Daisy Khan, wife of 9/11 conspiracy theorist, Hamas-lovin'. Ground Zero Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf says her 13-story mega-mosque is going to be built on Ground Zero, whether Americans like it or not.
And - perhaps relying on advice from folks like Pelosi, Bloomberg, and Barack , Devious Daisy spouts demented Democratic talking points, as in the opposition is just a bunch of racist Republicans, anyway:
The furor surrounding the planned mosque and Islamic cultural center two blocks from Ground Zero has "only strengthened our supporters. None of them have caved. They are circling the wagons around us. They know they could be next."
Khan said she is completely taken aback by the opposition.
She expressed surprise that "a community center for everyone in the neighborhood, to scale up and build up people of all religions, has become so skewed."
"It's hard to see yourself portrayed this way daily. But to me, it's an indication that the post-9/11 controversy is not finished. It's not over and neither is the healing. This is a teaching moment. A healing moment," she said.
She blamed partisan strife for stirring up people's emotions.
"It's hard for us to imagine we are in the thick of a controversy like this. The Republicans are really going after us," she said.
The uproar over the mosque, said Khan, shows that "there is still healing that needs to happen. There are bigger issues here and it's also about how Muslims are perceived. When will Muslims be accepted as plain old Americans?"
When will Muslims be accepted as plain old Americans, Daisy? When they start to show the slightest bit of sensitivities for American values, including not building a mosque on our hallowed ground. Don't spit in our faces, then act all surprised that we don't love you....
Another question for Daisy Khan: 63% of all New Yorkers are opposed to your "victory tower". In a city that likely has a Democratic registration of 63%, how can their opposition be explained away as Republican agitation?
Daisy is swinging at all the left-wing talking points, but missing badly. If she thinks this interview with the discredited Washington Post's liberal doyenne Sally Quinn is going to help her case, she's mistaken. She may move the meter with the political class, but she's only going to piss off more average Americans by playing the "Islamophobia" card, whatever the f*ck that is.
Daisy, I'd tone down your subtle anti-American rhetoric a bit. There's going to be a new political class running the show in about 90 days, and they don't hate their own country as much as you - and the Democrats - do...
Update: Ace makes the proper comparisons and comments here:
There are dozens of bureaucrats in NYC government tasked with making sure the government is sensitive to Muslim feelings.
Is there a single person at Cordoba House tasked with monitoring the sensitivities of non-Muslims, or victims of 9/11? Did they ask any of the 9/11 families if they'd have a problem with this?
No, they went right ahead because they don't give a shit.
And on my end-- If someone so aggressively tells me to my face they don't give a shit about my sensitivities, concerns, and values, then I am not going to extend myself a micron to understand theirs.
Friday, August 20, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Mike Bloomberg Makes Fool Of Himself, Sestak In Philly
Apparently Mike Bloomberg decided that he was done with this whole "centrist" thing -heck, this whole "democracy" thing - shortly after he bribed his way into a third term as mayor. Taking a break from deriding all opponents of the Ground Zero mosque as "bigots who should be ashamed of themselves", he rolled over to Philadelphia to endorse Pelosi stooge Joe Sestak for Congress over Republican challenger Pat Toomey.
But Billionaire Bloomberg doesn't do "man of the people" stuff very well anymore, especially since his recent decision to totally align himself with the nation's elitist ruling class. So his attempt to be a regular cheesesteak eatin' Philly guy took an embarrassing turn as the manicured Mayor and the snobby Sestak decided to show their bona fides by ordering theirs at a grocery store (The equivalent of getting New York pizza at a deli, or eating at P.F. Changs to show your taste for Chinese food).
To make matters worse, Bloomberg refused to even take a bite of his before the cameras, taking it to go with the assurance he would eat it later. Ah, OK, sure pal. Every red-blooded Philadelphian knows that cheesesteak will be tossed out the back window of your limo on the interstate, like so much public opinion...
Why do I think Bloomberg will become much less in demand for campaign appearances after this fiasco?
But Billionaire Bloomberg doesn't do "man of the people" stuff very well anymore, especially since his recent decision to totally align himself with the nation's elitist ruling class. So his attempt to be a regular cheesesteak eatin' Philly guy took an embarrassing turn as the manicured Mayor and the snobby Sestak decided to show their bona fides by ordering theirs at a grocery store (The equivalent of getting New York pizza at a deli, or eating at P.F. Changs to show your taste for Chinese food).
To make matters worse, Bloomberg refused to even take a bite of his before the cameras, taking it to go with the assurance he would eat it later. Ah, OK, sure pal. Every red-blooded Philadelphian knows that cheesesteak will be tossed out the back window of your limo on the interstate, like so much public opinion...
Why do I think Bloomberg will become much less in demand for campaign appearances after this fiasco?
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Liberals Begging Bush To Weigh In On Ground Zero Mosque
Well, this is certainly an oddity. I thought Barack Obama was the man who would be able to make our tattered orb whole again, with his gifted combination of the soaring rhetoric of Dr. King and the superior intellect of Khan Noonien Singh. Who would have thought that the left - the hard left - would be crying out for George Bush to return, to lend his moral clarity to the Ground Zero Mosque debate?
Byron York gives three examples - first, prototypical NYC bitter single girl Maureen Dowd(dy):
"It's time for W. to weigh in," writes the New York Times' Maureen Dowd. Bush, Dowd explains, understands that "you can't have an effective war against the terrorists if it is a war on Islam." Dowd finds it "odd" that Obama seems less sure on that matter. But to set things back on the right course, she says, "W. needs to get his bullhorn back out..."
Ah, the bullhorn. Rock beats scissors, scissors beats paper, paper beats rock, bullhorn smashes teleprompter....but even more surprising than Dowd is the pining from the always-angry, conservative-hating left wing-nut (and Washington Post stalwart) Eugene Robinson:
"I…would love to hear from former President Bush on this issue," Robinson wrote Tuesday in a Post chat session. "He held Ramadan iftar dinners in the White House as part of a much broader effort to show that our fight against the al-Qaeda murderers who attacked us on 9/11 was not a crusade against Islam. He was absolutely right on this point, and it would be helpful to hear his views."
And party-line hugging Peter Beinart? Oh, no! Et tu, Beinart?
Words I never thought I'd write: I pine for George W. Bush," Beinart wrote Tuesday in The Daily Beast. "Whatever his flaws, the man respected religion, all religion."
What's funny is, of course, that in retrospect George Bush is showing himself to be more intelligent and well spoken - two qualities that the media derided him mercilessly for allegedly lacking - than the lefty wet dream who succeeded him. What's scary is that the left-wing media is finally starting to admit it.
But it's a momentary phenomenon. All the above leftist longing for George W. Bush is based upon their belief that he would support their cause; that he would tell the 70% of bigoted Americans (who apparently only take orders from Texans) and the 63% of notoriously intolerant New Yorkers that building a mosque at Ground Zero is both acceptable and necessary in order to facilitate rapprochement with Islam.
Of course, George Bush was a pretty shrewd politician as well; I don't remember him leading the nation into a place that 70% of his countrymen rejected. I think that, despite his exaggerated over-appreciation for Islam, he would likely come out (gently) against the mosque, stating what so many decent Americans already know: tolerance is a two-way street, and you must show it to receive it.
Of course, the left's longing for W. would revert back to its usual disgusting form, and Bush Derangement Syndrome would re-surface almost immediately amongst the Left, not unlike the occasional embarrassing flare-up of a long-ago contracted STD....
But W. wouldn't mind, nor would the "70-percenters". The hatred of the hard left echos in the ears of Americans as praise. Why else would the #1 selling t-shirt at Obama's vacation getaway (Martha's Vineyard!) be the one with a smirking W. asking, "Miss me yet"?
We do, Mr. President, we do. And apparently, it's not just the Right and the Center anymore, either....
Byron York gives three examples - first, prototypical NYC bitter single girl Maureen Dowd(dy):
"It's time for W. to weigh in," writes the New York Times' Maureen Dowd. Bush, Dowd explains, understands that "you can't have an effective war against the terrorists if it is a war on Islam." Dowd finds it "odd" that Obama seems less sure on that matter. But to set things back on the right course, she says, "W. needs to get his bullhorn back out..."
Ah, the bullhorn. Rock beats scissors, scissors beats paper, paper beats rock, bullhorn smashes teleprompter....but even more surprising than Dowd is the pining from the always-angry, conservative-hating left wing-nut (and Washington Post stalwart) Eugene Robinson:
"I…would love to hear from former President Bush on this issue," Robinson wrote Tuesday in a Post chat session. "He held Ramadan iftar dinners in the White House as part of a much broader effort to show that our fight against the al-Qaeda murderers who attacked us on 9/11 was not a crusade against Islam. He was absolutely right on this point, and it would be helpful to hear his views."
And party-line hugging Peter Beinart? Oh, no! Et tu, Beinart?
Words I never thought I'd write: I pine for George W. Bush," Beinart wrote Tuesday in The Daily Beast. "Whatever his flaws, the man respected religion, all religion."
What's funny is, of course, that in retrospect George Bush is showing himself to be more intelligent and well spoken - two qualities that the media derided him mercilessly for allegedly lacking - than the lefty wet dream who succeeded him. What's scary is that the left-wing media is finally starting to admit it.
But it's a momentary phenomenon. All the above leftist longing for George W. Bush is based upon their belief that he would support their cause; that he would tell the 70% of bigoted Americans (who apparently only take orders from Texans) and the 63% of notoriously intolerant New Yorkers that building a mosque at Ground Zero is both acceptable and necessary in order to facilitate rapprochement with Islam.
