Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Bias’

Recently, a friend of mine pointed out this chick:

For those of you who’ve been paying attention for a while, you can guess what the liberal response was.  Here’s a few choice quotes:

Hey, you really seem like one stupid c*nt. That being said, I’d still let you wrap yours lips around my c*ck.”

“This b*tch is Psycho!”

“A hate mongering bigot, she probably supports modern day slavery as well.”

“The Palin legacy, people…..*sigh*”

“She’s bats*it crazy!!”

Yep.  That’s liberals at their best for you!  There’s nothing that says “classy” like Internet-published rape fantasies about a 16-year-old girl who has opinions that you don’t agree with.  That puts her square into, at the very least, stage 2 of the stages of conservative female abuse.  She’s in good company.

I know what you’re saying…   “Mr. Elephant,” because that’s my name, “you called liberalism dumb!  And a religion!  You can’t do that!  It’s just a political philosophy that’s different from yours!  Aren’t you giving in to the same hate you’re criticizing those responders in that video for?”

Silly person.  Let me educate you.  And before we get started – no, I’m not giving in to the hate.  While I despise the philosophy of liberalism, I’m not (and I don’t know a single conservative who is) sexualizing and demonizing a 16-year-old girl who disagrees with me…  because I am an adult and choose to act like it.  I also stand by what I say: Liberalism is a dumb religion.

  1. Liberalism is a religion.  That’s why whenever anyone starts quoting from the Bible as the basis for their beliefs, they tend to go ballistic.  Simply put: a Biblical worldview stands in direct contrast to a modern American liberal/socialist worldview.  Their belief in the state as the supreme deity stands in contrast to Christ’s claim that HE was the way, the truth, and the life.  Ann Coulter spent an entire, excellent book pointing out exactly how liberalism is, in fact, a secularist state-based religion, and while I disagree with her conclusions regarding Darwinism (don’t get me started on that stupid debate), her conclusions regarding the cult-like devotion to liberalism by liberals is spot-on.
  2. A Complete Retard.

    A Complete and Utter Retard.

    Liberals are dumb.  I hate to put it that simply, but when you have a group of people who think you can tax a nation into success and that penalizing success is a good idea (instead of recognizing that success breeds more success) and that catering to the lowest common denominator is a bad idea, then you have to conclude that those who believe this are dumb.  Are you asking me if I actually believe that Karl Marx and all of his derivative socioeconomic systems were dumb?  Yes.  Yes, I do.  Every single last aspect of them.

    “But Mr. Elephant,” you cry like an infant, “what about when someone’s poor, out of work, and lying at home in bed because they got hit by a truck full of the Ebola virus?  Doesn’t the fact that the government can step in and help those poor souls prove that you’re wrong?”

    No, it does not.  No reasonable person would disagree that there is a great benefit to a small group of needy people being assisted in a way that allows them to reach for the maximum amount of their contribution to society, say by assisting them when they are out of work, providing for their medical needs when they are in desperate circumstances, providing them with food, shelter, and the basic needs.  However, where we disagree is in both the source of that assistance and in the quantity of that assistance.  A smart person recognizes that whether the assistance comes from the state or private charity, that ultimately, the source of that assistance (besides God) are human beings who pay for that assistance.  Welfare does not allow you to create assistance out of thin air – the money has to come from somewhere.  A smart person also recognizes that if you give a mouse a cookie, they’re going to want a lifetime of comfortable living on the public dole, with steak and lobster dinners, a nice house, digital cable TV, top-notch medical care, 4 cell phones with unlimited texting, and a partridge in a pear tree.

    A dumb person thinks that the money just appears out of the unlimited government coffers and that helping people forever who don’t contribute to society is a sustainable model.  They scream that, sure, while socialism failed in the USSR, the Eastern Bloc, and Africa, and where it hasn’t failed it keeps people in abject poverty, that it’s just because we haven’t tried the perfect system yet.  If we would just try TROOOOOOO Marxism, Stalinism, Maoism, Castroism, etc., it would work perfectly!  They’re ignorant of the fact that as long as there are people (who are by nature territorial, greedy, and in need of boundaries), socialism is doomed to failure.

