Call this a rant, call it what ever you want. Here is a round-up of some of today’s liberal blogs and post’s, choice picked by me. While this is in no way exclusive to every liberal, it will give you an idea of what they are thinking today, and in general most of the time.
Over at The Huffington Post, Chris Durang has a post titled: Thankful, well not so very much. He feels like this:
But in terms of our country and our planet — hmmm. Not feeling so confident, so up, so grateful. And about Barack Obama — well I feel very disappointed.
But, he does feel that the President is still smart and charming, the more important being the charming I’m sure. In an email a friend of his wrote this:
this latest move in Afghanistan leaves my stomach so knotted with shock and despair. I believe it is not in our national interest to keep fighting in Afghanistan. I think our presence there exacerbates violent extremism. Prolonging the war means killing and maiming more innocent Afghan civilians and destroying the lives of many more American soldiers. And I believe pouring billions more into Afghanistan at a time of economic crisis at home is a betrayal of the American people.
Not in our national interest? I won’t even tackle that, I’ll let President Obama:
“So I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaida in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future,” the president said. The safety of people around the world is at stake.”
Exacerbates violent extremism? I can’t quite figure out if Liberals really believe this, or if this is some holy high road they take to make themselves feel better, or to try and show the “nice terrorists“, that we get it. We are the cause of 9-11, the Ft. Hood Massacre, and any other terrorist activity that befalls our nation. Come on, wake up! These terrorists hate us. The first gulf war was not the cause of 9-11, and our current military involvement in their country isn’t the cause either. Their extremist religious belief and hatred is a good place to start. Yes, we are in economic crisis, and wars cost billions of dollars, but the safety of our country is at stake.
His comments on the bailout reflect a lot of americans thoughts on bonuses given to executives, but at the end of the segment, he decides to describe Tea Party attenders as “tea baggers“. This one statement is the main reason I decided to rant today. Sure we have political differences, we don’t agree on health care, the military, taxes, and so on. We occasionally call each other names, but, the sexual intention and demeaning tone behind tea baggers is despicable. It really does shows you the tactics the left will use to try and get their delusional points across, and the viciousness that can accompany it. The americans that attend tea parties are simply concerned citizens, they have 9-5 jobs, families, and pay their taxes. The term used to describe them says so much of how little liberals think of fellow human beings.
Oh look, another video of a Palin Ambush, they just can’t leave her alone. One would think they are obsessed with her. Any liberal, will deny that they are afraid of her and everything she stands for until the day they die (or are converted into a conservative). No, they aren’t fearful at all that she has a positive-conservative influence on our country. If you look at the amount of time the liberal media spends talking about her, and the way that they are constantly trying to railroad her any way they can, it certainly makes you think that there is something the liberals are very very concerned about. Could it be that Sarah is teaching women something that doesn’t fit into the shape and mold of progressive women? This article from real clear politics is about a year old, but sheds a very bright light on this.
What next……Acorn, remember when Congress said this:
no more federal dollars should flow to Acorn
That was a bipartisan effort. But, according to the NYT, the good ol’ Attorney General–Holder and the Justice Department are saying this: Acorn Can Be Paid for Pre-Ban Contracts. The acting assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel, David Barron said this:
The new law “should not be read as directing or authorizing HUD to breach a pre-existing binding contractual obligation to make payments to Acorn or its affiliates, subsidiaries or allied organizations where doing so would give rise to contractual liability,” Mr. Barron wrote.
Of course it shouldn’t, those are probably mostly legitimate and legal, unlike the future obligations that Acorn would have, that are now banned from receiving any tax-payer money. Can I please choose the no option for not allowing my tax dollars to fund this organization. Can my tax money please fund something else, a little less corrupt?
Well, that is enough for now. We’ll see what strange and odd thoughts the liberals have tomorrow.