One last plea for sanity.
--Rights are not created or granted by government, they pertain to the realm of the 'Moral Law,' hence, they are given by God. Government exists ONLY to protect the people who give it power over them from having those rights taken away. --
As the argument among the ‘new enlightened’ runs: Abortion is ONLY ONE ISSUE in an election that has more important matters and issues to be decided, such as the economy and the war in Iraq.
However, reason, conscience, truth and righteousness not only demand, but scream out loud: NO! Abortion IS NOT ONE among many other issues…. IT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE, because THE RIGHT TO LIFE IS THE ONE DEFINING ISSUE for humanity.
If no people remain to grant rights to, or take away rights from... who or what then remains?
Government then, is the servant of the people, not its master, therefore, government’s usefulness, purpose and duties are subservient to those it governs, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. That being the case, government’s primary role is that of keeping its citizens safe.
Further, the Constitution of the US spells this clearly: This is a government FOR THE PEOPLE AND BY THE PEOPLE. It also says that the people who are governed by it are endowed, NOT by the government, but BY THEIR CREATOR with INALIENABLE RIGHTS to LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.
The right to life was purposely put ahead of the other two because if life does not exist, the other two are meaningless.
Additionally, the Constitution declares that: NO STATE shall create laws that might imperil or abridge such rights.
The fact is that presently the state, through courts motivated by political reasons and outright biases, have arbitrarily superseded and nullified the will of the very people who initially granted it power to govern them, the very people they swore to serve. They have taken away rights from the majority, not in order to protect them, but to favor small groups of vocal, well funded minorities with very specific agendas. These minorities are intent on willfully subverting and misconstruing the wording of the Constitution to acquire for themselves rights and privileges completely unrelated to the meaning and intent of the framers.
Taking rights away from human beings -as it has happens yearly to approximately one and a half million infants inside a mother's womb since the passage of Roe v. Wade- is the ultimate aberration, the ultimate INSANITY perpetrated by a government over its own people.
If we logically examine the thought of such infamy and take it to its most elementary meaning, we end up with the EXTINCTION OF THE HUMAN SPECIES. This is occurring gradually through the silent GENOCIDE taking place since abortion became an arbitrary 'right.'
But what exactly is this 'right to choose' that radical feminism -aided by the media, by craven 'Hollywood values,' and by liberal courts- argues for? Despite the sophistry and verbal engineering imposed by the proponents of 'choice,' what we are talking about is nothing less than the right to kill one's own offspring. In other words, the right to commit MURDER! Yes, let's say it: it is the 'choice to either kill or to allow a human being to live,' plain and simple.
To re-state, there are quite a few questions pertinent to the subject of government and people that need to be seriously examined, they are as follows:
--If it is people who give power to government, but there are no people to either grant the power to govern or be governed, then does government exist?
--If the primary duty of government is to keep its people safe, but instead it turns against them by creating arbitrary laws which result in the destruction of the people, then has government exceeded and abused the power it was granted?
--If a defenseless human being cannot be safe in the place where it should feel most safeguarded --his mother’s womb-- then where exactly can a human being feel safe?
--If a mother cannot keep her own children safe, then who can?
--If a government makes laws to destroy its own citizens, then how can it keep them safe from enemies?
--If there is no peace between the government and its citizens, can there be peace between a government and the citizens of other countries?
--If there are no citizens to govern because they have been contracepted, aborted, and euthanized into non-existence, of what purpose then is government?
Many have argued that the immorality of killing people in an ‘unjust war’ trumps all other arguments as a reason to vote in politicians who not only advocate for abortion, but use the issue to attract votes from those who would profit politically and financially from its imposition.
Others also argue that the political 'right' cannot argue for the preservation of life in the womb, while it advocates 'capital punishment.'
On this point here is, however, no possible moral equivalence between the two issues.
Anyone willing to honestly use morality and logic to examine the enormous injustice of abortion will conclude that there is no possible rational justification for it. Abortion, by its own nature, is ultimately an act of intrinsic, unequivocal evil because it is the act of killing an innocent, defenseless, voiceless human being, while the killing of a heinous criminal involves first, a careful process of finding evidence of the criminal's culpability, and then seeking justice. Not until that process has been fully exhausted it is decided that society is better protected and served by not keeping the criminal alive. Equally, on the subject of what is called 'a just war,' there are cases in which a war must be conducted in order to save the citizens from a greater danger. One simply has to contemplate the consequences of remaining passive in the face of Hitler's rape of Europe and, yes, even in the case of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of unstable and fanatical Middle Eastern regimes. The following link will provide chilling proof of why sane people cannot afford to remain naive or complacent:
http://www.tangle.com/view_video.php?viewkey=o861ff3eabea1ceb73e4%20
(If link as written here does not work by simply pressing on it, then copy and paste onto search engine, but whatever you do, don't fail to see it as well as other ones in the same website put on by Al-Jazeera regarding the 'rights and privileges of women' in muslim countries).
In sum, there exists no moral 'principle of proportionality' that can equate war or capital punishment to the evil of abortion, because abortion is aimed at the extinction of life for the purpose of convenience which, taken to its most drastic consequence, will lead humanity to extinction by its own hand.