Of course, George Bush was a pretty shrewd politician as well; I don't remember him leading the nation into a place that 70% of his countrymen rejected. I think that, despite his exaggerated over-appreciation for Islam, he would likely come out (gently) against the mosque, stating what so many decent Americans already know: tolerance is a two-way street, and you must show it to receive it.
Of course, the left's longing for W. would revert back to its usual disgusting form, and Bush Derangement Syndrome would re-surface almost immediately amongst the Left, not unlike the occasional embarrassing flare-up of a long-ago contracted STD....
But W. wouldn't mind, nor would the "70-percenters". The hatred of the hard left echos in the ears of Americans as praise. Why else would the #1 selling t-shirt at Obama's vacation getaway (Martha's Vineyard!) be the one with a smirking W. asking, "Miss me yet"?
We do, Mr. President, we do. And apparently, it's not just the Right and the Center anymore, either....
Ground Zero Mosque: A "Victory Tower" For Radical Islam
Bob Turner is the opponent of Democratic Douchebag Anthony Weiner (NY), most famous for his recent spittle-spraying, cringe-inducing blowup on the House floor. While Weiner has taken the weenie's way out (a la Barack Obama) on the Ground Zero mosque, Turner can see clearly, for his eyes are not sealed with ideological scales:
For Imam Faisel Abdul Rauf and his supporters to erect a 13 story mosque in the shadow of Ground Zero is not just an act of insensitivity, it is an absolute affront to those who perished that day. There have been no outreach to the families and survivors of this attack prior to the decision to build and their sensitivities have been ignored.
To most practicing Muslims, this tower may be seen as a house of worship. But to those radical Islamists who still seek to destroy America, this Mosque will be seen as a “victory tower”. Most Americans fully support efforts to improve relations between all religions but we cannot turn a blind eye to the mindset of radical Islam in the name of religious tolerance and political correctness.
Turner's right - it's not about outreach, it is about conquest:
The Koran (018:021) states: 'Build a building over them, their Lord knows best about them;' and those who prevailed in their affair said, 'We will surely make a mosque over them.'
Turner can expect to be under investigation by Nancy Pelosi and Mayor Bloomberg for "un-American activities" any minue now...
For Imam Faisel Abdul Rauf and his supporters to erect a 13 story mosque in the shadow of Ground Zero is not just an act of insensitivity, it is an absolute affront to those who perished that day. There have been no outreach to the families and survivors of this attack prior to the decision to build and their sensitivities have been ignored.
To most practicing Muslims, this tower may be seen as a house of worship. But to those radical Islamists who still seek to destroy America, this Mosque will be seen as a “victory tower”. Most Americans fully support efforts to improve relations between all religions but we cannot turn a blind eye to the mindset of radical Islam in the name of religious tolerance and political correctness.
Turner's right - it's not about outreach, it is about conquest:
The Koran (018:021) states: 'Build a building over them, their Lord knows best about them;' and those who prevailed in their affair said, 'We will surely make a mosque over them.'
Turner can expect to be under investigation by Nancy Pelosi and Mayor Bloomberg for "un-American activities" any minue now...
The Ground Zero Mosque: Obama, Pelosi, and the Media Wage War Against America
...because the push to build a mosque on ground sacred to most Americans is nothing less full-frontal assault against the will of the people. It is an attempt to force us to swallow a gross indignity, so that our elites can simultaneously display their alleged moral superiority while finally forcing us to admit defeat in a war they wanted to lose from day one.
The first to abandon us? The president of the United States, who has proven that despite his job title, the lusts and desires of the Muslim nation come before the needs of the American people:
Whose defense a politician rushes to first tells you whose side he is on. And will always be on.
No amount of backpedaling and obfuscation later by even the most magical of politicians can erase the colors he has chosen.
So, after weeks of his administration's repeatedly dodging the scary issue of whether a mosque should be built within sneering distance of Ground Zero, President Obama decided to pick a side.
In a roomful of Muslim-Americans observing a religious feast at the White House, Obama once again embraced them first over the victims, survivors and rememberers of 9/11.
Instead, in the sea of pain and agony that lingers from that horrible terrorist attack nine years on, Obama determined once again that it is Americans who must do more.
Survivors of 9/11 need to just get over it.
They really need to be more tolerant.
And how does Speaker Nancy Pelosi follow up? By demanding an investigation - not of the mosque's Imam, who has refused to refute the the endorsement of Hamas, not of the mosque's funding, of which $100 million are coming from "whereabouts unknown", but....of the American people, for daring to raise their voices in opposition to the Treason being committed by the government:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, called for an investigation of those who are protesting the building of the Ground Zero Mosque on Tuesday. ...
"There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded," she said.
Calls to investigate the funding for those proposing the $100 million "Cordoba House" have fallen on deaf ears, though, as New York's Mayor Mike Bloomberg has described such an investigation as "un-American."
Obama shifts the weight of his office behind our enemies, Pelosi threatens federal investigations of those who dissent, and Mike Bloomberg labels us a nation of hate criminals. Feel abused enough? Wait, our national media, who the Founders thought would protect us in an instance such as this, are instead reminding the American people what thick, bigoted, dunces we are:
America's post-9/11 obsession with terrorism, the belief that we are locked in an epic ideological struggle with radical Islam, has stretched our resources to the limit and distracted us from higher-order priorities. National myopia poses a bigger challenge to the U.S.'s long-term stability than terrorism ever will.
Echoing the president's "get over it", or so it seems....
American citizens are now battling a two-front war: Against Islamists trying to turn the ruins of the World Trade Center - a ruin which they created - into a beach head for a renewed jihad against America ( The symbolism of a mosque rising where the World Trade Center once cast shadows is understood by everyone save our elite betters), and against our feckless, cowardly leadership, who - like most liberals - decided it would be better to surrender than fight.
Can we survive until November? Can we survive until 2012, against an onslaught of the nation's most powerful political and information interests?
The election of Barack Obama was hailed as the day America was reborn again, Ironic if it turned out to be the day we began our death spiral instead...
The first to abandon us? The president of the United States, who has proven that despite his job title, the lusts and desires of the Muslim nation come before the needs of the American people:
Whose defense a politician rushes to first tells you whose side he is on. And will always be on.
No amount of backpedaling and obfuscation later by even the most magical of politicians can erase the colors he has chosen.
So, after weeks of his administration's repeatedly dodging the scary issue of whether a mosque should be built within sneering distance of Ground Zero, President Obama decided to pick a side.
In a roomful of Muslim-Americans observing a religious feast at the White House, Obama once again embraced them first over the victims, survivors and rememberers of 9/11.
Instead, in the sea of pain and agony that lingers from that horrible terrorist attack nine years on, Obama determined once again that it is Americans who must do more.
Survivors of 9/11 need to just get over it.
They really need to be more tolerant.
And how does Speaker Nancy Pelosi follow up? By demanding an investigation - not of the mosque's Imam, who has refused to refute the the endorsement of Hamas, not of the mosque's funding, of which $100 million are coming from "whereabouts unknown", but....of the American people, for daring to raise their voices in opposition to the Treason being committed by the government:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, called for an investigation of those who are protesting the building of the Ground Zero Mosque on Tuesday. ...
"There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded," she said.
Calls to investigate the funding for those proposing the $100 million "Cordoba House" have fallen on deaf ears, though, as New York's Mayor Mike Bloomberg has described such an investigation as "un-American."
Obama shifts the weight of his office behind our enemies, Pelosi threatens federal investigations of those who dissent, and Mike Bloomberg labels us a nation of hate criminals. Feel abused enough? Wait, our national media, who the Founders thought would protect us in an instance such as this, are instead reminding the American people what thick, bigoted, dunces we are:
America's post-9/11 obsession with terrorism, the belief that we are locked in an epic ideological struggle with radical Islam, has stretched our resources to the limit and distracted us from higher-order priorities. National myopia poses a bigger challenge to the U.S.'s long-term stability than terrorism ever will.
Echoing the president's "get over it", or so it seems....
American citizens are now battling a two-front war: Against Islamists trying to turn the ruins of the World Trade Center - a ruin which they created - into a beach head for a renewed jihad against America ( The symbolism of a mosque rising where the World Trade Center once cast shadows is understood by everyone save our elite betters), and against our feckless, cowardly leadership, who - like most liberals - decided it would be better to surrender than fight.
Can we survive until November? Can we survive until 2012, against an onslaught of the nation's most powerful political and information interests?
The election of Barack Obama was hailed as the day America was reborn again, Ironic if it turned out to be the day we began our death spiral instead...
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
The Ground Zero Mosque, and Obama's Anti-Semitism
Let us review Obama's Ramadan endorsement of a mega-mosque at Ground Zero:
"As a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America. Our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country and that they will not be treated differently by their government is essential to who we are."
Now here's my question: It would seems as if Barack Obama is making a principled stand here - that no matter how offended ordinary Americans are, morality dictates that we must allow a Muslim mosque to be built on sacred land, land that was already defiled once by...Muslims.
But apparently, this "principle" of the president is only contingent on one issue: Muslims being the ones to enjoy property rights. Because if it is Jews trying to build on land they rightfully own, well - forget it. Only one group needs to apply for privileged status in Obama's world, and they are not Jews - or Americans:
...for Obama, there are some groups who must be denied the same civil rights he upholds as absolute in his defense of the plan to build a mosque at Ground Zero. As Obama has made clear since his first days in office, he believes that Jews should be denied the right to their property in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria simply because they are Jews.
