baltimore.

To begin with, we have the coalescence of an unprecedented number of national factors that threaten the security of American citizens.

There are record levels of immigration from the Middle East against the consent of the governed. Now there are countless numbers of homegrown and immigrant Islamic terrorists in our midst similar to the family of Saeed Farook, whose family members harbored anti-American sentiments.

There are almost a million illegal aliens that have been ordered deported, however they remain at large. In addition, there are 375,000 known criminal aliens at large who have been released into our cities.

The Department of Justice has embarked on a program to release 46,000 felons, including many violent drug dealers or those who have committed gun crimes. Additionally, Republicans and Democrats in Congress are working on legislation to retroactively release felons who have committed violent crimes with firearms.

Piled on to those disquieting national realities, anyone living in the Baltimore area has to contend with record high crime and homicides.

Naturally, any law abiding citizen of Maryland would want to exercise his or her Second Amendment right to protect himself and his family given the circumstances. But guess what?

Not only is concealed carry prohibited in Maryland (except for rare exceptions), as of October 1, 2013, but anyone desiring to even purchase or rent a handgun must obtain a Handgun Qualification License (HQL). This entails paying several hundred dollars for four hours of instruction, getting fingerprinted and monitored like a criminal by the state police. Only after that process does one enjoy the privilege of waiting potentially weeks to hear back from the police to even embark on purchasing a firearm for home defense.

While police officers are on trial for allegedly not putting a seat belt on a violent and belligerent drug dealer, a policy that was enacted only weeks before the alleged infraction, the city of Baltimore is burning. Thanks to the “space to destroy” that was afforded to the criminals, shootings have spiked 80% since last year. Baltimore is second only to St. Louis in the rate of homicides per capita for 2015. Robberies have increased sharply as well.

Consequently, after passing the most draconian gun laws in the nation, “shootings” in Baltimore have increased beyond belief and parts of the city look like Gaza. And yet liberals have the impertinence to suggest that law abiding gun owners are the problem and that we need stricter gun laws?

Now that liberals have made it so tedious for law abiding citizens to purchase a simple handgun and only violent criminals can get their hands on a firearm, Baltimore is experiencing the most homicides per capita since records were kept.

Law abiding residents of the Baltimore metropolitan area are staring down the barrel of the gun of mob rule that is expected to break out when the cops are inevitably exonerated – either in the trial court or upon appeal to the circuit court. And so many of them will be unable to properly defend their bodies while walking the streets and even in their homes.

If your blood is not already boiling, consider the following: earlier this year the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that illegal aliens, even those about to be deported, have standing to sue in federal court for gun rights. Also consider that, according to the courts, states have the power to pass laws prohibiting concealed carry and even limiting gun ownership – unalienable and foundational rights of our Constitution – yet those same states lack the power to pass marriage laws, even though marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution and is therefore left up to the states.

The perverted sense of justice and governance emanating from all levels of both our government and political class, coupled with the dyslexic debauchery endemic in our court system represents a fundamental threat to our democracy. Over a decade ago, conservative jurist Robert Bork warned that we were “Slouching Towards Gomorrah.”

Well, I’m here to tell you that we are no longer slouching towards Gomorrah. We are in it. (For more from the author of “Baltimore, Gun Control, and the Moral Bankruptcy of Liberalism” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Security Committee Chair: Hillary, Obama to Blame for ISIS

The Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, claiming that the U.S. faces its highest security threat since 9/11, on Wednesday put the blame for it and the rise of the Islamic State squarely on President Obama and his former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton.

“I would say that she and the president are responsible for ISIS rearing its ugly head. They have not effectively dealt with it and that’s going to be a huge campaign issue,” said Rep. Michael McCaul.

The Texas lawmaker said that Clinton failed early in her term as the nation’s top diplomat to handle the Iraq war and stem the resulting terrorism. He said that her policies “imploded Iraq and creates ISIS.” He spoke to reporters at a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor.

And he said that the eventual Republican presidential nominee will use that to defeat Clinton. (Read more from “Security Committee Chair: Hillary, Obama to Blame for ISIS” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

C.J. Pearson Endorses Bernie Sanders

C.J. Pearson, the 13-year-old black conservative who became a viral sensation earlier this year after denouncing President Obama on YouTube, has changed his mind about who he’s supporting this presidential election season.

C.J., the former chairman of Teens for Ted Cruz who recently renounced the conservative movement, said Wednesday that he is now endorsing Democratic candidate Sen. Bernard Sanders, CNN reported.