As a human being with a moral conscience and compassion for those innocents who cannot speak for themselves, and as a mother, I have dared to speak out against this evil out of grave concern. Therefore, here’s is a final warning from a mother who begs her children to use their Catholic upbringing, their own moral conscience and compassion to awaken them from this unpardonable sin:
From the words of Malachi in Old Testament -which can in some instances be rather harsh, but for the moment we will forgo the digression into Theology- the Lord says:
“If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand. But if you warn the wicked and he DOES NOT turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you will have saved your life.
Again if a righteous man turns from righteousness and commits iniquity, and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die; because you have not warned him, he shall die for his sin, and his righteous deeds which he has done shall not be remembered; but his blood I will require at your hand. Nevertheless if you warn the righteous man not to sin, and he does not sin, he shall surely live, because he took warning, and you will have saved your life.”
YES, WE ARE OUR BROTHER’S KEEPER! Even more so when our brother is a defenseless potential human being, endowed from the first moment of conception with every possible attribute and quality of the person he/she will have at the moment of birth, and at every moment thereafter until his/her death.
For some years going there has been enormous emphasis and indoctrination of schoolchildren regarding the proper stewardship of our planet's resources and the preservation of animal species. The question is, are seals, bears, turtles, etc. more valuable or worthy to be kept alive than human beings? If not, and they surely aren't, why do governments protect animals and prevent their extinction more vigorously than they do the life of human beings?
Still, as a human being of conscience it is not difficult to realize the fact that we live in a world where all living creatures are valuable not only for their utility to humans but because they enhance our quality of life. In this respect, long ago I learned long ago a lesson from my wonderful daughter which I have since followed religiously. She taught me to cut up the plastic rings that keep six packs of cans together so that sea animals, pelicans and other fauna would not be harmed by getting trapped by them when they become part of the debris that ends up in the sea.
Would that my two children hark back to the lessons in compassion, love of neighbor and respect for life they were once given, take a step back from the abys, from the temptation of giving power to people who will forcefully advocate and even impose the evil of abortion, and reconsider their vote.
With my heart in my hand I beg: please, please, please, reconsider! Your own future and that of your children is at stake.
Love, Mom
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Saturday, October 4, 2008
On: "What should the media have asked Palin.."
Tsk, tsk... no one can keep the rabid lib-nutters happy. There was plenty of lip-smacking when they heard the right color (red and black), as well as appropriately interest-conflicted person was assigned the task of inquisitor at the VP debate. Some people posting on the Com(unist)edy Central blogs were swooning with glee.
What....? Why did their smirk vanish so quickly? They got their wish by having that ample-bodied figure (nah, she's just big boned!), asking the questions. Yeah, you know who I mean, the one with the ridiculous slime green outfit, and one more Obgasm inducing book about ObSama, on deck.
So...what happened? Did the questions turn out to be too tame for the lefties' taste?
Did Sarah disappoint them by not meeting the 'standard of stupid' they had had set for her in the month-long evisceration process carried out by the media, along with the sycophantic lunatic bloggers who visit all the sites cherished by the left ?
There was enough blood spilled at the Puffington Boast, the Daily Rant as well as the 'howl-oed halls' of Com(unist)edy Central to send a cruise ship to Scotland full of it processed into haggis. Those LCD mass-opinion- bending, near-funny guys, Stewart and Colbert could not get material fast enough to insidiously indoctrinate the faithful on how to best portray the object of their fears.
Gosh darn it! By heck! this woman through charm, honesty, candor and common sense might actually derail the unchained ObZero love-train.
You know, candid and honest are attributes the left has a reason to be panicked about. That tactic could ACTUALLY defeat the well planned and well heeled strategy - straight from Alinsky's method "Rules for Radicals" - that so far has been so fruitful and successful to those who serve as useful idiots to Soros and Co. To wit: The black-guilt ridden liberal whites intent on redressing past wrongs, the DemocRat party, the bull dykes who fund and protect Planned Murderhood, the various unions, ACORN, the entire DemoCreep Congress with Pelosi at the helm, and Barney Frank somewhere at his preferred 'tail-end' spot. If you know what I mean.
And they thought Rove was sinister? Fact is, in the Alinsky methodology these people are no better than cannon fodder. Of them the powers behind B. Hussein's campaign can truly say that, as it pertains to their purposes, 'The masses are Asses.'
Well, it's back to the drawing board for the bad guys. The job has just gotten a bit more difficult, but there's no shortage of bile or lies they will not employ or stoop down to in their quest to put a RED chimp in the oval office. Even as we speak, the latest load of manure being spread on the blogs. The buzz is that Palin wore an earpiece.
What I can say is that if that were the case one must truly stand in wonder of Palin. She must have one heck of a talent in order to absorb the text being passed on to her, and simultaneously move her lips. What a genius!
BTW, on the subject of Frank, has anyone stopped to notice the shape of his mouth as a 'full blown' pathetic down turned simian smile; something out of Il Pagliacci? Is it due to lack of teeth, or the result of more unrestrained, recreational, after Congressional duties activities?
