Thursday, October 23, 2008
Barry Obama hypocrisy on foreign policy
Liberal hypocrisy knows no bounds. They bitched and moaned that their civil liberties were being stolen when President Bush pushed to pass the Patriot Act and also institute warrantless wiretapping, to TRULY protect us. Yet, Democrats attempt to sift through your garbage (in the name of "recycling"), to enact the Fairness Doctrine, or ban anti-gay/Islamic terrorist speech, truly stealing our first amendments.
The dumb fuckers on the Left, including the MSM, are nowhere to be found. Instead they're all sipping their lattes, driving their Volvos, and castigating Christians.
Just another day in a soon-to-be Obama nation.
Speaking of liberal hypocrisy, try this one on for size. Undoubtedly, you've heard smug liberals proclaim that invading Iraq (in 2003) was illegal and that we had no business here. In one of the recent presidential debates, Democratic candidate Obama stated the following:
"When genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening somewhere around the world and we stand idly by, that diminishes us."
But he had stated in 2007, "Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there."
Furthermore, it was okay in the late 1990's for President Clinton to interject American military forces in Serbia to halt a genocide occurring against Bosnian Muslims?
How the hell is Iraq or Darfur ANY different? All three have or would be done to prevent or halt genocide.
The answer is that it's not different; it's just the matter of liberals, so consumed with their of Bush, Christianity and Conservatism, to concoct stories, courtesy of the aforementioned corrupt liberal MSM.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Latest charge of "racism" against McCain-Palin
You've got to be kidding me.
Of course the object of those remarks is one Barry Soetoro/Dunham/Obama, Democratic presidential candidate, and Mainstream Media golden child.
The "socialist" label that Sen. John McCain and his GOP presidential running mate Sarah Palin are trying to attach to Sen. Barack Obama actually has long and very ugly historical roots.
J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI from 1924 to 1972, used the term liberally to describe African Americans who spent their lives fighting for equality.
Those freedom fighters included the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., who led the Civil Rights Movement; W.E.B. Du Bois, who in 1909 helped found the NAACP which is still the nation's oldest and largest civil rights organization; Paul Robeson, a famous singer, actor and political activist who in the 1930s became involved in national and international movements for better labor relations, peace and racial justice; and A. Philip Randolph, who founded and was the longtime head of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters and a leading advocate for civil rights for African Americans.
McCain and Palin have simply reached back in history to use an old code word for black. It set whites apart from those deemed unAmerican and those who could not be trusted during the communism scare.
Shame on McCain and Palin.
Pardon my language, but what a crock of shit. Any attack by the Right is deemed racist by liberals and propagated through the corrupt, liberal mainstream media.
Here's a newsflash for you, Lewis: Obama IS a socialist. Not only has he been affiliated with the New Deal Party, a reknowned socialist organization, but on multiple occasions he has employed the phrases "redistribution of wealth" and "spread the wealth around." Sorry, Lewis, but that is code for SOCIALISM.
It's getting sad that any dissent in this country has been stifled by the Left, notably Obama and his Thought-Police. Oh but wait, it was Bush that stole your civil rights, isn't that correct?
Idiots.
Liberal Hypocrisy of the Day: Attacks against Christians
Remember, stereotypes are usually based on facts.
Said liberals are quick to cast aspersions on anyone that disagrees not with them. They love to flaunt their sophistication and enlightenment. After all, this certain Democratic president is often referred to as the "Enlightened One."
That sophistication is thrown out the window when it comes to Christianity; the gloves come off.
Note the following, courtesy of the Minneapolis Star Tribune's Katherine Kersten:
I get it -- Al Franken is a serious senatorial candidate despite his penchant for the pornographic. Franken's one-liners about rape and oral sex and his leering fantasies about big-busted women were just for yucks, right?
Last June, DFL bigwigs chose to forget about their man's decades-long record of sexual crudity after he hooked the endorsement by putting on a serious face and saying "sorry" at the party's convention.
But Franken didn't apologize for another aspect of his trash-talking shtick. He's aimed some of his most offensive material at religious believers, particularly Christians.
Why hasn't this been aired in public? We in the press are too busy searching through Sarah Palin's junior high yearbooks and tracking down the filing dates of Joe the Plumber's tax returns.
Meanwhile, Franken gets a pass for making a joke of the life and death of Jesus Christ.
Franken finds Christ's crucifixion to be a barrel of laughs. For example, in his 1999 book, "Why Not Me?" he wrote about his discovery -- as a fictional former president -- of "the complete skeleton of Jesus Christ still nailed to the cross" during an archeological dig. At the Franken Presidential Library gift shop, visitors can buy "small pieces of Jesus' skeleton."
"We would like to display Jesus' skeleton at some future point," Franken went on. "It's merely a matter of designing and building an exhibition space ... . Until then he's very comfortable in a box down in our basement near the geothermal power station."
Very funny. Anybody want to try a joke like that about Mohammed?
Reread the last sentence. Of course no one will make a joke about Mohammed or Islam in general for two reasons: 1.) liberals have aligned themselves with Muslims, despite their overwhelmingly negative views towards women, homosexuals, and non-Muslims; 2.) they fear violent retribution from Muslims if insulted.
You don't see too many Christians issuing fatwas, do you?
The enlightened liberals have no problem stereotyping and mocking Christians for their beliefs. Personally as a Christian, I'm not too offended by what Franken said; with that said, his humor is lame. He's just not a funny guy. He thinks he is, but he's not.
For a group that recoils in horror at any little verbal indiscretion, their hypocrisy knows no bounds when it comes to Christianity.
But hypocrisy from liberals shouldn't really surprise you, should it?

