Liberalism as a Dumb, Hypocritical, Sex-Based Religion

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 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

   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 »

Technology Cost Analysis

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

Read Full Post »

Sarah Palin’s Move to Fox News, why is this a shock?

Ok I have to admit first off I am a Sarah Palin fan. I have read her book and like myself, she professes to be a fiscal conservative. She believes in hard work, believes in God and is thankful for what she has and the potential for her to be better, and for America to be greater. She believes that the Democrats are on a socialist path and bad for America. Let all the hate be heaped on me for being a Sarah Palin admirer. I’m ready for it!

I sometimes have to wonder, that why does it seem that everything that Sarah Palin does, it sends the liberal news media into a tizzy? Like headlines of “Palin resigned from her governorship. now her political career is over”, or “An official Review of Sarah’s Book and why you shouldn’t buy it” or my current favorite now is “How Sarah’s Job at Fox points that She won’t run for President in 2012″ opposite the headline of “How Sarah’s Job at Fox sets her up for a 2012 Presidential Run”. It seems like the liberal news media out there are just dying to have the first official news headline and will throw up any crap they can think of to be the “first on the scene”.

I think of Sarah Palin’s move to Fox News as a good one. Let us not forget what her college degree is in: Journalism. You know that thing you really need to be on a news show or write in a newspaper. So in a sense, this makes her better qualified than 90% of all the liberal crackpots in the news today. Secondly, this so-called move is not to a political show like Sean Hannity has. Sarah will occasionally appear to give her point of view on important news and occasionally give commentaries. Don’t expect Sarah to pack up the moving boxes and move to New York. I expect live news feeds from her home state of Alaska. Thirdly, this contract with Fox, does not preclude her from running for the President in 2012. Mike Huckabee is on Fox News and his work at Fox doesn’t preclude him from running again. Why should it preclude Sarah?

It really amuses me how the media and people in general underestimate Sarah Palin. She does things that she want’s to do, because she feels like it’s the RIGHT thing to do, not the EXPECTED thing to do. She doesn’t play by anyone’s rules and this confounds liberals and liberal news media to no end. And because she doesn’t play by the liberal’s official set of rules, they set out to ridicule her, deride her, and out-and-out destroy her. What they don’t get is that once you get to know Sarah Palin, people really like her. And to those of us in flyover country, she is one of us, and we are rooting for her in whatever she chooses to do. Personally, I think that this move to Fox News will help her get her message out to all of those people who don’t know Sarah Palin. You know, those people who’s only knowledge of Sarah Palin, is the one that the liberal news media has painted her to be: an extremist bimbo who doesn’t know where Africa is and can see Russia from her front porch.

In fact the liberal assertions that try to paint Palin in a negative corner and try to make her a non-issue, in reality, makers her a very important issue. No-one in the Potential Republican Presidential camp has really fired me up in any way. I really didn’t like any of the past primary potentials and in the previous primaries my vote was for Fred Thompson, for obvious conservative reasons. No-one really excites me, except for Sarah. I believe the liberals are really scared of Sarah, because once people really get to know Sarah, she is going to be a force to be reckoned with, well in fact she already is! They proclaim they want Sarah to run against Obama, because it will be easier for Obama to be re-elected. What the lib’s continue to underestimate, is the power of Sarah Palin’s popularity for all of us people who “don’t count”. What I do know, is that my vote most certainly DOES COUNT and it won’t be counted for any politician that is part of Obama’s socialist agenda. The lib’s better pray that Sarah doesn’t run because for a lot of us, it will fire up the conservative branch that we haven’t seen since Ronald Reagan. And be forewarned establishment Republicans, we are keeping an eye on you too, because we want real conservative change, the REAL type of change that Sarah stands for. Charlie Crist now understands it, do you?

Whatever you think of Sarah Palin, she is not irrelevant and she is not going away. You think she has been in the news a lot before? Just wait until her message starts to get out and let the hailfire in Washington DC begin.

Read Full Post »

Just a response to those crazy liberals..

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 »

A Tale of Two Women

If there’s one thing that liberals love trumpeting, it’s their love for women.  And by “women”, I mean “female human beings who believe, talk, and act like they agree with the liberal agenda without a second thought of their own”.  If we were to be honest with ourselves – as we always should be, the single worst thing to happen to women in recent history has been liberal feminism’s fascistic stranglehold on the “female agenda”.

And woe be unto they who upset the apple cart.

Let’s start by talking about the woman who’s done more to promote the idea of powerful, confident females in recent memory, who was within a hair’s breadth of the Vice Presidency, and who was the inspiration for tens of millions of Americans – and I’m not talking about Hillary Clinton.

To be sure, Hillary’s rise to power is as admirable as the rise of anyone who rides her lecherous husband’s coattails to further her own agenda, but Sarah Palin is far different.  She’s a woman who didn’t ride any coattails, who got elected on her own merits and beliefs, and who has risen, stumbled, and moved along on her own merits.  She’s been a mayor, a governor, and a Vice-Presidential candidate who’s inspired millions and ignited a conservative base thought long dead under the ashes of the Bush-McCain Republican Party – all while being the mother of a gaggle of kids (including one special needs child) and gracefully guiding her wayward daughter through her late-adolescent pregnancy.   All this while helping her husband run a fishing company.