What....? Why did their smirk vanish so quickly? They got their wish by having that ample-bodied figure (nah, she's just big boned!), asking the questions. Yeah, you know who I mean, the one with the ridiculous slime green outfit, and one more Obgasm inducing book about ObSama, on deck.
So...what happened? Did the questions turn out to be too tame for the lefties' taste?
Did Sarah disappoint them by not meeting the 'standard of stupid' they had had set for her in the month-long evisceration process carried out by the media, along with the sycophantic lunatic bloggers who visit all the sites cherished by the left ?
There was enough blood spilled at the Puffington Boast, the Daily Rant as well as the 'howl-oed halls' of Com(unist)edy Central to send a cruise ship to Scotland full of it processed into haggis. Those LCD mass-opinion- bending, near-funny guys, Stewart and Colbert could not get material fast enough to insidiously indoctrinate the faithful on how to best portray the object of their fears.
Gosh darn it! By heck! this woman through charm, honesty, candor and common sense might actually derail the unchained ObZero love-train.
You know, candid and honest are attributes the left has a reason to be panicked about. That tactic could ACTUALLY defeat the well planned and well heeled strategy - straight from Alinsky's method "Rules for Radicals" - that so far has been so fruitful and successful to those who serve as useful idiots to Soros and Co. To wit: The black-guilt ridden liberal whites intent on redressing past wrongs, the DemocRat party, the bull dykes who fund and protect Planned Murderhood, the various unions, ACORN, the entire DemoCreep Congress with Pelosi at the helm, and Barney Frank somewhere at his preferred 'tail-end' spot. If you know what I mean.
And they thought Rove was sinister? Fact is, in the Alinsky methodology these people are no better than cannon fodder. Of them the powers behind B. Hussein's campaign can truly say that, as it pertains to their purposes, 'The masses are Asses.'
Well, it's back to the drawing board for the bad guys. The job has just gotten a bit more difficult, but there's no shortage of bile or lies they will not employ or stoop down to in their quest to put a RED chimp in the oval office. Even as we speak, the latest load of manure being spread on the blogs. The buzz is that Palin wore an earpiece.
What I can say is that if that were the case one must truly stand in wonder of Palin. She must have one heck of a talent in order to absorb the text being passed on to her, and simultaneously move her lips. What a genius!
BTW, on the subject of Frank, has anyone stopped to notice the shape of his mouth as a 'full blown' pathetic down turned simian smile; something out of Il Pagliacci? Is it due to lack of teeth, or the result of more unrestrained, recreational, after Congressional duties activities?
Thursday, September 25, 2008
People voted for CHANGE in 2006
Remember the election of 2006? It was only 2 years ago.
So, I Thought you might like to read the following:
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.
THEN..,
Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $4.00 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
America voted for CHANGE in 2006, and we got it!
What is the slogan of B. Hussein ObSama? Are we ready for more of that?
Everyone blames Bush for the present economic situation, but does anyone remember it is Congress that makes law, not the President. He has to work with what's handed to him.
Does anyone question the fact that:
a) This is an election year, and that the present crisis and the timing are perhaps a bit too coincidental?
b) Some of the people that most benefitted from the financial failure of Wall Street, Fannie and Freddie are not only DemocRats, but are presently prominently employed by Barrack's campaing (Franklin Raines who made 90 Mill in only 6 years of working for Fannie, deeply connected to past Demo administrations of Carter and Clinton, and now a prominent advisor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_Raines ; Jim Johnson (now gone to prevent embarrasement), and Stanley O'Neal of the failed Merrill Lynch who left the Co. with a 150 Mill bonus!)
c) That key Democrats - among them Christopher Dodd and ObSama himself - were the biggest beneficiaries of Fanny and Freddie's largesse?
Do we really want these guys managing the economy of the US? If in the past they have so greatly profited from those who have bankrupted the country, who do we think they'll be working for, if they are the very crooks who have brought us to the brink? Should we entrust them with the management of the bailout and 700 Billion of the taxpayers money?
So, I Thought you might like to read the following:
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.
THEN..,
Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $4.00 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
America voted for CHANGE in 2006, and we got it!
What is the slogan of B. Hussein ObSama? Are we ready for more of that?
Everyone blames Bush for the present economic situation, but does anyone remember it is Congress that makes law, not the President. He has to work with what's handed to him.
Does anyone question the fact that:
a) This is an election year, and that the present crisis and the timing are perhaps a bit too coincidental?
b) Some of the people that most benefitted from the financial failure of Wall Street, Fannie and Freddie are not only DemocRats, but are presently prominently employed by Barrack's campaing (Franklin Raines who made 90 Mill in only 6 years of working for Fannie, deeply connected to past Demo administrations of Carter and Clinton, and now a prominent advisor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_Raines ; Jim Johnson (now gone to prevent embarrasement), and Stanley O'Neal of the failed Merrill Lynch who left the Co. with a 150 Mill bonus!)
c) That key Democrats - among them Christopher Dodd and ObSama himself - were the biggest beneficiaries of Fanny and Freddie's largesse?
