A Few History Lessons For The Media  by Tom Reynolds

The media’s hysterical reaction to Donald Trump challenging the election highlights their lack of knowledge – or willful ignorance – of law and history.  A few “blasts from the past”, some of which you may remember.

Al Gore took more than five weeks to acknowledge defeat in the 2000 election to George W. Bush.  Gore called for selective recounts in heavily Democratic Florida counties while attempting to block the inclusion of military absentee ballots. It took more than a month of legal battles, recounts, and a Supreme Court decision to bring Gore to a concession.

The Gore v Bush election was decided by just 537 votes in Florida.  Democrats still say, to this day, that it was stolen.  But - after the dust settled – a group of newspapers (including the reliably Democratic NY Times) did their own count and…Bush won, again.

Some in the current media have praised Gore’s concession speech as a model for what Trump should immediately do, ignoring that it took 5 weeks for Gore to concede.

The 1960 race between John Kennedy and Richard Nixon was filled with accusations that Democratic political machines—in Chicago, in particular—manufactured votes for Kennedy.  (Chicago…corrupt…say it aint so.)  Nixon considered challenging the election results in Illinois and a number of other states, but ultimately decided to concede for the sake of the country and his political career.

The 1876 election between Democrat Samuel Tilden and Republican Rutherford B. Hayes had a turnout of 82% of eligible voters.  Ballot stuffing may have had something to do with the high turnout.  (That couldn’t happen today…could it?) 

Tilden won the popular vote but neither candidate won enough electoral votes; 20 disputed electoral votes from four states would decide the majority. Each party reported its candidate had won the four states and one elector was replaced after being declared illegal for being an "elected or appointed official".  An informal deal was struck to resolve the dispute.  The Compromise of 1877 awarded all 20 electoral votes to the Republican, Hayes, and he became President by 1 vote.  Since political deals required a quid-pro-quo for the Democrats, the Republicans agreed to withdraw federal troops from the South, ending Reconstruction. The effect of the Compromise was to cede power in the Southern states to the Democrats, who proceeded to disenfranchise black voters.

In the four way race in 1824 between Andrew Jackson, John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay and William Crawford, no candidate won a majority of the electoral vote.  Andrew Jackson won the most popular and electoral votes but not a majority, so the election went to the House of Representatives.  On February 9, 1825, two months after the election, the House elected John Quincy Adams as President. 

The Constitution eliminated House Speaker Henry Clay from being considered, after he finished fourth in the voting, and he threw his support to Adams.  After Adams won, Clay was nominated to be the Secretary of State.  At that time, the Secretary of State was considered the stepping stone to the Presidency.  Jackson and his supporters called “foul” on this but were unable to do anything.

And talk about not conceding the election…

Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, insisted that Trump colluded with Russians to steal the 2016 election, a story that most major media outlets ran with for years without providing any hard evidence.  When the Mueller report blew holes in that effort, they then impeached the President over a phone call.

Before the recent election, Hillary Clinton’s advice to Joe Biden was to not concede the election.

Georgia state Representative, Democrat Stacey Abrams, lost the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election to Gov. Brian Kemp, a Republican, by almost 55,000 votes.  Abrams has never conceded defeat. She is often asked by left wing media to give her opinion on the current election controversy.

Both Nixon and Jackson did not – or were not able to – contest the election and both were eventually elected President.  Clay was never able to convert the Secretary of State position into the Presidency.  Gore, Tilden and Clinton disappeared from presidential politics.  Abrams is still hanging around as a TV commentator, pretending to be a force in Democrat politics.  Gore and Clinton were able to become multi-millionaires.

The USA has been here before and probably will be again.  Fraud has happened before and probably will happen again, since at least one party benefits from fraud and has no reason to stop it.  A few weeks delay in deciding the presidency has happened before and will probably happen again.  Isn’t it worth the delay to ensure our voting system is secure?

Electoral College  by Tom Reynolds

The left is trying to do away with the Electoral College and replace it, directly or indirectly with the popular vote.  In the Electoral College, each state gets one vote for each Senator and one vote for each Representative.  (A minimum of 3.  Eight states and D.C. have only 3 votes.) It would take a constitutional amendment to do away with the Electoral College.  All but two states have a winner take all approach; whoever wins the majority of the popular vote in that state gets all the electoral votes, whether the majority was by one vote or one million votes. 

Keep in mind that the Electoral College helps protect the minority (small states) from the tyranny of the majority (large states). 