OBAMA IS so firm in his belief that Jews should be denied civil rights in Israel's capital and in the heartland of Jewish history that he has provoked multiple crises in his relations with Israel to advance this bigoted view. Almost from his first day in office Obama has struck out a radical position in which he has insisted that Jews must be prohibited from building anything - synagogues, homes, nurseries, schools - in Judea, Jerusalem and Samaria on land they own.
Jews - Israeli and non-Israeli - should be barred from exercising their property rights even if their construction plans have already been approved "in accordance with local laws and ordinances."
At the same time, Obama has insisted that Israel take no action to enforce its "local laws and ordinances" against illegal structures built by Arabs in Jerusalem, Judea, or Samaria.
Next month the deeply discriminatory and legally dubious 10-month moratorium on Jewish building in Judea and Samaria that Obama coerced Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu into instituting is set to end. So now Obama is putting the full weight of the White House on Israel to again coerce Netanyahu into prolonging the discriminatory ban that denies the civil rights and property rights of Jews simply because they are Jewish.
So what is the principle Obama is standing up for here? The right for Muslims to deface sacred ground in America, and the right for Muslims to strip Jews of their rightful property in their eternal capital of Jerusalem. Americans have no right to their holy land, and the Jews, well - it doesn't seem as if Obama grants them any rights at all.
But what did you expect when you elected a president named Barack Hussein Obama?
"As a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America. Our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country and that they will not be treated differently by their government is essential to who we are."
Now here's my question: It would seems as if Barack Obama is making a principled stand here - that no matter how offended ordinary Americans are, morality dictates that we must allow a Muslim mosque to be built on sacred land, land that was already defiled once by...Muslims.
But apparently, this "principle" of the president is only contingent on one issue: Muslims being the ones to enjoy property rights. Because if it is Jews trying to build on land they rightfully own, well - forget it. Only one group needs to apply for privileged status in Obama's world, and they are not Jews - or Americans:
...for Obama, there are some groups who must be denied the same civil rights he upholds as absolute in his defense of the plan to build a mosque at Ground Zero. As Obama has made clear since his first days in office, he believes that Jews should be denied the right to their property in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria simply because they are Jews.
OBAMA IS so firm in his belief that Jews should be denied civil rights in Israel's capital and in the heartland of Jewish history that he has provoked multiple crises in his relations with Israel to advance this bigoted view. Almost from his first day in office Obama has struck out a radical position in which he has insisted that Jews must be prohibited from building anything - synagogues, homes, nurseries, schools - in Judea, Jerusalem and Samaria on land they own.
Jews - Israeli and non-Israeli - should be barred from exercising their property rights even if their construction plans have already been approved "in accordance with local laws and ordinances."
At the same time, Obama has insisted that Israel take no action to enforce its "local laws and ordinances" against illegal structures built by Arabs in Jerusalem, Judea, or Samaria.
Next month the deeply discriminatory and legally dubious 10-month moratorium on Jewish building in Judea and Samaria that Obama coerced Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu into instituting is set to end. So now Obama is putting the full weight of the White House on Israel to again coerce Netanyahu into prolonging the discriminatory ban that denies the civil rights and property rights of Jews simply because they are Jewish.
So what is the principle Obama is standing up for here? The right for Muslims to deface sacred ground in America, and the right for Muslims to strip Jews of their rightful property in their eternal capital of Jerusalem. Americans have no right to their holy land, and the Jews, well - it doesn't seem as if Obama grants them any rights at all.
But what did you expect when you elected a president named Barack Hussein Obama?
Barack Obama: An Emptier Vessel Than Usual?
Geez...after being elected on the mantra of "Hope and Change", and governing for some 20 months, this is the best Barack Obama can come up with as he desperately barnstorms the nation looking to hold on to his congressional majority?
“Don’t give in to fear,” President Obama said Monday, in a campaign stop in Milwaukee. “Let’s reach for hope.”
As Pete Wehner says:
When Obama said those words in 2008, they were empty. Now, more than 18 months into his presidency, they are discredited.
The public is rising up in massive numbers against Obama’s version of “hope and change” — and Obama’s party is going to suffer massively because of it.
Well, while the president offers platitudes to the masses, he gets more specific with his sycophants down in Hollywood:
President Obama told a Hollywood fundraiser Monday night that he and congressional Democrats have passed the most progressive legislation in decades."
We have been able to deliver the most progressive legislative agenda -- one that helps working families -- not just in one generation, maybe two, maybe three," Obama said.
Obama is always more honest on the West Coast, surrounded by the like-minded, and that's when he speaks from the heart - whether it is about folks "clinging" to God and guns, or boasting about just how radical his agenda is. But for us, the average citizen? Open wide and take whopping spoonfuls of "Yes We Can Hope And Change Since We Are The Ones We Have Been Waiting For"....
Is it because we can't handle the truth, or that Obama is aware that in fact it is the truth - about himself , and his party - that is causing the public to "rise up in massive numbers"?
Expect more of the same - baseless attacks and nonsensical chanting in lieu of policy discussion. And when the Democrats get their asses handed to them in November, we'll be told that it's because we're the "stupid" ones....
“Don’t give in to fear,” President Obama said Monday, in a campaign stop in Milwaukee. “Let’s reach for hope.”
As Pete Wehner says:
When Obama said those words in 2008, they were empty. Now, more than 18 months into his presidency, they are discredited.
The public is rising up in massive numbers against Obama’s version of “hope and change” — and Obama’s party is going to suffer massively because of it.
Well, while the president offers platitudes to the masses, he gets more specific with his sycophants down in Hollywood:
President Obama told a Hollywood fundraiser Monday night that he and congressional Democrats have passed the most progressive legislation in decades."
We have been able to deliver the most progressive legislative agenda -- one that helps working families -- not just in one generation, maybe two, maybe three," Obama said.
Obama is always more honest on the West Coast, surrounded by the like-minded, and that's when he speaks from the heart - whether it is about folks "clinging" to God and guns, or boasting about just how radical his agenda is. But for us, the average citizen? Open wide and take whopping spoonfuls of "Yes We Can Hope And Change Since We Are The Ones We Have Been Waiting For"....
Is it because we can't handle the truth, or that Obama is aware that in fact it is the truth - about himself , and his party - that is causing the public to "rise up in massive numbers"?
Expect more of the same - baseless attacks and nonsensical chanting in lieu of policy discussion. And when the Democrats get their asses handed to them in November, we'll be told that it's because we're the "stupid" ones....
Monday, August 16, 2010
While waiting on $8 billion in "anti-obesity funds", Michelle Obama orders the double-double
Yup...it looks as though hungry Americans living on food stamps will now have to starve to death so that Michelle Obama can tell fat kids to eat less. Does that include herself? Wait, I'm not there yet...let's start here, at Michelle Malkin's place:
The House will soon consider an $8 billion child nutrition bill that’s at the center of the first lady’s “Let’s Move” initiative. Before leaving for the summer recess, the Senate passed a smaller version of the legislation that is paid for by trimming the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps.
The proposed cuts would come on top of a 13.6 percent food stamp reduction in the $26 billion Medicaid and education state funding bill that President Obama signed this week....
Lucky this country isn't suffering through a Great Recession or anything like that, or else we would need to keep that money in food stamps, and...oh, wait. Yeah....
It's an outrage, all right - go visit Miss Malkin's place for how Michelle Obama's anti-obesity crusade is designed to fatten some up...assuming you're in a union, of course.
And speaking of the First Skank (yes, I know, I am a racist because I think she is unattractive, even though I've probably dated more black girls than Barack Obama), it seems as if her "anti-obesity" initiative is a classic case of "fat for me, but not for thee". While her and her husband work out a way to steal another $8 billion in taxpayer dollars, they help themselves to some ice cream.
A lot of ice cream:
The House will soon consider an $8 billion child nutrition bill that’s at the center of the first lady’s “Let’s Move” initiative. Before leaving for the summer recess, the Senate passed a smaller version of the legislation that is paid for by trimming the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps.
The proposed cuts would come on top of a 13.6 percent food stamp reduction in the $26 billion Medicaid and education state funding bill that President Obama signed this week....
Lucky this country isn't suffering through a Great Recession or anything like that, or else we would need to keep that money in food stamps, and...oh, wait. Yeah....
It's an outrage, all right - go visit Miss Malkin's place for how Michelle Obama's anti-obesity crusade is designed to fatten some up...assuming you're in a union, of course.
And speaking of the First Skank (yes, I know, I am a racist because I think she is unattractive, even though I've probably dated more black girls than Barack Obama), it seems as if her "anti-obesity" initiative is a classic case of "fat for me, but not for thee". While her and her husband work out a way to steal another $8 billion in taxpayer dollars, they help themselves to some ice cream.
A lot of ice cream:
Gee, Michelle, is that a double-scoop of chocolate chip mint, or a triple? Looks like young Sasha has a pretty sizable portion herself - not that it's any of my business, but if Michelle can stick her nose in my waistline, I can certainly comment on hers and her daughter's. Speaking of which, hasn't Sasha picked up the angry liberal frown just perfectly?
Remember this picture, when the Obamas inevitably hit us with the "ice cream tax", in order to pay for obesity-related national health care costs. We'll be paying double for a single, while they'll be paying half for a triple. All while spending $8 billion of our money to tell us how much we suck, as the King and Queen continue to engorge themselves lavishly in the very lifestyle they try so hard to keep us from attaining...
