Briefings  from SCOPE President, Tom Reynolds

  • 11/11/2020 4:17 PM | Anonymous

    The House of Representatives  by Tom Reynolds

    There are 435 seats in the House, so 218 is a majority.  As of Tuesday at 5PM, per Politico, Republicans had won 201 seats and were leading in 11 more.  (212 total).  There are 5 of the 11 that are very close.  212 is not enough for a majority but a potential pickup of 15 from their starting point of 197.  Democrats have won 215 and are leading in 8. (223 total).  Of those undecided, 2 are almost tied and 5 are very close.  Of course, counting still continues so nothing is firm on the 19 still outstanding.

    Many of the undecided races are in New York, where there are five races undecided; Republicans have substantial leads in four of them and a small lead in the fifth.

    Without doubt, Democrat House members will see their ranks thinned, it’s just a question of how much.  As a result, several House Democrats have been outspoken in their criticism of Nancy Pelosi’s leadership. Their criticism focuses on the party’s far leftward tilt toward Socialism and the prominent place that radicals have taken in the party’s public image and that group’s influence being greater than their numbers.  Depending on the final figures, there may be sufficient anger to replace.    

    The Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee Chairwoman has already announced she is stepping down after only one term, another sign that the election did not go well for Democrats.

    Many House members are more likely than Senators to reflect rural values, such as the 2nd Amendment.  Senators represent the entire state - which may be dominated a few large cities (as in New York) - while Representatives have small districts within the state and rural voters have more of a say. 

    NICS checks and gun sales set records in the months before the election.  Congresspersons from rural areas, where gun rights are a big issue, will have to think twice before supporting gun control.  Could there be some defections from the Democrat Party line on gun grabbing?  If the House split remains close, it will only take a few defections to kill gun control bills in the House instead of depending on the Senate to do it.

    Biden’s proposals concerning guns may cause problems for a closely split House.  He has proposed applying an existing federal law, with a $200 tax on machine guns, to assault weapons — which he may define to include semi-automatic firearms. He also proposed requiring universal background checks on all firearms transfers, limiting firearm purchases to one per month, and giving owners of modern sporting rifles the option of either selling their guns “back” to the government or registering them under the National Firearms Act (compensated confiscation).

    Biden’s plan includes providing incentives (bribes with taxpayer dollars) to the states to set up gun licensing programs. He would give grants to state and local governments for them to require individuals to obtain a license prior to purchasing a gun. 

    A Biden administration might try to administratively (bypassing Congress) achieve his goals. 

    The U.S. Supreme Court will probably have something to say about this and its impact on exercising a fundamental right protected by the Constitution.

    Speaking of the need for guns, Democrats were silent on the riots until their polling started dropping.  Was it too little, too late?  Will riots restart?  The rioters saw success and almost no consequences as Democrat Mayors and Governors took a pass on law and order.  Will they see riots as a way to gain power?  If so, will Democrats stand up to them?

    Of course, pro-2A President Trump is contesting the election and if he were successful, we would have a very different situation!

  • 11/10/2020 10:43 AM | Anonymous

    Georgia On All Our Minds  by Tom Reynolds

    In the 100 seat Senate, political parties need 51 seats for control.  (The Vice President breaks ties.)  After the election, Republicans have 48 for sure and 1 that is almost certain and 1 that is highly probable for a 50 total. Democrats have 48 for sure.  The two remaining undecided seats are both in Georgia. 

    A Senate candidate in Georgia must win 50% of the vote or there is a runoff election between the top two candidates.  There were two Senate elections in Georgia (one a special election) and no candidate won 50% in either election.  So, there will be two Senate seats on the line in a January election.  The Republicans need one victory to maintain control while Democrats need a sweep of both.    

    In one election, Republican David Perdue leads by 90,000 votes with 49.8%.  His challenger, Democrat John Ossoff, got 47.9% of the vote.  The rest (115,000 votes, 2.3%) went to Libertarian Shane Hazel.  So, one immediate question is: where will Hazel’s voters go, (if they don’t sit out the January election)?

    Hazel is a Marine combat vet who supports 2A.  He was a former Republican who was disenchanted with the party and became a Libertarian (but he did not become a Democrat).  His web site has a mix of positions but would seem to lean Republican.  However, did his supporters vote for him or against a major party; and if so, which party?

