Daily Archives: December 21, 2013

More Girls Getting Guns.

— by on — Leave a reply

Anti gun nuts worst nightmare: Check out these REAL Hello Kitty guns

Girl power has become girl firepower, from several Hello Kitty guns to gun purses, hunting clothing, pink earmuffs and more, our Second Amendment is being embraced by more women than ever.

Durkheimer, owner of Northwest Armory in Milwaukie, says gun manufacturer Smith and Wesson has five models of guns they call “Lady Smiths.” Durkheimer says gun sales for women became more common after several tragedies, including the Sandy Hook School shooting.

….

Roger Lihs says the mass shootings prompted his wife to start going with him to the shooting range. He says he never imagined he would be buying his wife a Christmas gift at a gun store.

“She goes to the shooting range with me and she is darn good at it. Actually, she is better than me,” Lihs said.

Source: http://www.katu.com/news/local/Gun-gifts-for-women-increase-236831641.html

If you’re looking or ideas about what to give your girlfriend, wife or mom, visit  http://girlsguidetoguns.com/

 

How to write Headlines for Gun Blogs.

— by on — Leave a reply

Headlines or post titles are the bread and butter of blogging, without them people will not read what you write no matter how well you wrote it. So how do you write those pesky headlines?

1. The “Who” and “What.” Suppose you see this headline in a newspaper: “Police: Gun-carrying passerby ‘did noble thing’ halting Mpls. store robbery.” Not bad, but it’s a little too long. That’s why I wrote: Minneapolis Gun Owner Saves Muslim Shopkeeper.
It’s short, it’s sweet, it’s not something you see every day.
2. The “New” and “Free”:  As a copywriter I can tell you there are no more powerful words than new and free. Think about it, who doesn’t want to read: New Ways to Pay Credit Card Debt, The New Nissan Altima, New Music from Justin Bieber, Free Money for College, Free German Lessons, Free Trip to Hawaii. I think you get the picture.

3. The How Headline: Who doesn’t want to know how to do something? In the 1960s, a famous pen company published an advertisement with the words “How to Write a Love Letter.” The ad itself was an interesting piece of the do’s and don’ts’, it wasn’t addy, it was newsworthy, informative, and that’s the kind of thing that brings traffic to your blog and keeps them coming back for more.

4. The Rhyme Headline: Suppose you’re blogging on Justin Bieber retiring from music. You can write something plain like “Bieber retires from music” or something interesting that makes people want to know more, like “Bye Bye Bieber” or “Bieber Beats It: Justin says Bye-Bye to Music.”   Just don’t overdo it, the key to being an interesting blogger is always surprising them and never being predictable.

5. The Negative Headline: Some naysayers claim the negatives are a no-no, yet it’s been proven scientifically that negative advertising campaigns work, especially in politics. Here’s an example of a negative headline: Knockout Game is NOT a HOAX. Ann Coulter herself is famous for negative headlines, “Words with Fiends” is a good example.

6. The Humorous Headline: People like to laugh, whether it’s wit, dry humor, black jokes, etc, your headline is an opportunity to put a smile on their face. As a fan of South Park, I appreciate the humor of the song “what what in the butt,” which was based on a YouTube sensation from the 1990s. Thus when I heard of a woman who told her arresting officer that she had a gun where the sun don’t shine, what better headline than: I say “gun gun,” in the butt.

7. The List Headline: For whatever reason, people like lists, whether it’s “10 Ways to Make More Money” or “5 Perfect Gifts for Valentine’s Day,” they work wonders. Just try to avoid unlucky numbers like 13 unless you’re writing for Halloween or a Jewish audience (13 is the age a boy becomes a man in Judaism), and remember that people’s patience is limited. “50 Ways to Keep your Dog Healthy” is not something everyone will read.

 

Duck Dynasty is NOT the Dixie Chicks.

— by on — Leave a reply

When the left can’t win the argument, they change the argument. Now they’re pointing fingers at the right because of what we did to The Dixie Chicks. After Texas-born Natalie Maines told a London Audience that she was ashamed President Bush was from Texas and that she didn’t want the Iraq war, we raised hell and caused her to quit country music.

Hey GLAAD, this is what a real protest looks like. No press releases, no web statements, just real people burning the records of The Dixie Chicks. Source: The BBC

What Maines did would be the equivalent of Phil Robertson telling his Christian audience that he now he worships Beelzebub and favors abortions. So what did we do against the Dixie Chicks? We called our radio stations, we burned their records in public, we raised far more hell with far less money than a bunch of GLAAD activists and their limousine liberal allies.

As the BBC reported: “Airplay for the group’s songs is down 29% on country stations, and 20% on general music stations around the country, a monitoring group has said“
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/2867221.stm

Natalie Maines forgot the first rule of marketing: Know Your Audience. If the people that listen to country music are mostly Republican and conservative, you don’t attack the President they love!