Well, screw you guys - I'm going to the corner and ordering the triple. With sprinkles, bitch. Every ice cream cone is now an act of rebellion, a display of rage against the socialized health care machine....
Johnny Rotten: Friend of Israel
Sometimes drunks make the best poets, and as per the author of this article ex-Sex Pistol and current PiL frontman Johnny Rotten had put down quite the liquid lunch before (and during) the interview. Nevertheless, Johnny's drunken rantings contain more common sense than the deep thoughtfulness of liberal icons such as, oh, say famous anti-Israeli singer-songwriter Elvis Costello.
It's a British interview, so of course anything pro-Israeli needs to go at the very, very bottom, so get ready to scroll for it:
As we're about to say our goodbyes, he pulls a sheaf of faxes out of his pocket. They are complaints, e-mailed to his manager, John "Rambo" Stevens, who lives in Arkansas, complaining that PiL will shortly be performing in Israel. One, from a fan called Lawrence Casin, declares: "I will destroy all my albums and paraphernalia that I have collected over the years if you bastards play that hell hole."
Most musicians, particularly those who have been around for 30 years, wouldn't let hate mail upset them. They probably wouldn't even read it. But John's anger is genuine. He wants me to record it, for posterity. "I really resent the presumption that I'm going there to play to right-wing Nazi jews," he tells me. "If Elvis-fucking-Costello wants to pull out of a gig in Israel because he's suddenly got this compassion for Palestinians, then good on him. But I have absolutely one rule, right? Until I see an Arab country, a Muslim country, with a democracy, I won't understand how anyone can have a problem with how they're treated."
We like it. A lot. As a matter of fact, we'll call it "Johnny's Rule" in his honor.
Of course, the British press have no honor, so the last line of the article, following Johnny's support of Israel, reads thusly:
That's our Johnny Rotten. Always lively. Always entertaining. Often wrong....
It's a British interview, so of course anything pro-Israeli needs to go at the very, very bottom, so get ready to scroll for it:
As we're about to say our goodbyes, he pulls a sheaf of faxes out of his pocket. They are complaints, e-mailed to his manager, John "Rambo" Stevens, who lives in Arkansas, complaining that PiL will shortly be performing in Israel. One, from a fan called Lawrence Casin, declares: "I will destroy all my albums and paraphernalia that I have collected over the years if you bastards play that hell hole."
Most musicians, particularly those who have been around for 30 years, wouldn't let hate mail upset them. They probably wouldn't even read it. But John's anger is genuine. He wants me to record it, for posterity. "I really resent the presumption that I'm going there to play to right-wing Nazi jews," he tells me. "If Elvis-fucking-Costello wants to pull out of a gig in Israel because he's suddenly got this compassion for Palestinians, then good on him. But I have absolutely one rule, right? Until I see an Arab country, a Muslim country, with a democracy, I won't understand how anyone can have a problem with how they're treated."
We like it. A lot. As a matter of fact, we'll call it "Johnny's Rule" in his honor.
Of course, the British press have no honor, so the last line of the article, following Johnny's support of Israel, reads thusly:
That's our Johnny Rotten. Always lively. Always entertaining. Often wrong....
Politico: Opponents of Ground Zero Mosque are "Anti-Islam"
This Ben Smith piece is a classic - apparently, he believes that it is axiomatic that opposition to building a mosque on Ground Zero can only be rooted in anti-Islamic sentiment....so he starts there, with no need to prove his hypothesis, of course (isn't it obvious), and builds a big, filthy, mudslide:
The harsh Republican response to President Barack Obama's defense of a mosque near ground zero marks a dramatic shift in the party's posture toward Islam — from a once active courtship of Muslim voters to a very public tolerance after Sept. 11 to an openly aired sense of mistrust.
The shift plays to a hostility toward Islam among many Republican voters, and it fits with traditional Republican attacks on Democratic weakness on security policy.
Republicans have "shifted completely away from the Bush administration line on relations with Islam and they've obviously made the political calculation that bashing Islam and Muslims is a winning issue for them," said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, who blamed the "tea party movement [for] liberating the inner bigot in people."
And while Smith gives quote space to mosque opponents such as Rep. Peter King and Debra Burlingame, he does not for a moment attempt to legitimize the opposition, instead, he crams it into the "right-wing anti-Islamic" shoebox.
Nor is their any need to even question CAIR tool Hooper about his accusations of bigotry against the Tea Party - Smith too, takes this as a given, rather than questioning what anti-Islamic acts have been committed by the Tea Party folks (answer: none).
Expect this talking point to spread through the media like wildfire over the next 24 hours - not "how do we stop the Ground Zero Mosque", opposed by 68% of all Americans, but "how to we stop the racist inclinations of the right-wing anti-Mosque elements in our society"?
The answer to that one - in the eyes of the Left and the media - is easy: Just build the mosque at Ground Zero. If the people won't tolerate their enemies building trophies on our war dead, well, we'll just have to force it down their throat....
Let's see how well that goes over...
The harsh Republican response to President Barack Obama's defense of a mosque near ground zero marks a dramatic shift in the party's posture toward Islam — from a once active courtship of Muslim voters to a very public tolerance after Sept. 11 to an openly aired sense of mistrust.
The shift plays to a hostility toward Islam among many Republican voters, and it fits with traditional Republican attacks on Democratic weakness on security policy.
Republicans have "shifted completely away from the Bush administration line on relations with Islam and they've obviously made the political calculation that bashing Islam and Muslims is a winning issue for them," said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, who blamed the "tea party movement [for] liberating the inner bigot in people."
And while Smith gives quote space to mosque opponents such as Rep. Peter King and Debra Burlingame, he does not for a moment attempt to legitimize the opposition, instead, he crams it into the "right-wing anti-Islamic" shoebox.
Nor is their any need to even question CAIR tool Hooper about his accusations of bigotry against the Tea Party - Smith too, takes this as a given, rather than questioning what anti-Islamic acts have been committed by the Tea Party folks (answer: none).
Expect this talking point to spread through the media like wildfire over the next 24 hours - not "how do we stop the Ground Zero Mosque", opposed by 68% of all Americans, but "how to we stop the racist inclinations of the right-wing anti-Mosque elements in our society"?
The answer to that one - in the eyes of the Left and the media - is easy: Just build the mosque at Ground Zero. If the people won't tolerate their enemies building trophies on our war dead, well, we'll just have to force it down their throat....
Let's see how well that goes over...
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Where Does Rush Holt Stand On the Ground Zero Mosque?
Well, my fellow residents of NJ-12, wondering where Congressman Rush Holt (D-NJ12) stands on the building of the mega-mosque at Ground Zero? Well, I don't see any release of any specific endorsement, but these words from Barack Obama's speech at his Ramadan dinner on Friday - the one where he endorsed the Cordoba House - should give you a clue:
I want to welcome members of the diplomatic corps; members of my administration; and members of Congress, including Rush Holt, John Conyers, and Andre Carson, who is one of two Muslim American members of Congress, along with Keith Ellison...
So Holt was one of only three congressman - the others a Muslim and a psycho-lefty - to be in attendance at the" dinner of infamy". Think he wasn't standing up and applauding Obama's declaration of support for the Ground Zero mosque?
Being that Rush Holt stands with J Street (a "pro-Israel" lobby who feels the only way to achieve peace in the Middle East is with Israel's destruction), seeing him at the scene of Obama's Ramadan Treason, sitting among such luminaries as Hezbollah supporter Salam Al-Marayati, Sharia fan (and Obama advisor) Dalia Mogahed, and Ingrid Mattson, Muslim Brotherhood leader and unindicted co-conspirator in the biggest terrorism financing trial in the nation’s history, is really no great surprise.
The surprise is that the people of NJ-12 keep re-electing this racist. Perhaps his opponent, Scott Sipprelle, ought to point out to folks who Holt's Friday night dinner companions are, and ask why he applauds building a mosque on the bodies of our yet-to-rest dead...
I want to welcome members of the diplomatic corps; members of my administration; and members of Congress, including Rush Holt, John Conyers, and Andre Carson, who is one of two Muslim American members of Congress, along with Keith Ellison...
So Holt was one of only three congressman - the others a Muslim and a psycho-lefty - to be in attendance at the" dinner of infamy". Think he wasn't standing up and applauding Obama's declaration of support for the Ground Zero mosque?
Being that Rush Holt stands with J Street (a "pro-Israel" lobby who feels the only way to achieve peace in the Middle East is with Israel's destruction), seeing him at the scene of Obama's Ramadan Treason, sitting among such luminaries as Hezbollah supporter Salam Al-Marayati, Sharia fan (and Obama advisor) Dalia Mogahed, and Ingrid Mattson, Muslim Brotherhood leader and unindicted co-conspirator in the biggest terrorism financing trial in the nation’s history, is really no great surprise.
The surprise is that the people of NJ-12 keep re-electing this racist. Perhaps his opponent, Scott Sipprelle, ought to point out to folks who Holt's Friday night dinner companions are, and ask why he applauds building a mosque on the bodies of our yet-to-rest dead...
Ground Zero Mosque: A Symbol Of Islamic Conquest
Despite the caterwauling by Barack Obama and Mike Bloomberg, no one protesting the "Ground Zero Mosque" is doing so out of Islamo-hatred, or whatever made-up word the liberal kindergarten class is using today. They are simply asking that the "Cordoba House" be moved a bit uptown out of respect for the sensitivities of the survivors of those killed by people espousing the same religious beliefs as will be practiced inside the mosque.
