I repeat: this is not a stimulus package!
31 January 2009
I repeat: this is not a stimulus package!
While Democrats are doing everything possible to steal the Minnesota Senatorial election on behalf of rape-mocking huckster Al Franken, Barack Obama is working on his own plan to create a filibuster-proof supper majority of 60 in the Senate.
Word is spreading now that Barack Obama may nominate Republican Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire to serve as Secretary of Commerce. The Chosen One's administration simply claims this is part of his worship's tone of bipartisanship . . . and by that they mean that if Gregg is brought on board then the Democratic Governor of New Hampshire will be free to appoint a Democrat to replace him. So, if Franken successfully burgles his position and Gregg is replaced by a Democrat . . . PRESTO -- a Democrat super majority that cannot be stopped.
So, if asked, I'm begging you Senator Gregg, don't do it!
Don't give the left unbridled power.
Don't feed the big government beast!
29 January 2009
I saw this clip over at Common Cents and wanted to share it here as well.
It's a wonderful letter from the Bush twins to the two Obama girls. It's a touching tribute to what should remain important in every family, even the President's.
Labels: George W. Bush
28 January 2009
When you're a teenager you live in search of instant stimulus. You rush to find it as quickly and as often as possible. But as President, shouldn't you take a little time in thoughtful consideration? Instead of healthy bipartisan discussion, the Obama administration has rushed ahead with their economic stimulus plan, stifling debate and demonstrating all of the self-control and preparation of a math club member who stumbles across a willing cheerleader.
Today's House vote went about as expected with Democrats lining up in support and every Republican voting against the $819 billion stimulus package that contains more pork than my mother's Ham & Soggy Greenbean recipe. The dissent was perhaps best voiced by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland:
"Mr. President, I think our obsessive borrowing has fully mortgaged my kids and my grandkids," Bartlett told Obama, according to statement from Bartlett's office. "Now we're working on mortgaging my two great-grandkids.
"Mr. President, I think it's more than a little bit selfish to try to solve our economic problems which we created by burdening future generations yet to be born," he added.
Of course, given Obama's earlier executive order to federally fund international groups that promote or perform abortions, that little problem of burdening "future generations yet to be born" may just take care of itself.
My complaint here is twofold.
1) When you're about to spend loads of loot like this you should at least spend a month or so looking over the situation.
B) When you claim that you are coming to Washington to build bridges and unity you may want to at least pretend to listen to the opposition.
Of course, if you believe our fledgling President, there is no need to listen to the opposition because nobody disagrees with him . . . I guess he's hoping that nobody tells the American people about the army of economists identified by the Cato Institute who think he's nuts.
According to StandardCarbon.com, the accumulation of massive illegal campaign contributions wasn't the only record Barack Obama's presidential campaign established; it also left the largest carbon footprint in campaign history.
25 January 2009
Once again our new President has wasted no time displaying the arrogance of royalty by staring down a reporter who had the audacity to hope that his majesty would directly answer a tough question. When will they learn that The Chosen One is above the paltry concerns of peasantry?
President Obama paid a surprise visit to members of the White House press corps Thursday evening when he walked through their working area of the West Wing, but he quickly became agitated when he was confronted with a question by one of the journalists. According to reports, when the Politico's Jonathan Martin asked the president about his nominee for deputy secretary of defense, William Lynn, Obama refused to answer, saying he was not there to take questions.
Pressed further by the Politico reporter about his Pentagon nominee, Obama turned more serious, putting his hand on the reporter's shoulder and staring him in the eye.
"All right, come on," he said, with obvious irritation in his voice. "We will be having a press conference, at which time you can feel free to [ask] questions.
The situation came to a close when a cameraman in the room interrupted, declaring: "I'd like to say it one more time: 'Mr. President.'" (*BARF*)
Obama was willing to field lighter questions, though. Yes, he's discovered the gym in the White House residence. No, he hasn't played basketball yet on the outdoor White House court because it's been too cold.