There are some interesting numbers that need to be considered:

  As of July 1, 2019, the USA’s population was estimated at 328 million people. 

  The 10 most populated states had 178,000,000 (54% of the total population). 

  The next 10 most populated states had 71 million (22% of the population). 

  Combined, the top 20 states had 249 million (76% of the population).

  The 30 least populated states have only 24% of the population.  (The 30 least populated states are certainly the minority that needs to be protected.)

California (population 39 million) has the most electoral and popular votes but gets little attention during the campaign since it will reliably go Democrat.  Nevada (population 3 million) has only 6 electoral votes but it got a lot of attention even though its vote was fairly evenly split. 

If the President was elected by only the popular vote, the 30 least populated states would get much less attention from presidential candidates (before and after the election) since the election would depend on voter turnout and piling up numbers in the top 20 states - or maybe only the top 10 states.

There is another reason to keep the Electoral College.

In the current election, several states are very evenly split and there are numerous legal challenges as well as a possible recount in those states.  Imagine a national popular vote that was close and we had lawsuits and recounts in all 50 states!

What is the chance that the Democrats can pass a Constitutional Amendment and do away with the Electoral College?  Unless the bottom 30 states have a death wish, virtually zero.  (Unfortunately, some states do seem to have that death wish.)

One way the Amendment process can start is in Congress but if Republicans win in Georgia’s special election, they can use their majority in the Senate to stop it.

An Amendment can also start if: two-thirds of the states (34 states) call a constitutional convention to draft a proposed amendment or if the Democrats have the majority in the Senate (they win both Georgia elections) and Congress passes the proposed amendment.  In both cases, the proposed amendment must then get the approval of three-fourths of the states (38 states).  Again, unless the bottom 30 states have a death wish, it won’t happen. 

What if the deep blue states in the bottom 30 decided to vote for the proposed amendment, would that be enough?  There are only 8 deep blue states in the bottom 30.  And only 10 of the top 20 are deep blue.  Well short of the 38 needed.

There are about 23 reliably Republican states that should not, in their worst moment of madness, ever consider doing away with the Electoral College.

Democrats are trying another approach; on a state by state basis, they want to have each state assign all of their state’s electoral votes to whoever wins the national popular vote. (Assuming that the party they favor will forever win the national popular vote is a very chancy assumption since the future is…well…unknown.)  A smaller state could vote 100% for a candidate, but if that candidate loses the national popular vote, that state’s citizens will have lost their voice.  Any small state that agrees to that - and some small blue states have - would be giving away all of its votes to the 10 largest deep blue states.

Apparently, political suicides do happen because 16 states have entered into an interstate compact and agreed to do this; 14 are deep blue and the other 2 lean blue.  9 of the 16 are relatively small to small states who, apparently, believe in political suicide.  (New York is the 4^th most populated state – and declining – and is one of the 16).  The agreement would not take effect until these states had a majority of the electoral college votes in the agreement.  If a Republican should take the popular vote in a coming election, how many states would reconsider their commitment to this?

By the way, interstate agreements for political purposes require Congress’ approval and Congress has not given its approval, so the agreement is currently illegal.  But hey, legality never stopped Democrats.

Actions Speak Louder than Words  by Michael A. Morrongiello, Ph.D.

“It is enough that the people know there was an election.  The people who cast the votes decide nothing.  The people who count the votes decide everything."       -- Joseph Stalin

The man who calls himself President-Elect, Joe Biden, has recently called for unity.  We desperately need to be unified, but first Biden needs to convince the 72 million Americans who voted for Trump that Biden won in a fair election.  Fair elections are a cornerstone of a functioning republic.  

When Trump won in 2016, no Democrat called for unity.  Instead, they launched the “resistance” which tried to intimidate Electors into casting their vote for someone other than Trump in the Electoral College.  The term “resistance” means resistance to a foreign occupation, not an elected President from the opposition party in your own country.  Long before that, the Obama administration intelligence agencies had spied on the Trump campaign and transition, spinning the narrative that Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election.  Elected Democrats routinely called Trump “Putin’s puppet” and said he was “illegitimate,” attempting to negate the 2016 election.  Conclusion: when Democrats say every vote must count, they don’t mean Republican votes.

The Democrats were lying about collusion. Trump won the 2016 election.  Democrats famously said that Trump voters were deplorables, chumps and (the constant refrain) racists. They undermined public confidence in elections and in the office of the Presidency itself.  So, why wouldn’t we believe that they fixed the 2020 election?

