Dems Are About to Go for the Guns
Democrats are gearing up for a full-on gun grabbing jihad. The Washington Examiner reported yesterday that Democrats are about to propose a weapons ban AND gun confiscation powers, and the inspiration didn’t come from anyone on the left. Their new muse is President Trump, and - after his comments on Wednesday - they believe they finally have the power to begin the war on guns.
We don’t know for sure yet what exactly is in the upcoming proposed bill, but Democrats are beginning to talk, just enough, for us to get a clue about what we’re looking at. The details include expanded background checks, the banning of certain kinds of weapons, and a plan to “temporarily” confiscate someone’s guns if they are deemed to be a threat to themselves or others.
Let’s just take this line by line, shall we? Expanded background checks, also called universal background checks, sound good on the surface. It’s true that we already have a background check system, but Democrats are worried about private sells. Like if you want to sell one of your guns to a neighbor. Currently, you can do that without a background check. If this gets amended, you won’t be able to. My guess is that you'd have to go to a licensed seller, called an FFL, and the background check and transfer would take place there. My only problem is this: if I want to gift my Henry Rifle to my son, would HE have to get a background check? These are the little details that never get disclosed, and I can guarantee you that Democrats won’t even try.
Second, the bill is rumored to contain a ban on quote “certain weapons.” Democrats are all up in arms over assault-style weapons, but the vast majority of them have no friggin clue what they're talking about. Debbie Wasserman Schultz went on CNN yesterday as the poster child for the clueless liberal on guns. She was adamant that we need to keep quote “high capacity, rapid-fire magazines” out of the hands of civilians. Umm… WHAT THE WHAT?! I never heard of a magazine that could fire it’s own ammunition - without the gun - at a high rate of fire. I better look into that before she gets it banned.
She then went on to say that “military-style weapons” should only be available to the military. I am so sick of this argument. She’s obviously referring to the AR-15, but the AR-15 was a civilian rifle FIRST and a military rifle SECOND. The Armalite company sold the plans to the military, who then adopted it with burst and rapid fire. The civilian models don’t have that. It’s actually MORE correct to say that the military is using a CIVILIAN style weapon, but these people have no clue what they are talking about.
Democrats want an all out ban on semi-automatic weapons, which would basically eliminate 80% of the market. That would leave you with bolt action hunting rifles, and John Wayne style six shooters.
And finally… gun confiscation. Democrats are proposing a program where family and law enforcement could petition a court to have someone’s guns taken away if they’re deemed mentally unstable. Answer this, what if that’s extended to anyone on medication? Will simply being on antidepressants now be enough label you full on mentally unstable? What about ADD medication?
We’re headed down a dark path. We need solutions, but this Bill is definitely not it. Let’s HOPE the President puts it where it belongs… in the trash.
President Trump is committed to the idea of “America First.” Technically, it’s more like Tweet First, America Second. But either way, he’s about to prove his commitment to American industry again, this time with a controversial new tariff. Because nothing says innovative 21st century trade policy like a protectionist tariff from the President McKinley era.
Trump announced yesterday that his administration will impose a 25% tariff on steel and 10% on aluminum imports. The move has been debated inside the White House for months and advisers were split, but Trump is going for it. He sees it as a way to help those struggling industries in the U.S. But it almost never actually helps.
For decades, the U.S. steel industry has lobbied the government to help them compete with foreign steel. But the data is clear that protectionist policy only makes things more expensive for consumers, with few benefits to the protected industry.
Past presidential attempts to give the steel industry a boost have not gone well. In 2002, President Bush placed tariffs ranging from 8% to 30% on steel products. Just one year later, there was so much international backlash and bad economic consequences that he got rid of the tariffs.
Top advisers warned about retaliation from other countries, and the Defense Department warned about how this will affect close allies. But Trump was eager to make the announcement anyway, in a room full of steel and aluminum executives at the White House. He said, “When it comes to a time where our country can’t make aluminum and steel, you almost don’t have much of a country.”
The Stock Market did not take kindly to the announcement – the Dow dropped 500 points. Companies that make products with steel and aluminum are not happy, already warning about loss of jobs in those industries and increased prices for consumers. Hmm, wonder where they got that idea? Oh yeah – history.
Senator Ben Sasse had a surprisingly strong reaction in a statement, saying: “Let’s be clear: The President is proposing a massive tax increase on American families. You’d expect a policy this bad from a leftist administration, not a supposedly Republican one.”
Why now? Maybe Trump thought it would end his week of bad press on a more positive note – look, I’m doing something for American workers! If so, that strategy is backfiring.
China Is in the Censorship Business
George Orwell’s “Animal Farm.”
Winnie the Pooh.
The letter “N.”
These are just a handful of things that have been recently banned in China.
They promote criticism of Chinese President Chee Chinping, of course.
He has just announced that he is extending his presidency into a lifetime appointment, the first to do so since Mao. And he’s worried that reading Animal Farm will make his citizens question communism.
Winnie the Pooh is apparently a problem because there is a specific image of the bear clutching a honeypot next to the quote, "Find the thing you love and stick with it.”
No doubt Pooh is spouting cynical commentary about Chinping’s indefinite position.
There wasn’t a clear reason why the letter “N” was banned. So, the Chinese government “unbanned” it almost immediately.
This isn’t new to the Chinese people. Chinping has been periodically censoring specific things for years. He controls the media, the government, and almost every aspect of Chinese citizen’s lives.
And it’s only going to get worse from here. He’s looking to be a lifelong dictator. That hasn’t worked out too well for China and the world in the past.