“This election will make a pivotal difference in the future of our nation. If it takes changing your mind to make the right choice as to who should lead our country, I am willing to do it. Screw the optics,” he said. “People are struggling in America. We need the right man in the White House. And in my opinion, that man is Senator Bernie Sanders.”

C.J. said he left the conservative movement due to its “lack of concern over racial discrimination in this country.” (Read more from “C.J. Pearson Endorses Bernie Sanders” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The White House Just Made a Ridiculous Claim of What Will Happen to Trump with His Muslim Ban

By Maya Rhodan. Donald Trump’s statement that he would ban Muslims from entering the U.S. “disqualifies him from serving as president,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said of the Republican candidate during a press briefing on Tuesday.

“What Mr. Trump said is deeply offensive,” Earnest said. “It’s morally reprehensible. It runs counter to the U.S. Constitution” and threatens national security, he added.

Earnest also slammed Trump’s campaign as a “carnival barker routine” that was rooted “in the dustbin of history.” Earnest said the “question now is about the rest of the Republican party and whether they’re going to be dragged into the dustbin of history with him.” He called on Republicans to condemn a Trump presidency. (Read more from “The White House Just Made a Ridiculous Claim of What Will Happen to Trump with His Muslim Ban” HERE)

___________________________________

Despite Outcry, Muslim Ban Unlikely to Spell Quick Fall for Trump

By Tribune News Service. Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump’s proposal to bar Muslims from entering the U.S. won’t destroy his candidacy; but it would severely threaten the party’s chance at the White House in 2016 if he’s the nominee, GOP strategists and pundits said.

Trump in a statement on Monday called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the U.S. until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on,” days after a mass shooting in California that authorities say was an act of terrorism by a radicalized Muslim couple.

His plan ignited a firestorm among rival Republicans, Democrats and party chairmen in the three states that will hold the first nomination votes next year. But GOP voters’ antipathy toward Islam and frustration with President Barack Obama, plus competitors’ inability to outmuscle Trump so far, suggest this won’t be the uproar that finally ends his bid and clears the way for a stronger nominee to face Hillary Clinton, the likely Democratic standard-bearer.

“Hate Donald Trump all you want, be offended by his proposal all you want, but it is really brilliant politics for Trump right now in the Republican primary and the reactions from the other candidates prove it,” wrote conservative radio host Erick Erickson. Candidates “attacking Trump on his immigration proposals now attacking him on this have done themselves no favors within the primary process” by aligning themselves with Obama on both issues in voters’ eyes.

Trump’s critics have become all too familiar with the pattern: The New York billionaire says something they consider offensive, sexist or racist; prognosticators forecast his downfall; but he stays strong or even rises in GOP polls. The pattern held when Trump trashed migrants from Mexico, attacked Sen. John McCain’s war record and insulted Fox News host Megyn Kelly. (Read more from “Despite Outcry, Muslim Ban Unlikely to Spell Quick Fall for Trump” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Carter Banned Iranians from Coming to US During Hostage Crisis

During the Iranian hostage crisis, Carter issued a number of orders to put pressure on Iran. Among these, Iranians were banned from entering the United States unless they oppose the Shiite Islamist regime or had a medical emergency.

Here’s Jimmy Carter saying it back in 1980.

Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly . . .

In November 1979, the Attorney General had given all Iranian students one month to report to the local immigration office. Around 7,000 were found in violation of their visas. Around 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the US . . .

Now unlike Muslims, Iranians were not necessarily supportive of Islamic terrorism. Many were and are opponents of it. Khomeini didn’t represent Iran as a country, but his Islamist allies. So Trump’s proposal is far more legitimate than Carter’s action. Carter targeted people by nationality. Trump’s proposal does so by ideology. (Read more from “Carter Banned Iranians from Coming to US During Hostage Crisis” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Fox Suspends Retired Army Officer for ‘Profane’ Response to Obama Speech

Two Fox News contributors were suspended Monday for using inappropriate language about President Barack Obama while discussing his speech on terrorism the night before in two separate episodes.

The analysts, former U.S. Army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters and actress Stacey Dash, were each ordered off the air for two weeks . . .

“This guy is such a total p—-, it’s stunning,” Peters said. After he spoke some more, Varney said that while he could tell Peters was “super angry,” he shouldn’t use such language. (Read more from “Fox Suspends Retired Army Officer for Profane Response to Obama Speech” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Donald Trump Calls for Barring Muslims from Entering U.S.

Donald J. Trump called on Monday for the United States to bar all Muslims from entering the country until the nation’s leaders can “figure out what is going on” after the terrorist attacks in San Bernardino, Calif., an extraordinary escalation of rhetoric aimed at voters’ fears about members of the Islamic faith.

