So, President Obama is now at last willing to admit publicly that he doesn’t have a strategy in Iraq, after months of saying he did have a strategy. That he didn’t have a strategy is not news. Frankly, this has been the problem all along. Is that he is willing to admit it is, however, news.
Now, here at home, there’s only 19% of the American who think that Obama actually has a strategy, despite his admission according to the polls I’ve seen. The rest of us know, and have apparently known for some time that he doesn’t have a working strategy. You have to wonder about the thought processes of those 19% Who still believe that Obama is going to pull this one out. That he has a strategy at all, much less a working one.
His admission that he doesn’t have a strategy, is only a partial admission, in fact. What’s really been going on here is that his previous strategy didn’t work.
It’s far more politically expedient to claim that you don’t have a plan then it is to admit the plan you were dealing with, didn’t work, and in fact made things worse.
Its previous strategy was based on this stupidly misguided notion that he could train up the Iraqi army and get them to do their own fighting.
There’s several problems with this. The message of the history of the last ten or twelve years in Iraq is clear. The Iraqis fight well when we are at their side. Or, at least they did. They’re not fighting well now, after having been abandoned by this president. It comes down to an issue of trust on the part of the Iraqis. When W sent our troops over not only to train but also to fight, the Iraqis saw that we had resolve in the matter. We were genuinely there to help them, and they responded accordingly.
President Obama meantime, has walked away from America’s responsibilities in the region at what even he described this political need, and essentially turned the whole problem over to Iraq. Or, more correctly, to Iran. This is a foreign policy blunder of the first order, and it is in fact emblematic of what we’ve come to expect from this administration.
When Obama abandoned Iraq, Iraqi leadership saw the only way that they were going to be able to get anything accomplished was to lean toward Iran. And thus began purging everyone from the military forces of Iraq that was unsympathetic to Tehran.
So as a result we now have the Sunnis on the outs with both the US and the Iraqi government, abandoned, and we expect them to fight? By walking away from our responsibilities at political need, Obama not only squandered the blood and fortune that we invested in Iraq’s future, he also squandered any hope of regaining the trust of the Iraqi people. He’s thrown away that trust so effectively, that one really must wonder if that’s what he had in mind in the first place. That’s a trust that is key in all of this.
Obama knows that the situation is broken, it was broken by him, and he doesn’t see a clear way of repairing the situation. That’s a correct assessment. As a result of his bungling there really is no way to solve this situation. And so now he admits he doesn’t have a plan after all. What he doesn’t say is the reason he doesn’t have a plan now is that the one he originally thought to go with, the one he abandoned the Bush Doctrine to follow, was proven to be faulty at least.
We were warned when we first went into Iraq years ago by the Bush administration and by our military that this was going to be a generation long event. That once we went in there we have to stick to the plan for there to be any hope of it working. With Obama that strategy was sacrificed on the altar of his political need to satisfy his pacifist base and his stated desire to bring America down to the level of the rest of the world.
I submit that those actions have not served the cause of peace but rather the cause of war. It is little noted that Obama and his pacifists have in fact caused more military conflict, more military deaths, and more mayhem around the world in the last six years than both Bushes and Reagan combined. And yet Obama gets the Nobel Prize for Peace. The mind boggles.
It appears to me now that the only way this situation is going to be salvaged is with an even greater effort on the part of ourselves and our military at even greater cost of money and blood, all because Obama didn’t want to stick to the plan.
One wonders, in looking at the amount of purge is going on in the military with Obama as commander in chief, whether or not our military actually has the kind of people necessary to see that commitment through. frankly, I have my doubts anymore.
What has to happen first, however, is a repudiation of Obama policy.
As I write this, I’m preparing for my day, having and spent the night at the Delaware Water Gap in New Jersey. It’s a beautiful morning here, and these hills are just gorgeous. I’ll head down to South Jersey later this morning, and then from there, who knows? I never know from one day to the next where I’m going to be, but that’s part of the game here. Welcome to my world.
It’s fascinating to me, that for all the questions being tossed at Republican candidates about whether or not they would have invaded Iraq, knowing then what they know now, nobody has bothered recently to ask Hillary Clinton that question. This, despite the fact she alone of the current crop of declared candidates was in a position to vote for the blessed thing in the first place.
If you want an example of how the press is protecting Hillary Clinton, I can’t think of a more potent one than that.