    If exactly the same people vote in the special election that voted in the recent one, the Republican needs only 13,000 of the 116,000 who voted for Hazel.  Of course, exactly the same people won’t be voting for exactly the same party.

    The other election is a real mixed bag.  Democrat Raphael Warnock got 32.9% of the vote (1,612,000).  There were two major Republican candidates totaled 2,254,000 total votes (45.9%).  Of the three major candidates, the two Republicans led by 642,000 votes.  But there were 1,040,000 votes (21.2%) that went to 16 other candidates and some of these other candidates also identified as Republicans or Democrats!

    All candidates who identified as Republicans got a combined total of 2,425,000.  All Democrat candidates totaled 2,341,000.  There were about 134,000 votes that went to other candidates; primarily Independents and 1 Libertarian.

    50% of the total votes would have been 2,450,000.  Therefore, Republicans need 25,000 of the 134,000 votes and Democrats need 109,000 of the 134,000 votes, if the same people vote in the same way they just did.  But of course, exactly the same people will not vote for exactly the same party.

    While every voter should have been aware that the majority in the Senate hung in the balance, it has now hit them like a 2 by 4 as to how important their Senate vote will be and that may change some votes.

     Republicans will probably emphasize that winning Georgia would allow the Democrats to implement their radical agenda while Democrats will emphasize that winning Georgia allows them to implement their agenda and reverse the Trump agenda.  Under this scenario, will moderate Democrats be afraid of the radical left’s agenda and either: not vote or vote Republican?  Will more Republicans be motivated to vote in order to stop the radical left?  Under this scenario, very few Republicans will change their vote to a vote for the radical Democrat agenda.  But they have to show up!

    Will Republicans show up?  What will turnout be like?  Given the importance of this race, there will be multi-millions of dollars spent and turnout should be heavier than a normal for a Senate only race.  But will turnout rise to the level of the just completed race, when presidential candidates were on it? 

    Will gun rights be an issue, given the huge increases in NICS checks and gun sales, especially sales to first time gun owners?

    The Senate Majority Leader has huge powers to determine what gets done (or not done).  Expect Republicans to emphasize that this is election is between Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell and New York’s Chuck Schumer for Majority Leader.  Do Georgians want a New York Liberal dictating policy to Georgia?  Democrats may try to offset that by bringing up the recent Supreme Court fight, which may or may not help them. 

    Democrats are threatening to admit Puerto Rico and Washington DC as states with, presumably, all Democrat Senators in those two states.  They need a Senate majority to do that.  How will that play? 

    Democrats also threaten to pack the Supreme Court.  Republicans will use this to motivate Republicans while many Democrats have polled a bit negatively towards this power grab and it may demotivate them. 

    Unfortunately, the election is two months away.

  • 11/10/2020 9:43 AM | Anonymous

    Deep Blue Governors and Mayors  by Tom Reynolds

    Governors and mayors in deep blue states made a decision that they would wreak havoc on their own state’s economy and empower criminals to destroy property and lives in riots.  They believed their states and cities were so deep blue that it would not impact their personal political positions.  This was all done in an attempt to hurt President Trump’s reelection chances.  As it turned out, they were right about their positions being safe since what little opposition they faced was from those even further left.  

    Governor Jay Inslee of Washington State stood by while “peaceful protesters” destroyed Seattle’s downtown.  He took no action when Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan allowed the “CHOP Zone” to flourish and “secede” from the USA, until there were murders in it.  During the riots he identified with Black Lives Matter.  Inslee easily won reelection.

    Seattle’s Mayor Durkan was not up for reelection.  Seattle police have been quitting and retiring in droves, including Chief Carmen Best, because of the lack of support.  There have been attempts to recall her because she is not radical enough.

    The District of Columbia has been torn by riots under Mayor Muriel Bowser and a far-left Democrat City Council.  There have been concessions made to Black Lives Matter rioters, including naming a plaza after them, and in general the rioters got a free pass.  Bowser was not up for reelection but in the D.C. Council races, all Democrats running for reelection won.

    Portland, Oregon, Mayor Ted Wheeler stood by and watched Antifa and Black Lives Matter loot and burn Portland.  When President Trump offered to send the National Guard in to help, Wheeler said, “No thanks”.  When they attacked the federal courthouse, President Trump had to step in.  The Portland police union has been a constant critic of him.     Wheeler’s concern has been about potential white supremacist activity.  Wheeler won reelection over both an opponent who was farther left than him and also a Black Lives Matter activist. 