A prohibition of Muslims – an unprecedented proposal by a leading American presidential candidate, and an idea more typically associated with hate groups – reflects a progression of mistrust that is rooted in ideology as much as politics.

Mr. Trump, who in September declared “I love the Muslims,” turned sharply against them after the Paris terrorist attacks, calling for a database to track Muslims in America and repeating discredited rumors that thousands of Muslims celebrated in New Jersey on 9/11. His poll numbers rose largely as a result, until a setback in Iowa on Monday morning. Hours later Mr. Trump called for the ban, fitting his pattern of making stunning comments when his lead in the Republican presidential field appears in jeopardy.

Saying that “hatred” among many Muslims for Americans is “beyond comprehension,” Mr. Trump said in a statement that the United States needed to confront “where this hatred comes from and why.”

“Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life,” Mr. Trump said. (Read more from “Donald Trump Calls for Barring Muslims from Entering U.S.” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Now Wants Guns from These 47,000 People

If the federal government doesn’t want the 47,000 people on its No-Fly List to board airplanes, those individuals should be banned from ever owning guns, President Obama argued in his Sunday address from the Oval Office – but if his proposal ever becomes law, America could see U.S. Marines, congressmen, journalists and even federal air marshals mistakenly stripped of their firearms.

“To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a No-Fly List is able to buy a gun,” Obama said Dec. 6. “What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to but a semi-automatic weapon? This is a matter of national security.”

But while San Bernardino, California, terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook managed to fly to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia under the radar of federal authorities in 2014, thousands of innocent people have been mistakenly linked to U.S. terror watchlists. Some experts and critics contend the federal list process contains many errors and relies on an overly broad standard of reasonable suspicion . . .

Under Obama’s standard, even the late-Sen. Ted Kennedy, an ardent advocate of gun control while he served in Congress, would be blocked from purchasing a firearm.

In March 2004, Kennedy was stopped three times at airports in Washington, D.C., and Boston. Airline agents told the senator he couldn’t purchase a ticket because his name was on a list, according to USA Today. (Read more from “Obama Now Wants Guns from These 47,000 People” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

San Bernardino Shooter’s Mother Active in US Branch of Pro-Caliphate Islamic Group

Rafia Farook, the mother of San Bernardino terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook, is an active member of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), a Muslim organization that promotes the establishment of a caliphate and has ties to a radical Pakistani political group called Jamaat-e-Islami.

Farook’s affiliation with ICNA was revealed on Friday when MSNBC and other new outlets scoured the Farooks’ apartment in Redlands, Cal. An MSNBC reporter found a certificate of appreciation presented to Safia Farook last summer by ICNA’s sisters’ wing.

Malik reportedly posted a comment to Facebook during the attack stating her allegiance to ISIS. Farook is also believed to have communicated with known terrorists based overseas.

Though ICNA has not been named as a target in the ongoing investigation into Wednesday’s attack, the group has been associated with many others who have engaged in terrorism or plotted to do so.

Al-Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki has spoken at the group’s events. He spoke at an ICNA event in Baltimore in 2002, though the group has said that al-Awlaki was not radicalized at that time. Al-Awlaki exchanged emails with Nidal Hasan, the Army major who killed 13 people in a terrorist attack at Fort Hood in Nov. 2009. Al-Awlaki was killed by a U.S. drone strike in 2011 in Yemen. (Read more from “San Bernardino Shooter’s Mother Active in US Branch of Pro-Caliphate Islamic Group” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Assault Weapon Ban

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a challenge by gun rights activists to a Chicago suburb’s ordinance banning assault weapons and large-capacity magazines, handing a victory to gun control advocates amid a fierce debate over the nation’s firearms laws.

The 2013 ordinance passed by the city of Highland Park, Illinois will remain in place. By opting not to hear an appeal of a lower-court ruling that upheld the measure, the justices declined to take up what would have been a high-profile gun rights case following a succession of mass shootings including the one last week in San Bernardino, California.

The Highland Park measure bans various semi-automatic weapons, including well-known guns such as the AR-15 and AK-47, in addition to magazines holding more than 10 rounds of bullets.

Two conservatives on the nine-member court, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, said the justices should have taken the case.

Thomas wrote a six-page dissent in which he said that despite recent pro-gun rights rulings by the conservative-leaning high court, several lower courts “have upheld categorical bans on firearms that millions of Americans commonly own for lawful purposes.” (Read more from “Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Assault Weapon Ban” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.