Now – to me, anyway, all this would scream “successful woman who should be a model for all people, not because of her gender, but because she is a successful human being”.  But not to liberals.  Sarah’s opposition to things like “murdering your baby because you’d rather not be inconvenienced” made her a target for the agenda-worshipping members of the liberal establishment.  She’d committed the cardinal sin in the religion of Liberalism: she disagreed with Liberalism.  On everything.  And, being good members of a fascistic, control-hungry religious order, the left did the one thing they’d do to anyone who’d oppose a fascistic, control-hungry religious order: they held an inquisition.

If they could’ve used thumbscrews, they would have.  Fortunately, they had photoshops and pictures of dolls instead.

And yet, Sarah remains Sarah.  In comparison to her critics’ frothing meltdowns, her new book is, in my ever-lovin’-not-even-remotely humble opinion, an honest (if singular-perspective) autobiography.  And despite the AP’s assignment of 11 reporters to fine-tooth-comb the book for “errors” (something they have yet to do with Barack “Jimmy Carter, Jr.” Obama’s 2 Bill-Ayers-scribed tomes), the books are classy – if folksy – tales from the inside that everyone should give ear to.

Naturally, the left is in a lather.  Perhaps she should’ve made contact with The Taliban or Al Qaeda first.  Then they’d love her!

Is it just women this happens to?  Absolutely not.  Is Sarah the only woman who’s suffered their wrath?  Absolutely not.  And this brings us to our second woman: Carrie Prejean.

Carrie Prejean, for those of you who’ve been residing under a rock, is the Miss USA runner up who dared to give her real opinion during an interview by celebrity pervert Perez “I’m Not Actually Creative and Can’t Think for Myself, So I’ll Steal Someone Else’s Name” Hilton.  Being a naive 21-year-old, she actually believed that saying that it was great that our country had the choice, but that her personal opinion was that marriage was a sacred institution that should be between a man and a woman was a way to be respected as a free-thinking individual who has her own opinions.

Unfortunately for her, those who would label her “free thinkers” would declare war on her for not thinking exactly like them.  This is because liberals confuse “free” with “liberal”.  They’re also bad at math, but that’s beside the point.

So, Ms. Prejean spends the better part of her time now defending her answer.  She was stripped of her title as Miss California USA, purportedly after refusing to take the Levi Johnston “let’s pose for a naked people magazine” Route dú Famé.  Still.  In the meantime, her liberal opponents are busily digging up as many semi-naked pictures of her as they can to “prove” her hypocrisy (never quite grasping their own hypocrisy).

And now, we’re receiving news that Ms. Prejean may have made more than just a few semi-naked pics.  Like so many stupid American adolescents, she may have made some videos for her boyfriend that involved her doing things that shouldn’t be done in front of a camera.  The hypocrisy!  The horror!

OK, first…  teenagers?  Here’s a few pointers from your good friend, Uncle Elephant:

1.  Don’t take naked pictures of yourself.  They’re never as funny or awesome as you think they are and they WILL end up on the internet.

2.  If it’s on the internet, everyone on the planet will know exactly what your hoo-hah or ding-dong looks like.

3.  You will be forever judged by your hoo-hah or your ding-dong.  That guy selling you french fries?  He’s seen your ding dong.  That creepy old lady with the cigarette hanging out of her mouth and breath that smells too much like Wild Turkey?  She’s seen your hoo-hah.

4.  Your mom and dad will be so proud!  Seriously…   no, they won’t.  Neither will your siblings, your grandparents, or your children.  There’s a reason they’re called “private” parts.

Ok – so we got that down?  No more taking naked pictures of yourself with your cell phone.  The “cool” kids who are doing that are retards, and unless you want to be just like the retards, you’ll keep your freakin’ clothes on whenever there’s a camera nearby.  Got it?  Are we clear?

Good.

Now, Ms. Prejean has indeed admitted that she’s done that exact stupid thing we’ve just been talking about.  She, too, thought it was cool, and now she’s fighting against a corporation with expensive lawyers and her waning credibility to keep those pictures and videos off the open market.  And now, today… a few years later and a bit more mature, she’s stating that she thinks it’s wrong.  Is she a hypocrite?  Maybe.  More likely, she’s a maturing woman who’s growing in her Christian faith and coming to the realization that she did some stupid things in her past that she’s now having to pay the price for.

If having liberals in charge should teach you anything, it’s that stupidity always costs.

But her own change of heart isn’t enough for liberals.  They want blood.  She dared to stand up for her own thoughts and beliefs and for this, she must be destroyed.  Disagreement with the agenda must not be tolerated, on pain of having Perez Hilton act like a complete jackass on his website whenever your name flitters through his tiny little brain, right in between his latest pervert session with anonymous lovers and wondering whether he should’ve gotten extra napkins with his Nacho Bellgrande®.

Carrie’s reaction has been, frankly, unfortunate.  She’s run away from softball interviews with Larry King and hasn’t quite learned the grace it takes to survive public exposure and criticism.  On the other hand, she’s twenty-freaking-two years old.  I have belly button lint older than Carrie Prejean.  I am fully confident that she will learn, grow, and continue to mature into an adult.

In the meantime, she could learn a lot from Sarah.  She could learn about the grace and confidence it takes to handle the idiotic, hypocritical, inquisitorial splatter-screaming criticism of the idjut left.  She could learn about what it takes to be a free-thinking woman who’s comfortable enough in her own skin to own up to her own shortcomings in a way that disarms her critics.  She could learn about the confidence that faith and family instill in her.

Frankly, I think we could replace the “She” with “I” in that above sentence.

Read Full Post »