  3. Liberals are hypocrites.  Liberals hold others to standards that they are unwilling to hold themselves to.  They scream about the separation of church and state, and then treat Obama like a messianic figure when he goes into or sends others into black churches to raise money for their campaigns.  They whine about how voting against gay marriage is based in hate and ignorance – and then ignorantly spew their hate on 16-year-old girls who can’t vote and whose personal politics offend them.  They cry about how women should be able to have taxpayer-funded abortion on demand, but work to block the executions of admitted, tried, and convicted cop-killers because killing is wrong.
  4. The Traditional Family Terrifies Liberals

    The Traditional Family Terrifies Liberals

    Let’s talk about sex.  There is no issue that liberals think is more important in the world than the right to government-funded consequence-free sex, to the point where it’s the cornerstone of their religion.  That’s why they parade idiots like Sandra Fluke (30-year-old activists masquerading as 23-year-old college coeds) around to try to get the government to force Catholic institutions to distribute free birth control against the Catholic faith, because they see their own religion’s cornerstone as being far more important than that of thousands of years of Catholic traditions.  Liberals believe that any and all sex should be free of any kind of government interference, unless it’s interfering with the rights of fathers.  To liberals, moms possess a magical device called a “vagina” that magically tells them when it’s OK to murder their unborn infants.  If dad wants to raise the child, it doesn’t matter, because he lacks the magical vaginal ability to determine if a child should be murdered due to its giving mommy stretch marks.  But if mommy wants to bring the child to term, that’s her business (unless she’s Sarah Palin), and the government will be there to lessen the consequence of that decision by ensuring that dad, who had no say in whether the child should be carried to term or not, is forced to give up half his salary so that mom can live more comfortably, and if that means weekends in jail for dad when he can’t afford his payments, well, he should’ve thought about that!

    The irony of this being that if liberals weren’t so dead-set opposed to the traditional family, there would already be a method in place to ensure that sex between 2 consenting adults is an enjoyable process, that there’d be a mom and a dad available to rear their child, and both parents would actively contribute to the family’s needs.

As I said in the title, Liberalism is a dumb, hypocritical, sex-based religion.  And if you disagree with me, I won’t say you’re worse than Hitler…   you’re just wrong.

Now, am I saying that liberals can’t have an occasional smart moment, or that all conservatives are always smart all the time?  No.  I am not talking about incidents – I am talking about consistent patterns of behavior that demonstrate, conclusively, that liberals are members of a dumb, hypocritical sex cult.  Which is perfect, because whenever I think of liberals, I keep thinking “screw you”.

So it all works out.

Read Full Post »

There’s nothing like watching a Union thug beat a Nikki Haley piñata to make you ask a simple question: why is it OK?  Or, to be a bit more direct: would it be OK if someone made a Barack Obama piñata and beat it with a stick?

I’m not saying that the right has been innocent in their treatment of liberals, but…   well, we are.  Seriously.  There’s no comparison.  Between the union thugs assaulting people who disagree with them to the Occupiers who attack cops and destroy private property, the left seems to have trouble containing the most violent of their ranks.

In comparison, the Tea Party events were peaceful, well-organized, and cooperative with law enforcement.  I’ve been able to come across a couple of stories of TPers getting arrested (most notably when a group decided to Occupy the Hart Office Building in Washington DC), but most of the events have been peaceful.  Sure, there’ve been accusations of people spitting on Congressmen and calling them names, and one CNN producer totally heard a Tea Partier use the F-word once, maybe, possibly….    but in comparison to the Occupy Twits?  They’re freakin’ boy scouts.

The point being that equivocation only serves its purpose when there’s something to equivocate, and there’s nothing here to equivocate.  I’ll go ahead and say it: the AFL/CIO idiot who made a Nikki Haley piñata was just as wrong as someone who’d make a Barack Obama piñata.  They’re both idiots and should both be treated accordingly.

Read Full Post »

Very few things get my ire up more than our educational system here in the United States.  “Oh, but Mr. Elephant”, you say, actually believing my first name is “Annoyed”, “teachers are wooooooonderful….  and don’t you know that I believe the children are our future…?”

Silly person.  Sit down and let Mr. Elephant educate you, and by “educate” in that sentence, I mean something completely different from the “education” your children are getting today.