President Trump has not conceded the election, nor should he.  Trump has a solemn duty to his voters and the Constitution. The Trump campaign and the GOP are filing lawsuits in key states.  Republican poll watchers were denied access to observe vote counters in Detroit and Philadelphia. The Pennsylvania supreme court changed election law, when the Constitution clearly states that only state legislatures can do that.  The Trump campaign is also filing suit under the equal protection clause of the US Constitution.  The suit alleges that in Democrat counties, voters were allowed to alter mistakes in their ballot, in a process known as curing.  Voters in Republican districts were denied this opportunity, as their election officials strictly followed the law.

If Biden truly wants to unite the country, he should call for a manual recount in every state where the margin of victory was 1% or less.  The count must be observed by both Democrat and Republican poll watchers.  Words are easy, but deeds are hard.  Hey, Joe:  Come on, man!  Look, here’s the deal.  Call for a recount.  Then I’ll believe you.

Georgia and the Supreme Court  by Henry Kramer

As of November 11, 2020, Republicans had secured fifty (50) seats in the U.S. Senate with two outstanding senatorial elections still to be decided, both in Georgia.  These appear to be going to a runoff election on January 5, 2020 and will determine who controls the Senate.  These have major implications for 2^nd Amendment rights, assuming that recounts and final counts in Georgia and Pennsylvania do not result in President Trump eking out a victory over Biden.

The United States Supreme Court could hang in the balance.  Democrats have threatened to pack the court by adding liberal justices who would be likely to favor expanded gun control and perhaps even the confiscation of weapons, gutting the 2nd Amendment.  The threat to the Court may be somewhat abated this week as Senator Manchin (D-WV) announced he would not support court packing.  (However, this may only be a political ploy to ease Georgians’ mind about this issue.)  But if true, there would be at least 51 votes against court packing (at least 50 Republican senators plus Manchin).  Manchin also said he would not support eliminating the sixty-vote filibuster rule (that would protect a Republican minority in the Senate from being run roughshod over if there was a Democrat majority).  Again, is it a ploy?  And there is no guarantee that Manchin would not cave under Democrat Leader Schumer’s pressure.  The 2^nd Amendment is not out of danger.

The next Supreme Court appointment may occur during Biden’s administration. The most likely Justice to retire or leave the Court is Justice Breyer.  His departure would not change the balance of power but could lead to a farther-left nominee for the Court. A Republican Majority Senate could stop a far- left nominee while a Democrat Majority Senate is likely to approve one.

Justice Thomas, if he was going to retire voluntarily from the Court would likely have done so already to ensure that his successor was a Trump nominee. 

Early voting for the runoff election is schedule in Georgia for December 14 to December 31, though counties have the option to schedule more days for early balloting.  Absentee ballots will go out automatically to seniors, the elderly, military, and overseas voters who had them in the November general election.  There is no indication that Georgia will use mail in ballots (other than absentee ballots) for the runoff. 

In prior senatorial runoff elections, Republicans have increased their margins and won the runoffs but in this year’s voting climate it is hard to predict turnout for a runoff (it is usually lower).  The Georgia legislature, which is under Republican control, could change the rules (the governor is also a Republican) and it might be wise to eliminate early voting, though the Supreme Court generally frowns on rule changes while an election is in process.

There are strong reasons for supporters of the 2^nd Amendment to be concerned that a Biden administration will attempt to gut 2A through legislation if they control House, Senate, and White House or - if power is divided - through the courts or by Executive Order.  We urge all 2^nd Amendment supporters to contribute to and support pro 2^nd Amendment candidates for the U.S. Senate in Georgia in this crucial election on January 5.

The House of Representatives  by Tom Reynolds

There are 435 seats in the House, so 218 is a majority.  As of Tuesday at 5PM, per Politico, Republicans had won 201 seats and were leading in 11 more.  (212 total).  There are 5 of the 11 that are very close.  212 is not enough for a majority but a potential pickup of 15 from their starting point of 197.  Democrats have won 215 and are leading in 8. (223 total).  Of those undecided, 2 are almost tied and 5 are very close.  Of course, counting still continues so nothing is firm on the 19 still outstanding.

Many of the undecided races are in New York, where there are five races undecided; Republicans have substantial leads in four of them and a small lead in the fifth.