The Catholic Church tried to warn us that Barack Obama wasn't just a "pro-choice" politician, but a radical pro-abortion activist with little regard for the sanctity of life. They told us that his speech in front of Planned Parenthood where he promised to make the "Freedom of Choice Act" a presidential priority (thus granting Federal funding for abortion, waving parental consent for minors and changing the practice for partial-birth abortions) wasn't just a campaign speech but was a core belief. They told us that his active defense of infanticide in the practice of killing babies who survived abortions was a reflection of his world view. The Church raised a red-crossed flag when Obama said that when he supported abortion it was because if his two daughters "make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby," that he honestly saw unplanned conception as a simple mistake and a baby as the unacceptable punishment. They warned us.
Only a few days into his presidency Barack Hussein Obama has begun his assault on the sanctity of life. In every poll I've ever seen most Americans agree that women should have the right to choose when it comes to abortions, but when you dig deeper and ask Americans how they feel about paying for other people to have abortions, partial birth abortions or killing abortion-surviving babies they emphatically shout "NO," leaving those sickening positions to the radicals who believe that abortion is more than a right, it is a political statement of power at any cost. And the new President is quickly identifying himself as the most radical baby-life-snuffer ever to wield the executive pen.
On Friday, under the cover of date night, Barack Obama used his newly found presidential power to repealed a ban on federal funding for international groups that promote or perform abortions. Our taxes will now go to work paying for other peoples "mistakes" and "punishments."
But the Chosen One's inkwell indictment of life didn't stop there. Obama has also move to reverse Bush's tight-fisted treatment of embryonic stem cell research. As I pointed out in previous posts, embryonic stem cell research is not science, but a social agenda. It has yet to produce a single cure while adult stem cell research has provided many. Beyond that, the primary reason proponents claim that we need embryonic stem cells has been discredited, as we now know that the much sought pluripotent cells can be harvested elsewhere. Yet still they persist, leading us with only one conclusion, this is not about cures but about a cause. And Barack Obama is now leading that cause.
The cause is not that of pro-choice, but pro-abortion. Not of cures, but of conquest. Not of life, but of power.
24 January 2009
22 January 2009
Those of us who didn't follow the kool-aid drinking Obots into their mindless worship of Barack Obama were always stunned by the difference between the Barack Obama who delivered scripted speeches and the one who answered unrehearsed questions (like the one delivered by Joe the plumber). It was as if they were two different guys. The scripted Obama waxed eloquent while the unscripted one made Maggie Simpson seem articulate.
Well , now that he is President he can no longer hide behind scripts and 3 days into his presidency we are already seeing signs that have me wondering if there are men behind the curtain directing a charismatic guy who may just be a figurehead for the radical left.
Today Barack Obama, or whoever is leading this country, displayed his (or their) priorities by signing an executive order to close down the Guantanamo Bay detention facility within a year . . . admitting during the announcement that they are doing so without yet having a plan concerning what to do with the detainees. Ah, but there's no need to rush into that . . . I mean, we're only talking about terrorist here so why have a plan before you take action? No need to worry about the details.
But what I found most interesting is that this was supposed to be an executive order from the President, Barack Obama, but if you watch the video below you'll find that "the President" doesn't really seem to understand his own executive orders. Not only does he stutter and "uh" his way through his explanations, but he has to call out to the off-camera Greg several times to explain what he is actually signing. Now that's something I've never seen before.
And democrats spent years claiming that George W. Bush was just a figurehead for a government run by Dick Cheney??????
Have you heard the one about mellowing the yellows?
The more I think about it, the more I find the thing that bothers me most about the racist comments Dr. Joseph Lowry made during Obama's inaugural benediction was the laughter it generated from the crowd -- like he'd just delivered the punchline to "A Jew, a Polack and a gun-clinging fundamentalist hick walk into this bar." That partisan liberal crowd who earlier displayed their class by booing the man who'd kept them safe from terrorism for 7 years, burst with hardy guffaws about getting those "yellows" mellow and dreaming of a day when "Whites" finally embrace right.
Apparently there's nothing like good racist jabs to move liberals from booing to side-splitting laughter.
