Will Another “Obama Lite” Replace Boehner? That’s the Game Plan

by Al Benson Jr.

From the Gun Owners of America, http://www.gunowners.org  I received an alert dealing with the resignation of Speaker of the House John Boehner. It said, in part, “Realizing he did not have the votes to remain in power, at the end of October John Boehner will resign as Speaker of the House of Representatives, and from Congress entirely,..But our fight has just begun…Sadly, the gears are already in motion to replace Boehner with another compromiser.” Does that really surprise anyone?

Back in 2014 on http://www.wnd.com Joseph Farah did an article in which he stated: “It’s not important that the House Speaker be perfect. He or she just needs to be faithful to the people who placed them all in office and in power.Otherwise our two-party system is a joke. Right now it’s worse than a joke. It’s a lie.” If the truth be known, Mr. Farah, it’s been a lie for a long, long time–and the joke is on the voters who think differently.

Farah noted that Boehner was an “Obama collaborator, an appeaser, a co-dependent. Maybe he’s being blackmailed…Maybe he’s just afraid to take on Obama.” I think Boehner is definitely an Obama collaborator, that he really shares the same vision for the country that Obama shares (socialism) but he can’t, as a Republican, come right out and say that and so he cloaks it with what he does (or doesn’t do) in Congress under the Republican label. He’s “Obama-Lite.” Socialism with a “conservative” twinge!

According to another article on http://www.gatewaypundit.com  talk show host and author Mark Levin is warning Republicans in Washington: Don’t replace outgoing House Speaker Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) with Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA). The talk show host noted that Republicans need to learn a lesson and not repeat the same mistake they made after Eric Cantor’s “fall from power–namely that Republicans must replace Boehner with a ‘principled conservative’.” That’s solid advice, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. The Republican Establishment in Washington has no interest in “principled conservatives”–it is only interested in party hacks who will promote the One World Government line that Obama espouses but who will do it with standard Republican  rhetoric. At the national level there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats. They are both controlled by the same people (Council on Foreign Relations/Trilateral Commission) and they both have an agenda that reflects the worldview of the people that really control them. The only real difference is the verbiage they spew out.

This “conservative” Congress we all voted for in the last election has been a laugh and now that the public is beginning to realize they were taken to the cleaners, the Elites in Washington have to make a few cosmetic changes–just enough to fool the rubes back home into thinking they really want reform and good government, when that’s the last thing they care about..

The real agenda in Washington, with both parties, is to merge this country into a One World socialist system where anything even remotely approaching national sovereignty has been jettisoned–let alone state sovereignty–that subject is totally beyond the pale, hence the ethnic cleansing now going on in the South. It’s all related folks. As the man says “connect the dots.” If you want some background material for all this then go on line and read None Dare Call It Conspiracy  by Gary Allen.

I would urge people to follow the advice of the Gun Owners of America and contact your Congress critters and let them know you want someone who will defend their Second Amendment rights as Speaker of the House. If enough people will do this it might, at least temporarily, help to assure that we don’t get another version of Obama-Lite as a House speaker, which, I get the distinct impression, is the game plan at this point.


Some Good News Among All the Bad

by Al Benson Jr.

This blog spot has been rather quiet for the month of April. I went into the hospital on April 2nd and was there for 21 days, which pretty much shot April. I am home now and receiving therapy and hope to be a bit more vocal this month, Lord willing.

I did not get much news in hospital. What you see on tv hardly qualifies as news. Mostly it is someone’s spin on the news.

However I did hear, while in hospital that all three of Mr. Obama’s gun control bills had been defeated–all three. I was slightly amazed. I knew that the one banning “assault rifles” would probably not make it and even the one limiting magazine capacity was in trouble. However, most informed folks felt these bills would not make it anyway. All they were out there for was to give the anti-gun senators something to vote for so they could appear to be “pro-2nd Amendment.” What Obama really wanted was to get the one mandating background checks and registration passed. That way he’ d have all the names of the gun owners (he hoped). That one didn’t make it either. I’m told it failed by six votes. I can only applaud the 2nd Amendment groups, like Gun Owners of America, who must have done some really good work in this area and made certain senators feel the heat.

However, the pro-2nd Amendment folks cannot rest of their laurels. Mr. Obama and his gun grabbers do not intend to let folks keep their firearms and their scheme to eviscerate the 2nd Amendment is still in place in spite of this temporary setback.

One wonders how this will all play out. Will we have yet another “lone, crazed gunman”  kill more kids in another gun free zone, with the resultant political rhetoric that guns must be banned? I would not be surprised if such occurred. But if that one is getting a bit stale the anti-gunners may be forced to come up with a new tactic.

Stay tuned. You just never know.

Would Obama and Congress Deceive the Public on Gun Control?—You Bet They Would!