Seems like a reasonable request, no? One that would at least be open to discussion? Apparently not:
There was a better way. It came from Gov. Paterson, whose offer to help the mosque developers find another location held the potential for a harmonious settlement.
But without even a serious conversation, they rejected the offer, reinforcing suspicion that provocation to the memory of 9/11 is part of the developers' plan
It is self-evident that their professed aim, to build bridges across religions, can better be carried out in a spot not in the shadow of the murderous attacks by Islamic fanatics. Moving the mosque would help prove their motives are trustworthy and win a level of public support they won't get otherwise.
Paterson's offer called their bluff. While much about the project remains a mystery, we now know the developers are not the healers they say they are.
So if the Ground Zero Mosque is really about peace and understanding, why wouldn't its founders help create a little by moving it? Because, as most Americans clearly see, this mosque ha a lot less to do with reaching a hand out and a lot more to do with pulling a scimitar out:
Referring to his idea of covering the European landscape with mosques, the Islamist Prime Minister of Turkey declared: “Minarets are our bayonets; domes are our helmets; our mosques are our barracks; our believers are our soldiers”…With that, he spelled out his own version of Jihad for Islam to conquer Europe and convert the populations....
Because it is about conquest....
Ottoman Sultan Mehmet conquered Constantinople (Istanbul) in 1453 when it was the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire, or Byzantium as it was known then. When Sultan Mehmet entered the city on May 29, 1453, one of the first things he set out to accomplish was to convert the Cathedral of Constantinople, Saint Sophia, into a mosque. The building served as a mosque from 1453 to 1934 when it was secularized and opened to the public as a museum on February 1 of the same year…
Don't trust me? Take it from The Koran:
The Koran (018:021) states: 'Build a building over them, their Lord knows best about them;' and those who prevailed in their affair said, 'We will surely make a mosque over them.'
And that's why a mosque in Midtown is meaningless, and why a mosque overlooking Ground Zero is both a fulfillment of the commandments of the Koran and the execution of Turkish PM Erdoğan's battle plan.
It is a powerful symbol of the forcing of the United States of America to its knees before Allah and the Islamic world.
A symbol that President Barack Hussein Obama seems more than willing to provide them with. Hardly surprising, the Middle Name That Must Never Be Spoken has long indicated whose priorities come first in our president's mind...
UPDATE: More on the origin of the meaing of "Cordoba House", which is the chosen name of the Ground Zero mosque builders:
Cordoba was, of course, the seat of the caliphate established in what is now modern Spain after the Islamic invasion from North Africa in the 8th century A.D. The medieval occupation of Spain – “al-Andalus” – is considered by Islamic theorists to have been an inevitable step in the manifest destiny of Islam, and its eventual reversal through the lengthy European “Reconquista” a tragic but temporary triumph of the infidels. The great mosque at Cordoba was built on the foundation of a Christian cathedral, and when Europeans retook Cordoba in the 13th century they turned the magnificent mosque back into a cathedral.
"Cordoba,” in Islamic symbolic terms, means Islamic rule in the West. It does not mean “coexistence,” unless coexistence is interpreted as referring to Islamic rule....
UPDATE II: The other name being used by the founders of the GZ Mosque is the "Park 51 Mosque". Funny that there are a few good "51's" found in the Koran...the last line of Chapter 51 is especially interesting:
Therefore woe to those who disbelieve because of their day which they are threatened with....
Nice verse to reference in the shadow of Ground Zero...or perhaps this one - Chapter 5, verse 51 - is more of what the builders of the, ahem, Park 51 Mosque had in mind?
O YOU who have attained to faith! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for your allies: they are but allies of one another and whoever of you allies himself with them becomes, verily, one of them; behold, God does not guide people who are unjust...
Seems like a reasonable request, no? One that would at least be open to discussion? Apparently not:
There was a better way. It came from Gov. Paterson, whose offer to help the mosque developers find another location held the potential for a harmonious settlement.
But without even a serious conversation, they rejected the offer, reinforcing suspicion that provocation to the memory of 9/11 is part of the developers' plan
It is self-evident that their professed aim, to build bridges across religions, can better be carried out in a spot not in the shadow of the murderous attacks by Islamic fanatics. Moving the mosque would help prove their motives are trustworthy and win a level of public support they won't get otherwise.
Paterson's offer called their bluff. While much about the project remains a mystery, we now know the developers are not the healers they say they are.
So if the Ground Zero Mosque is really about peace and understanding, why wouldn't its founders help create a little by moving it? Because, as most Americans clearly see, this mosque ha a lot less to do with reaching a hand out and a lot more to do with pulling a scimitar out:
Referring to his idea of covering the European landscape with mosques, the Islamist Prime Minister of Turkey declared: “Minarets are our bayonets; domes are our helmets; our mosques are our barracks; our believers are our soldiers”…With that, he spelled out his own version of Jihad for Islam to conquer Europe and convert the populations....
Because it is about conquest....
Ottoman Sultan Mehmet conquered Constantinople (Istanbul) in 1453 when it was the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire, or Byzantium as it was known then. When Sultan Mehmet entered the city on May 29, 1453, one of the first things he set out to accomplish was to convert the Cathedral of Constantinople, Saint Sophia, into a mosque. The building served as a mosque from 1453 to 1934 when it was secularized and opened to the public as a museum on February 1 of the same year…
Don't trust me? Take it from The Koran:
The Koran (018:021) states: 'Build a building over them, their Lord knows best about them;' and those who prevailed in their affair said, 'We will surely make a mosque over them.'
And that's why a mosque in Midtown is meaningless, and why a mosque overlooking Ground Zero is both a fulfillment of the commandments of the Koran and the execution of Turkish PM Erdoğan's battle plan.
It is a powerful symbol of the forcing of the United States of America to its knees before Allah and the Islamic world.
A symbol that President Barack Hussein Obama seems more than willing to provide them with. Hardly surprising, the Middle Name That Must Never Be Spoken has long indicated whose priorities come first in our president's mind...
UPDATE: More on the origin of the meaing of "Cordoba House", which is the chosen name of the Ground Zero mosque builders:
Cordoba was, of course, the seat of the caliphate established in what is now modern Spain after the Islamic invasion from North Africa in the 8th century A.D. The medieval occupation of Spain – “al-Andalus” – is considered by Islamic theorists to have been an inevitable step in the manifest destiny of Islam, and its eventual reversal through the lengthy European “Reconquista” a tragic but temporary triumph of the infidels. The great mosque at Cordoba was built on the foundation of a Christian cathedral, and when Europeans retook Cordoba in the 13th century they turned the magnificent mosque back into a cathedral.
"Cordoba,” in Islamic symbolic terms, means Islamic rule in the West. It does not mean “coexistence,” unless coexistence is interpreted as referring to Islamic rule....
UPDATE II: The other name being used by the founders of the GZ Mosque is the "Park 51 Mosque". Funny that there are a few good "51's" found in the Koran...the last line of Chapter 51 is especially interesting:
Therefore woe to those who disbelieve because of their day which they are threatened with....
Nice verse to reference in the shadow of Ground Zero...or perhaps this one - Chapter 5, verse 51 - is more of what the builders of the, ahem, Park 51 Mosque had in mind?
O YOU who have attained to faith! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for your allies: they are but allies of one another and whoever of you allies himself with them becomes, verily, one of them; behold, God does not guide people who are unjust...
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Backlash at Obama's Mosque Endorsement Racially-Based, Claims New York Times
A dog whistle to the race-card playing Left, but so off-key that it makes an ugly sound...From the New York Times "Political Memo", as they give play to Obama's attempted walk-back of his endorsement of the Ground Zero Mosque:
From the moment he took the oath of office, using his entire name, Barack Hussein Obama, as he swore to protect and defend the Constitution, Mr. Obama has personified the hopes of many Americans about tolerance and inclusion. He has devoted himself to reaching out to the Muslim world, vowing, as he did in Cairo last year, “a new beginning.”
But his “new beginning” has aroused nervousness in some, especially those who disagree with his counterterrorism policies, or those more comfortable with a vision of America as a white and largely Christian nation, and not the pluralistic melting pot Mr. Obama represents.
Can you hear that?
You know, what really gets me is when I started reading this piece, I thought it was a news article; when I got to the point referenced above I felt like I was reading opinion-page analysis...what the f*ck is up at the New York Times, anyway?
From the moment he took the oath of office, using his entire name, Barack Hussein Obama, as he swore to protect and defend the Constitution, Mr. Obama has personified the hopes of many Americans about tolerance and inclusion. He has devoted himself to reaching out to the Muslim world, vowing, as he did in Cairo last year, “a new beginning.”
But his “new beginning” has aroused nervousness in some, especially those who disagree with his counterterrorism policies, or those more comfortable with a vision of America as a white and largely Christian nation, and not the pluralistic melting pot Mr. Obama represents.
Can you hear that?
You know, what really gets me is when I started reading this piece, I thought it was a news article; when I got to the point referenced above I felt like I was reading opinion-page analysis...what the f*ck is up at the New York Times, anyway?
The Ground Zero Mosque: Obama's Treason
So the president wipes the corner of his delicate mouth with a napkin, wiping off any remaining traces of his Ramadan feast, and stands up before an audience that includes such luminaries as:
Ingrid Mattson heads the largest Muslim Brotherhood front in the country, the Islamic Society of North America. ISNA was an unindicted co-conspirator in the biggest terrorism financing trial in the nation’s history...