Do we really want these guys managing the economy of the US? If in the past they have so greatly profited from those who have bankrupted the country, who do we think they'll be working for, if they are the very crooks who have brought us to the brink? Should we entrust them with the management of the bailout and 700 Billion of the taxpayers money?
The Media, Playing the 'Gotcha' Game - Only with Palin
Snarky Media Hide Palin Policy News
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Wednesday, September 24, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Election '08: The press spent so much time sniping at Sarah Palin for her visits with global leaders that in the end it babbled about itself. What it missed was news on John McCain's foreign policy. Who are the real rubes?
Palin's meetings with foreign heads of state in New York this week sent a stark message to the world's tyrants: If she and John McCain are elected to the highest office in the land, America will stand by the embattled nations it calls friends.
Not those nations with the most money, prestige or radical think tanks lobbying Congress on their behalf. Just friends.
What's more, by visiting with leaders of Colombia, Afghanistan, Georgia, Iraq, Pakistan and India, Palin and McCain showed that premium attention will be paid to the friends undergoing the biggest tests and trying hardest to embrace markets.
Dictators and terrorists won't miss that memo. They will adjust their calculations accordingly. But the media are another matter.
Palin met Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Tuesday. Yet not one media outlet caught this undercurrent of McCain's foreign policy to stand by committed allies, derived from President Bush's drive to spread democracy.
Instead, outlets from AP to Newsday to even Fox News busied themselves hollering about access. They made themselves the story. Then they conjectured that these were "tutorials" and "burnishings of resumes" instead of messages to the world.
Obsessed with pink sofas and Alaska-shaped earrings, and on lookout for a mispronounced word, they complained that they got only a briefing, not a seat at the table. In the end, their braying only underlined their lack of interest in foreign affairs.
How do we know this? Because there really was news out there about what was discussed in Palin's meetings, like the one she had with Uribe. Details were reported in Colombian newspapers like El Tiempo, agencies like EFE and other Spanish-language press, where interest in what a President McCain means for a nation like Colombia is very real. Any American who wanted to know that was out of luck unless he could read Spanish.
This emphasis on our strongest allies is a stark contrast with Barack Obama's academic tack on foreign policy, centered on former power centers of Europe and along the beaten track of the Mideast. Those are the places where he chose to visit and meet leaders. And most of the media didn't insist on access to his private sessions.
Palin is denounced as "inexperienced" by these media, but she's no rube in grasping an emerging new world with implications for U.S. policy. In fact, she is looking at the picture with fresh, non-Beltway eyes. Countries like Colombia will grow more relevant as its economy expands, its internal war is won and the threat builds from Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, armed to the teeth with big new weapons.
Obama has never set foot in Latin America. He has yet to sit down with any Latin American leader in person, though he's made the offer to Venezuela's Chavez and Cuba's Castro brothers.
His running mate, Joe Biden, reaps hay for his foreign policy experience but has only managed to set foot in two Latin American countries during his 35 years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Obama has yet to negotiate with a foreign government. Palin did so with Canada, our top energy supplier and largest trading partner, to create a 1,700-mile natural gas pipeline. Obama, in fact, discounted Canada's importance in a campaign vow to break the 1994 trade ties forged in the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Meanwhile, as Palin assured our Colombian and Afghan allies, McCain threw attention to another media-ignored friend, Australia. The Australian on Tuesday published a 1,298-word essay by McCain on what Australia means to him and what his U.S. foreign policy means for them. The newspaper noted that Obama had also been asked to submit a piece but hadn't bothered.
That's the real shame of it all. Palin's visit with Colombia's Uribe, our battered ally surrounded by a hostile Marxist state, sends a major message to the entire region about McCain's commitment to our loyal new friends.
Obama, meantime, imagines that hate-filled, obscenity-spewing Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez will turn docile if he sits down to tea with him without preconditions. Even with that offer on the table to Chavez, he didn't bother meeting with Uribe. Don't think that a tyrant like Chavez didn't notice.
The self-absorbed media missed the real story about McCain and Palin's foreign intentions that the rest of the world is watching and reporting on. Who, again, are the real rubes?
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Wednesday, September 24, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Election '08: The press spent so much time sniping at Sarah Palin for her visits with global leaders that in the end it babbled about itself. What it missed was news on John McCain's foreign policy. Who are the real rubes?
Palin's meetings with foreign heads of state in New York this week sent a stark message to the world's tyrants: If she and John McCain are elected to the highest office in the land, America will stand by the embattled nations it calls friends.
Not those nations with the most money, prestige or radical think tanks lobbying Congress on their behalf. Just friends.
What's more, by visiting with leaders of Colombia, Afghanistan, Georgia, Iraq, Pakistan and India, Palin and McCain showed that premium attention will be paid to the friends undergoing the biggest tests and trying hardest to embrace markets.
Dictators and terrorists won't miss that memo. They will adjust their calculations accordingly. But the media are another matter.
Palin met Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Tuesday. Yet not one media outlet caught this undercurrent of McCain's foreign policy to stand by committed allies, derived from President Bush's drive to spread democracy.