By Al Benson Jr.
Larry Pratt, head of Gun Owner’s of America has been watching as Congress has played mind games with the American public for decades. They say one thing and by the time the legislation ends up being voted on it is the exact opposite of what they said it would be and ends up doing more harm than good to patriotic Americans. This is not by accident. It is by intent. They think us rubes back home in flyover country are so stupid we won’t be able to figure out their games. Not all of us are stupid in spite of their efforts to force public schooling down our throats. My wife and I would probably qualify as some of Nancy Pelosi’s “low-level terrorists” as we home schooled our kids. Nowadays that’s enough to earn you the title of “terrorist” by our Marxist government’s standards.

The February 28, 2013 issue of The Gun Owner’s, the newsletter for the Gun Owners of America stated quite plainly stated: “Even still, the most serious involves the threat of gun confiscation—as every background check identifies the purchaser as a gun owner and creates the framework for a registration system…In one debate, the anti-gun spokesperson actually said, ‘I don’t know what you’re talking about in regard to registration’ and insisted that nobody was trying to take away our guns. Really? Do gun grabbers actually think the American gun owners don’t realize the gun confiscation agenda that is afoot?” The newsletter then quotes New York Governor Andrew Cuomo where he said that “Confiscation could be an option.” Then there was Iowa Rep. Dan Muhlbauer who said: “Even if you have them, I think we need to start taking them.” In the face of such comments is anyone still dumb enough to think gun confiscation is not the name of the game? If so please contact me. I have a bridge in Tucson, Arizona I’d love to sell you—bargain rates too!

Mr. Pratt made a prescient prediction. He said that Obama and the Congressional leadership realize they will probably not be able to get enough votes for total gun confiscation and quite possibly not even enough to reduce magazine capacity for most guns, but if they can enact a background check and registration bill they will then have what they need for future confiscation and that’s really what they want. This also gives Congress critters the opportunity to cast a vote against total confiscation—at this point—to make it appear as if they are supposedly “pro-gun” which they feel will play well with the “great unwashed” back home while they then vote for the more “reasonable’ measure of background checks and registration. This gives them what they really want—a list of all the gun owners in the country so that when confiscation time rolls around—and it will roll around—they will know who has which guns.

I had read Mr. Pratt’s comments and agreed with them when, lo and behold, an article appeared on http://www.huffingtonpost.com  that bore out his contention. It was posted on 3/19. The headline for the article read “Obama’s Gun Reform Package Loses One Major Provision, Another In Danger.” If you didn’t know better you would almost be tempted to think that most of the steam had been taken out of Obama’s gun confiscation scheme—and that’s what you are supposed to think! As you read the article, if you are not aware of how the prostitute press works, you will envision poor old Harry Reid from Nevada, struggling emotionally because he doesn’t have the votes to bring Feinstein’s gun confiscation bill to a successful vote and so he will probably be forced to jettison most of it so he can at least get “something” passed in the way of gun control, to protect “the children” naturally. About three quarters of the way through the article they throw in the fish hook you are supposed to swallow. It says “Indeed, the fate of that proposal will now determine whether the president’s attempt to reform gun laws will be deemed successful. It will certainly be easier to pass universal background checks than an assault weapons ban or a limit on the size of magazines, but the measure’s success is far from guaranteed.” So there is what they are going for. They know that at this point they can’t get confiscation so they will be willing to settle for a list of all gun owners as mandated by law. After all, isn’t that the “reasonable” approach? That’s what some of your RINO congressmen will try to peddle to the folks back home—“well I voted against confiscation, but I felt it was only reasonable to vote for background checks and gun registration. Don’t you think it is?” No I don’t! Quite frankly it’s none of the federal government’s business who’s got what. They just want you to think it is—until they come for your guns because your name is on the registration list. Once they have your guns they couldn’t care less what you think. They will have the guns and you won’t and that’s what it is really all about.

Feinstein also noted that she “had been promised two votes—one an assault weapons ban, including a ban on high capacity magazines and another on just the magazine ban. Feinstein said it was her understanding that both of these votes would be on amendments rather than on any gun control package introduced by the Senate.” Do you grasp what that means? It means that if they can’t get her bill passed on its own merits they will break it up and add some parts of it as amendments to other bills they need to get passed that might have very little to do with guns, but if you pass these other bills you will also be passing the gun control amendments that have now become part of them. So we have to let our Senators know we are opposed to their voting on any bill or amendment that even contains the word “gun” in it.

Larry Pratt was right on the money with how they are going to try to sneak this background checks and registration through—on a bill if they can but on various amendments if they have to do it that way.

Folks, unless we let our Senators know we are onto this little game and that we will work to unseat them if they decide to play it they will vote for gun registration and background checks as the supposed “reasonable” alternative to outright confiscation—for now. We have to really watch those people in the Senate. Some of them could give lessons to snake oil salesmen!