Salam Al-Marayati is president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)...Al-Marayati claimed that the terrorist group, Hezbollah, was a legitimate organization and has the right to attack the Israeli Army...
Dalia Mogahed runs the insidious Gallup Center for Muslim Studies and advises President Obama on Muslim affairs...In an October 2009 interview with the London Telegraph, she made the following astounding assertions: “I think the reason so many women support shariah is because they have a very different understanding of shariah than the common perception in Western media.” “The majority of women around the world associate gender justice, or justice for women, with shariah compliance.”
..and announced that in the name of religious freedom (the primary right that the aforementioned animals would like to eliminate), he supports the building of a mega-mosque overlooking the ruins of Ground Zero.
Forget about the president over-ruling once again the will of a majority of the American people. Forget about his rubbing salt in to the wounds of the people still scarred by the Islamic attack on America on September 11th. And try not to think about those who still visit to mourn the loss of their loved ones, who now will have to pay their respects under the eyes of the membership of a radical mosque, while the Muslim call to prayer wails around them, shattering the peace they have come to obtain.
Let's think, for a moment, of the affect of the building of this mosque in the Muslim world. Where George Bush punished the Middle East with war, leading the Arabs to damn Osama bin Ladin and the death he brought upon them, now they see the patience of bin Ladin paying off. Bush is gone, and America is now ruled by a man named Hussein, who observes Muslims precepts, who loathes Israel every bit as much as they do, and is allowing Islam to gain a foothold in America's most sacred ground.
Soon enough the propaganda posters will arrive to plaster the walls of the slums of Islam: pictures of the World Trade Center falling, overlapped with pictures of the Ground Zero Mosque rising. Perhaps with the beatific face of a solemn Osama bin Ladin superimposed upon it all.
What will the Islamic world make of this? It's obvious: The attacks of 9/11 were in fact a tremendous success, that guilt-ridden Americans, even after being mercilessly slaughtered, can be made to believe that it is all their fault, and their only hope of redemption is acquiescence to Islam.
They will learn that attacks like bin Ladin's are in fact only counter-productive in the short term, in the long term (and the Arab world, to its credit, sees things this way, and ten years is not very long at all) attacks like the ones of September 11th will allow Muslims to gain power and control over the people of the United States of America.
So why in the world would they cease and desist terrorist activities when Barack Obama has proven to them they can win with it? Sure, the Battle of New York took almost ten years, but a huge piece of the city was destroyed, never to be properly rebuilt, and in its place will stand a huge mosque, proclaiming the superiority of Allah and the Islamic way over the ways of the decedent West. Perhaps the greatest Muslim victory since the age of the Ottoman Empire.
And our president, Barack Hussein Obama, has just handed it to them, without a fight, over the screaming protests of his countrymen.
Now that the Muslims see the way of the sword is the way to victory, why in the world would they cease the battle, now that they are finally winning?
The president has guaranteed a further rain of Islamic death upon the head of Americans - landing on all of us, from our soldiers battling overseas to average citizens in shopping malls, airplanes, and skyscrapers. A rain of death set into motion by our president, by ceding land, in a horrific battlefield (while the dead are still being uncovered) to our sworn enemies.
Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]."
The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort.
Dictionary.com: Treason is any attempt to overthrow the government or impair the well-being of a state to which one owes allegiance; the crime of giving aid or comfort to the enemies of one's government.
Obama's actions here fit the definition of treason to a "T", no matter how you parse it. We have been betrayed by our president, who has made it clear that the will of the American people - not to mention its safety and well-being - is secondary to the will of the Islamic world, even if that will is our destruction.
How do we, as Americans, respond? At what point do we fight back against the hijacking of our nation? And if so, how, short of insurrection?
Dark days ahead, for us all, my friends.
Ingrid Mattson heads the largest Muslim Brotherhood front in the country, the Islamic Society of North America. ISNA was an unindicted co-conspirator in the biggest terrorism financing trial in the nation’s history...
Salam Al-Marayati is president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)...Al-Marayati claimed that the terrorist group, Hezbollah, was a legitimate organization and has the right to attack the Israeli Army...
Dalia Mogahed runs the insidious Gallup Center for Muslim Studies and advises President Obama on Muslim affairs...In an October 2009 interview with the London Telegraph, she made the following astounding assertions: “I think the reason so many women support shariah is because they have a very different understanding of shariah than the common perception in Western media.” “The majority of women around the world associate gender justice, or justice for women, with shariah compliance.”
..and announced that in the name of religious freedom (the primary right that the aforementioned animals would like to eliminate), he supports the building of a mega-mosque overlooking the ruins of Ground Zero.
Forget about the president over-ruling once again the will of a majority of the American people. Forget about his rubbing salt in to the wounds of the people still scarred by the Islamic attack on America on September 11th. And try not to think about those who still visit to mourn the loss of their loved ones, who now will have to pay their respects under the eyes of the membership of a radical mosque, while the Muslim call to prayer wails around them, shattering the peace they have come to obtain.
Let's think, for a moment, of the affect of the building of this mosque in the Muslim world. Where George Bush punished the Middle East with war, leading the Arabs to damn Osama bin Ladin and the death he brought upon them, now they see the patience of bin Ladin paying off. Bush is gone, and America is now ruled by a man named Hussein, who observes Muslims precepts, who loathes Israel every bit as much as they do, and is allowing Islam to gain a foothold in America's most sacred ground.
Soon enough the propaganda posters will arrive to plaster the walls of the slums of Islam: pictures of the World Trade Center falling, overlapped with pictures of the Ground Zero Mosque rising. Perhaps with the beatific face of a solemn Osama bin Ladin superimposed upon it all.
What will the Islamic world make of this? It's obvious: The attacks of 9/11 were in fact a tremendous success, that guilt-ridden Americans, even after being mercilessly slaughtered, can be made to believe that it is all their fault, and their only hope of redemption is acquiescence to Islam.
They will learn that attacks like bin Ladin's are in fact only counter-productive in the short term, in the long term (and the Arab world, to its credit, sees things this way, and ten years is not very long at all) attacks like the ones of September 11th will allow Muslims to gain power and control over the people of the United States of America.
So why in the world would they cease and desist terrorist activities when Barack Obama has proven to them they can win with it? Sure, the Battle of New York took almost ten years, but a huge piece of the city was destroyed, never to be properly rebuilt, and in its place will stand a huge mosque, proclaiming the superiority of Allah and the Islamic way over the ways of the decedent West. Perhaps the greatest Muslim victory since the age of the Ottoman Empire.
And our president, Barack Hussein Obama, has just handed it to them, without a fight, over the screaming protests of his countrymen.
Now that the Muslims see the way of the sword is the way to victory, why in the world would they cease the battle, now that they are finally winning?
The president has guaranteed a further rain of Islamic death upon the head of Americans - landing on all of us, from our soldiers battling overseas to average citizens in shopping malls, airplanes, and skyscrapers. A rain of death set into motion by our president, by ceding land, in a horrific battlefield (while the dead are still being uncovered) to our sworn enemies.
Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]."
The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort.
Dictionary.com: Treason is any attempt to overthrow the government or impair the well-being of a state to which one owes allegiance; the crime of giving aid or comfort to the enemies of one's government.
Obama's actions here fit the definition of treason to a "T", no matter how you parse it. We have been betrayed by our president, who has made it clear that the will of the American people - not to mention its safety and well-being - is secondary to the will of the Islamic world, even if that will is our destruction.
How do we, as Americans, respond? At what point do we fight back against the hijacking of our nation? And if so, how, short of insurrection?
Dark days ahead, for us all, my friends.
"An Abomination"
Well, my fellow Americans, when you elect a president named Barack Hussein Obama, you should not be suprised at whose interests come first.
"Let me make perfectly clear...
"Ground Zero is, indeed, hallowed ground, but let me make clear," said the president at a White House dinner celebrating the Islamic holy month of Ramadan today....As a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances....
....the loathing that I have, for the nation that I lead"
Obama has shown his true sentiments now, after weeks of concealing them, on an issue of deep significance not only to the families and loved ones of 3,000 slaughtered Americans but also to the vast majority of his fellow citizens. He has once again revealed himself to be divorced from the values and concerns of his countrymen. He is entirely – and to many Americans, horridly — a creature of the left, with little ability to make moral distinctions. His sympathies for the Muslim World take precedence over those, such as they are, for his fellow citizens. This is nothing short of an abomination.
"Let me make perfectly clear...
"Ground Zero is, indeed, hallowed ground, but let me make clear," said the president at a White House dinner celebrating the Islamic holy month of Ramadan today....As a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances....
....the loathing that I have, for the nation that I lead"
Obama has shown his true sentiments now, after weeks of concealing them, on an issue of deep significance not only to the families and loved ones of 3,000 slaughtered Americans but also to the vast majority of his fellow citizens. He has once again revealed himself to be divorced from the values and concerns of his countrymen. He is entirely – and to many Americans, horridly — a creature of the left, with little ability to make moral distinctions. His sympathies for the Muslim World take precedence over those, such as they are, for his fellow citizens. This is nothing short of an abomination.
Friday, August 13, 2010
Alvin Greene's Pornography Indictment: A Government Conspiracy?
South Carolina Democratic Senate nominee Alvin Greene is the victim here, folks, and we saw this coming a long, long time ago....first, the trumped-up charges:
Longshot Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Alvin Greene was indicted Friday on two charges, including a felony charge of showing pornography to a teenage student in a South Carolina college computer lab....