    Oregon Governor Kate Brown, who was not up for reelection, ordered the activation of the National Guard to quell months of rioting in Portland, THE DAY AFTER THE ELECTION!, Brown had rejected Trump’s offer to bring in the National Guard, months ago.

    Andrew Cuomo…well, we all know about him.  No place in New York for Conservatives.

    These are the people we are dealing with.  Because they live in deep blue states, they promote far left programs because they suffer no consequences when these programs fail.  We’ve been listening to the media and politicians (now that the election is over) talk about extending our hands in friendship and compromising.  That being the “American” thing to do.  As if the media saying this ever, in the past, cared about being “American”.  Can we expect the left to give up their gun grabbing?  Can we expect them to give up the Green New Deal?  Will they compromise on the border wall and immigration?  Will the media cover the Hunter Biden scandal and the “Deep States” treachery?

    Be careful when you extend a hand to them as they will bite it off.

  • 11/05/2020 9:15 AM | Anonymous

    New York State Senate (Update)  by Tom Reynolds

    Prior to 2018, Republicans usually had control of the New York State Senate.  This somewhat offset the heavily New York City based gun grabbers in the Assembly and the Governor’s office.  Republicans were the only defense against the gun grabbing left and when they lost the Senate majority, in a landslide in 2018, the gun grabbers came out in force.

    In October, when SCOPE reviewed the Senate races and advised you of those races that were competitive, it was noted that in many of the races that Republicans lost in 2018 (a non-presidential year) was because the Republican voter turnout cratered from 2016 (a presidential election year.)  It was hoped that some of these seats would be regained in 2020 if Republicans turned out in force to vote for the President – and they did – but not enough.

    There are 63 Senate seats so 32 is a majority.  As of this writing the Republicans have won 28 and 2 more are too close to call.  Not a majority.  And in New York State politics, a miss is a good as a mile.  When the Democrats have the legislative majority, they run roughshod.

    This is particularly distressing since 2020 is also a census year and Senate districts will be redistricted (gerrymandered) prior to the 2022 election.  The Senate majority (Democrats) have control over the process and they will use that power to increase their power.  For example, there are 2 districts in New York City that are Republican (Staten Island and South Brooklyn).  Standing mostly alone, these districts elect Republican Senators.  After redistricting, they will undoubtably be split and their parts merged with heavily Democrat areas surrounding them, thus, dissipating their Republican strength and potentially turning them into Democrat majority districts.  

    Upstate Republican Senators may find themselves opposing other Republican Senators in 2022 as their districts are realigned.  (There is a residency requirement in their districts for Senators.

    So, that’s the problem.  What’s the plan?

    Even before redistricting is complete, we need to be motivating gun owners to act.  (Register and Vote.)  Unfortunately, this will probably be made a little easier as the gun grabbing majority will be pushing all sorts of radical gun control bills to, in effect, do away with the 2nd Amendment.  Hopefully, that might catch reluctant voters’ attention and, perhaps, motivate them.  SCOPE will do its best to publicize these efforts of the left but we also need ordinary members to get motivated and spread the word.  (“The gun grabbers are coming” is the modern equivalent of “The British are coming”.)

    Once redistricting Is done, we need to find and/or support candidates who will defend 2A and run for the Senate in these new districts.  That means getting involved. 

    The far left has their sights on destroying more than just 2A and we need to find those people and organizations targeted by the left and work with them (The enemy of my enemy is my friend.)

    Hopefully, the Covid restrictions will have eased and chapters can get active in their local communities.

    Money is needed to run campaigns and it is easier to start with a little each month than to find a lot just before the election.  The SCOPE PAC is being reorganized and will soon reopen for business.  It made a major contribution to the Senate election committee this year.

    The next few years are not going to be fun but if we are to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution,  it’s our duty as Americans.