First, let me get this much out of the way: I think the public education system is unconstitutional.  I believe our students would be better off if we had a system of privately-held schools that had a profit motivation for producing high quantities of high-quality students.  I also think they would do so at a much lower cost than we currently blow on our unbelievably mediocre national school system – over $1.1 Trillion dollars annually on all levels of education from all levels of government – compare that to our Defense Budget of $707 Billion.  And yet, here, I am not going to advocate for the dismantling of the system.  No, I’m just going to point out what’s wrong with our current system and what we could to fix it.

  1. Seems legit.

    Seems legit.

    Pedophiles.  Whenever I say that word, I’ll bet you that you start thinking “priests” or “boy scout leaders” or “creepy guy hiding in a white van labeled ‘free candy’”, right?  I mean, obviously, the problem of child sexual predators is surely restricted only to those weird and creepy people who do stuff like “pray”, “build fires”, and “drive around in a van advertising free candy”.

    OK, I’ll give you the last one.

    An organization called “Bishop Accountability” once estimated that 10% of priests were pedophiles.  The problem is that they used a very loose interpretation of “pedophile” that included priests who were merely accused of sexual abuse.  The real number is probably between 2 and 5 percent.  Still a high number, but it’s pretty much equivalent to the rate of the general population.  Still – 64% of people, when you say “Catholic Priest” wonder exactly how many children they’ve diddled.

    If they’re looking for diddlers, tho, maybe they should look at teachers.  There are no hard facts because, shock of shocks, powerful lobbies like the National Education Association have worked to keep government polls from being done.  Fortunately, private polling has been done.  It is estimated that the percentage of abuser teachers is similar to the general population (between 1 and 5%), but the problem is that while the average abuser is exposed to children for only a brief time, teachers are exposed to children on a daily basis for many hours a day.  The result is that between 10 and 15% of students have reported being sexually harassed or abused by their teachers. When the American Association of University Women Foundation interviewed over 1,600 students between 8th and 11th grade, they found that 25% of girls and 10% of boys had been abused or harassed, and identified their abuser or harasser as a school employee.  The same poll found that between 1991 and 2000, over 250,000 students had been sexually abused or harassed by a school employee.

    The response from the schools?  15% were terminated.  38.7% resigned, changed districts, or retired.  54.3% suffered no ill effects other than a stern talking-to or re-education.  While it’s certainly terrible that sexual abuse happens, it’s even more terrible when over 54% of cases are covered up, ignored, or punished with little more than a slap on the wrist.  In New York City, teachers accused of sexual abuse of students are put through the district’s disciplinary system, aka “the rubber room”.  Basically, they’re sent to a room to twiddle their thumbs, get paid their full salaries with benefits, and wait – often for years – until the district decides what to do with them.

    How bad is it in NYC?  Well, we have the case of this lovely man, one Roland Pierre.  He finally retired last year at the age of 76.  He’d spent every day since 1997 in one of the rubber rooms, twiddling his thumbs and collecting his full salary and benefits.  Why was he in the rubber room, you may ask?  Did he give a rich kid a bad grade?  Did he vote Republican?  Nothing that heinous, apparently.  All he did was call one of his 6th grader ESL students into his classroom, hugged her, kissed her full on the mouth (with tongue), grabbed her boobs, and finally reached under her skirt for a good feel of her downstairs parts.  He was arrested and then the school system parked him in a room and paid him $97,000 a year, with full vacation and benefits from the age of 62 (when he could’ve retired) to the age of 76.

    And then there’s Alan Rosenfield.  This man has a $10 million real estate portfolio and has been deemed a walking danger to children when he perved out, made some lewd comments to 8th graders, and grabbed some girls’ butts.  So the NYC schools pulled him out of the classroom and put him in a rubber room, paying him $100,049 a year with benefits (including a currently-estimated $87k annual pension) for the past decade.  Again, he could’ve retired at 62, but decided he’d rather, in his own words, give a big F-U to the school system for denying him his rights to grab 13-year-olds’ hinnies.

