I took a little heat last night and this morning from my Tweeps – the 137,734 (as of this morning) people who follow me on Twitter at @talkmaster.  By the way --- if you’re not one of them, you’re missing out.  We’re having a blast.  But – back to the heat they threw my way.  You see, I wasn’t there Tweeting 0bama’s State of the Union Speech last night.  In previous years I was sitting at a computer Tweeting my snarky comments as 0bama droned on.

One of the privileges of retirement is that I don’t feel compelled to watch and listen to 0bama every time he decides to share the wisdom garnered over his years as a community organizer with the American people.  I do pay attention, but I don’t have to look at his face or listen to his ers, ahs, uhs, and well-practiced cadence.  I’ll just get on the computer later and read what he said without the gag reflex.  Even now, as I write these notes, the TV is off.  I just know that any news program I tune in to this morning is going to be full of cuts from the speech last night.  I’m feeling too good to subject myself to that.

Does that seem a bit much to you?  Yeah --- I suppose it could.  But I am absolutely firm in my belief that this man’s ultimate goal is the destruction of this country.  His intention is to weaken us economically and militarily.  He wants to replace our free enterprise system, which he despises, with a centrally-planned government controlled economy, which he believes will be more “fair.” 

OK … so I read the speech this morning and it was exactly what I expected it to be.  There were the fully anticipated homilies to the greatness of America, He used the word “freedom” three times.  He referred to America as a democracy twice, though our founding fathers specifically told us we were not a democracy.  And the word “I” or “me” showed up 35 times. Setting the word usage aside, the message was the same as it has always been with 0bama.  We need more government, more government programs and more government spending.  America is great because of government.  The more government spends, the greater America becomes, and to do this we just have to raise taxes on the rich some more.  Nothing new here!

But then I read Marco Rubio’s rebuttal, and was encouraged. 

Let me share a little story about March Rubio.  Soon after I moved to Florida I became aware of Rubio.  He had resigned his position as Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives and was running for the U.S. Senate.  At the suggestion of friends I went online and listened to his farewell speech to the Florida House.  I want you to watch that speech right now.  I want you to see Marco Rubio standing before the Florida House, his left hand in his pocket, his right hand holding the microphone.  No teleprompter.  No notes.  Watch that speech … here’s the link … and then tell me that Rubio’s comments back in 2008 don’t surpass anything you’ve ever heard Barack 0bama say. 

Anyway … back to the story.  As soon as I learned of Marco Rubio I decided that I wanted to vote for him in the Florida Senatorial primary.  He was running against that hack Charlie Crist.  To do that I had to change my voter registration from Libertarian to Republican, and I did so.  (I have since gone back to my original Libertarian registration.)  I then started making the contacts necessary to have March Rubio on my show.  My studio was in the forth bedroom of my Naples condo.  Rubio showed up with one campaign aide, and we talked on the radio for an hour.  I have a few years on me, but I cannot remember being as impressed with any politician I’ve ever met as I was that day with Marco Rubio. 

After the interview we retired to the living room where Rubio and The Queen started talking.  He looked around our condo – and out the window at the expansive view of Naples and the Gulf of Mexico.  “This,” he said, “Is what I aspire to.”  Donna looked at him and said “Oh … you’re going to live in a MUCH nicer place than this.” 

Back then we realized what a great potential for American leadership rested in Marco Rubio.  Last night he showed it in his response to The Destroyer.  Here’s a link to Rubio’s response.  Read it.

This man – this Marco Rubio – may be America’s best – and last – hope.

NO … SHE DIDN’T REALLY SAY THAT?

Oh yes she did. 

Here name is Deborah Feyerick, and she’s a CNN anchor.  Feyerick was interviewing “Bill Nye, the Science Guy” about the snowstorm that stuck the Northeast.  Being a CNN anchor, she naturally had to suggest that the snowstorm was the result of …. GASP! ….. GLOBAL WARMING! 

But Feyerick went even further than that.  There’s an asteroid on the way.  It’s a rather small one, but it’s going to buzz the earth.  This asteroid has been out there for billions of years making laps around the sun.  This time it will pass close by.  So this Feyerick lady … please, I hope you’re sitting down … actually asks Bill Nye if this asteroid is a result of global warming.   No!  I’m not kidding, and you’re not reading The Onion.  She did it.  Really.  Here’s the link if you don’t believe me.  Today millions of blondes in America are praying for Deborah Feyerick to dye her hair some other color.  ANY other color.  Just not blonde. 

Gawd … where does this type of ignorance come from?  Oh, right.  Government schools. 

 WHY THE LIBERAL HATRED OF CITIZENS WITH GUNS? 

You’re snug in your cabin in the mountains outside of Big Bear, California.  Snug, but fearful.  They’re searching for a killer near you.  A terrifying, heavily armed former cop from Los Angeles who has gone on a killing rampage.

Suddenly you hear gunshots.  You part the curtains to look outside .. and there’s the man who’s picture you’ve seen countless times on TV over the past few days running toward your house as he returns fire to police officers in pursuit.

Just a few weeks ago you had been considering buying an AR-15 just in case it might be needed to defend your home from predators of the two and the four-legged variety.  They don’t call the place Big Bear for nothing.  You couldn’t buy one, though, because private ownership of these weapons had been outlawed.  That didn’t stop the killer.  He was carrying one .. that along with several pistols.  The law didn’t seem to deter him at all.  The murderer was still far enough away that you could stop him with one shot through your window, but that option had been taken away by anti-gun zealots.