Authorities said he approached a student in a University of South Carolina computer lab, showed her obscene photos online, then talked about going to her dorm room.
A Richland County grand jury indicted Greene, 32, for disseminating, procuring or promoting obscenity — a felony — as well as a misdemeanor charge of communicating obscene materials to a person without consent.
If convicted, Greene could face up to three years for the misdemeanor or up to five years for the felony.
Mediaite gives voice to our suspicions:
...furthermore, this whole indictment seems biased. Since when is it against the law to be bad at propositioning coeds? If that’s the case, then didn’t most of us break that law for four straight years?
Or maybe Greene is crazy...like a fox. Crazy like Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory.
Here's a quote from Alvin shortly after his stunning primary win, that the AP uses to establish Greene as a bit off-kilter:
At his home in Manning on Thursday, Greene told an AP reporter who reviewed the documents with him that the evaluations show he was discriminated against by military supervisors but he did not explain what that meant.
"I'm telling you who they promote: the terrorists and the communists," said Greene, wearing a blue U.S. Air Force T-shirt. "This is why we need to overhaul the military and get these people out."
And here's what I wrote on his hypothesis a few weeks back:
Sounds crazy? Really? Hmmm...I seem to remember a certain Major that was promoted again and again before deciding to shoot up Ft. Hood, killing 13 American soldiers and wounding more than 30 others while screaming "Allah Akbar!", the terrorist's mantra. Ah, yes - Major Nidal Malik Hasan, promoted a multitude of times despite poor evaluations and concerns about his radical Islamic rants. Would seem to validate at least part of Greene's accusation....
And how about General Stanley McCrystal? Communist is a tough charge, but....ultra-ultra liberal to the point of banning beer on bases and creating rules of engagement so restrictive that it gave a distinct advantage to our enemy? And what kind of freedom-loving American bans FOX News from the television sets in and around his headquarters? And really - who besides a communist would ban Burger King from American bases as they might be construed as a sign of "American (capitalistic?) excess"? Seems like he really might approve of a different system of government than is espoused by our Constitution...
Is Alvin Greene crazy? Or is he speaking some uncomfortable truths about our military establishment under the iron grip of political correctness? And could Obama and the Democrats be sending out the media in order to discredit Greene, to make a mockery of him, so that people don't pay any attention to his "outrageous" claims and the evidence that seems to back him up?
Is Alvin Greene the victim of....a massive government conspiracy?
Short answer: Yes. In Obama's America, if the truth is inconvenient, the truth must be silenced, even when coming from an incoherent vessel such as Mr. Alvin Greene....
Longshot Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Alvin Greene was indicted Friday on two charges, including a felony charge of showing pornography to a teenage student in a South Carolina college computer lab....
Authorities said he approached a student in a University of South Carolina computer lab, showed her obscene photos online, then talked about going to her dorm room.
A Richland County grand jury indicted Greene, 32, for disseminating, procuring or promoting obscenity — a felony — as well as a misdemeanor charge of communicating obscene materials to a person without consent.
If convicted, Greene could face up to three years for the misdemeanor or up to five years for the felony.
Mediaite gives voice to our suspicions:
...furthermore, this whole indictment seems biased. Since when is it against the law to be bad at propositioning coeds? If that’s the case, then didn’t most of us break that law for four straight years?
Or maybe Greene is crazy...like a fox. Crazy like Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory.
Here's a quote from Alvin shortly after his stunning primary win, that the AP uses to establish Greene as a bit off-kilter:
At his home in Manning on Thursday, Greene told an AP reporter who reviewed the documents with him that the evaluations show he was discriminated against by military supervisors but he did not explain what that meant.
"I'm telling you who they promote: the terrorists and the communists," said Greene, wearing a blue U.S. Air Force T-shirt. "This is why we need to overhaul the military and get these people out."
And here's what I wrote on his hypothesis a few weeks back:
Sounds crazy? Really? Hmmm...I seem to remember a certain Major that was promoted again and again before deciding to shoot up Ft. Hood, killing 13 American soldiers and wounding more than 30 others while screaming "Allah Akbar!", the terrorist's mantra. Ah, yes - Major Nidal Malik Hasan, promoted a multitude of times despite poor evaluations and concerns about his radical Islamic rants. Would seem to validate at least part of Greene's accusation....
And how about General Stanley McCrystal? Communist is a tough charge, but....ultra-ultra liberal to the point of banning beer on bases and creating rules of engagement so restrictive that it gave a distinct advantage to our enemy? And what kind of freedom-loving American bans FOX News from the television sets in and around his headquarters? And really - who besides a communist would ban Burger King from American bases as they might be construed as a sign of "American (capitalistic?) excess"? Seems like he really might approve of a different system of government than is espoused by our Constitution...
Is Alvin Greene crazy? Or is he speaking some uncomfortable truths about our military establishment under the iron grip of political correctness? And could Obama and the Democrats be sending out the media in order to discredit Greene, to make a mockery of him, so that people don't pay any attention to his "outrageous" claims and the evidence that seems to back him up?
Is Alvin Greene the victim of....a massive government conspiracy?
Short answer: Yes. In Obama's America, if the truth is inconvenient, the truth must be silenced, even when coming from an incoherent vessel such as Mr. Alvin Greene....
Guess The Profession of This Anti-Semite !!
A tale told by Carol Gould, of an incident at a "lovely house party" across the pond, in once-Great Britain, a few weeks back. We'll excerpt:
...A friend and I arrived at the party and were having a lovely time when a young man in a baseball hat sauntered over to me and said, “I have some questions for you.” I had no problem with this and sat down next to him on a bench in a cramped corner. He proceeded to spend what seemed like an eternity traducing Americans, Jews, Zionism, and Israel until I began to suspect he was a Nazi. When I attempted to defend my ancient heritage (I told him this will be the 5,771st Jewish New Year), of which I am as proud as would be a person of Egyptian, Indian, Chinese or Persian descent, he became irate. I thought he was going to strike me.
He was fixated on the Jewish lobby so I reminded him that many American banks are Protestant-run. When I reminded him of the good that Jews do, like writing virtually every Broadway and West End show, he erupted and said I was self-obsessed. “It’s always me, me , me — the Jews, the Jews,” he shouted. It is unheard of for me to scream and shout at a genteel summer garden party, but I suddenly found myself bellowing at the top of my lungs: “Listen, I am damned proud of my Jewish heritage and burst with pride at being an American.” It was impossible for me to get away from him because every seat was taken and I was hemmed in. Meanwhile, his little girl sat down across his lap and glowered at me as he ranted in an endless stream of the f word...
Let's get to the title question: What does this ugly bloke do for a living?
....He is creative director of one of the main British television networks! The anti-Jewish and anti-American abuse I nobly tolerated was astonishing in the context that he is in charge of output for a main channel watched by millions. It was deeply disturbing to me that a man with such high responsibility could harbor such rabid sentiments about Jews and Americans.
I'll go out on a limb and say he's a BBC man, as Carol mentions it's an after-party for a BBC show.
Everything you need to know about the sh*tbags at the BBC can be found here, at Biased BBC.
Remember when the Left used to cry out, "Why do they hate us"? Well, there's a clue for you, Jack....
Incidentally, I take issue with one of Ms. Gould's statements - "the abuse...I nobly tolerated". Carol, it is not noble to tolerate such abuse. The last time I ran into such a person at a party, I calmly removed the little drink straw from my glass, and poked the abuser in the eye. That too, is noble. Lefties love to spew hate, but when challenged physically, they revert to the little bitch inside of them...
Via Closet Conservative
...A friend and I arrived at the party and were having a lovely time when a young man in a baseball hat sauntered over to me and said, “I have some questions for you.” I had no problem with this and sat down next to him on a bench in a cramped corner. He proceeded to spend what seemed like an eternity traducing Americans, Jews, Zionism, and Israel until I began to suspect he was a Nazi. When I attempted to defend my ancient heritage (I told him this will be the 5,771st Jewish New Year), of which I am as proud as would be a person of Egyptian, Indian, Chinese or Persian descent, he became irate. I thought he was going to strike me.
He was fixated on the Jewish lobby so I reminded him that many American banks are Protestant-run. When I reminded him of the good that Jews do, like writing virtually every Broadway and West End show, he erupted and said I was self-obsessed. “It’s always me, me , me — the Jews, the Jews,” he shouted. It is unheard of for me to scream and shout at a genteel summer garden party, but I suddenly found myself bellowing at the top of my lungs: “Listen, I am damned proud of my Jewish heritage and burst with pride at being an American.” It was impossible for me to get away from him because every seat was taken and I was hemmed in. Meanwhile, his little girl sat down across his lap and glowered at me as he ranted in an endless stream of the f word...
Let's get to the title question: What does this ugly bloke do for a living?
....He is creative director of one of the main British television networks! The anti-Jewish and anti-American abuse I nobly tolerated was astonishing in the context that he is in charge of output for a main channel watched by millions. It was deeply disturbing to me that a man with such high responsibility could harbor such rabid sentiments about Jews and Americans.
I'll go out on a limb and say he's a BBC man, as Carol mentions it's an after-party for a BBC show.
Everything you need to know about the sh*tbags at the BBC can be found here, at Biased BBC.
Remember when the Left used to cry out, "Why do they hate us"? Well, there's a clue for you, Jack....
Incidentally, I take issue with one of Ms. Gould's statements - "the abuse...I nobly tolerated". Carol, it is not noble to tolerate such abuse. The last time I ran into such a person at a party, I calmly removed the little drink straw from my glass, and poked the abuser in the eye. That too, is noble. Lefties love to spew hate, but when challenged physically, they revert to the little bitch inside of them...