Without doubt, Democrat House members will see their ranks thinned, it’s just a question of how much.  As a result, several House Democrats have been outspoken in their criticism of Nancy Pelosi’s leadership. Their criticism focuses on the party’s far leftward tilt toward Socialism and the prominent place that radicals have taken in the party’s public image and that group’s influence being greater than their numbers.  Depending on the final figures, there may be sufficient anger to replace.    

The Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee Chairwoman has already announced she is stepping down after only one term, another sign that the election did not go well for Democrats.

Many House members are more likely than Senators to reflect rural values, such as the 2^nd Amendment.  Senators represent the entire state - which may be dominated a few large cities (as in New York) - while Representatives have small districts within the state and rural voters have more of a say. 

NICS checks and gun sales set records in the months before the election.  Congresspersons from rural areas, where gun rights are a big issue, will have to think twice before supporting gun control.  Could there be some defections from the Democrat Party line on gun grabbing?  If the House split remains close, it will only take a few defections to kill gun control bills in the House instead of depending on the Senate to do it.

Biden’s proposals concerning guns may cause problems for a closely split House.  He has proposed applying an existing federal law, with a $200 tax on machine guns, to assault weapons — which he may define to include semi-automatic firearms. He also proposed requiring universal background checks on all firearms transfers, limiting firearm purchases to one per month, and giving owners of modern sporting rifles the option of either selling their guns “back” to the government or registering them under the National Firearms Act (compensated confiscation).

Biden’s plan includes providing incentives (bribes with taxpayer dollars) to the states to set up gun licensing programs. He would give grants to state and local governments for them to require individuals to obtain a license prior to purchasing a gun. 

A Biden administration might try to administratively (bypassing Congress) achieve his goals. 

The U.S. Supreme Court will probably have something to say about this and its impact on exercising a fundamental right protected by the Constitution.

Speaking of the need for guns, Democrats were silent on the riots until their polling started dropping.  Was it too little, too late?  Will riots restart?  The rioters saw success and almost no consequences as Democrat Mayors and Governors took a pass on law and order.  Will they see riots as a way to gain power?  If so, will Democrats stand up to them?

Of course, pro-2A President Trump is contesting the election and if he were successful, we would have a very different situation!

Georgia On All Our Minds  by Tom Reynolds

In the 100 seat Senate, political parties need 51 seats for control.  (The Vice President breaks ties.)  After the election, Republicans have 48 for sure and 1 that is almost certain and 1 that is highly probable for a 50 total. Democrats have 48 for sure.  The two remaining undecided seats are both in Georgia. 

A Senate candidate in Georgia must win 50% of the vote or there is a runoff election between the top two candidates.  There were two Senate elections in Georgia (one a special election) and no candidate won 50% in either election.  So, there will be two Senate seats on the line in a January election.  The Republicans need one victory to maintain control while Democrats need a sweep of both.    

In one election, Republican David Perdue leads by 90,000 votes with 49.8%.  His challenger, Democrat John Ossoff, got 47.9% of the vote.  The rest (115,000 votes, 2.3%) went to Libertarian Shane Hazel.  So, one immediate question is: where will Hazel’s voters go, (if they don’t sit out the January election)?

Hazel is a Marine combat vet who supports 2A.  He was a former Republican who was disenchanted with the party and became a Libertarian (but he did not become a Democrat).  His web site has a mix of positions but would seem to lean Republican.  However, did his supporters vote for him or against a major party; and if so, which party?

If exactly the same people vote in the special election that voted in the recent one, the Republican needs only 13,000 of the 116,000 who voted for Hazel.  Of course, exactly the same people won’t be voting for exactly the same party.

The other election is a real mixed bag.  Democrat Raphael Warnock got 32.9% of the vote (1,612,000).  There were two major Republican candidates totaled 2,254,000 total votes (45.9%).  Of the three major candidates, the two Republicans led by 642,000 votes.  But there were 1,040,000 votes (21.2%) that went to 16 other candidates and some of these other candidates also identified as Republicans or Democrats!

All candidates who identified as Republicans got a combined total of 2,425,000.  All Democrat candidates totaled 2,341,000.  There were about 134,000 votes that went to other candidates; primarily Independents and 1 Libertarian.

50% of the total votes would have been 2,450,000.  Therefore, Republicans need 25,000 of the 134,000 votes and Democrats need 109,000 of the 134,000 votes, if the same people vote in the same way they just did.  But of course, exactly the same people will not vote for exactly the same party.