21 January 2009
We all remember Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the bigoted minister who pastored Barack Obama and his family for 20 some years. I guess we were pretty sure that his O-ness would show the audacity of "nope" and refrain from asking that Chicago icon to say anything during this historic day for fear that Rev. Wrong might use the tax funded inaugural pulpit to drop the ol' "White folk created aids to kill blacks" riff again. But just because he couldn't use his spiritual mentor for the occasion, that didn't mean the new president would be stopped from creating cleric controversy at the inauguration.
Complain if you will about the choice of anti-gay marriage activist Rick Warren's "purpose-driven" opening prayer, when it comes to spiritual space cadets our new commander and chief saved the best for last with Dr. Joseph Lowry's bigot's-bonanza benediction.
When yellow will be mellow? Are you kidding me? Because we all know how crazy those Asians get in their wacky kung fu movies. And when white will embrace right? Well, since whites are the majority in this country and it was their vote that won Barack Obama the presidency . . . maybe he had a point with that one.
You may recall that the day after Obama was elected Wall Street experience a record post-election crash. Well, it appears corporate investors are still worried about the Chosen One's economic prowess as yesterday Wall Street experienced the worst inauguration day drop in history.
20 January 2009
Debbie over at Right Truth hit on the concerning crux of the message Obama sent us today:
Obama said in his first speech as president. “Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.”
"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it."
19 January 2009
Labels: George W. Bush
18 January 2009
Have you been watching the media coverage of Barack Obama (the President Elect, in case you'd forgotten) taking the Lincoln trail to his inauguration? Have you heard the stories of people lined up just to catch a glimpse of the Chosen One? In fact, I believe there was a woman just outside of Philly who was healed of her mental illness simply by touching the hem of his garment. Now she's a Republican.
And we haven't even made it to the ceremony yet. By all accounts this is to be the most expensive inauguration in American history, with most estimates topping the $150 million mark. I guess this is part of his economic stimulus package. And with Beyonce, Springsteen, Denzel and the rest of the star-studded party, let's just hope some of the benefits trickle down to us.
But I just can't help but think back to when the last Democrat was elected president and we had Fleetwood Mac and Maya Angelou plucking our heartstrings. Forget that this guy would eventually dismantle our intelligence agencies and sell confidential info to the Chinese, he was a Democrat and that meant it was time to party and time for the media to capture every booty wiggle. Why, if you'd only watched TV you'd have thought that Bill Clinton had brought the entire country together with his message of change and a new day . . . you see, the mainstream media forgot to mention that "the man from Hope" never in his life sniffed so much as 50% of the national popular vote.
So here we stand today on the brink of a new show as the left-leaning media celebrates the hope brought by a man who is attractive, though he only showed his pretty face on the U.S. Senate floor for around 140 days. The Democrats are prepped to rejoice for a guy they admire for his language skills, though he seemed to lose his ability to articulate when he voted "present" 130 while serving in Illinois. The mindless followers of the empty suite from . . . well, can we really be sure where he's from since he bizarrely had his birth records sealed? Anyway, the mindless followers are set to carouse for a man who failed to demonstrate any leadership in his previous elected positions but sure showed us that he never failed when it came to picking twisted friends. (Which reminds me, I wonder if Rev. Wright, Rashid Khalidi, William Ayers, Khalid al-Mansour, Tony Rezko, his buddies in the Fannie and Freddie banking scandal or any of Obama's other troubling chums will be at the festivities in person or just in spirit?)
Ah, but none of this matters. Let's face it, we all know what really matters to them. Ask an Obama supporter about their man's stimulus package, his national security measures or the specifics of his education reform and you'll be greeted by a blank stare . . . and perhaps that famous Obamanite stutter. But ask them about the inauguration party and the stare and stutter are quickly replaced with glazing and a guest list. It's all about the show.
14 January 2009
I've found change under the cushions. I've found change in my car's ashtray. I've even found change behind children's ears . . . in the cool "magician" way, not in the creepy "I've also got some candy in my van" way. But I have to admit, I'm having a hard time finding any of that much promised CHANGE in the presidential team that Barack Obama is putting together. In fact, not only is he loading his team with Washington retreads, he's not even picking innovative quality retreads. These spinners are just loaded with old-school dirt.