Instead, outlets from AP to Newsday to even Fox News busied themselves hollering about access. They made themselves the story. Then they conjectured that these were "tutorials" and "burnishings of resumes" instead of messages to the world.
Obsessed with pink sofas and Alaska-shaped earrings, and on lookout for a mispronounced word, they complained that they got only a briefing, not a seat at the table. In the end, their braying only underlined their lack of interest in foreign affairs.
How do we know this? Because there really was news out there about what was discussed in Palin's meetings, like the one she had with Uribe. Details were reported in Colombian newspapers like El Tiempo, agencies like EFE and other Spanish-language press, where interest in what a President McCain means for a nation like Colombia is very real. Any American who wanted to know that was out of luck unless he could read Spanish.
This emphasis on our strongest allies is a stark contrast with Barack Obama's academic tack on foreign policy, centered on former power centers of Europe and along the beaten track of the Mideast. Those are the places where he chose to visit and meet leaders. And most of the media didn't insist on access to his private sessions.
Palin is denounced as "inexperienced" by these media, but she's no rube in grasping an emerging new world with implications for U.S. policy. In fact, she is looking at the picture with fresh, non-Beltway eyes. Countries like Colombia will grow more relevant as its economy expands, its internal war is won and the threat builds from Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, armed to the teeth with big new weapons.
Obama has never set foot in Latin America. He has yet to sit down with any Latin American leader in person, though he's made the offer to Venezuela's Chavez and Cuba's Castro brothers.
His running mate, Joe Biden, reaps hay for his foreign policy experience but has only managed to set foot in two Latin American countries during his 35 years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Obama has yet to negotiate with a foreign government. Palin did so with Canada, our top energy supplier and largest trading partner, to create a 1,700-mile natural gas pipeline. Obama, in fact, discounted Canada's importance in a campaign vow to break the 1994 trade ties forged in the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Meanwhile, as Palin assured our Colombian and Afghan allies, McCain threw attention to another media-ignored friend, Australia. The Australian on Tuesday published a 1,298-word essay by McCain on what Australia means to him and what his U.S. foreign policy means for them. The newspaper noted that Obama had also been asked to submit a piece but hadn't bothered.
That's the real shame of it all. Palin's visit with Colombia's Uribe, our battered ally surrounded by a hostile Marxist state, sends a major message to the entire region about McCain's commitment to our loyal new friends.
Obama, meantime, imagines that hate-filled, obscenity-spewing Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez will turn docile if he sits down to tea with him without preconditions. Even with that offer on the table to Chavez, he didn't bother meeting with Uribe. Don't think that a tyrant like Chavez didn't notice.
The self-absorbed media missed the real story about McCain and Palin's foreign intentions that the rest of the world is watching and reporting on. Who, again, are the real rubes?
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Questions worth asking
Kids, as promised, I'm making the effort to write, however, I don't expect you'll demand originality at every post. As you know, there are quite a few original thoughts out there that have earned the right to be exposed to as large an audience as possible, so that in case you end up missing them because of your reticence to visit certain places you might want to avoid, or find plainly distasteful to your liberal snobbishness, at least there's a chance you'll give them a glimpse, in a furtive attempt to check what lengths 'crazy mom' has gone to.
Here's one I thought merited looking at. It comes from one of those gainfully employed citizens who - rather than waste time attending a Hollywood inspired political worship-fests for the benefit of one more ersatz rock star - was working late, honoring the old American work ethic. Yeah, you know, the one that provides for the economic stability of this country, while allowing whiners, immediate gratification seekers, welfare queens and dons, and all those who'll attend anything that's free, plenty of leisure time.
I don't recall where this was posted, and just for the record, I am not averse to tacking a few add-ons to give the post some ME color in italics. So here it goes:
"DavesRaves1:13AMAug 29th 2008I didn't get home in time to hear the speech. Did Obama try to explain to the American people about his relationship with a terrorist who has never expressed any remorse about the government buildings he bombed?
(Alas, he did not. Not only that, but did not attempt to explain why the home-grown terrorist, now a 'respected tenured prof' - who rather regretted 'not having done enough bombing' - was in charge of a chunk of money from the Annenberg Foundation which he intended to use to turn schools into left-wing re-education camps. Meanwhile, archives detailing the close relationship between himself and Ayers, long suppressed by the Chicago Demo political machine, have now surfaced, to the predictable yawns from the friendly press).
Did Obama happen to mention what made him decide to attend Reverend Wright's church, why he chose to take his family there?And why he chose to stay for 20 years to listen to the reverend's hate-filled sermons?
(Mr O claims that it was Wright who taught him about 'Cheesas,' conceivably the one pictured with a scraggly scant beard, wearing green fatigues, a red beret topped with a star, and sporting an AK47. Just below him a legend reads "Whitey, your time is coming...")
Did Obama explain why he voted against the "Born Alive" act three separate times?( That was the bill that would allow medical care for a fetus who survived a late-term abortion procedure, rather than leaving it in a laundry room to die).
