Thoughts on the most recent effort to slaughter President Trump. There will be others.

Thoughts on the most recent effort to slaughter President Trump.

At the outset, let me address the elephant in the room.

Considering the armament this scumbag was carrying, his intent wasn't just to murder the president: it was to kill him and as many others as possible, considering most of the political leadership of the United States was sitting in close proximity... Trump of course, Vance, Johnson, et al, were bunched together and, if given the opportunity and knowledge of trained use, easy targets, except for the Secret Service getting in the way.

Yes, the main target was likely the president. But it was what could best be described as a "target rich environment" for any leftist, murdering opportunist.

Ever since the Obama debacle of a race-based, DEI presidency, I have postulated the left, writ large, operates entirely on hatred.

Not what’s best for the people. Not what’s best for the country. Not on ways to unite us, but instead on just the opposite: ways to divide us.

The reality is clear: leftists hate President Trump enough to want him and his entire family, dead.

The equation of left=violence is an easy one to prove.

Just another hate-filled, programmed, fringe-left teacher.

Leftist scum on the internet will always make the claim that he Omar-ed it when the attempt fails, even though social media is rife with their fellow terrorists giddy at the thought of spilling the president's blood.

They're just pissed that he wasn't successful.

Just another hate-filled, programmed, fringe-left teacher.

Need any other argument to get your kids out of public school shitholes that hire nut jobs like this clown?

Of course, it's despicable and hypocritical.

Can you imagine their response if, God Forbid, their pole dancing drunk won the election and these attempts had happened to her?

They'd be out on the street right now, demanding the blood of anyone to the right of Mao.

You can't seriously expect introspection on the part of hate-driven scum, can you?

And they will keep doing it.

Because they want is the president's blood.

That's what happens when your entire politics are based on hatred. 

The left has been taught to hate. Programmed to hate. And when these attempts have failed, they uniformly express disappointment, their few pro forma denials to the contrary notwithstanding… when they even bother to go through THAT motion…

Locally, the riots, murders, theft, vandalism, arson, assaults the complete disregard for enforcing our laws have been recorded, videoed and institutionalized.

Thousands of miles of video of riots where cities were under siege, literally for months, while leftist leaders applauded, blood of victims was spilled, businesses burned to the ground (you remember… the “mostly peaceful” riots a few years ago?) or looted out of existence, all with either the outright applause of the left or the orchestral leadership of leftist politicians who demand that instead of enforcing the laws of their locality, state or nation they’ve sworn to uphold, every effort must be made to ignore, resist and delegitimize those laws as excuses to not only ignore them, but to actively obstruct their enforcement.

Every so-called “sanctuary” city, county or state is a case in point.

These entities actively obstruct justice, or at least make the attempt to do so. They make, for example, enforcement of immigration law as difficult as they possibly can to protect their illegal alien voter base.

And all of these facts are merely symptoms of the greater disease: leftist hatred.

Leftists, by and large, make no bones about their hatred of Trump, his family, his supporters and, on an even larger scale, this country.

They slavishly support terrorists, they hate Jews in ways that Himmler would be genuinely proud of, almost as much as they hate Trump.

And they have worked unceasingly to institutionalize their hatred by passing laws they KNOW they cannot enforce merely to virtue-signal to their political base that even though politically irrelevant, they’re at least TRYING to do SOMETHING to stop “Orange Man Bad.” (State/local laws banning law enforcement (but not rioters or antifa scum) from wearing masks come to mind)

They label everyone wise enough to oppose them. And everyone opposing them is a nazi, fascist, ignorant, uneducated, pedophile (which is ironic considering Joe Biden repeatedly molested his own daughter) stupid, etc and those are of the more polite terminologies they use.

Simultaneously, they routinely applaud the multiple efforts made to slaughter the president and express dismay, not at the efforts to kill him but instead, at the failures to get it accomplished.

Social media is rife with these dimmer bulbs demanding he be put to death. And some have branched off into the fantasies as to how that can/should be done.

But these same hate-filled psychopaths just elected a state attorney general in Virginia, Jay Jones, who expressed his fantasies concerning HIS desire to slaughter the then Speaker of the Virginia House, Todd Gilbert and his family, specifically including his children.