Somehow you don’t feel comfortable with only your handgun and it’s seven-shot magazine to protect you from this approaching danger.  You know the killer, who is rapidly nearing your door, is much more heavily armed than you.  Things aren’t looking all that rosy for you and your family right now. 

Why did this have to happen?  Why were these liberals -- these Democrats -- so hell-bent on reducing your capacity to act in your own self-defense in a situation just such as this? 

Interesting question, isn’t it?  Setting statistics aside --  the statistics on the number of people shot by lunatics on killing sprees versus the statistics on the number of times a civilian uses a privately-owned firearm to defend themselves every year, usually without ever having to pull the trigger – leaving those statistics aside, just what is it about the liberal Democrat mind that  brings forth this primal fear, this hatred of the idea that a private individual would own a gun and use that gun in self defense? 

I think I have some ideas here.  Let’s share:

The liberal penchant for gun control starts with their obsession with controlling the lives and actions of those considered to be their inferiors .. and  anyone not liberal is inferior.  To amplify the point;  progs believe that their innate intellectual superiority gives them a right to control the lives of the not-so-bright.  You can only buy a 12-ounce soft drink, you ignorant fool.  Stop putting all that salt on your food.  You can’t negotiate your own contract with an employer.  We’ll tell you how much you’re allowed to work for.  Union membership is not a decision for you to make.  We’ll make that decision for you.  We know best.  Do as we say and you’ll be just fine. 

What amazing arrogance!  Liberals (the more self-aggrandizing among them prefer the term “progressives” – I just call them “progs” or “proggies”) have the most dangerous of superiority complexes … superiority complexes coupled with power. 

Now since liberals are entitled to use their superior intelligence to order and control your life, it stands to reason that they’re going to get their proggie panties in a wad when the great unwashed start to show signs of individualism and self reliance.  And to a lib there is no act of independence and self-reliance that is more infuriating and alarming than the act of owning – and perhaps using – a gun for the purpose of defending your life and your freedom.  How dare you accept the responsibility for your own safety? 

And there you have the crux of this anti-gun effort the left and their Dear Leader are putting forth.  The very architecture of this gun control campaign is based on an attack on individualism.  These anti-gun zealots know their assault weapons ban will not save any lives.  The last one didn’t, the next one won’t.  They’re fine with that.  Saving lives is not their goal.  They know that background checks wouldn’t have prevented Sandy Hook, Aurora or almost any other mass shooting.  They’re fine with that.  Saving lives is not their goal.  They know that not one gun control measure they have proposed would have stopped this rogue LA cop.  No problem.  Again, that’s not the goal they’re working toward.  They know that the so-called “gun show loophole” is a complete fiction.  Doesn’t matter.  The media certainly isn’t going to call them on that, and it’s the best lie available for moving toward gun registration; which, history shows us (even in this country) leads to confiscation.

The left is trying to reign in a beast.  Well, a beast in their eyes anyway.  To a liberal -- to today’s progressive Democrat -- the independent freedom-loving and self-reliant American is a dangerous beast who must be controlled, a wild horse that must be broken.  Individualism must be attacked and discredited.  There was, after all, a reason liberal icon Ted Kennedy referred to and praised our “war against individualism!” 

We’re supposed to all be a part of a team .. a team of well-behaved horses pulling the carriage of big government along.  A headstrong horse that refuses to respond correctly to the master’s whip cannot be tolerated.  A person with a strong sense of self-reliance and individual self-worth is, similarly, a dangerous and out of control wild animal that must be corralled … corralled for the common good.  The person who celebrates their individualism, and the laws that protect their individual rights, is a threat to the Democrat holy grail of all-encompassing governance.  The individual, the independent American, the self-reliant and freedom-loving troublemaker must be wrestled down and the bridle of government domination slipped over their heads. 

Obama and the Democrats had their gun control plans ready long, long ago.  The plan was ready to be implemented, they were just waiting for two things to happen. 

First, of course, they had to reelect Barack Obama.  The second necessary element needed to be a crisis – a mass murder committed with guns --- preferably so-called assault weapons.  That first criteria – Obama’s reelection – would be the reason liberals didn’t implement their push against the Second Amendment when the shootings happened at the theater in Aurora, Colorado.  Obama was still campaigning for his second term.  Dang it!  A crisis that can’t be exploited!  But then, after Obama’s reelection,  came Sandy Hook.  That was it – prerequisites satisfied – it was time to move against guns.

Democrats love the term “gun violence.”  You heard it last night during the State of the Union speech.  Note, please, that the term refers to an inanimate object, the gun, not the person who used that gun to kill or wound.  To cite the perpetrator would be to hold an individual responsible for their actions with the gun.  In the liberal world this cannot be allowed.  The instrument must bear the blame, not the individual using it, for you cannot hold an individual responsible for their actions without first recognizing the concept and free will of the individual in the first place.  In the world of the left the gun commits the crime – the spoon eats the ice cream.

This isn’t about saving lives.  It’s all about breaking the spirit of independent-minded and self-reliant Americans who still believe that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and that the term “shall not be abridged” is much more than a mere suggestion.   Can that spirit be broken by the incessant hammering of the left and an obedient (or “legitimate,” as Joe Biden calls them) media pressing the left’s anti-gun message?  Or have we reached the point where Obama and the Democrats have, perhaps, pushed their agenda a little to far and a little too hard.

As Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto is reputed to have said after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."  With a bit of luck --- and maybe luck is what we have to rely on at this point – the same might be said of the left’s attack on the Second Amendment.  Time, and the reaction of patriots, will tell.