(Tsk, tsk, Dave, you know better than to ask questions that are 'above Obama's pay grade').
Did Obama try to clear the air about his business dealings with a convicted Chicago slum lord, who donated heavily to Obama's political career and helped Obama buy his million-dollar home for 300 thousand off the sales price?
(No, nothing on that. But Dave, you forgot to ask why, in return for his benefactor's generosity, Obama obtained for Resko contracts worth some 14 and a half mill! Not a bad return on a buddy's investment, he? Meanwhile, isn't Oby's bro living on 1 dollar a day back in Kenya? Now, there's someone who could use some 'CHANGE').
Did Obama explain what he really meant concerning those radical quotes from his books, like, "I will stand with the Muslims..." or "White folks greed runs a world in need"?
(Never mind Obama's explanations. Don't you rather wonder why 'White folks' who read this incendiary prose and have proof positive of this guy's hatred for them continue their infatuation with the author? Do we now REALLY have the insane running the asylum?)
Did Obama explain why his church gave a "lifetime achievement" award to the leader of the Muslim nation and the biggest racist in the world, Lewis Farrakhan?
(That's an easy one to answer. Any man who actually sells video tape of himself ranting in front of a gleeful, applauding congregation; "God bless America....??? NO!!! Goddamn America!!!" does not need to explain anything further. The mystery is why are those who've heard the rants still doubting not only the intent of this angry anti-American racist hiding behind clerical robes, but his toxic influence over his listeners, among them the O's. Is this type of hate-speech protected?
Also, what are the consequences of giving guys like Wright a free pass. Where is the outrage of the patriots?)
And lastly- did the anointed one explain how a junior Senator who has been in office less than three years, and has spent half that time campaigning, should be elected President of the greatest nation on earth?
(One can already hear the wheels turning and the knives sharpening in preparation for Palin's entrance into their world of big time slash and burn politics. Here's a small proof of their unmitigated gall: They're trying to turn the table questioning her ability to 'lead' with ONLY two years experience...!!! Say what?)
By the way- did Obama happen to thank his buddies at CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, and PMSNBC for being steadfast with their hush-hush about the above issues?"
(No Dave, no thanks needed there. Olbermann and Matthews have whored for Obama from day one free of charge, Stewart and Colbert have kept the faithful amused, distracted and anesthetized from reality with their clever antics, and Soros, Buffet and Gates have had no trouble tossing a few coins to keep the clowns dancing, the flame and knife throwers.. well... throwing, the elephant dung cannon balls firing in all directions, to bring their dream of 'One World' into fruition. Why bother with gratitude when all the wheels are turning in sync?).
So guys, I think Dave has a point. Doesn't he? I rather despair ( or is it shudder) when I think of how shallow and uninformed present voters are. How misled and self serving, waiting for Messiah Big Government to solve the problems they themselves help create, and are unwilling to remedy. They are sure the ONE will perform a miracle greater than the multiplication of loaves and fishes, one that will be henceforth called: "The Plundering of the Productive Class." Or as referred to in Demo-spin 're-distribution.' When that happens, all the heretofore hungry, needful masses, (so exploited and downtrodden by those who only offer them jobs they are too good to accept, and leave them no choice but to sit around the flat screen watching Oprah), now will have a reason to exert themselves. It's quite a stretch - you know - leaving the comfort of the couch to check the bank balance online, just in case the direct deposit has arrived from BIG BRO.
Here's one I thought merited looking at. It comes from one of those gainfully employed citizens who - rather than waste time attending a Hollywood inspired political worship-fests for the benefit of one more ersatz rock star - was working late, honoring the old American work ethic. Yeah, you know, the one that provides for the economic stability of this country, while allowing whiners, immediate gratification seekers, welfare queens and dons, and all those who'll attend anything that's free, plenty of leisure time.
I don't recall where this was posted, and just for the record, I am not averse to tacking a few add-ons to give the post some ME color in italics. So here it goes:
"DavesRaves1:13AMAug 29th 2008I didn't get home in time to hear the speech. Did Obama try to explain to the American people about his relationship with a terrorist who has never expressed any remorse about the government buildings he bombed?
(Alas, he did not. Not only that, but did not attempt to explain why the home-grown terrorist, now a 'respected tenured prof' - who rather regretted 'not having done enough bombing' - was in charge of a chunk of money from the Annenberg Foundation which he intended to use to turn schools into left-wing re-education camps. Meanwhile, archives detailing the close relationship between himself and Ayers, long suppressed by the Chicago Demo political machine, have now surfaced, to the predictable yawns from the friendly press).
Did Obama happen to mention what made him decide to attend Reverend Wright's church, why he chose to take his family there?And why he chose to stay for 20 years to listen to the reverend's hate-filled sermons?
(Mr O claims that it was Wright who taught him about 'Cheesas,' conceivably the one pictured with a scraggly scant beard, wearing green fatigues, a red beret topped with a star, and sporting an AK47. Just below him a legend reads "Whitey, your time is coming...")
Did Obama explain why he voted against the "Born Alive" act three separate times?( That was the bill that would allow medical care for a fetus who survived a late-term abortion procedure, rather than leaving it in a laundry room to die).