It's psychotic, to be sure. Instead of condemning this criminal, they elected him.

Instead of replacing him with someone sane, instead of holding this fringe-left nutjob accountable, they lionized him and endorsed him.

Then they elected him.

Imagine, if you will, what the left’s reaction to a GOP candidate for attorney general  would be if such a candidate had expressed those thoughts and desires about a democrat opponent and their family.

We’d never hear the end of it.

From Wiki:

“In October 2025, Jones came under fire for an August 2022 text message conversation with his former Republican delegate colleague Carrie Coyner, in which Jones made "threatening messages" and used "graphic and violent language" against the then–state house speaker Todd Gilbert and his family.[33][34] Jones, who was not in the legislature at the time, stated that if he had two bullets and could shoot Gilbert, Adolf Hitler, or Pol Pot, Gilbert "gets two bullets to the head".[35][36] Jones acknowledged that he had talked about hoping Gilbert's children would die because "Only when people feel pain personally do they move on policy", before describing Gilbert and his wife as "evil" and "breeding little fascists".[37][38][39]

The impetus for Jones's texts to Coyner was his anger at the eulogies Republican legislators had for former delegate Joseph P. Johnson, a moderate Democrat, who had recently died, with Jones disparaging "Johnson's political centrism".[40][41] Jones said of Republican legislators who gave tributes about Johnson that "If those guys die before me I will go to their funerals to piss on their graves" and said that it will "Send them out awash in something".[42][41][43]

After the story broke, Coyner said in an interview that Jones made charged comments during a phone conversation on qualified immunity in 2020.[48][49][50] Jones allegedly said "if a few police officers died, then maybe they would stop killing people".[49] Jones denied making the comment.[49]"

___________________________________________________________

This is who the rabid left supports and puts into office.

During the DOGE efforts in the early part of Trump’s most recent term in office, there was a “thundering silence” on the part of democrats (the same tribe who used to scream “silence is complicity” at us) as they applauded the burning and vandalism of Teslas and their dealerships… even though the people who own them are mostly their fellow fringe-leftists… and even though Elon made even MORE money off their criminal efforts through repairing or replacing those cars.

And who can forget their hero Kamala Harris donating to the Minneapolis Rioter fund to get criminals out of jail?

Kamala Harris' support for bail fund that freed violent criminals shows how 'tough on crime' she really is

These are symptoms of the democrat disease. Hatred is their motivation. Violence is how they express it. And they’re more rabid in their demands for Trump’s blood than even the muslim government of Iran.

All of which reminds me that it’s time to go buy more ammo.

There will be more attempts. These scum want to play fringe-left hero because they believe that ending Mr. Trump’s life, even at the risk of their own, is the right thing to do and they will eternally be heroes of their fellow terrorists,

Democrats thrive on hatred. They’re programmed to do so; They’re REWARDED for doing so. And when you have a political wing giddy of their comparisons of Trump to Hitler, nazism and fascists, it’s no wonder deranged leftist scum are and will do their best to destroy him, not only politically?

But physically.

Gee.... the Columbian is going to blow a gasket over this one: US Senate Backs Allowing Guns In National Parks

.
Last December, the Columbian blew a gasket over allowing guns into parks... as if they were some sort of zone where criminals (The odd murderer/robber aside) simply don't tread, thus there is no conceivable need for non-criminals to be allowed their Second Amendment rights inside the borders of this federal property.

"... Jeers: To the Bush administration for overturning a 25-year-old rule and allowing people with concealed-weapon permits to carry loaded guns into national parks and wildlife refuges. The Columbian opposed this effort back in May, and, more compellingly, the change was opposed earlier by the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees. Yet this week the Interior Department announced that the new provision will take effect in January if the state in question allows concealed weapons.

"According to The Seattle Times, the change will have limited impact in Washington state. Even though the state has a concealed weapons program, the Times reported, “many visitors won’t be able to pack a gun because Washington only recognizes concealed-weapons permits from a handful of states with requirements as stringent. That’s just eight states, the closest of which is Utah.”