And why is it that nobody, but nobody has asked Hillary Clinton if she considers the current state of Iraq to be among her big accomplishments as Secretary of State? Again, protecting the favored candidate.
Now, she’s going to have to come out of her shell eventually. If you look at her poll numbers, the pattern that becomes very clear indeed is that when she says nothing in the press, when she is basically invisible to the electorate, her numbers go up. On the other hand, everytime she opens her mouth, her poll numbers drop like a bungee jumper, without the bungee.
Does that give you any indication of how she’s going to do, when we get closer to the 2016 election cycle? She’s not even polling well among Democrats these days, much less the rest of us.
Like it or not, she’s the Democrat front runner, and she can’t even muster enough support from her own party to make a dent in the upcoming general. It’s simply not going to happen. I am rapidly coming to the conclusionthat the Democrats have absolutely nothing to bring to this party. First of all, the Democrats as a party, even, are simply unelectable at this point. No matter who comes to the party, it’s simply not going to happen. The brand has been so damaged by the Clintons and Obama, Harry Reid, et al, that there isn’t a person in the party today you can salvage the party’s chances of regaining the losses that they suffered. Certainly, nobody capable of taking the White House.
And given what’s happened to previous people within the party and without that have crossed swords with Hillary Clinton, other political fortunes after that confrontation, there’s not going to be many people that are going to want to do so in this cycle. This is Hillary’s last hurrah, no matter what happens. There’s going to be a lot of people who are going to be willing to sit back and wait for her to be gone, and time to heal the wounds that the Democrat Party has caused both to the country, and to the party itself.
And down the road I go. I’ll see you tomorrow.
There is a debate, and much confusion, among some whether the person who now calls himself Caitlyn Jenner is now somehow a woman, from Harry Bruinius, Christian Science Monitor:
Some radical feminists say that males who transition to females can hardly embody the unique experiences, both physically and culturally, that constitute being an authentic female. The photos of Caitlyn Jenner in Vanity Fair renewed the debate.
By , Staff writer June 8, 2015What it means to be female means has in fact been an angry debate within some feminist circles, scholars say. That debate dates back to the “second wave” of feminism in the 1960s and ’70s, when some thinkers and activists refused to include transgender women as part of their movement for women’s liberation.
Then there are some, such as myself, who are not confused. If Jenner is indeed a woman, how so? What makes Jenner a woman?
Sane people, note that Jenner has both X and Y chromosomes. That he is genetically male. His sexual mating habits have been historically male. Jenner has fathered many children, but given birth to none. Further Bruce seems to be in no hurry to get rid his male parts, those below the belt.
Not only does Jenner claim to be a female. He seems to fancy himself a a female sexual icon. By age sixty-five most biological women have transitioned to the grand-parenting and social cause phase. In stark contrast, Jenner wants to both a female and a female six symbol. Can a porn video be next? Everybody is entitled to delusions. However, nobody is entitled a regard another person’s delusion as if it were a fact.
File under Trans-Jenner
I’m just outside of Liverpool Pennsylvania as this is written. It’s been a rather wet day. Supposedly we had a tornado touch down near here. All I saw was the 70 plus mile an hour winds and rain. The truck is certainly a lot cleaner than it was.
I have a load headed up to outside Rochester and then I’m not sure what I’m doing. Other than the weather everything is fine. Welcome to my world.
It is amusing and annoying to me that the left who is otherwise universally supportive of the United Nations and indeed sees it as the only legitimate governing body for the world, while being so universally disparaging against the only legitimate and indeed the first action the United Nations ever took, that being the creation of the State of Israel.
It is both amusing and annoying to note that the left, who so universally castigates the police, is also universally calling for an ever increasing amount of power to be given to governments. It is both amusing and annoying because the left to this day does not seem to understand that the police are the representatives of that government. Obviously the equation that they missy is more government equals more police.
It is both amusing and annoying to note that Barack Hussein Obama went out of his way and cost the lives of many soldiers to bring the deserter Bo Bergdahl back home, and basically gave him a hero’s welcome, whereas a real soldier, insert name, sits and writes in a ready in prison. While Obama does nothing whatsoever.
It is both amusing and annoying that the left universally labels George W Bush a warmonger whereas they support Barack Hussein Obama who created five times as many military actions and many times the dead. Him, they give the Nobel Prize to.