(Tsk, tsk, Dave, you know better than to ask questions that are 'above Obama's pay grade').
Did Obama try to clear the air about his business dealings with a convicted Chicago slum lord, who donated heavily to Obama's political career and helped Obama buy his million-dollar home for 300 thousand off the sales price?
(No, nothing on that. But Dave, you forgot to ask why, in return for his benefactor's generosity, Obama obtained for Resko contracts worth some 14 and a half mill! Not a bad return on a buddy's investment, he? Meanwhile, isn't Oby's bro living on 1 dollar a day back in Kenya? Now, there's someone who could use some 'CHANGE').
Did Obama explain what he really meant concerning those radical quotes from his books, like, "I will stand with the Muslims..." or "White folks greed runs a world in need"?
(Never mind Obama's explanations. Don't you rather wonder why 'White folks' who read this incendiary prose and have proof positive of this guy's hatred for them continue their infatuation with the author? Do we now REALLY have the insane running the asylum?)
Did Obama explain why his church gave a "lifetime achievement" award to the leader of the Muslim nation and the biggest racist in the world, Lewis Farrakhan?
(That's an easy one to answer. Any man who actually sells video tape of himself ranting in front of a gleeful, applauding congregation; "God bless America....??? NO!!! Goddamn America!!!" does not need to explain anything further. The mystery is why are those who've heard the rants still doubting not only the intent of this angry anti-American racist hiding behind clerical robes, but his toxic influence over his listeners, among them the O's. Is this type of hate-speech protected?
Also, what are the consequences of giving guys like Wright a free pass. Where is the outrage of the patriots?)
And lastly- did the anointed one explain how a junior Senator who has been in office less than three years, and has spent half that time campaigning, should be elected President of the greatest nation on earth?
(One can already hear the wheels turning and the knives sharpening in preparation for Palin's entrance into their world of big time slash and burn politics. Here's a small proof of their unmitigated gall: They're trying to turn the table questioning her ability to 'lead' with ONLY two years experience...!!! Say what?)
By the way- did Obama happen to thank his buddies at CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, and PMSNBC for being steadfast with their hush-hush about the above issues?"
(No Dave, no thanks needed there. Olbermann and Matthews have whored for Obama from day one free of charge, Stewart and Colbert have kept the faithful amused, distracted and anesthetized from reality with their clever antics, and Soros, Buffet and Gates have had no trouble tossing a few coins to keep the clowns dancing, the flame and knife throwers.. well... throwing, the elephant dung cannon balls firing in all directions, to bring their dream of 'One World' into fruition. Why bother with gratitude when all the wheels are turning in sync?).
So guys, I think Dave has a point. Doesn't he? I rather despair ( or is it shudder) when I think of how shallow and uninformed present voters are. How misled and self serving, waiting for Messiah Big Government to solve the problems they themselves help create, and are unwilling to remedy. They are sure the ONE will perform a miracle greater than the multiplication of loaves and fishes, one that will be henceforth called: "The Plundering of the Productive Class." Or as referred to in Demo-spin 're-distribution.' When that happens, all the heretofore hungry, needful masses, (so exploited and downtrodden by those who only offer them jobs they are too good to accept, and leave them no choice but to sit around the flat screen watching Oprah), now will have a reason to exert themselves. It's quite a stretch - you know - leaving the comfort of the couch to check the bank balance online, just in case the direct deposit has arrived from BIG BRO.
Friday, August 29, 2008
McCain's Pick
ABSOLUTE GENIUS! A woman (as if you hadn't noticed) Pro-life, has just chosen to give life to a down syndrom child, rather than ABORT which further portends committment, integrity and willingness to SACRIFICE. A maverick, corruption TERMINATOR. Young. Married to a union man... Is there anything left for the DARK SIDE to criticize? Oh yes, "she is a hunter," some 'peta' punk opined.
As of now the left is speechless, but they'll find something, to be sure.
And BTW, after ObSama picked an angry, arrogant pit bull for a mate did anyone notice how the circle was closed with the name? Look closely:
ObSama / BI -n la - DEN '08
How FORTUITOUS. If that isn't a heavenly indication of BEWARE WHAT YOU PRAY FOR...
As for the spectacle last night at the Invesco arena, what did that setting and the props remind you most of?
The Nuremberg Rallies?
The October parades on Red Square?
The 'spontaneous' demonstrations at El Zocalo in Mexico City, where indigent peasants - purchased at the price of cold beer and a bag o beans to take home - were massively carted on fleets of buses to cheer for the 'crowned-before-being-chosen candidate'?
Yes, ObSama knows the book. After all he spent part of his youth lapping up the lessons given him by Frank Marshall Davis
As of now the left is speechless, but they'll find something, to be sure.
And BTW, after ObSama picked an angry, arrogant pit bull for a mate did anyone notice how the circle was closed with the name? Look closely:
ObSama / BI -n la - DEN '08
How FORTUITOUS. If that isn't a heavenly indication of BEWARE WHAT YOU PRAY FOR...