"So, in addition to loaded guns being taken into previously pastoral parks and crowded campgrounds, there now is this huge new bureaucratic and enforcement nightmare. We hope the next administration reverts to the old rule."

The idiocy of such a position is obvious to someone not blinded by a bizarre, leftist, anti-gun agenda. And the verbiage?

"So, in addition to loaded guns being taken into previously pastoral parks and crowded campgrounds"

As if the view is somehow diminished by my decision to carry a concealed .45 Colt Combat Commander?

As I stated before: Idiots.

As I had written:

"In situations like these, I tend to think of those writing these editorials in terms of "what would THEY want if their life was on the line?"

If these writers were at risk in a classroom. If there was a Columbine-style shooting going on in a school where they happened to be; would they pissed that I was carrying a .357 magnum? Would they be so outraged when I pulled my weapon and ended the threat?

It's not hard to imagine these sanctimonious hypocrites in a Virginia Tech classroom, whimpering on the floor in little liberal, whinny puddles, howling with outrage that some student or faculty member; or even worse, say, a college-student military-veteran had actually come to class with a firearm and was ready to use it to SAVE THEIR INCREASINGLY WORTHLESS LIVES had actually done so.

And so now what happens?

A completely-controlled-by-democrats Senate now BACKS allowing guns in Federal Parks AND Wildlife Refuges.

How much that must suck for the local fishwrapper.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., sponsored the measure, which he said would protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. The amendment allows firearms in parks and wildlife refuges, as long as they are allowed by federal, state and local law.

"If an American citizen has a right to carry a firearm in their state, it makes no sense to treat them like a criminal if they pass through a national park while in possession of a firearm," Coburn said.

Twenty-seven Democrats joined 39 Republicans and one independent in supporting the amendment, which was attached to a bill imposing restrictions on credit card companies. The amendment was approved 67-29.

This is OVERWHELMING support for a position this newspaper abhors. I guess someone is clueless... and I've got to wonder who.

Will this newspaper re-evaluate their position to something that actualy relates to common sense?

Nahhhh.

Senate Backs Allowing Guns In National Parks
Senate Backs Amendment To Allow Loaded Guns In National Parks
WASHINGTON, May. 12, 2009
E-Mail Story
Print Story
Sphere

(AP) The Senate on Tuesday backed an amendment that would allow people to carry loaded guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.

.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., sponsored the measure, which he said would protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. The amendment allows firearms in parks and wildlife refuges, as long as they are allowed by federal, state and local law.

.

"If an American citizen has a right to carry a firearm in their state, it makes no sense to treat them like a criminal if they pass through a national park while in possession of a firearm," Coburn said.

.

Twenty-seven Democrats joined 39 Republicans and one independent in supporting the amendment, which was attached to a bill imposing restrictions on credit card companies. The amendment was approved 67-29.

.

Groups supporting gun control, park rangers and retirees opposed the amendment, which they said went further than a Bush administration policy that briefly allowed loaded handguns in national parks and refuges.

.

A federal judge blocked the policy in March, two months after it went into effect in the waning days of President George W. Bush's term. The Obama administration has said it will not appeal the court ruling.

.

More:

The Columbian blows it: Cheers & Jeers Dec. 13 - feds faulted for allowing guns into parks

'
Like the Pravda-Izvestia it's modeled after, the Columbian finds itself inherently incapable of viewing any issue through anything but a far left prism, where all is sweetness and light, and no one is bad (Well, except, unless, they're Republicans. Then they're evil incarnate.)

Last Saturday, President Bush showed a little intelligence (an asset that seems to have been strangely absent, most recently in his bizarre handling of our economic woes) by rightfully overturning a rather moronic law/rule that forbids the carrying of a concealed weapon in a national park or wildlife refuge.

Unfortunately, there are those leftists out there that seem to share a view typically ignored by our more criminal element. They seem to believe that our parks and refuges should join with the many other idiotic places that receive special dispensation by being exempt from the Second Amendment. And they're upset, perhaps because they envision some sort of bloodbath, where people who have gone to the time, trouble and expense to secure a concealed weapons permit (CWP) will just start screaming "YAHOOOOO!" while they pull their weapon and pick off both the local wildlife and others visiting these places.