It is amusing to note that Nancy Pelosi was just very recently telling us what is and is not Catholic doctrine. Amusing for obvious reasons, but annoying that the rest of the story hasn’t gotten out. Particularly, that she is now forbidden by the church from accepting communion.
It is both amusing and annoying to note that the Environmental Protection Agency has finally gotten around to admitting that there has been no evidence whatsoever of any drinking water problems incidental to fracking. None. What’s annoying about this, as if the story really hasn’t gotten out. More annoying still is the idea that places like New York are still foot-dragging on the practice. Another source of amusement on this point, is the idea of fracking is the only thing that has managed to save the Democrats, particularly Obama from complete economic disaster. Still, they haven’t gotten the message.
It is both amusing and annoying to know ch that the federal government and its infinite wisdom is pushing the idea of 65 mile an hour speed limiters on all trucks as a mandatory item. Amusing because the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and its own data tells us that 90% whereabouts of all car truck crashes are the Falls of the car driver, not the truck. So what does the federal government do about car truck crashes? Why they limit the speed of trucks. Make sense to you? Edit insert so, the guy buying the brand new Corvette can still do a hundred and fifty five miles an hour without batting an eye, but God help the truck driver driving at 70 on a 70 mile an hour road.
And, it is amusing and annoying to know about the just announced candidacy of the poster boy for term limits, Lindsey Graham. Amusing that he thinks he’s got a chance in hell of getting the nomination despite having the stamp of approval from the GOP establishment, annoying that anyone takes this septic git seriously. Same thing goes for Rick Santorum, and Jeb Bush. When the GOP establishment finally commits suicide, and it will end soon, it will be with that type of politician.
The Snark of the Day:
I am 100% against rape. I do say to women if they don’t want to have sex with a man, they should not be naked in bed w/him.
Confession: I don’t even know if this eighty-seven year old Jewish grandmother and former sniper, is even capable of snark. I mean nobody will ever confuse Dr. Ruth with Blondie, a/k/a Ann Coulter. However the statement, as a matter of sound advices, is indisputably true, and totally politically incorrect.
Hat tip: Ethel C. Fenig, American Thinker.
I wonder when New York’s junior senator will comment on Emma Sulkowicz’s new porn video, from Gothamist?
In an interview with Artnet, Sulkowicz explained that she was inspired to make the video, at least in part, by her relationship with the media (“It’s been terrifying”). Asked if she feared that Carry That Weight would forever pigeon-hole her as “Mattress Girl,” Sulkowicz responded:
To which Sulkowicz responds:
Yeah, I mean, when people call me “Mattress Girl” I find that really infuriating. It’s like, okay great, so you think that I’ll never progress beyond that point. That I’ll be a “Mattress Girl” rather than a living, breathing person who has the ability to change.
Ms Sulkowicz lugs a mattress around the Columbia campus for what two years, in a publicity stunt intended to promote her lie that she had been raped by a fellow student, and now she is in shock that she is, and will be forever known, for that her. Monica Lewinski was not available for immediate comment.
If Bruce Jenner can be retroactively designated a female, then Sulkowicz can be said to be the first porn actress invited to the State of the Union. Good show Gillie.
This is not a defense of Lena Dunham.
Josh Duggar made a couple of mistakes. One, he was born to a outspoken conservation traditional family, from KTLA5:
There are certainly political overtones to the Duggar controversy. The devoutly Christian conservative Duggars are popular figures on the right,and family members have played active roles in Arkansas politics.
A former state legislator, Jim Bob Duggar ran unsuccessfully for U.S. Senate in 2002. Last year, Michelle Duggar recorded a robocall urging residents of Fayetteville, Arkansas, to protest an ordinance aimed at preventing discrimination against gays.
And the embattled family has a well-documented relationship with one of the state’s best-known political figures, former Arkansas governor and GOP presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee.
You don’t say.
Further, instead of touching his sisters above the waist, he should have sodomized his brothers. from Washington Post:
[Sarah Palin] hopeful lashed out at the media — including in ALL CAPS — for its “hell-bent mission to go after the entire Duggar family for one member’s wrongdoing, while giving a total pass to perverted actions of someone like Lena Dunham.”