So far he's given us a chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, a former advisor to Bill Clinton who had numerous conversations with Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich while the Gov was trying to sell Obama's former senate seat. But No worries, The Chosen One told the press that he looked into it an there was no wrong doing so we can let it go. Phew!
In addition, Obama has recommended an Attorney General, Eric Holder, who spent his previous stint in Washington working to pardon ga-zillionaire fugitive Marc Rich and 16 members of the FALN terrorist organization. But don't be concerned about this retread, The Messiah checked him out and gave him his blessing, so no further investigation is needed. Phew!
For Secretary of State Obama pegged the ultimate Washington insider, Hillary Clinton, who currently carries some baggage in that some of the country's she will be "negotiating" with are already in bed with her husband . . . not literally . . . that we know of . . . by donating tons of cash to his ventures. Some might consider this a dangerous conflict of interest, but no worries, The Sacred Elected Guy has already informed the press that they need dig no deeper because he has already investigated and given this appointment the green light. Phew!
Now we have Obama's choice for Secretary of Treasury, Timothy Geithner, (you got it, another long-time Washington insider) who failed to pay some $34,000 from 2001-2004, presumably because he didn't understand the code. Ah, so the guy who'll be in charge of the IRS is a tax dodger who doesn't understand tax code. On top of that, his housekeeper was an illegal . . . wonder how he wrote off her salary? But forget about it. The Voice of Change has already looked into Geithner's background so there's no need for any additional questions. Phew!
The mantra for change rang throughout his campaign and now we're finally getting a glimpse of what that vision really meant: gather those who have spent their lifetime in Washington and put them in positions of power . . . but only after you're sure they have scurrilous backgrounds.
Luckily we don't have to worry. Don't ask, don't toil. Barack Obama said they're OK and that should be good enough for everybody. Phew!
13 January 2009
Crystia Freeland doesn't like waterboarding or any type of aggressive interrogation. I wonder if she thinks it would constitute torture to have captured terrorists listen to sound bites of Obama's anti-terror strategy? Or would they just laugh themselves silly on their way to 72 virgins?
H/T: Queer Conservative
The 2009 North American International Auto Show has kicked off in Detroit with a focus this year on the mainstream media's latest transport darling, the electric car. Why, if you believe what the media (and some members of congress) has to say you'd be under the impression that as soon as manufacturers produce electric cars that can make it to the corner and back without a recharge, consumers will start beating their swords into Duracell shares just to get a piece of the action. But are Americans really ready to volt . . . I mean, bolt down to the dealerships to scrap their powerful internal combustion engines for a green feeling?
I have complained in the past that the fall of the American auto industry was caused in no small part by the over-regulating yahoos in Washington. For years American manufacturers have had to scale down performance to meet Federally mandated Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) regulations. These regulations, intended to improve the country's energy consumption and carbon footprint, in essence required the Big Three to build some cars that were expensive to manufacture, but wouldn't sell. As GM's Bob Lutz put it (sorry, don't remember it verbatim), trying to develop a national energy policy by creating fuel economy regulations for the auto manufacturers is like trying to solve the national obesity problem by forcing the clothing industry to make smaller clothes. And he's right, it doesn't make much sense. And it doesn't work.
So here we are, with the mainstream media and congress pushing the electric car, and they will do so through regulations. Soon we will see CAFE standards that force an even greater number of electrics and/or hybrids into U.S. fleets. But who is going to buy them? What proponents of this strategy don't seem to understand is that as long as gas prices stay below $2.00 a gallon most Americans won't be trading in their cost-effective fossil fuel flamers. And, believe it or not, some folk actually like big, powerful engines for hauling, towing or just plain flying down the highway like Burt Reynolds in that movie where he did that funny laugh. Are those folk likely to turn in their horses for a battery-charged pony ride?
Sure, there may come a time when the electric motor can provide efficiency and economy, but we're not there yet. And if the regulations continue to escalate, expect the auto industry to end up like the solar and wind power folk -- unable to survive without subsidy.