    And then there’s Francisco Olivares.  This genius among men impregnated a 16-year-old back in 1978, but avoided any fooferall by marrying her.  Over the next 14 years, he molested and took porno pictures of at least 3 more 12-year-old girls.  The school system…  overturned his conviction on a technicality and later, in 2002, he found himself in trouble again when he fondled yet another girl.  This time, the schools struck back hard and the arbitrator gave him a warning not to stand close to students.  And then the stuck him in the rubber room and paid him $94,154 a year, plus benefits.

    The NYC Schools response, once these controversies were exposed?  They shut down the rubber rooms, sent the teachers home, and paid them their salaries and benefits anyway.

    It’s like the thin blue line, except with chalk.

  2. Performance.  There’s a very helpful infographic that will pretty much sum up my problems here.  Non-collegiate American education spends more money, per student, than any major country on the planet, and yet, our students consistently come in average to below average in comparison to the rest of the planet. Obviously, dollars are not helping matters, as nations who spend less money per student get consistently better performance from those students (Canada, Finland, South Korea, etc.).  And yet, at the state and local level, we consistently hear how our schools need more money, more money, more money.  I’m fully convinced that if you offered them every last dime, there still wouldn’t be enough money to spend on making students more and more mediocre.
  3. Indoctrination.  Teacher in Rowan County, NC tells her students that it’s illegal to criticize Barack Obama.  Another NC teacher, Diantha Harris, used her classroom to bully a student who supported John McCain.  And lest we forget: Barack Hussein Obama…  mmm… mmm… mmm…A simple question: would this be allowed for George W. Bush?  How about Mitt Romney?  Ronald Reagan?  I’ll go ahead and tell you: hell, no.  Private organizations, like clubs and churches, may voice support for those men, but never, ever would a public school be allowed to be used for such caterwauling praise of a sitting President.  At least, not a Republican President.  And why is that, do you suppose?
  4. Student discipline.  There’s a reason people’ve been complaining for years about how schools aren’t paddling students anymore: paddling works.  There’s nothing that’ll cure a desire to bring an AK-47 to the classroom like the thought that you’re going to get your butt whooped by a principal with a 2×4 and the upper arm strength of a major league home run king.  You don’t need to be abusive, but with classroom behavior downtrending like a flushed turd, a logical person would have to somehow conclude that maybe, just maybe, a limpwristed approach to discipline isn’t an effective means of discipline.  Joe Clark took up a baseball bat and chained the doors to his school and got rid of most of the discipline problems at his school.Of course, there’s more than just political indoctrination.  There’s religious indoctrination, too.  If you’re opposed to teachers pushing the religion of Christianity on students, then certainly pushing Islam, Buddhism, and Atheism is equally wrong, right?  RIGHT?

Those are just 4 areas.  There’s more, but let’s just run with those 4 for right now because my solution, frankly, will solve the other problems, too.  And like I said above, I’m not going to advocate for dismantling the schools, even though I think it would probably solve these problems much, much more quickly.

The Solution

  1. End teacher unions.  There is no reason in the modern world for a teacher union to exist except to bully the taxpayers and protect a class of citizens that need no protection.
  2. End tenure.  There is no reason in the world to allow bad teachers to have extra protection in their jobs.  Good teachers will keep their jobs by being good teachers.
  3. Keep testing students.  Like it or not, standardized testing is good.  It lets us know if your students meet the standards.  Yes, there are issues, but at least we have a number we can use to base whether your students are failing to meet, meeting, or exceeding expectations.
  4. Pay teachers accordingly.  If your students are expected to be at level 7 and they’re consistently testing at level 9, you should be paid more.  If, however, they’re testing at level 4, you should be fired.
  5. Hold all school staff accountable.  Do regular background checks and drug testing of all school staff, from the janitors to the principals.  Hold them accountable if they step out of line.
  6. Ban political activity by teachers and hold them to the ban.  Teachers who push a political agenda should be fired immediately.
  7. Revoke licenses regularly.  If a teacher crosses the line often or egregiously enough, revoke their license permanently.
  8. Fire limp-wristed disciplinarians.  Children need to learn to act like adults and they can’t learn from adults whose solution to discipline problems is to hide in the corner, smile through their teeth, and hippie-hug people into submission.  If you have a child who’s a problem, they’re keeping other children from learning.  Send the child home with a note that says they’re not to come back until they grow up and if the parent doesn’t like it, they can pay for a private education or homeschool their little angel.
  9. Give parents an out.  If the school their kids attend sucks, then parents need to have an out, via school vouchers and charter schools.  At the very least, if those kids end up in charter schools, then you’ll get lower classroom sizes at the schools they leave.
  10. Keep school boards accountable.  In North Carolina, I’m in favor of removing school taxes from city and county budgets and placing that taxation authority in the hands of the school system – but only giving them taxation authority over families whose students use the school system.  On one hand, if I have no children, then I am receiving a very limited benefit from the school system.  On the other hand, it means that the people who receive the greatest benefit from a public education will have to hold those elected officials responsible for the expenditure of their local tax dollars.  In other states, I dunno.  Just vote the punks out.