Via Closet Conservative
Barack Obama: President Of....The Travel Channel?
Or is the leader of the free world on, as Aerosmith put it, Permanent Vacation?
Actually, I like Jim Geraghty's moniker for the relaxer-in-chief: President Carmen Hussein Sandiego :
There they go again. For the fifth time since July, the first family has set plans to board Air Force One for a frilly vacation, a 10-day return trip to exclusive Martha’s Vineyard where they are expected to stay at the 28-acre oceanfront Blue Heron Farm that rents for up to $50,000 a week. But first the Obamas will be traveling to the Gulf Coast of Florida for a mini-vacation as a way to encourage other vacationing Americans to head to the beaches that have been shunned by tourists worried about oil-slicked sands due to the Gulf oil spill. They are expected to travel to Florida this weekend, return to Washington for a few days then it’s off to the Massachusetts island August 19....
Here's what the elites don't get, as they have insulated themselves from the downturn:
Everybody’s feeling anxiety. Everybody’s having a hard time figuring out how they get from where they are and where they want to be. Everybody’s worried about dreams postponed and perhaps withering entirely....
So when they see the president take off yet again on another 5-star vacation, well...no wonder they feel like Washington is a reality show, where the stars are playing drama games with other people's money, and have no clue as to what reality really is...
That's why we are clamoring for cancellationof this dismal production...
Actually, I like Jim Geraghty's moniker for the relaxer-in-chief: President Carmen Hussein Sandiego :
There they go again. For the fifth time since July, the first family has set plans to board Air Force One for a frilly vacation, a 10-day return trip to exclusive Martha’s Vineyard where they are expected to stay at the 28-acre oceanfront Blue Heron Farm that rents for up to $50,000 a week. But first the Obamas will be traveling to the Gulf Coast of Florida for a mini-vacation as a way to encourage other vacationing Americans to head to the beaches that have been shunned by tourists worried about oil-slicked sands due to the Gulf oil spill. They are expected to travel to Florida this weekend, return to Washington for a few days then it’s off to the Massachusetts island August 19....
Here's what the elites don't get, as they have insulated themselves from the downturn:
Everybody’s feeling anxiety. Everybody’s having a hard time figuring out how they get from where they are and where they want to be. Everybody’s worried about dreams postponed and perhaps withering entirely....
So when they see the president take off yet again on another 5-star vacation, well...no wonder they feel like Washington is a reality show, where the stars are playing drama games with other people's money, and have no clue as to what reality really is...
That's why we are clamoring for cancellationof this dismal production...
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Video: Bill Clinton Masters 21st Century Elitism
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em? Hillary Clinton tried to connect with the American people by downing shots of Crown Royal in Pennsylvania blue-collar barrooms, and she was defeated by a snotty man who shunned the residents of said state due to their frighteningly unenlightened propensity for clinging to "guns and religion".
So what to do? Join the winning team, stick your nose up in the air, and declare your elitism by equating capitalism with greed, and stating loud and proud that only the government can really run things right, assuming he's the one (or his elite bretheren) running the government:
"We have known now for 100 years now...capitalism has a tendency to self-destruct … once you get so much growth going that people get greedy.”
"The health care reform bill is not perfect...but you are never going to get hold of this until you cover everybody..."
So health care reform as the first step to socialism? Oh, Bill, from feeling our pain to delivering it....
So what to do? Join the winning team, stick your nose up in the air, and declare your elitism by equating capitalism with greed, and stating loud and proud that only the government can really run things right, assuming he's the one (or his elite bretheren) running the government:
"We have known now for 100 years now...capitalism has a tendency to self-destruct … once you get so much growth going that people get greedy.”
"The health care reform bill is not perfect...but you are never going to get hold of this until you cover everybody..."
So health care reform as the first step to socialism? Oh, Bill, from feeling our pain to delivering it....
Memo to Linda McMahon: Don't Run From The WWE, Embrace it !!
With former WWE CEO Linda McMahon now the formal Republican nominee for Senate, the Connecticut Democrats are blasting away with the only weapon they have in their arsenal: An elitist's disdain for the world of "professional" wrestling:
It took less than an hour after Linda McMahon’s triumph in the Connecticut Republican primary election for Senate Tuesday night for Democrats to throw her past as a pro wrestling CEO in her face, in a volley of attacks that is unlikely to cease until election day in November.
“Today the party of Bob Dole, Jack Kemp and Richard Lugar nominated a candidate who kicks men in the crotch, thinks of scenes of necrophilia as ‘entertainment,’ and runs an operation where women are forced to bark like dogs. This is what has become of the once grand old party,” said Hari Sevugan, national press secretary for the Democratic National Committee.
Usually personal attacks are saved for the final third of a campaign, when the down-in-the-polls candidate realized they cannot win based on the merits of their arguments (see Corzine, Jon). The fact that this is what the Connecticut Democratic establishment is leading with signals they are working with very ammunition at the very start of what will be a long, protracted battle.
How should McMahon respond? Let's break it down:
-She should not respond to the WWE taunts. At all. She should fire back at opponent Richard Blumenthal by tying him to the Democratic establishment and Barack Obama (hey, if it worked in Massachusetts...), and remind voters in Connecticut that he represents a continuation of the polices that are enraging them in the
first place. Let the Democrats talk about sweaty, oily Mexicans in masks, Linda can talk economics.
-Should she feel the need to respond, she should not do it by degenerating the very business that made her and her husband so wealthy.
Wrestling is a type of NASCAR to the liberal elites: something they don't watch, something they don't understand, and something they would rather see replaced by chamber music and museum exhibits. But professional wrestling has been around and beloved by Americans for over a century, enough for the WWE to hold sold-out shows nightly across America (making them, on an annual basis, the largest grossing "entertainment tour" in the world). Their pay-per-views, especially Wrestlemania, are usually the most-purchased events of the television season. And with a WWE product on cable/free TV four nights out of seven - TV being the ultimate democracy; if people don't watch you, you're gone - all the evidence points to a NASCAR-like following completely under the radar of the Leftist elite.
Go ahead, let the Democrats mock wrestling, the way they mock NASCAR fans. How well has that worked out for the party? And again, do not distance yourself too far or degenerate your product, Linda - otherwise you will alienate fans who are going to vote for you simply based upon your last name...
-Finally, if Al Franken, an untalented, uncouth, unkempt, rude "entertainer" could win a Senate election without abandoning what made him famous, why can't Linda do the same? If Ronald Regan could become the greatest president in my lifetime without turning his back on his monkey co-stars in the "Bonzo" film series, why should Linda have to disown Rey Mysterio?
Embrace your life, Linda McMahon, along with all the jobs you have created with it, and all the joy and laughter you have brought to people. You cannot run from the WWE.
So run with it, instead....
It took less than an hour after Linda McMahon’s triumph in the Connecticut Republican primary election for Senate Tuesday night for Democrats to throw her past as a pro wrestling CEO in her face, in a volley of attacks that is unlikely to cease until election day in November.
“Today the party of Bob Dole, Jack Kemp and Richard Lugar nominated a candidate who kicks men in the crotch, thinks of scenes of necrophilia as ‘entertainment,’ and runs an operation where women are forced to bark like dogs. This is what has become of the once grand old party,” said Hari Sevugan, national press secretary for the Democratic National Committee.
Usually personal attacks are saved for the final third of a campaign, when the down-in-the-polls candidate realized they cannot win based on the merits of their arguments (see Corzine, Jon). The fact that this is what the Connecticut Democratic establishment is leading with signals they are working with very ammunition at the very start of what will be a long, protracted battle.
How should McMahon respond? Let's break it down:
-She should not respond to the WWE taunts. At all. She should fire back at opponent Richard Blumenthal by tying him to the Democratic establishment and Barack Obama (hey, if it worked in Massachusetts...), and remind voters in Connecticut that he represents a continuation of the polices that are enraging them in the
first place. Let the Democrats talk about sweaty, oily Mexicans in masks, Linda can talk economics.-Should she feel the need to respond, she should not do it by degenerating the very business that made her and her husband so wealthy.
Wrestling is a type of NASCAR to the liberal elites: something they don't watch, something they don't understand, and something they would rather see replaced by chamber music and museum exhibits. But professional wrestling has been around and beloved by Americans for over a century, enough for the WWE to hold sold-out shows nightly across America (making them, on an annual basis, the largest grossing "entertainment tour" in the world). Their pay-per-views, especially Wrestlemania, are usually the most-purchased events of the television season. And with a WWE product on cable/free TV four nights out of seven - TV being the ultimate democracy; if people don't watch you, you're gone - all the evidence points to a NASCAR-like following completely under the radar of the Leftist elite.
Go ahead, let the Democrats mock wrestling, the way they mock NASCAR fans. How well has that worked out for the party? And again, do not distance yourself too far or degenerate your product, Linda - otherwise you will alienate fans who are going to vote for you simply based upon your last name...
-Finally, if Al Franken, an untalented, uncouth, unkempt, rude "entertainer" could win a Senate election without abandoning what made him famous, why can't Linda do the same? If Ronald Regan could become the greatest president in my lifetime without turning his back on his monkey co-stars in the "Bonzo" film series, why should Linda have to disown Rey Mysterio?
Embrace your life, Linda McMahon, along with all the jobs you have created with it, and all the joy and laughter you have brought to people. You cannot run from the WWE.
So run with it, instead....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)