Today Natalie Maines is admitting she doesn’t like country music. In other words, good riddance.

Former Dixie Chicks lead singer Natalie Maines recently opened up to Us Weekly about her upcoming album and revealed that despite the country trio’s 13 Grammy awards and many, many country music accolades, she does not, in fact, listen to country music anymore.

http://static.flickr.com/50/116806837_03c4aeedc8_o.jpg

“People do look at it as an insult that I say I don’t listen to country music, which cracks me up,” the 38-year-old singer told Us. “Music is a personal preference. Everyone’s free to connect and like whatever they want.”

PHOTOS: Best girl groups ever

“I definitely have a bad taste in my mouth about country radio,” she added. “We did get supporters, but as a whole, the country music industry did not support us. Award shows would laugh at our expense. It was fun to hate us.”
Read more: http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/natalie-maines-doesnt-regret-slamming-george-bush-never-liked-country-music-2013254#ixzz2o9QSuKhT

 

Liberals are desperate, which is why Time Magazine is drawing a false equivalency:

“It is not a First Amendment issue. It may be dumb, it may be justified, but it is not a constitutional violation. It is not for Phil Robertson, Alec Baldwin, Martin Bashir, Don Imus, The Dixie Chicks, Rush Limbaugh, or anyone else. People changing the channel or not buying your products because of what you said is not “censorship”; nor is losing a business deal for same.
Source: Losing Your TV Job Is Not a First Amendment Issue | TIME.com http://entertainment.time.com/2013/12/19/losing-your-tv-job-is-not-a-first-amendment-issue/#ixzz2o9S9WEgI

He is being deceptive. Yes, the First Amendment doesn’t protect you from getting fired in the private sector, however, this is censorship in the private sector, and unlike The Dixie Chicks, this isn’t a decision based on market forces, where are the liberals burning Duck Dynasty t-shirts? They don’t exist because they don’t own the products and until this  brouhaha, they barely even knew Duck Dynasty existed. This is like Burger King going vegetarian because PETA finds meat offensive, or LOGO (the gay TV station) airing only Girls Gone Wild, fine with the lesbians, but I doubt gays want to see that.

So when he tells us to “change the channel,” he’s lying to us. We didn’t change the channel, A&E did.

As for Martin Bashir and Alec Baldwin, they had low ratings. Rush Limbaugh hasn’t been fired because he has high ratings. I can’t tell you about Don Imus because I don’t listen to him, but I did think his suspension over the “nappy headed hoes” remark was idiotic, an overreach by people who don’t even watch his show (it’s on TV and radio).

I support Phil because the market supports him, because people want to watch him, if he can be censored, anyone of us can be censored. Now maybe my Christian friends don’t always like the shows I watch, but for the most part, they stick to their own shows and let me be. That’s what America needs right now, for people to mind their own business and stop telling each other what to say, what to watch and what to do.

Bring Back Phil T-Shirt

 

Liberals only enforce the laws they like.

— by on — Leave a reply

62 sheriffs in Colorado are suing the constitutionality of anti-gun laws in their state, and Dan Thomasson isn’t happy about it.

So who’s in charge in Colorado? Apparently it’s not the legislature or the governor or the judiciary; it’s the county Mounties. If they are allowed to get away with this, these badge-wearing, gun-toting successors to the Earps and the Hickoks, like their predecessors, are pretty much a law unto themselves.
Source: Law enforcement officials must enforce laws

No, the Earps and the HIckoks would have shot anyone that got in their way, these Sheriffs are working within the system, they are engaging in lawful civil disobedience, standing up for the Second Amendment.

Cops don’t always enforce the laws, when you’re stopped for speeding, something they give you a warning instead of a ticket. Prosecutors themselves have been known to ignore the law when it suits them, cutting deals with criminals in order to win great witnesses against other criminals. That’s how Sammy “The Bull” Gravano did only 3-years in prison in spite of his crimes being as bad as those of John Gotti.

Bill Clinton himself used to brag about the Brady Bill turning away criminals, if that was the case, why not enforce federal laws that make it a crime for a felon to even touch a gun, as one does when going to Academy Sports or Walmart?

Or let us revisit the Lewinsky affair, Bill clearly lied under oath, perjury is against the law, yet did he get convicted? Did we not get a bunch of liberals to claim “it’s just sex” and thus the law should not matter?

Or what about the Black Panthers? Voter intimidation is against the law, standing outside polling places with baseball bats while yelling invectives against voters sounds like intimidation to me, yet did the AG not drop the case against them? Did Obama not took their side? This is after all the same Obama who said “the police acted stupidly” when they arrested a college professor that was disturbing the peace, clearly against the law.

So which is it, liberals? Does the law matter to you only when it targets your enemies? Because to the rest of us, the law is either right or wrong regardless.