Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.


When it comes to muddying the waters of government, no one is as adept as the Queen of Corruption, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The former Secretary of State will likely go down in History as one of the most nefarious and crooked politicians that our nation has ever endured.  Her constant backdoor dealings with men such as Vladimir Putin is the stuff of legend, and a number of far more serious concerns have raised their ugly heads in recent months.

Oh, and let’s never forget about Seth Rich, even if there seems to be some sort of blackout regarding the unsolved murder of a man believed to be the connection between the DNC and Wikileaks.

Clinton, like a good little progressive, is all about neutering the Second Amendment, regardless of whatever lip service she gives us.  (And, to be honest, I wouldn’t believe that anything we hear from the Wicked Witch of The East isn’t lip service).

take our poll - story continues below

Should Joe Biden drop out of the Presidential race because of his inappropriate touching of women?

  • Should Joe Biden drop out of the Presidential race because of his inappropriate touching of women?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Keep and Bear updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Now, in an affront to the idea of a fair and impartial government sworn to protect our freedom, Hillary is asking her supporters to eschew the political realities of our Constitution in favor of a far more hysterical and emotional viewpoint on the Second Amendment.

“Soul searching”?  I’d much rather do something about the safety of our students than spend time wondering why their teachers weren’t armed, or why their school were not properly protected.

Unfortunately, this isn’t a new leaf turned over by the colliding conniver.

It is not unusual for Clinton to make a push for gun control after a high profile, firearm-based crime, and that often translates into pushing gun laws that would have not have prevented the very crime that inspired her comments.

For example, she responded to the October 1, 2017, by criticizing firearm suppressors and then-pending legislation that would have removed suppressors from the auspices of the National Firearms Act (1934).  Ironically, suppressors were not even used in the Las Vegas attack.

If Clinton is insinuating that thinking long and hard about the Second Amendment will force people to give up their guns, she may have another thing coming.

The right to bear arms is itself an insurance policy against the loss of that very right.  The moment Clinton, or any other democratic deity decides that they have enough support to go around confiscating weapons is the same moment that the Second Amendment activates.  It’s a protection against tyranny, and the loss of the Second Amendment certainly qualifies as tyranny.


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Become an Insider!

Enter your email address below to stay in the loop and read our latest and greatest updates!

Send this to a friend