We have Josh Duggar confidential sealed courts records from when he, and his victims were all minors. We do not have B.J. Clinton’s travel records while attorney general of Arkansas, Barack Obams’s college transcripts, most of Mrs. Clinton’s official government emails, or the late Freddie Gray’s autopsy report.
Nothing justifies a beheading, but …
From Breitbart:
Nobody should target Erin Burnett for beheading, but …
Pam Geller is an American Hero, and the Southern Poverty Law Center is a terrorist support group.
Tonight I’m in Buffalo, heading for York, Pennsylvania in the morning. Everything’s going fairly well, the weather’s nice, no problems. Nothing left to report out here really.
Lots going on these last few days in the Democrat race, though, so let’s get to it.
So, Maryland governor O’Malley has announced for the presidency. I suppose that’s no shock, he’s been bubbling under the surface for some time now and I’ve been seeing references to his setting this up for some months. If he manages to survive between now and the election without ending up face down in Ft Marcy park with a bullet in the head and a gun that wont fire in his hand, I suppose we’ll all be surprised.
Now, O’Malley comes down in my view somewhere between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton in terms of how far left they lean.
We both know the political positioning has very little to do with one’s actual positions. In terms of one’s actual policies, you probably can’t fit water between O’Malley and Bernie Sanders. It should be interesting to watch them debate each other. It’ll be a contest to see how much of other people’s money they can give away inside of the 60-minute debate or whatever the time limit is.
Regardless though, of any other outcome there is one site thing that we can draw from this situation. Hillary Clinton is not going to have an easy time of it, even from her own party at this point. O’Malley is if nothing else a pragmatist. He wouldn’t be going in this direction if he didn’t smell blood in the water.
With that in mind, O’Malley is a pragmatist in a party of them. If he smells blood in the water, do you suppose nobody else does?
I mean, look at her numbers.
Ponder the level of insanity surrounding the Democrat Party. When it takes the insanity of Bernie Sanders to make their leading candidate thus far, Hillary Clinton, look like a sane choice.
Look anyone who believes in socialism, and its many offshoots, is a mental midget to begin with. Sanders is certainly no exception. That said, he’s been hanging around for a lot of years, and has had a mode of political success, particularly in the left-leaning state of Vermont. Which, these days is occupied mostly by aging hippies who’ve never gotten out of the idea that wearing a tie dye t-shirt is the in thing to do.
But his sudden rise on the scene leaves me wondering about the grassroots claims. Democrats are always going to claim that their candidates, however positioned, are very organic, very grassroots ish. But the fact is, they almost never are. Usually, corporate sponsors are coming out of the candidates years. And that, usually in the hopes of buying influence I like Hillary Clinton.
But Sanders and his sudden pop star status, to me has a different feel to it… And probably a different explanation. Certainly, one of the complaints that can be leveled very easily at Hillary Clinton is that she is too far left of the mainstream. How to correct that image? Certainly, she can’t change her position… not substantially anyway. But with a few dollars here in a few dollars there, she could pump up Bernie Sanders to make him look like a serious threat to your candidacy. Then, if he gets too large, it does actually presented a serious challenge, you can always question his birth certificate.
Oh wait, that’s what she did with Obama. Well, you get the idea anyway.
Suddenly all the money dries up, and charges start flying out of the woodwork.
What I guess I’m saying here is that I suspect and suppose that Sanders and his sudden rise to power is all for the benefit of Hillary Clinton.
Yes, I know that I’ve mentioned that aspect before, but I mentioned it as a possibility at the time. Thing is, the more time goes on the more I am convinced that that’s precisely what’s happening here.
Let’s also consider George Soros. If anybody had the kind of money needed to pull something like this off, Soros would certainly be very close to the top of the list if not at the top. Getting the party as a whole to bend more to the left, what should the purposes of Soros very nicely. You know, it was only several weeks ago now that Sanders and his people were gloating over the amount of money that all then, very quickly after his announcing his candidacy. I would be very interested in seeing where precisely that money comes from. I will guarantee you but if you follow the money a couple of hops back, Clinton calculates very large of those figures.
In the end, it’s my view the Bernie Sanders has about as much chance of obtaining the Democrat nomination as Rand Paul does the Republican nomination… And for the same reason. But, often as not, watching the outliers gives you an indication of what’s going on in the middle, because usually the outliers have strings tugging on them from the middle. Controlling them.
