She Actually Believes we do not have the right to defend ourselves, and she has a life appointment on the highest court in the United States. Thank God the jury in Kenosha, WI. believes we still have the right to defend ourselves.

Ammoland Inc. Posted on  by F Riehl, Editor in Chief

Sotomayor Takes Axe to Second Amendment
Won’t answer whether she believes there’s a right to self-defense.
The U.S. Senate must vote NO on Judge Sonia Sotomayor!

Gun Owners of America
Gun Owners of America

Washington, DC – -(AmmoLand.com)- In defending her decision that the states could enact any form of gun control they wished — with absolutely no regard to the Second Amendment — Judge Sonya Sotomayor has developed a new love for Nineteenth Century court opinions.

Demonstrating that she was programmed in her responses, Sotomayor defended one of her earlier legal opinions by citing “footnote 23” of Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion in the DC v. Heller case last year.

But, when pressed by questioner Orrin Hatch yesterday, Sotomayor could not recite the contents of that footnote or the holdings of the cases which it cited. As it turns out, the footnote on which Sotomayor claims to rely, cited — without approval — two Nineteenth Century cases which rejected the notion that the Second Amendment was ‘incorporated’ to apply to the states.

But those were also the days when the Supreme Court held that the rights protected in the First Amendment did not apply to the states. Apparently, Sotomayor wants to base her anti-gun philosophy on antiquated decisions from an era when the U.S. Supreme Court was spitting out racist decisions.

Her answers got even worse today when Republican Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma asked her, point blank, “Is there a constitutional right to self-defense?” Sotomayor said that was an “abstract question” and that she couldn’t think of a Supreme Court case that addressed that issue.

Coburn said he didn’t want a legal treatise on what Supreme Court holdings have said, rather, he wanted her own personal opinion. Sotomayor would not answer the question, although when pressed, she equated self-defense with vigilantism!

Folks, do you see how important it is to stop this nomination? GOA mailed its members postcards opposing Sotomayor not too long ago. Please make sure you have mailed those in. We need a multi-pronged offensive right now where our Senators are receiving snail mail, email and phone calls.

And, we need ALL PRO-GUN ORGANIZATIONS to take a stance AGAINST this nominee.

Organizational spokesmen can talk a good game and say they have serious “concerns” about Sotomayor. That’s all well and good. But unless those organizations (big and small) rate each Senator’s vote on Sotomayor — when she’s clearly anti-gun — then those supposed “concerns” are just meaningless.

Senators have to hear from ALL the pro-gun organizations — big and small — that they are going to rate this vote during the 2010 election. Otherwise, those organizations are just Paper Tigers.

We can’t let this anti-gun judge infiltrate U.S. Supreme Court! She is dangerous on so many levels — but, especially, on Second Amendment rights.

GOA considers her nomination to be of the most important gun votes in the HISTORY of the US Senate. We can’t think of any other nominee in recent history who has taken such a horrid stand on the basic right of self-defense.

She says that she will follow the precedent in the DC v. Heller (2008) case. But even if she does, that only means that she will vote to apply the Second Amendment in Washington, DC. She has already ruled this year in Maloney v. Cuomo that the amendment doesn’t apply to where you live. — Tim Macy, Vice-Chairman of Gun Owners of America

ACTION: We need to “pull out the stops” to defeat this nominee. Please contact your two U.S. Senators today and urge them to VOTE NO on Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at

http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the pre-written e-mail message below.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Senator:

Even though President Obama is extremely anti-gun, I still started with an open mind regarding his nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor. But after her testimony these past two days, there is no way that she should be confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

When asked by Senator Tom Coburn if there was a right to self-defense, Sotomayor said that was an “abstract question.” Sotomayor would not answer directly, although when pressed, she equated self-defense with vigilantism!

How can the Senate confirm a judge to the U.S. Supreme Court who does not believe in the rights that are EXPLICITLY stated in the Bill of Rights?

INI World Report

▪︎THE WASHINGTON POST HITS OBAMA!

  • Finally, the Washington Post speaks out on Obama! This is very brutal but 
    timely though. As I’m sure you know, the Washington Post newspaper has 
    a reputation for being extremely liberal. So the fact that its editor 
    saw fit to print the following article about Obama in it’s newspaper 
    makes this a truly amazing event and a news story in and of itself. At 
    last, the truth about our President and his obvious socialist agenda 
    are starting to trickle through the protective wall built around him 
    by our liberal media. I too have become disillusioned 
  • By Matt Patterson (columnist – Washington Post, New York Post, San 
    Francisco Examiner)
  • Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack 
    Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a 
    baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the 
    Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of 
    professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could 
    manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful 
    military, execute the world’s most consequential job?
  • Imagine a future 
    historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and 
    through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores 
    along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer”; a brief 
    career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in 
    fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”); 
    and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, 
    the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. 
  • He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature 
    legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his 
    troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher 
    who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor”; a real-life, 
    actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political 
    sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all 
    and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president? 
  • Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz 
    addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be 
    sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken 
    hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist 
    like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day.
  • But because Mr. Obama 
    was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have 
    hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if 
    they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.
  • Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass – held to a lower standard – because of the color of his skin
  • Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history 
    matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself 
    had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance 
    to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of 
    racism to rest? 
  • Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the 
    Obama phenomenon – affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of 
    course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all 
    affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily 
    to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about 
    themselves. 
  • Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat 
    themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools 
    for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the 
    inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. 
    Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t 
    around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem 
    resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist.
  • Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the 
    color of his skin – that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if 
    that isn’t racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama.
  • True, Obama himself was never 
    troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many 
    have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite 
    undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough 
    for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois ; he was told 
    he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the 
    Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was 
    good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the 
    contrary. 
  • What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display 
    every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked 
    executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory 
    skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives 
    included – ought now to be deeply embarrassed.  The man thinks and 
    speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that’s when he has his 
    Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can 
    barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued 
    from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has 
    failed over and over again for 100 years. 
  • And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and 
    everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I 
    inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing 
    to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own 
    incompetence. But really, what were we to expect?
  • The man has never 
    been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act 
    responsibly? In short: our past president is a small and small-minded man, with 
    neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you 
    understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current 
    erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone 
    otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.
  • And now Obama is back, with his hand up Biden’s arse moving his 
    demented mouth…….. the USA is in real trouble…..

https://nation.foxnews.com/watch/7b15a1a99394fddaa4fadb454c530222/

https://nation.foxnews.com/watch/530e9d824fd7505e8cb5fabc6229f6e5/

https://nation.foxnews.com/watch/995289c333cbefbfe1fc53e64b88c99e/

Yes, You read this correctly. Biden must be impeached.

Confused Students –

No Wonder America Ranks Low in Most Academic Standards World Wide.

Campus Reform shares an interesting video of how students view diversity and talent. I love the girl that says there should be more diversity in every single field. She obviously hasn’t thought of the consequences of what sacrificing talent for diversity would be like for very specialized jobs.

It’s amazing how people can see that the football team would be losing if diversity quotas were applied to it but they can’t see how society is losing in general because of these same diversity quotas.

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Categories