12 January 2009
First he created his own seal. It replaced the flag on his airplane, became a bumper bonanza, and served as a hubristic halo during the campaign.
Labels: Barack Obama
10 January 2009
Sure, it could be argued that Barack Obama destroyed U.S. intelligence when he convinced a majority of Americans to elect him, but now he's taking steps to make it official.
First, "The President Elect" tagged Eric Holder as his choice for Attorney General. Yeah, the same guy who played a special little role in Bill Clinton's pardon of ga-zillionaire fugitive Marc Rich and 16 members of the FALN terrorist organization. On top of that, Holder was the guy with Janet Reno's back when she worked with the Clinton administration to compartmentalize American intelligence organizations, making it impossible for the FBI and CIA to share information (a disaster Bush corrected after 9/11).
Now Obama has identified Leon Panetta to head the CIA. Yep, another Clinton retread, proving that these people make more comebacks than the Eagles. This is the same Leon Panetta who, as a Congressman, supported the "Institute for Policy Studies" (IPS), a Washington think tank famous for its opposition to the U.S. intelligence community. In fact, the FBI reportedly has a file on the organization linking it and its founders to KGB activity as well "fronting an intensive campaign to discredit the CIA." But that not the only time Panetta proved less-than-friendly to the agency he is about to take over. REDSTATE reports:
Leon Panetta, the Clinton administration’s first director of OMB, had indicated to Woolsey early in 1993 that OMB was considering providing the DCI with top-line guidance, perhaps with a publicly disclosed figure, and seeking sizable out-year cuts in intelligence spending. Woolsey also faced skeptical audiences in Congress anxious to find an additional “peace dividend” in intelligence spending as well as in the larger defense budget. From Woolsey’s perspective, he had the unenviable task of managing declining intelligence budgets in an era of multiplying intelligence targets (the “poisonous snakes”) . . .
Which, of course, brings us to Embassy bombings, the USS Cole and 9/11 once again, all wonderful results from the last time we had leadership who saw value in dismantling America's intelligence apparatus. Oh, and did I mention that Panetta has no real intelligence experience? Well, then I guess he'll fit in well with the rest of the administration.
The Hellmouth CD "Destroy Everything. Worship Nothing" has been released from wherever they had it bound and chained.
Now normally I don't shill products on this site, but the lead guitarist for this band is a friend of mine so I'm more than willing to try and help put some cabbage in his wallet (even though his political sensibilities take him toward Democratic collectivism rather than my beloved Republican attitude of 2nd amendment style self-reliance -- trust me, he's a great guy).
So if you like heavy, agressive, anti-everything shreds, click HERE to pick up the music and merchandise.
And if you don't like it, well, click HERE anyway and buy it for somebody else (a metal lover, somebody you want to drive nuts, a pastor who needs a sermon illustration on sin . . . )
Good luck with the new release, Alex.
John Ziegler will be releasing a documentary on "Media Malpractice" that revolves around the 2008 Presidential election, which took media malpractice to the heights of Olympus (a point Obama must have taken literally when he decided to surround himself with Greek Temple Columns during his Democratic Convention acceptance speech). Some elements of the documentary are covered on the beautiful new site How Obama Got Elected. But the centerpiece is his interview with Governor Sarah Palin where she blasts the media, slaps Katie Couric across the ego and addresses whether or not she'd "do it again."
Ya betcha, it's worth a watchin'!
07 January 2009
Barack Obama's mantra: Change
Is this what he meant?
Is this guy really going to succeed in stealing the Minnesota Senatorial Election and represent our country?
06 January 2009
Does Minnesota suck, or is the recent debacle there a case of the Democrats endless lust for power at any cost?
- More than 25 precincts now have more ballots than voters who signed in to vote.
- Canvassing Board member, State Supreme Court Justice G. Barry Anderson, has acknowledged that "very likely there was a double counting." Yet the Richie led board insists that it lacks the authority to question local officials and it is merely adding the inflated numbers to the totals.