As for O’Malley, I strongly suspect that he’s going to end up being nothing more than an also-ran in this contest, assuming even survives that long.
One more thing. I’ve been watching David’s comments as regards Bruce Jenner, and I can only add one comment to it all…
The question that seems to go ignored in this Jenner thing, is one that’s been asked several times previously about other people. What happens when, as happens so frequently, the person involved decides that the surgical disfigurement didn’t make them happy either?
It seems to me that no matter how you slice this one, what we are witness to is a case of a number of people trying to justify their own leanings against the societal status quo, by latching onto an emotionally troubled individual. Is Jenner what our society has reduced itself to and its perception of bravery and heroes? If so, I think I can easily predict our society is not going to be around come the turn of the next century.
And down the road I go . I’ll see you tomorrow.
Bruce Jenner wants to be accepted as if he somehow were a girl. With the help of a make-up crew, a professional photographer and much photoshopping, Vanity Fair put the results for the world do see on its cover
Darleen Click, a real girl, has both the photograph and her comments over at Protein Wisdom.
It would seem natural that Mrs. Clinton, at her age, would have some regrets and want a do over. It is only human. Yet for some strange reason, Mrs. Clinton wants a do over on one of the few things she ever did with a degree of competence, from Ace:
Hillary Clinton: Even Though I Already Said I’m Running for President, Today I Am Announcing That In Two Weeks I Will Announce I Am Running For President
She’ll announce on Roosevelt Island, in New York City, because Democrats no longer pretend to be part of broader America.
Everybody who has a pulse and follows the news already knows that Mrs. Clinton is running for president. Only the Lord knows why she thinks she is qualified.
As for potential do overs for Mrs. Clinton, the blog has just a partial list of suggestions:
- Her proclamation on Sixty Minutes that her husband did not have an affair with Jennifer Flowers and that she loved him.
- Her bold assertion of some heretofore unknown, but nefarious “vast right-wing conspiracy.”
- Her accidental hitting of the reset button, where she inadvertently restarted the Cold War.
- Her entire policy on Iran, supporting the invasion, opposing the surge, but supporting the abandonment.
- The fact that Bruce Jenner can appear on the cover of Vogue, and look sexier that her.
Can’t wait for what Carly will say.
I’m at mountaintop Pennsylvania has this is written, haven’t driven today from the Rochester area to Buffalo to Batavia back to Newark New York, and then down to Hazleton Pennsylvania. Then here. Fairly long day.
Tomorrow, I’ll pick up a trainee, and teach him how to drive for us. That’s a job I’ve been doing quite a bit of lately. I won’t say I like it or dislike it, I guess it’s down to I don’t mind it. And it seems I’m reasonably good at it. The truck is behaving, no the engine computer is complaining about a bad sensor which monitors the oil breather. It’s on order and I should see it at the end of the week.
The recent chill with Joan as come in with is actually a welcome respite. The air conditioners in the truck work fine, even one the truck isn’t running. But it’s nice to open the window at night. At least, the windows with screens in them.
Welcome to my world.
I saw an interesting study the other day.
This study, for whatever it’s worth concluded that yes, America does have a gun problem. At the same time however, when they broke the figures down, they found something very interesting indeed.
That being, that if you take away the incidence of gun crime involving black on black crime, and Hispanics using guns in criminal fashion, the incidence of gun crime here in these United States falls below that of Great Britain, of Australia and even below that of New Zealand, where such firearms are banned entirely.
It struck me as I was reading the report that I never seen anything of the like even contemplated before. And of course the reason why would be obvious. There are those who would consider even thinking such a thing to be racist. Or at least, so they would label it, and thereby have the opportunity to dismiss it.
Thing is, I’ve never been bound by such considerations. My pursuit of the truth is exactly that pursuit of the truth. Wherever it ends up leading.
I’ve always known of course with the emphasis on guns as a problem Factor was being well exaggerated by the gun grabbers in our society, and always have been. Consider the number of public schools for example that actually had gun ranges where students were taught how to handle firearms. That’s no longer happening.
But you know what else isn’t happening? You know what else isn’t being taught? Responsibility of the individual. And the thing is, I don’t consider it a racial issue, but a cultural one.
Just something to think about today.
None are so blind as those who will not see, from Daily Beast:
Obama Says Cuba Doesn’t Sponsor Terrorism. So What Are All These Hijackers and Bomb-Makers Doing There?
