Federal Hypocrisy -Eric Holder should resign

Credit Raul 654
This is a Free speech zone - behind wire - at the 2004 DNC
Feeling Patriotic?

If  you've been following the gun confiscation efforts across the country, and you should be, you know that some states have attempted to put laws into effect that would impede or prevent Federal agents from enforcing any anti-Second Amendment laws.

Kansas is one such state, with SB102 signed into law just one month ago. This law basically nullifies any act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation in the United States that violates the second amendment.  They state that such a law is not enforceable in the state of Kansas.

This law also provides for criminal penalties for those trying to enforce such unconstitutional laws and states that the federal government doesn't have interstate commerce authority over guns manufactured in their state.  This is a great law and a great step for every state to take to make their wishes known.

But of course, the United States Federal Government doesn't agree. After all, they want to crush the second amendment and disarm lawful citizens. In response to SB102 Attorney General Eric Holder issued a letter which will make you both angry and baffled at the same time.

In this letter Holder says that SB102 is unconstitutional because it conflict with federal law.  He says that federal agents cannot be forced to decide between criminal constitution and their federal duties. He goes on to say that the government will take all actions necessary against Kansas to keep them from interfering with federal law or federal agents.

Let's get this straight....
If you don't feel like you're down the rabbit hole at this point, I don't know what to say. What Holder is saying is that anything the federal government elects to make law is law, and you can't do anything about it. He is saying that the federal government makes laws and we follow them, period, no questions asked.

I find it supremely hypocritical for any agent of the government to talk about constitutionality these days. Seriously. Holder wants to decry Kansas's attempt to PRESERVE your constitutional right as UNCONSTITUTIONAL? Please somebody tell me how that works because there is no way you can use logic to defend Holder's claims.

Let's talk about unconstitutional... 

Credit Victor Falk
TSA Backscatter X-Ray - Shows your nude body to agents
This is not constitutional

Our federal government no puts up free speech zones, often times little cages placed conveniently out of the way for people to exercise their "free speech."

Do you think having a different opinion and wanting change and speaking up means you should be confined to a cage like an animal? Well our government does  yet they want to talk to us about the constitution?

I seem to recall a right to free speech in there and it didn't involve the need to be confined like criminals. (Check out the free speech zone image at the start of this entry.)

Let's talk about illegal searches with TSA agents man handling your genitals and scanning you with dangerous equipment. Let's talk about the out of control police force that will taser you first and ask questions later.  Let's talk about the "Patriot Act" which is the most sweeping unconstitutional act ever enforced up the citizens of the United States.

So, if Holder was concerned with the constitution, he'd resign and join the fight against this type of government intrusion.  But, let's be real, Holder wants what all federal puppets want, complete and absolute control over you, your family and every aspect of your life.