- But the board has been inconsistent. Last month, Mr. Franken's campaign charged that one Hennepin County (Minneapolis) precinct had "lost" 133 votes, since the hand recount showed fewer ballots than machine votes recorded on Election Night. Though there is no proof to this missing vote charge -- officials may have accidentally run the ballots through the machine twice on Election Night -- the Canvassing Board chose to go with the Election Night total, rather than the actual number of ballots in the recount. That decision gave Mr. Franken a gain of 46 votes.
- Meanwhile, a Ramsey County precinct ended up with 177 more ballots than there were recorded votes on Election Night. In that case, the board decided to go with the extra ballots, rather than the Election Night total, even though the county is now showing more ballots than voters in the precinct. This gave Mr. Franken a net gain of 37 votes, which means he's benefited both ways from the board's inconsistency.
- The Franken campaign initially howled that some absentee votes had been erroneously rejected by local officials. Counties were supposed to review their absentees and create a list of those they believed were mistakenly rejected. Many Franken-leaning counties did so, submitting 1,350 ballots to include in the results. But many Coleman-leaning counties have yet to complete a re-examination. Despite this lack of uniformity, Mr. Ritchie's office nonetheless plowed through the incomplete pile of 1,350 absentees this weekend, padding Mr. Franken's edge by a further 176 votes.
- Both campaigns have also suggested that Mr. Ritchie's office made mistakes in tabulating votes that had been challenged by either of the campaigns. And the Canvassing Board appears to have applied inconsistent standards in how it decided some of these challenged votes -- in ways that, again on net, have favored Mr. Franken.
- Democratic Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, the man who was insisting on "counting every vote," is now insisting that the vote count stops.
04 January 2009
It's the bedtime story liberals use to frighten their fortunate-to-be-born. The terrifying tale told to temper their tendency toward independent thought. "Beware, my children," they say in the dark of night. "Beware, beware, the Religious Right. They'll force you to birth your babies. They'll tell you there's such a thing as right and wrong. They'll talk, talk, talk about God. Beware their numbers, for they are legion."
Admit it, scary stuff, eh? The problem is that there is no such thing as the "Religious Right." Yes, there are religious voters. Yes, there are right-wing voters. But an organized Religious Right? It's a figment. A modern day boogeyman created to do what all boogeymen are created to do: Frighten, form and fixate all those who believe.
I'm not the first to make this observation. In her bestselling book, Slander, Anne Coulter explains:
Like all propagandists, liberals create mythical enemies to justify their own viciousness and advance their agenda. There is no bogeyman that strikes greater terror in the left than the apocryphal “religious right.” The phrase is a meaningless concept, an inverted construct of the left’s own Marquis de Sade lifestyle. It functions as a talismanic utterance to rally the faithful against anyone who disagrees with the well-organized conspiratorial left.OK, so she spells "boogeyman" differently than I do, but lose the Marquis de Sade hyperbole and she has rightly identified liberals' foremost windmill to joust . . . wait, I'm mixing hyperboles. Regardless, rest assured that when the Left needs a foil to further their faith they will resurrect the fictitious Religious Right.
Take, for example, the recent passage of California's Prop 8 that banned same sex marriage in the state. After the measure won the cry went out that the Religious Right had launched a campaign of distortion to undermine the vote. As reported in New America Media, "The Christian right out-organized the No on 8 Campaign."
The Christian right in California made a strategic shift in sharpening its “family values” focus on sexuality and marriage. This shift is likely to be effective for the long term political objectives of the right, which include an assault on the legal protections against discrimination for LGBT people. The broader agenda that the Christian right will continue to pursue will promote Christian nationalism, an ideology that seeks to use laws and regulations to promote fundamentalist Christian values on the nation. This is an agenda that seeks to eliminate the constitutional wall separating church and state.Ooooh, that's scary.