The White House says that Cuba has nothing to do with terrorism. But Havana is like a Star Wars cantina of Cold War radicals—including some of the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists.
If you happened to have found yourself in possession of a hijacked airplane circa 1970, chances are that you would have steered it to Cuba. From 1968 through 1972, over 80 American civilian jetliners were hijacked to the communist island. So popular was Cuba as a destination for airline hostage takers that the British Sun newspaper once featured a photograph of a flight attendant with the caption, “Coffee, tea, or—Castro?” on its front page.
Hat tip. BSWK and reax, Fausta:
Pres. Obama, in his desperate quest for a legacy while Iraq is lost and the economy grows at 2%/year, turns a blind eye to human rights abuses and seizes the low-hanging fruit.
Hence, the Communist regime gets all it asks for in exchange for nothing.
Dim Won, a/k/a Barack Obama denies Cuba sponsors terrorism. Yet, Cuba does sponsor terrorists. As Mrs. Clinton might say, “What difference does it make?” Dim Won, the socialist, wants a legacy fit to appease his socialist friends.
This not a defense of Denny Hastert.
Follow along with me, the Department of Justice, lead by Loretta Lynch, uncovers an on going felony and in responce, Lynch’s Lads arrest the victim, WTF, from Warrens Space:
Former congressman Dennis Hastert has been charged with failing to tell his bank why he was withdrawing his money (up to $3.5 million withdrawn in smaller amounts over a few years). It appears that he was being blackmailed by someone threatening to expose a sexual relationship long ago that Mr. Hastert does not want disclosed. Blackmail is a crime that I understand, but I have yet to read that the blackmailer has been charged with any crime. I assume that that is coming.
Mr. Hastert is being charged with violating our Anti Money Laundering (AML) laws.
These laws allow arresting and convicting people for moving money (as Mr. Hastert was doing) that the government thinks was the proceeds of crime (not the case with Mr. Hastert, his crime was failing to report what he planned to with his money), when they are not able to prove that there was a crime in the first place. As far as I know, paying a blackmailer (which is what Mr. Hastert apparently did) is not a crime, though demanding and receiving such money is.
If Lynch’s DOJ had any intention of prosecuting Denny Hastert’s blackmailer, they would not have kept his name secret. In the Lynch regime, it is now a federal crime for a private citizen to spend his own money as he alone sees fit for a completely legal purpose, albeit ever to ill advised. Lynch has charged Denny Hastert with nothing more that spending his own money and tell the FBI all about it. Lynch offers no evidence of any underlying prosecutable federal offense. Do we have to bring back the reprobate Eric Holder to restore some little dignity to the Department of Justice?
Representative Carolyn Maloney (NY – 12) understands neither the Constitution of the United States or basic statistics, fromPolitico
House Democrat Rep. Carolyn Maloney (N.Y.) has introduced a bill that would require gun owners to carry liability insurance.
The Firearm Risk Protection Act, unveiled Friday, would require gun buyers to have liability insurance coverage before being allowed to purchase a weapon, and would impose a fine of $10,000 if an owner is found not to have it. Service members and law enforcement officers, however, would be exempt from the requirement.
“We require insurance to own a car, but no such requirement exists for guns,” Maloney said in a statement. “The results are clear: car fatalities have declined by 25 percent in the last decade, but gun fatalities continue to rise.”
Guns are not analogous to motor vehicles. While the total number of deaths from guns and motor vehicles are about the same, their causes are totally different. Motor vehicle deaths are virtually all accidental, from from CDC:
Motor vehicle traffic deaths
- Number of deaths: 33,804
- Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.7
Whereas only three percent of guns deaths are accidental, from About:
There are roughly 32,000 gun deaths per year in the United States. Of those, around 60% are suicides. About 3% are accidental deaths (between 700-800 deaths). About 34% of deaths (just over 11,000 in both 2010 and 2011) make up the remainder of gun deaths and are classified as homicides. Sometimes the 32,000 and 11,000 figures are used interchangeably by gun control advocates. Clearly, the 32,000 figure is a far more dramatic number and it is often used for impact by anti-gun activists.
I dare to say that gun liability insurance will nary prevent a single suicide, nor a homicide with an illeal gun. Ms Maloney quit your war on our constitutional right to keep and bear arms, to cover up for the failure of the liberal social agenda.