  • 11/03/2020 12:48 PM | Anonymous

    Bernie Sanders Tells the Truth (A Little Bit, Anyway)  by Tom Reynolds

    Bernie Sanders is not on Tuesday’s ballot but he is a major force in the Democrat Party and his “thinking” is essentially that of the Democrat Party.  During an interview with Seth Meyers, Bernie Sanders said, “I think it is fair to say that in many ways the Democratic Party has become a party of the coastal elites.”  (Did he look at a national map of red states and blue states to get this stunning flash of brilliance?)

    Sanders continued, “But I think for many, many years the Democratic Party has not paid the kind of attention to working-class needs that they should’ve and that has a lot to do with who funds campaigns, etc.” 

    Sanders knows that, in the midst of riots, arson, murders, defunding police and rogue District Attorneys, Democrats ignored the safety needs of working-class citizens and wanted to do away with a citizens’ last form of protection, the 2nd Amendment.  With NICS checks and gun sales hitting all-time highs, shouldn’t that have caught the actual candidates’ (Biden and Harris) attention.  Perhaps they were too busy courting Wall Street to notice? Women are a significant percentage of these gun buyers and yet we hear that suburban women will vote for the gun grabbers Biden and Harris.  (Sarah Palin’s “pit bull with lipstick” now carries a Glock.)

    Democrats are too busy courting big donors, as Sanders said, to be bothered with working-class needs like safety.  Breitbart reports  that Wall Street executives in New York City, alone, have poured more than $74 million into Biden’s campaign. A CNN analysis noted that “all the big banks” are backing Biden against Trump. These donors want to buy Biden’s support instead of him wasting his time on working-class needs.  

    Sanders once embraced the rural gun culture in Vermont.  But he has moved to the left along with the rest of his party after he saw that his gun record could be a real detriment to his presidential ambitions.

    Wow, he flipped on 2A because of presidential ambitions.  Say it aint so!  Does that sound like anyone else we know?

    In 1986, Joe Biden voted with the NRA on a bill called the “Firearms Owners’ Protection Act,” which the NRA called “the law that saved gun rights”.  Biden was key to the law’s passage at the time.  When the Democrat Party subsequently shifted left, being loyal follower, Joe did the same and now has aextensive and undeniable history as a gun grabber - which doesn’t stop him from flip flopping on 2A.  When he was competing in the Democrat Primary against other gun grabbing Democrats, Biden was anti 2A and he said to Beto O’Rourke, “You're gonna take care of the gun problem with me, you're gonna be the one who leads this effort".  But while campaigning against 2A supporter President Trump, Biden was accused of being hostile to 2A by a factory worker.  His response was, “You’re full of sh..!  I support the Second Amendment”.  He may support it when talking to 2A supporters but when talking to gun grabbing democrats – not so much.

    On the other hand, Kamala Harris is nothing but consistent in her opposition to 2A.  She must believe that guns are the problem and not the person holding the gun, since she has never met a gun control bill she didn’t like.  But based on her actions, illegal aliens, on the other hand, are to be protected from the consequences of breaking laws.

    Harris figures that those inanimate objects can’t vote, but Biden and Sanders understand that the objects’ owners can vote!  And if gun owners sit home on November 3rd or believe the flip floppers on 2A, they will have sealed their own fate - as well as ours, too.

    Vote as if your 2nd Amendment right depends on it – because it does!

  • 11/03/2020 12:46 PM | Anonymous

    Journalism Is Not Dead  by Tom Reynolds

    Some people argue that Journalism is dead but, in fact, it is alive and well.

    People whose profession was to write or present the facts to us formerly were called news “reporters”.  Now they are called news “journalists”.  The change is appropriate.  Reporters were expected to present the facts and to cover all sides of an issue. Psychologists will tell you that people who journal are supposed to write down their thoughts and feelings; they are told that their feelings are real and need to be expressed.  Who can doubt that today’s news media is overwhelmingly populated by people who believe that their own thoughts and feelings are what is real and what must be “reported” as news.  Facts?  Well, not so much.  Both sides of the story?  Never!  “Journalism” is alive and well.  It’s just “Reporting” that has died.

    You may be aware that one presidential candidate’s son abandoned a laptop with overwhelming evidence that the candidate had discussed that son’s business, even though the candidate denied doing so.  And while the candidate was Vice President of the United States of America, he used his political power, in the second most powerful office in the world, as leverage in financial deals with foreign countries.  That would seem to be important news.  But if all you listen to is CNN, MSNBC, and other left-wing news stations, you don’t know about this because they quickly labelled the story “Russian Disinformation” and then buried it.  Director of National Intelligence, John Ratliffe, subsequently said that the laptop was not part of Russian disinformation.  Did CNN, etc. unbury the story?  No Lazarus there.