A CBS editorial then reported that it was the "Christian-right apparatus, long hampered by nativism and racism" who were able to muster the troops and push the proposition through. Sounds convincing. Those fundamentalists (ever the description of "The Religious Right") used their enormous political machine and won the day . . . but wait, wait a minute, who actually voted for Prop 8? Was it all those white, evangelical snake charming followers of Pat Robertson (a supposed "Religious Right" leader who actually endorsed gay-rights & pro-choice Republican candidate, Rudi Guiliani)? I mean, California is more blue than Kato Kaelin on labor day. Obama crushed McCain with 62% of the vote, yet Prop 8 passed -- and it did so on the back of Obama supporters. 70% of African Americans voted yes on Prop 8, 52% of Latinos gave it the nod as did a majority of older voters, all groups that voted mostly Democrat elsewhere on the ballot. So as far as the actual vote, it wasn't the Religious Right after all.
Of course, facts don't really matter to the Left. They simply prop up their boogeyman like El Cid and claim that the nearly omnipotent Religious Right were so well organized in California that they used the old Judaeo mind trick to fool the masses (though oddly, only on this particular issue if you buy what the left is peddling). And their scary story might make sense if California were the only State where it happened. But gay marriage tends to be defeated when put to vote, even in my home state of Michigan where the Religious Right is less organized than a stoner during exam week. Need proof? The Great Lake State voted Blue for Gore, Kerry and Obama, has elected two Senators with a "D", and voted for a left-wing Governor so many times that only term limits will save us from the economic disaster she has wrought.
But gay marriage isn't the only issue where the Left eerily tells tales of the spooky Religious Right. They claim these evangelical fundamentalists are behind the anti-abortion movement, despite the fact that the Catholic Church is the loudest religious voice in that din. Liberals attempt to petrify you that the Religious Right wants to ban the teaching of evolution in schools, even claiming that this was Sarah Palin's closet skeleton, despite the fact that she proposed the teaching of evolution along with creationism, saying "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both." It's a perspective 81% of Americans agree with . . . but again, the facts just don't matter. To the Left, it's this mythical Religious Right. And naturally, according to Liberal storytellers, it is the nefarious Religious Right who is behind prayer in public schools, despite the fact that, again, a magical 81% of all Americans endorse the idea. You see, it doesn't matter if most Americans support it, if non-evangelicals support it, if traditional Democrat voting blocks support it . . . if the liberal elite is against it they will invent a villain, and their favorite fabricated foe is the Religious Right.
I have to confess what I truly love about all of their campfire antics is that the left tends to ignore the role churches play in democratic politics. Can you imagine if Dick Cheny had given his first speech as a vice presidential nominee from the pulpit of a Methodist church like John Edwards did? And how about the fact that for the first time in history officials at the Library of Congress are soliciting churches for copies of sermons that focus on a presidential inauguration --namely, the Jan. 20 inauguration of Barack Obama? If only the Religious Right had more pull, maybe there'd be a collection of Sermons like that for Dubya. Ah, but facts don't matter.
Beware, beware the Religious Right.
02 January 2009
I swear if you gave the United Nations water and a freezer they still couldn't make ice. They are the most ineffectual, light blue bunglers since Lazy Smurf. Every time they are given a role their promise goes unfulfilled, and the Gaza Strip is no exception.
Over the past few days the U.N. has been criticizing Israel, calling for an immediate cease fire to stop the "critical emergency" in the strip caused by an air-assault induced "serious health and food crises." And while the patently anti-Semitic organization acknowledges that Israel is sending in more humanitarian supplies to the Palestinians than in previous weeks, they still cry for the Jewish State to quit pounding their repeat assailants into submission.
Hey, just a minute, I thought of a question for the United Nations. Where were you when Hamas was smuggling hundreds of rockets from Sinai into the Gaza Strip? I mean, this has been reported for over a year. Hamas had built an extensive tunnel network for smuggling and defence . . . or did you think they were constructing a tacky terror underground theme park? We know they have called for the destruction of Israel, so why didn't you show the same passion for the Israelis that you now show for their attackers? I mean, the U.N. had security and humanitarian forces in the area, so why didn't you whine to the world that Hamas must stop?
Wait, don't answer. I know what you're going to say. And since it's not good bye, I don't want to hear it.