Do you have any ideas to make our schools better?  Comment below, man!

Read Full Post »

For two months now, all we’ve heard is how an evil white guy in Florida gunned down a poor, innocent black kid in cold blood, and I’m sick of it.

I’ve spoken out on this on Facebook and message boards quite a bit, but it’s time to lay everything out, both in terms of understanding the situation, the law behind it, the people involved, and the fluff on both sides of the argument.  If you don’t agree with me, feel free to start your own blog on the matter.

Here’s the facts that we actually know at this point:

  • On February 26, 2012, George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch guy and concealed weapon license holder that lived in a neighborhood with rising crime rates, saw a person he thought was behaving suspiciously.  He phoned it in to the non-emergency number at the Sanford, FL police department at 7:09 PM.  At around 7:11-7:12, Martin begins running and Zimmerman begins to chase him.  The operator tells him “We don’t need you to do that”.  Zimmerman says “OK” and gives his best address location to the operator.  At 7:13, he hangs up.
  • Martin’s girlfriend was on the phone with him around 7:12 and was told that someone was following him.  She reported that there was a verbal confrontation at some point during the phone call.
  • At about 7:25, there is a physical altercation during which Zimmerman pulls a Kel-Tec PF9 pistol and fires a single shot at very close range.  The slug hits Martin in the chest.  At 7:26, support personnel arrive and perform lifesaving measures on Martin, who is declared dead at 7:30 PM.  Zimmerman tells the police officer on site that he had shot Martin.
  • According to witnesses, there was a physical altercation that involved Martin on top of Zimmerman, hitting him with his fists.  Medical reports released after the event show that Zimmerman had wounds to his face, nose, and back of head, and the back of his jacket was wet and covered with grass, consistent with him lying on his back in the wet grass.  Zimmerman’s hands were not bruised (indicating that he did not hit Martin).  Martin’s autopsy report showed that his hands were bruised, as if he’d been hitting someone.  The autopsy report also showed that Martin had THC (a byproduct of marijuana) in his system at the time of his death, but the quantity as of today is not known.
  • Zimmerman was placed into police custody and taken downtown where he was photographed, interviewed, and investigated.  The state attorney’s office called it self-defense and declined to pursue charges against him at the time.
  • After protests by the victim’s family and rising national pressure, Florida Governor Rick Scott assigned a different state prosecutor to the case.  On April 11, 2012, the new prosecutor charged Zimmerman with 2nd Degree Murder.

Here’s where we have to start talking about legal specifics.  I am not a lawyer, so please consult a legal professional if you have questions about this:

  • Self-defense law in the United States is simple and is accepted nationwide.  If a reasonable person believes they or someone else is at risk of loss of life, serious bodily injury, or serious sexual assault, then they have the right to use deadly force in defense.
  • There are two doctrines that are tied to self-defense.  The first is called “duty to retreat” and it states that a defendant who is claiming self defense must prove to the court that they attempted to avoid the conflict and took reasonable steps to attempt to retreat before they used deadly force.  19 states use this doctrine.
  • The second doctrine is called “stand your ground”.  This doctrine states that if you are in a conflict that you did not provoke and you have to use deadly force to defend yourself, you are under no duty to retreat.  31 states use some form of this doctrine that varies from an absolute stand-your-ground law (24 states) to a limited version that only applies to home, business, car, etc. (7 states)
  • Massad Ayoob nicely covers stand-your-ground laws here.  You should pay attention to what he says.
  • Under Florida Law, Second Degree Murder in Florida is defined as “The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree”. (FL State Code 782.04 (2)).  In other words, it is an unlawful killing of a human being with malice, but without premeditation.  A classic description of 2nd Degree Murder is if a person became angry, grabbed his usual self-defense gun, and then shot the person he was angry at.