    Recently, it was reported (but probably not on CNN) that the candidate’s son is under investigation for Money Laundering.  Nothing to see here, says the left-wing media.

    In Philadelphia, a knife wielding, career criminal attacked police and was shot by them.  That incident gave cover to a series of riots that are devastating Philadelphia businesses.  After months of previous riots throughout America, Democrats discovered that the riots were hurting them in the polls and, as a result, riot coverage was buried by the left-wing media in order to protect the Democrat Party.  Did the Philadelphia riots resurrect that coverage?  A cold day In Hell, amidst global warming, has a better chance of happening.

    What are CNN, etc. covering?  Mostly the Covid epidemic and how it is growing at alarming rates and it’s all Donald Trump’s fault.  There is also coverage of the presidential election and how Trump will be overwhelmingly defeated, so his supporters, by inference, need not bother voting in a lost cause. 

    Twitter and Facebook refuse to allow posts that support the laptop story.  Only someone with the IQ of a rock would believe this is anything but political censorship.

    There was a saying in defense of the 1st Amendment, “I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.  That saying is now, “I disagree with what you say and since it hurt my feelings you must stop saying it”.  The proponents of microaggressions should try following the saying, “Get over it”.  No, they’d rather pretend to wallow in self pity in order to strike a blow for political censorship. 

    This election is a test whether the American voters can see beyond the overwhelmingly biased left-wing journalism, that we are buried under every day, and use their judgement when casting their ballots.  The media believes they can decide the results of the election through their actions.  The course of American news reporting depends on you voting and showing that the media cannot brainwash you.  Oh yeah, and your future, too.

  • 10/29/2020 1:19 PM | Anonymous

    Critical of Critical Race Theory  by Tom Reynolds

    President Trump’s “Executive order on combating race and sex stereotyping”, effectively banned promoting Critical Race Theory within the federal government.  His opponents attempt to label President Trump as a racist but it is those who promote Critical Race Theory that are the racists.  In his Executive Order, Trump laid out principles that would have been embraced by Martin Luther King Jr. and his civil rights movement.  Critical Race Theory directly opposes the racial progress made in the last half century; it divides, rather than unites

    Many people are not familiar with the details of Critical Race Theory, which clearly does not correspond with the spirit or the letter of the Constitution and the civil rights laws; this unconstitutionality allowed President Trump to ban it. 

    In order to familiarize you with it, so you can better defend the Constitution, the following is a direct quote from the President’s Executive Order, “This ideology (Critical Race Theory) is rooted in the pernicious and false belief that America is an irredeemably racist and sexist country; that some people, simply on account of their race or sex, are oppressors; and that racial and sexual identities are more important than our common status as human beings and Americans”.

    In the executive order, Trump banned teaching the following divisive concepts that are at the heart of Critical Race Theory:

    an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously;

    an individual’s moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex;

    an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex;

    any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex;

    meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic and objectivity were created by a particular race to oppress another race;

    an individual’s character traits, values, moral and ethical codes, privileges, status, or beliefs are because of his or her race or sex”;

    an individual’s fault, blame, or bias is a result of their race or sex;

    members of any race are inherently racist or are inherently inclined to oppress others;

    members of a sex are inherently sexist or inclined to oppress others;

    and last but not least, the United States is fundamentally racist or sexist; 

    In direct contradiction to Critical Race Theories, on Monday, in Washington D.C., a black man from Georgia swore in a white woman from Indiana to be one of only nine Supreme Court justices.  Take that you race baiters!

    Those that want to take away your 2nd Amendment rights will embrace the divisiveness of Critical Race Theory as a way to destroy America.  President Trump can attempt to stop this divisive theory within the federal government but the private sector has the freedom, under our Constitution, to continue to divide us.  Check out your local schools funded by your taxes or the colleges charging tens of thousands of dollars in tuition, as they are indoctrinating our youth, counter to what Trump is outlawing.  Ask candidates for political offices to condemn Critical Race Theory.

    On November 3rd, vote against the proponents of Critical Race Theory.

