Democrats Protecting Children

ScreenHunter_409 Jan. 17 17.54

Twenty years ago in April, Bill Clinton, Janet Reno and Eric Holder protected a couple dozen children from guns – by burning them alive.

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated

When Clinton wasn’t busy raping women and burning American kids in their homes, he took time off to starve half a million Iraqi children. Because Democrats care about children.

After killing half a million kids over Saddam’s WMDs, the same Democrats screamed at Bush that there never were any WMDs.


About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Democrats Protecting Children

  1. I was listening to the news yesterday and Obama said regarding gun laws that if his new regulations saved even one life, that would make it all worth it. OK, following this logic… there are between 300-400 deaths related to bathtubs annually in the US. E.g., falling asleep in them. Should they be banned from homes?

    I realise this is just political rhetoric but it would be refreshing if the quality of the rhetoric was better.

  2. Duby says:

    I was and still pissed off about the non action the people of Texas did at Waco–not to mention Ruby Ridge and at least they killed some of the Bastards at Waco

  3. johnmcguire says:

    One of the low points in American history , easily equaling anything that happened during the Indian wars . And I am able to say that without reservation as I am of American heritage on my mothers side . I have as much as 12 and one half percent of Shoshone blood . Hey , that is as much as some of the folks on the reservations . My granny looked like the squaw she was , and had long black hair that reached the floor from the top of her 4 foot 11 inch head , although it had a lot of white in it in her old age . She lived to be 93 years and still had a good brain when she died . I thought Waco was an atrocity , a blight on the honor of America .

    • Andy DC says:

      A breed in our presence! Please excuse my politically incorrect sense of humor. That is what they called Quint (Burt Reynolds) on Gunsmoke.

  4. frimley7 says:

    Actually there were. They found 500 tons of yellow cake uranium and quietly removed it all before it was realized that we could not defend the huge supply. We removed it all to Canada and Bush was willing to take the fall for “no WMDs”. That’s a cool move, IMHO.

  5. Myron Mesecke says:

    Sorry. Here I have to disagree. I live near Waco. When people start shooting at law enforcement just for trying to serve a warrant they stop being law abiding citizens. No one outside started that fire. No one outside prevented anyone from getting out.

    • Andy DC says:

      What I have always believed is that by having the raid on an extremely windy day, they all but ensured that innocent women and children would be incinerated, regardless of who started the fire.

      I have a friend who is a meteorologist who told me that high winds were in the forecast two days before the raid. I cannot believe that those who conducted that raid would do so without taking the weather into account. Also the wind was blowing from a perfect direction to have the fire sweep thru the compound almost instantly and the people conducting the raid knew that as well.

      If they had only waited another day or so, the wind died down and the chances of saving the innocent would have dramatically increased.
      The day of the raid was the windiest day of the month at Waco up to that point.

    • daveburton says:

      I agree that nobody has the right to shoot at cops, but the ATF weren’t just trying to serve a warrant. They mounted a helicopter assault, fer Pete’s sake, over suspicion of a trivial violation of a constitutionally dubious firearms law.

      Supposedly, the ATF just wanted to detain Koresh, and search for illegally modified firearms. But they could have detained him easily, and bloodlessly, anytime he went to town. They didn’t bother to do so.

      Fifty days after the initial attack, on 4/19/1993, the ATF mounted a second assault, with heavier weapons, and torched the place. 54 adults, 22 children ages 1-17, and 2 unborn babies were burned to death.

      Some wag said that it’s true that Koresh and the Branch Davidians were religious nuts with guns, but this country was founded by religious nuts with guns, and it shouldn’t be a capital crime to be the child of parents who are religious nuts with guns.

      • Andy DC says:

        I remember the night after the raid, some high Clinton official said that the children killed were children of sin and we thus we should not have any remorse about incinerating them. Then the following Saturday, the bleeding heart, Carl Rowen on TV said he didn’t give a damn about the Dividians (no doubt because they were not black).

        I thought in this country we protected the innocent. The way that situation was handled showed incredible hypocracy on the part of phony liberals.

    • Ben says:

      The government cut off power to the compound. So the only interior light came from oil lanterns set on tables and hay bales (to absorb bullets).

      The final hour, the government deployed hole punching APCs, which knocked over one or more lanterns, and started a conflagration.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s