This is what we know so far.  Unfortunately, there’s so much stupid heat over this tragedy that we’ve forgotten the real facts of this case:

  • A young man is dead, possibly because of his own actions.
  • Another young man’s life is ruined, possibly because he defended his life against an aggressor.

Such a shame that both of these young men are being dragged through the mud by race-baiters, political hacks, media vultures deliberately editing material to poison public opinion, and politicians running for re-election.

Read Full Post »

Sometimes, you just can’t help laughing at the state of affairs in the world.  Laughter helps the world go ’round.  It also distracts my brain from its deep-seeded desire to eat its way out of the back of my skull for having been exposed to the ongoing theater of the absurd that is the war on the Tea Parties.

Now, it seems that our beloved Teleprompter has joined in with the self-appointed clowns of the left in referring to those who disagree with Obama, Communism, and the general flushing of our Constitution, principles, and nation down the toilet…   by vulgar sexual slang.  Honestly, if it were just him as a private citizen, we could almost laugh it off.  Especially the whole hypocrisy part, where he calls for civility while at the same time calling people names like any good 6-year-old bully would do.  But A) he’s the President; and B) it’s a pattern of behavior by members of the left.

From unapologetic vulgar sexual slang to bizarre theories of assistance based on political voting patterns to false accusations of racist comments to conspiracy theories that would normally get one committed to an asylum, the left’s war on the right – and common sense – continues, unstopped by any of those pesky “facts” or “opposition in the media”.

And they wonder why the latest polls show a butt-whoopin’ coming this November.

Read Full Post »

Obama’s TelePrompTer Brigade vs. Sarah’s Hand Notes…   a cost analysis.

Read Full Post »

Air America is hanging it up.  Here is a tissue for you.

They already had filed bankrupcy, and have been “rescued” once. 

The problem:  They are not able to get anyone or business to advertise.  No one seems to want to be responsible for supporting this garbage.  Hmmmm, is this the growing sentiment in America?

Read Full Post »

Compare and Contrast:

In 2006, Senator George Allen, running for his re-election in Virgina, used the term “macaca” to refer to a young man of Indian heritage who was filming him.  Despite the fact that no one in the country had ever heard of this term before, suddenly, “macaca” was traced to a French-speaking insult of African tribesmen from back in the 19th century, and obviously, it means something to a guy who couldn’t remember another guy’s name.  His penalty: Allen’s sure victory became a loss, and a Presidential contender’s hopes went down in flames.

In the same year, Senator Joe Biden, running for President, insulted all persons of Indian heritage by saying “You cannot go to a 7/11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I’m not joking.”  He wasn’t joking.  Later on, he referred to his opponent in the Democrat nomination for President, Barack Hussein Obama, as being a clean, well-spoken black man (apparently in contrast to all the other black men, who are dirty and can’t complete a grammatically correct sentence).  His penalty: he was nominated by the Democrat Party and currently serves as Vice President of the United States.

In 1990, white Southern Senator Jesse Helms ran against African-American Harvey Gantt for the North Carolina Senate.  A man who was fervently opposed to movements and collectivism – and many people mistook his opposition to the Civil Rights Movement as being based in racism, when in reality, Helms believed in constitutionalism, anti-communism, and individual achievement – employing Civil Rights leader and assassination attempt victim James Meredith as an adviser to him in the Senate.  His opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act was based on his belief that it should apply to everyone or no one.  Still, he ran against a black man whose campaign was built on supporting racial quotas.  When Helms pointed this out, his penalty was an endless stream of caricatures of him as a rabid, racist, extremist.

In 1944, Exalted Cyclops and Kleagle of the Klan, Robert Byrd wrote concerning his service in the United States military, “I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side… Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.”  He worked to filibuster the 1964 Civil Rights Act along with other Democrats, based on the fact that it helped black people.  He apologized for being a Klan member, but still felt comfortable enough with the n-word to repeatedly use it in a nationally televised interview.  His penalty?  He currently serves as President Pro Tem of the United States Senate and is referred to by fellow Democrats as “The Constitutional Conscience” of the US Senate.