Idiots.

I am all about arming the non-criminals in our society. There are a few instances that come to mind where, among other places, an armed teacher or two in a high school could have saved lives. Or an armed student or professor could have saved lives. Or an armed hiker in a federal park or wildlife refuge could have at least saved their own life.

In situations like these, I tend to think of those writing these editorials in terms of "what would THEY want if their life was on the line?"

If these writers were at risk in a classroom. If there was a Columbine-style shooting going on in a school where they happened to be; would they pissed that I was carrying a .357 magnum? Would they be so outraged when I pulled my weapon and ended the threat?

It's not hard to imagine these sanctimonious hypocrites in a Virginia Tech classroom, whimpering on the floor in little liberal, whinny puddles, howling with outrage that some student or faculty member; or even worse, say, a college-student military-veteran had actually come to class with a firearm and was ready to use it to SAVE THEIR INCREASINGLY WORTHLESS LIVES had actually done so.

The editorials they'd write....

"It's all well and good that Joe Sixpack put his ass on the line to save us all by shooting a crazed, maniacal intruder who had killed 12 others... BUT HOW DARE HE BRING A FIREARM ONTO SCHOOL PROPERTY!!!!!"

One wonders. What if only one of those students had come to only one of those classrooms armed? What if it was one of these leftists moron's kids that might be saved?

Would they stick to their idiotic and misguided "principles" (and I use the term advisedly) and believe that such a scenario where an armed student had dropped that waste of skin in his tracks was somehow "wrong," EVEN IF IT SAVED THEIR OWN CHILD?

Of course they would.

The moronic positions by this and many other leftist rags goes directly to their inability to grasp reality, and stands as yet another major reason why print media is so rightfully circling the drain.

There is nothing sacred about the property in question. To a criminal, there's nothing magical about a school, a park or a wildlife refuge.

The idea that those of us going to those places are absolutely secure; are absolutely without reason to be vigilant about both our personal safety and that of our families is absurdity to the level of insanity. The idea that we, as people, should be as vulnerable to those of the criminal persuasion as Bambi is only an academic exercise to the eggheads behind such pronouncements.

Because if ANY of these morons found themselves or their children on the receiving end of such criminality, and I just happened along at the right time or was otherwise prepared to defend them, they would literally BEG me to do so.

And this big, heaping pile of steaming hypocrisy goes to the heart of why I don't spend a dime on their increasingly irrelevant newspaper.

I always believed that the Second Amendment even applied to our parks and refuges. I'm pretty sure that any criminals carrying weapons into our "parks and refuges" feel that way. Imagine... no concern about the criminals.... just concern about those of us following the law, getting criminal background checks, and getting concealed weapon permits. And we all know that CWP holders are RAMPANT criminals. CWP holders rape, kill, pillage and burn everywhere we go!

"Rights" are not "suggestions." I believe this particular "jeer" represents another in the long and distinguished list of reasons why this newspaper is going bankrupt: an inability to apply the law evenly and equally combined with an inability to grasp reality.

Editorials
Email Print

Cheers & Jeers Dec. 13
Local scientist applauded for big grant; feds faulted for allowing guns into parks

Saturday, December 13 1:00 a.m.

"... Jeers: To the Bush administration for overturning a 25-year-old rule and allowing people with concealed-weapon permits to carry loaded guns into national parks and wildlife refuges. The Columbian opposed this effort back in May, and, more compellingly, the change was opposed earlier by the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees. Yet this week the Interior Department announced that the new provision will take effect in January if the state in question allows concealed weapons.

"According to The Seattle Times, the change will have limited impact in Washington state. Even though the state has a concealed weapons program, the Times reported, “many visitors won’t be able to pack a gun because Washington only recognizes concealed-weapons permits from a handful of states with requirements as stringent. That’s just eight states, the closest of which is Utah.”

"So, in addition to loaded guns being taken into previously pastoral parks and crowded campgrounds, there now is this huge new bureaucratic and enforcement nightmare. We hope the next administration reverts to the old rule."

.