  • 10/28/2020 8:02 PM | Anonymous

    Packing the Supreme Court  by Tom Reynolds

    With Amy Coney Barrett’s appointment to the Supreme Court (SCOTUS), there is talk amongst Democrats about “packing” SCOTUS.  Biden’s silence on the subject confirms that, if elected President, he will probably go along with this idea.  The purpose behind “packing” is to create more justice positions and fill them with anti 2A liberals in order to gain a liberal political majority on SCOTUS.  They may go beyond that and increase the number of other federal judges (over 600 now) to add even more anti 2A judges at all levels

    The Founding Fathers created two branches of government that are political and representative in nature: Congress and the Presidency.  The third branch of government, Judicial, is supposed to be the non-political, non-representative branch.  Its’ role is to make impartial non-political decisions based solely on the rule of law, as written in the Constitution or passed by Congress.  Being non-political gives the Judicial branch a moral authority as well as a Constitutional authority. 

    To insulate justices from political pressures and keep decisions non-political, the only way to remove a justice is for Congress to impeach that justice.  Congress has been very loath to impeach judges since that would open the door to Congress threatening impeachment in order to get a political judgement. While Congress could legally do it, political impeachments would destroy SCOTUS’ moral authority. Only fifteen federal judges have been impeached in the entire history of the USA. Congress has, until now, usually recognized the need for the Judiciary’s moral authority by not using its impeachment power to influence the judiciary.

    Supreme Court decisions are obeyed by the other two branches and by American citizens because those decisions are, theoretically, based on non-political judgements.  Americans – and especially legal gun owners - want to obey the law.  If SCOTUS reflected the whims of a temporary majority, rather than upholding the principles of law, it would soon lose its moral authority. If the court is packed, it becomes just another instrument of partisan politics and loses its credibility as the defender of our fundamental, constitutional values.

    The main difference between justices is in the way they interpret the Constitution; some are Strict Constructionists and some are Loose Constructionists.  Political definitions are flexible but, in general, Strict Constructionists believe the Constitution and laws passed under the Constitution mean what the laws meant when passed.  They do not believe in legislating from the bench since the ability to pass laws belongs only to Congress, which is elected by the citizens.  Loose Constructionists believe the law can be changed by judges to fit current needs - as the unelected judge sees those needs.  That is not a democracy!  The issue should only be the Constitution and not a judge’s feelings.

    Democrats justify court packing to “even the playing field”.  With SCOTUS divided 5 to 3 between Strict Constructionists and Loose Constructionists, (no one knows what John Roberts is), would Democrats add only 2 more justices to even the playing field or leap at the opportunity to tilt the playing field in their favor by appointing more than 2?  Everything in Democrats’ recent history indicates they would do the latter!

    Some Democrats justify court packing if Obamacare is struck down because millions of Americans are on it.  But the number of people on a plan does not and should not affect its constitutional status.  It’s either constitutional or it’s not.  

    Stare Decisis is a legal term that gives great weight to previous decisions when making current decisions on the same subject.  If the law is constantly changing with every change in political power, the law will not be viewed as impartial and loses its moral authority.  SCOTUS has consisted of 9 justices for over 150 years, through both Republican and Democrat political majorities, and only Franklin Roosevelt tried to change that for political purposes.  That consistency has helped preserve SCOTUS’ position as the final arbiter.  Shouldn’t Congress apply Stare Decisis to its own decisions on SCOTUS, in order to keep SCOTUS’ moral authority intact?  

    For 2A supporters, a “packed” SCOTUS would be a disaster as the Democrat Party and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have consistently been anti 2A and you can be sure they would appoint like-minded, anti 2A judges to the court.  Our temporary opening to strengthen 2A would close in a flash.


  • 10/27/2020 7:38 PM | Anonymous

    A Referendum on Liberty  by Harold Moskowitz

    Life is full of far-reaching decisions.  We choose a means of earning a living, a lifestyle, and perhaps another person with whom to share our life.  These choices can be changed if necessary.  Soon, all of us will have an additional choice to make.  It will profoundly affect not only your future but that of those people we care about as well.