While every voter should have been aware that the majority in the Senate hung in the balance, it has now hit them like a 2 by 4 as to how important their Senate vote will be and that may change some votes.

 Republicans will probably emphasize that winning Georgia would allow the Democrats to implement their radical agenda while Democrats will emphasize that winning Georgia allows them to implement their agenda and reverse the Trump agenda.  Under this scenario, will moderate Democrats be afraid of the radical left’s agenda and either: not vote or vote Republican?  Will more Republicans be motivated to vote in order to stop the radical left?  Under this scenario, very few Republicans will change their vote to a vote for the radical Democrat agenda.  But they have to show up!

Will Republicans show up?  What will turnout be like?  Given the importance of this race, there will be multi-millions of dollars spent and turnout should be heavier than a normal for a Senate only race.  But will turnout rise to the level of the just completed race, when presidential candidates were on it? 

Will gun rights be an issue, given the huge increases in NICS checks and gun sales, especially sales to first time gun owners?

The Senate Majority Leader has huge powers to determine what gets done (or not done).  Expect Republicans to emphasize that this is election is between Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell and New York’s Chuck Schumer for Majority Leader.  Do Georgians want a New York Liberal dictating policy to Georgia?  Democrats may try to offset that by bringing up the recent Supreme Court fight, which may or may not help them. 

Democrats are threatening to admit Puerto Rico and Washington DC as states with, presumably, all Democrat Senators in those two states.  They need a Senate majority to do that.  How will that play? 

Democrats also threaten to pack the Supreme Court.  Republicans will use this to motivate Republicans while many Democrats have polled a bit negatively towards this power grab and it may demotivate them. 

Unfortunately, the election is two months away.

Deep Blue Governors and Mayors  by Tom Reynolds

Governors and mayors in deep blue states made a decision that they would wreak havoc on their own state’s economy and empower criminals to destroy property and lives in riots.  They believed their states and cities were so deep blue that it would not impact their personal political positions.  This was all done in an attempt to hurt President Trump’s reelection chances.  As it turned out, they were right about their positions being safe since what little opposition they faced was from those even further left.  

Governor Jay Inslee of Washington State stood by while “peaceful protesters” destroyed Seattle’s downtown.  He took no action when Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan allowed the “CHOP Zone” to flourish and “secede” from the USA, until there were murders in it.  During the riots he identified with Black Lives Matter.  Inslee easily won reelection.

Seattle’s Mayor Durkan was not up for reelection.  Seattle police have been quitting and retiring in droves, including Chief Carmen Best, because of the lack of support.  There have been attempts to recall her because she is not radical enough.

The District of Columbia has been torn by riots under Mayor Muriel Bowser and a far-left Democrat City Council.  There have been concessions made to Black Lives Matter rioters, including naming a plaza after them, and in general the rioters got a free pass.  Bowser was not up for reelection but in the D.C. Council races, all Democrats running for reelection won.

Portland, Oregon, Mayor Ted Wheeler stood by and watched Antifa and Black Lives Matter loot and burn Portland.  When President Trump offered to send the National Guard in to help, Wheeler said, “No thanks”.  When they attacked the federal courthouse, President Trump had to step in.  The Portland police union has been a constant critic of him.     Wheeler’s concern has been about potential white supremacist activity.  Wheeler won reelection over both an opponent who was farther left than him and also a Black Lives Matter activist. 

Oregon Governor Kate Brown, who was not up for reelection, ordered the activation of the National Guard to quell months of rioting in Portland, THE DAY AFTER THE ELECTION!, Brown had rejected Trump’s offer to bring in the National Guard, months ago.

Andrew Cuomo…well, we all know about him.  No place in New York for Conservatives.

These are the people we are dealing with.  Because they live in deep blue states, they promote far left programs because they suffer no consequences when these programs fail.  We’ve been listening to the media and politicians (now that the election is over) talk about extending our hands in friendship and compromising.  That being the “American” thing to do.  As if the media saying this ever, in the past, cared about being “American”.  Can we expect the left to give up their gun grabbing?  Can we expect them to give up the Green New Deal?  Will they compromise on the border wall and immigration?  Will the media cover the Hunter Biden scandal and the “Deep States” treachery?

Be careful when you extend a hand to them as they will bite it off.

New York State Senate (Update)  by Tom Reynolds

Prior to 2018, Republicans usually had control of the New York State Senate.  This somewhat offset the heavily New York City based gun grabbers in the Assembly and the Governor’s office.  Republicans were the only defense against the gun grabbing left and when they lost the Senate majority, in a landslide in 2018, the gun grabbers came out in force.