In 2002, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott praised Senator Strom Thurmond at Strom’s 100th birthday party, saying, “When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over the years, either.”  The interesting thing is that “we” didn’t vote for Strom.  In fact, “he” didn’t vote for Strom (unless Mississippi had extended the vote to 7-year-olds for the 1948 election).  Unfortunately, Strom had run on a platform of racial segregation and Lott had stuck his foot squarely and deeply down his throat.  Calls for his resignation from Senate leadership came from all over, including from such sources as then-State Senator from Illinois’ 13th District Barack Hussein Obama.  Lott apologized, but the calls for his resignation continued.  The Penalty: Lott resigned 15 days after the statement was made.

In 2010, it was revealed in early releases from an upcoming book that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid referred to Presidential Candidate Barack Hussein Obama as  “light skinned” and “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”  He was joined by Former President William Jefferson Clinton, who said that “a few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee”.  Calls came in for Reid’s resignation.  The response?  Forgiveness from Al Sharpton.  Apology accepted by Barack Hussein Obama.  And silence from the rest of the left.

Speaking of Barack Hussein Obama…  this is a man who was a member of Trinity United Church of Christ, a church where the pastor (whom Obama referred to as being “like family” before tossing him under the bus) taught a theology that if God wasn’t in line with Black Theology’s goals of the destruction of the White Enemy, they won’t worship him.  Take THAT, God!  He referred to his grandmother as a “typical white woman” and referred to cops who investigated a potential break-in at a home in Harvard, MA as “acting stupidly”.  His penalty?  Near silence from the media and a sit-down photo op with one of the cops.

Look, I’ll say it: racism sucks.  Allen’s comments are questionable, but Jesse’s positions on race were, to put it best, inconsistent and complicated, and Lott should’ve watched his mouth.  Biden should’ve been tossed on his fanny for his repeated remarks, Robert Byrd is a joke of a fossil, and Reid is as much of a nightmare as Slick Willy – and they all need to be put out to pasture.  Barack Hussein Obama is a racist, period.

But they aren’t.

The double-standard that has existed for years is never better illustrated than when it comes to the way the media and the parties respond to racism.  The simple truth is that conservatives and Republicans are held to higher standards of behavior – and they should be.  The problem is that Democrats should be held to the exact same high standards – and they aren’t.  They’re given a free pass by the media lapdogs, and the party machinery cranks away to ensure that those who commit sins of commission are forgiven without question by those within the party.

It’s all simply a continuation of the same mindset behind racism, which is that one group of people deserve a pass while another group of people don’t deserve it.  It sucks and it’s up to us to call our political leaders (aka “our employees”) to the carpet over it.  If they won’t change, then it’s up to us to send them packing.

Read Full Post »

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.

Read Full Post »

Andrea Mitchel stars in this short clip, as a typical, pathetic, (and by pathetic I mean her inadequate and laughable attempt to “ambush” or try to catch Sarah Palin off guard, and fail miserably) liberal media journalist.  She will do anything it takes to try and deliver an embarrassing statement from Sara Palin.  But, nothing in Andrea’s bag of tricks prepares her for the readiness of Sarah. 

She tries the Newsweek cover, asks her about her intention in 2012, and also tries to prompt Sarah into commenting on John McCain’s reaction to her book.  Andrea is arrogant and rude with her elitist attitude and all that it encompasses. It really does nothing more than show how unsuccessful her attempt is to bring down Sara Palin.  Sarah is very polished and sharp with her answers.  Something I think Andrea is not expecting. 

So, in the last week or so, MSNBC has shown their love  (and by love, I mean their fear of her, and the people she ignites) for Sarah Palin.  Whether it is Chris Matthew’s and his comments about the crowds at the book signings, Nora O’Donell’s questions to  a teenager at a Palin book signing, or Andrea Mitchell trying to trip up Sarah Palin in Michigan.  It is all a very calculated and could prove to be very damaging to the liberal media’s agenda. 

Here is a link to a blog that goes into the reasons why the media seem to want to continue to show their love  for her and other conservative women.  It is a must read, and very informative.   

Props to Hot Air for the my initial exposure to the video.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.