    On November 3, 2020, an election will be held.  This election does not involve the mere choice between two candidates of different political parties.  In reality, this election will serve as a national referendum on whether or not we will become a socialist nation.  By extension, it will determine whether we remain a free nation with unalienable rights or a nation of “peasants and serfs” ruled by a tight-fisted soviet style “politburo.”  Should the candidate representing this second scenario win, the levers of government power will be used to stifle dissent and to institute changes designed to create and maintain one party rule in perpetuity.

    Without viable opposition, our constitutional republic’s safeguards against tyranny, which were built into our government by the Framers, will be removed or ignored.  In that case, we would be left with unrestricted one-party rule as is currently seen in repressive states such as California and New York.

    The choice will be yours to make.  Only you can stop socialism and the loss of individual liberty.  Some choices cannot be undone without having to risk your life.  A choice resulting in the loss of freedom and economic opportunity for those you love is one such choice.  Vote November 3rd to keep your freedom, your cherished values, and your way of life.

  • 10/27/2020 7:35 PM | Anonymous

    Indoctrinating about Intimidating  by Tom Reynolds

    Sunday’s Gannett papers featured an Associated Press article headlined, “Intimidation effort feared at polls”.  Given that riots went unchecked for months and rioters have felt free to try to intimidate bystanders and the police, that seems like a legitimate concern for polling places; the article’s first paragraph even referenced the riots as a cause of concern.  (But it doesn’t ever call them riots; they are only protests and civil unrest.)

    Who does the article identify as the people to be concerned about?  “Anti-government extremists and other armed civilians” are cited.  An American University professor puts the blame on the “extreme right” and he also worries about guns being carried into polling places. President Trump’s call for an “army of poll watchers” is also cited at the beginning of a paragraph that ends warning, “…observers will harass or intimidate voters”.  (Hint.  Hint.  Trump wants his “observers” to intimidate voters, not watch for fraud.)

    The article even includes reference to the group that plotted a kidnapping of Michigan’s governor.

    And, of course, the article included the mandatory liberal lie about Trump not condemning right wing extremists.

    Wow.  Sounds as if we had better beware of right-wingers intimidating voters; like those right-wing extremists who have been rioting for months in major cities, burning, looting, shooting and causing $2 billion in damage. Oh, wait.  That’s Black Lives Matter and Antifa that did that!  Don’t Black Lives Matter and Antifa qualify as “anti-government extremists”?  Do their actions constitute anarchy?  Surely, the article has to also include them as groups to be concerned about if the article is going to be comprehensive?  Nope.  Not even a hint of criticism of anything leftist.  Apparently, Gannett newspapers and the Associated Press believe that Black Lives Matter and Antifa have great respect for our rights as citizens and they would never use violence to intimidate anyone, so there was no need to mention either group in the article.

    Greater NY Black Lives Matter President Hawk Newsome admits to saying, “If this country doesn’t give us what we want, then we will burn down the system and replace it”.  Can voters rely on Black Lives Matter to not interfere with the election and, mercifully, give us one-last-chance to do what they want - before they burn down the system of voting and replace it with…?  (I’m gonna take a wild guess and say that Newsome’s replacement system parallels the old USSR system by allowing us to vote for Newsome’s candidate, or else.)

    The mention of the Michigan governor’s kidnapping plot made sure that we know she is a Democrat. (Hint.  Hint.  It must have been those nasty right-wing, bible clinging gun owners at work again.)  But according to social media posts, two of the six plotters initially arrested are anarchists that hated Michigan’s governor and hated President Trump and a third plotter identified with Black Lives Matter.  (One thing about right-wing extremists – they believe in diversity - and they’re even willing to include left-wing extremists.)

    The anti-gun rhetoric in the article pushes making polling places into “gun free zones”.  That’s worked out well in the past as criminals, historically, show great respect and deference for gun-free zones…

    This article was a terrific example of the deceit of the media in general and Gannett newspapers in particular.  They took a legitimate news concern and, by figurative winks-and-nods, turned it into an anti-Republican, anti-Trump editorial hiding in plain sight.  And they even got in a few “shots” for gun control.  Should we have expected anything else?

    At least this article didn’t say that Trump was dividing America…That article was on page 6.

A 2nd Amendment Defense Organization, defending the rights of New York State gun owners to keep and bear arms!

PO Box 165
East Aurora, NY 14052

SCOPE is a 501(c)4 non-profit organization.

[ Site Developed By A2Z Enhanced Digital Solutions ]

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software