In October, when SCOPE reviewed the Senate races and advised you of those races that were competitive, it was noted that in many of the races that Republicans lost in 2018 (a non-presidential year) was because the Republican voter turnout cratered from 2016 (a presidential election year.)  It was hoped that some of these seats would be regained in 2020 if Republicans turned out in force to vote for the President – and they did – but not enough.

There are 63 Senate seats so 32 is a majority.  As of this writing the Republicans have won 28 and 2 more are too close to call.  Not a majority.  And in New York State politics, a miss is a good as a mile.  When the Democrats have the legislative majority, they run roughshod.

This is particularly distressing since 2020 is also a census year and Senate districts will be redistricted (gerrymandered) prior to the 2022 election.  The Senate majority (Democrats) have control over the process and they will use that power to increase their power.  For example, there are 2 districts in New York City that are Republican (Staten Island and South Brooklyn).  Standing mostly alone, these districts elect Republican Senators.  After redistricting, they will undoubtably be split and their parts merged with heavily Democrat areas surrounding them, thus, dissipating their Republican strength and potentially turning them into Democrat majority districts.  

Upstate Republican Senators may find themselves opposing other Republican Senators in 2022 as their districts are realigned.  (There is a residency requirement in their districts for Senators.) 

So, that’s the problem.  What’s the plan?

Even before redistricting is complete, we need to be motivating gun owners to act.  (Register and Vote.)  Unfortunately, this will probably be made a little easier as the gun grabbing majority will be pushing all sorts of radical gun control bills to, in effect, do away with the 2^nd Amendment.  Hopefully, that might catch reluctant voters’ attention and, perhaps, motivate them.  SCOPE will do its best to publicize these efforts of the left but we also need ordinary members to get motivated and spread the word.  (“The gun grabbers are coming” is the modern equivalent of “The British are coming”.)

Once redistricting Is done, we need to find and/or support candidates who will defend 2A and run for the Senate in these new districts.  That means getting involved. 

The far left has their sights on destroying more than just 2A and we need to find those people and organizations targeted by the left and work with them (The enemy of my enemy is my friend.)

Hopefully, the Covid restrictions will have eased and chapters can get active in their local communities.

Money is needed to run campaigns and it is easier to start with a little each month than to find a lot just before the election.  The SCOPE PAC is being reorganized and will soon reopen for business.  It made a major contribution to the Senate election committee this year.

The next few years are not going to be fun but if we are to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution,  it’s our duty as Americans.

Bernie Sanders Tells the Truth (A Little Bit, Anyway)  by Tom Reynolds

Bernie Sanders is not on Tuesday’s ballot but he is a major force in the Democrat Party and his “thinking” is essentially that of the Democrat Party.  During an interview with Seth Meyers, Bernie Sanders said, “I think it is fair to say that in many ways the Democratic Party has become a party of the coastal elites.”  (Did he look at a national map of red states and blue states to get this stunning flash of brilliance?)

Sanders continued, “But I think for many, many years the Democratic Party has not paid the kind of attention to working-class needs that they should’ve and that has a lot to do with who funds campaigns, etc.” 

Sanders knows that, in the midst of riots, arson, murders, defunding police and rogue District Attorneys, Democrats ignored the safety needs of working-class citizens and wanted to do away with a citizens’ last form of protection, the 2^nd Amendment.  With NICS checks and gun sales hitting all-time highs, shouldn’t that have caught the actual candidates’ (Biden and Harris) attention.  Perhaps they were too busy courting Wall Street to notice? Women are a significant percentage of these gun buyers and yet we hear that suburban women will vote for the gun grabbers Biden and Harris.  (Sarah Palin’s “pit bull with lipstick” now carries a Glock.)

Democrats are too busy courting big donors, as Sanders said, to be bothered with working-class needs like safety.  Breitbart reports  that Wall Street executives in New York City, alone, have poured more than $74 million into Biden’s campaign. A CNN analysis noted that “all the big banks” are backing Biden against Trump. These donors want to buy Biden’s support instead of him wasting his time on working-class needs.  

Sanders once embraced the rural gun culture in Vermont.  But he has moved to the left along with the rest of his party after he saw that his gun record could be a real detriment to his presidential ambitions.