As for the spectacle last night at the Invesco arena, what did that setting and the props remind you most of?
The Nuremberg Rallies?
The October parades on Red Square?
The 'spontaneous' demonstrations at El Zocalo in Mexico City, where indigent peasants - purchased at the price of cold beer and a bag o beans to take home - were massively carted on fleets of buses to cheer for the 'crowned-before-being-chosen candidate'?
Yes, ObSama knows the book. After all he spent part of his youth lapping up the lessons given him by Frank Marshall Davis
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Rappin' the Demo Campaign.
Now that both Clintons have appeared at the Democrazy convention and have - with glowing words - urged UNITY and forgiveness toward the crowd that snubbed Hillary in favor of the empty suit ( to the noisy acclaim of every slobbering ObSama fan), the rift seems temporarily healed and all is love and harmony between THE CHOSEN, and the CAST OUTS.
Billy fanned the fires by adding 'we are not a team of two, but we are bringing to the Demo pot 18 Mill others!' How generous and prescient of them, who not too long ago seethed uncontrollably. There must have been a last minute 'sweetening' of their own pot by the well funded ObSama camp (one dollar at a time). Maybe it was the soothing sound of 18 Mill to the Clinton pot that stopped their sulking just in time to show some love at the convention for the clown who they'd had formerly declared was unable to effectively pick up the phone at 3 AM. Hey, there were RED NUMBERS in Hillary's books, and the sweet sound of some large KAAACHINK! has been quite persuasive in erasing lingering qualms by the Clintons on previous occasions.
So, the picture is complete, if the ONE can part the waters, THE TWO can prophesy, at least as far as how many sheep they can add to the flock. The Biblical underpining the godless Demo hordes so want to avoid, seem to accrete on their man, much to their chagrin. It remains to be seen if the docile post-menopausals are in the mood to follow the BLACK RAM into the socialistic Nirvana he plans to create over the carcass of every presently productive business owner.
Should Obsama have named Sibelius as his running mate? They don't need a side show, she would only be a distraction. This election is all about THE ONE, the Pepsi Center is not enough to contain his ego nor the elelphantine perception he has of himself. So, in wisdom, he has dictated that the convention should move to the Bronco's stadium to let ALL who would want to help him bask in his own glory juices come and cheer. He's bigger than any president, celebrity or deity that has preceded him. He, after all, is THE ONE!
His 'surprising' appearance last night was just a foretaste of the APOTHEOSIS to come. His adoring fans have dispensed with the traditional vote and have 'proclaimed' him king. Now all that is needed is the crowning. And I'd be surprised if, like Napoleon, he does not take crown and scepter from the powers that be in DA PARTY, and place them on his own head. So... All hail (or is it hell) to the prospective chief! All we need now is Ludacris or 50 Cent intoning the national anthem to rap beat, Bill Ayers in charge of the fireworks and Tony Resko in charge of the financial arrangements. Oh, and did I mention Rev. Wright and Fr. Pfleger are in charge of the invocation?
Billy fanned the fires by adding 'we are not a team of two, but we are bringing to the Demo pot 18 Mill others!' How generous and prescient of them, who not too long ago seethed uncontrollably. There must have been a last minute 'sweetening' of their own pot by the well funded ObSama camp (one dollar at a time). Maybe it was the soothing sound of 18 Mill to the Clinton pot that stopped their sulking just in time to show some love at the convention for the clown who they'd had formerly declared was unable to effectively pick up the phone at 3 AM. Hey, there were RED NUMBERS in Hillary's books, and the sweet sound of some large KAAACHINK! has been quite persuasive in erasing lingering qualms by the Clintons on previous occasions.
So, the picture is complete, if the ONE can part the waters, THE TWO can prophesy, at least as far as how many sheep they can add to the flock. The Biblical underpining the godless Demo hordes so want to avoid, seem to accrete on their man, much to their chagrin. It remains to be seen if the docile post-menopausals are in the mood to follow the BLACK RAM into the socialistic Nirvana he plans to create over the carcass of every presently productive business owner.
Should Obsama have named Sibelius as his running mate? They don't need a side show, she would only be a distraction. This election is all about THE ONE, the Pepsi Center is not enough to contain his ego nor the elelphantine perception he has of himself. So, in wisdom, he has dictated that the convention should move to the Bronco's stadium to let ALL who would want to help him bask in his own glory juices come and cheer. He's bigger than any president, celebrity or deity that has preceded him. He, after all, is THE ONE!
His 'surprising' appearance last night was just a foretaste of the APOTHEOSIS to come. His adoring fans have dispensed with the traditional vote and have 'proclaimed' him king. Now all that is needed is the crowning. And I'd be surprised if, like Napoleon, he does not take crown and scepter from the powers that be in DA PARTY, and place them on his own head. So... All hail (or is it hell) to the prospective chief! All we need now is Ludacris or 50 Cent intoning the national anthem to rap beat, Bill Ayers in charge of the fireworks and Tony Resko in charge of the financial arrangements. Oh, and did I mention Rev. Wright and Fr. Pfleger are in charge of the invocation?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)