Wow, he flipped on 2A because of presidential ambitions.  Say it aint so!  Does that sound like anyone else we know?

In 1986, Joe Biden voted with the NRA on a bill called the “Firearms Owners’ Protection Act,” which the NRA called “the law that saved gun rights”.  Biden was key to the law’s passage at the time.  When the Democrat Party subsequently shifted left, being loyal follower, Joe did the same and now has an extensive and undeniable history as a gun grabber - which doesn’t stop him from flip flopping on 2A.  When he was competing in the Democrat Primary against other gun grabbing Democrats, Biden was anti 2A and he said to Beto O’Rourke, “You're gonna take care of the gun problem with me, you're gonna be the one who leads this effort".  But while campaigning against 2A supporter President Trump, Biden was accused of being hostile to 2A by a factory worker.  His response was, “You’re full of sh..!  I support the Second Amendment”.  He may support it when talking to 2A supporters but when talking to gun grabbing democrats – not so much.

On the other hand, Kamala Harris is nothing but consistent in her opposition to 2A.  She must believe that guns are the problem and not the person holding the gun, since she has never met a gun control bill she didn’t like.  But based on her actions, illegal aliens, on the other hand, are to be protected from the consequences of breaking laws.

Harris figures that those inanimate objects can’t vote, but Biden and Sanders understand that the objects’ owners can vote!  And if gun owners sit home on November 3^rd or believe the flip floppers on 2A, they will have sealed their own fate - as well as ours, too.

Vote as if your 2^nd Amendment right depends on it – because it does!

Journalism Is Not Dead  by Tom Reynolds

Some people argue that Journalism is dead but, in fact, it is alive and well.

People whose profession was to write or present the facts to us formerly were called news “reporters”.  Now they are called news “journalists”.  The change is appropriate.  Reporters were expected to present the facts and to cover all sides of an issue. Psychologists will tell you that people who journal are supposed to write down their thoughts and feelings; they are told that their feelings are real and need to be expressed.  Who can doubt that today’s news media is overwhelmingly populated by people who believe that their own thoughts and feelings are what is real and what must be “reported” as news.  Facts?  Well, not so much.  Both sides of the story?  Never!  “Journalism” is alive and well.  It’s just “Reporting” that has died.

You may be aware that one presidential candidate’s son abandoned a laptop with overwhelming evidence that the candidate had discussed that son’s business, even though the candidate denied doing so.  And while the candidate was Vice President of the United States of America, he used his political power, in the second most powerful office in the world, as leverage in financial deals with foreign countries.  That would seem to be important news.  But if all you listen to is CNN, MSNBC, and other left-wing news stations, you don’t know about this because they quickly labelled the story “Russian Disinformation” and then buried it.  Director of National Intelligence, John Ratliffe, subsequently said that the laptop was not part of Russian disinformation.  Did CNN, etc. unbury the story?  No Lazarus there.

Recently, it was reported (but probably not on CNN) that the candidate’s son is under investigation for Money Laundering.  Nothing to see here, says the left-wing media.

In Philadelphia, a knife wielding, career criminal attacked police and was shot by them.  That incident gave cover to a series of riots that are devastating Philadelphia businesses.  After months of previous riots throughout America, Democrats discovered that the riots were hurting them in the polls and, as a result, riot coverage was buried by the left-wing media in order to protect the Democrat Party.  Did the Philadelphia riots resurrect that coverage?  A cold day In Hell, amidst global warming, has a better chance of happening.

What are CNN, etc. covering?  Mostly the Covid epidemic and how it is growing at alarming rates and it’s all Donald Trump’s fault.  There is also coverage of the presidential election and how Trump will be overwhelmingly defeated, so his supporters, by inference, need not bother voting in a lost cause. 

Twitter and Facebook refuse to allow posts that support the laptop story.  Only someone with the IQ of a rock would believe this is anything but political censorship.

There was a saying in defense of the 1^st Amendment, “I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.  That saying is now, “I disagree with what you say and since it hurt my feelings you must stop saying it”.  The proponents of microaggressions should try following the saying, “Get over it”.  No, they’d rather pretend to wallow in self pity in order to strike a blow for political censorship. 

This election is a test whether the American voters can see beyond the overwhelmingly biased left-wing journalism, that we are buried under every day, and use their judgement when casting their ballots.  The media believes they can decide the results of the election through their actions.  The course of American news reporting depends on you voting and showing that the media cannot brainwash you.  Oh yeah, and your future, too.