Monday, February 28, 2011
At the time, it just seemed like the logical conclusion to accept. After all, China is a huge country that is quickly becoming industrialized and self-sustaining.
Additionally, that viewpoint was the only one I ever heard spouted by academics. And those economists, historians and political commentators made some extremely convincing arguments.
But just because something sounds logical doesn’t mean that it is logical… or that reality will act out logically regardless. And in China’s case, there are a few little problems that hamper its claim to fame, most importantly, its human right violations.
Back during the 2008 Olympics, Chinese citizens repeatedly got annoyed with the West’s depiction of their country’s human rights violations. They said that was the China of the past, that today’s China is something quite different and growing more positive every day.
But if that was true, why would protests in the Middle East spur more of the same in China?
China’s Police Force Try to Throw Cold Water on Protests
Elaine Kurtenbach reports how: “Large numbers of police – and new tactics like shrill whistles and street cleaning trucks – squelched overt protests in China for a second Sunday in a row… In Beijing, trucks normally used to water the streets drove repeatedly up the busy commercial shopping district spraying water and keeping crowds pressed to the edges.”
Such actions strongly indicate that China is not nearly as content as its political leaders want outsiders to believe. Unhappy workers are usually unproductive workers or, at the very least, unreliable ones. A nation’s future is only as strong as its people’s future is.
The Chinese government takes its power from keeping its people weak in one respect or another. So even while it tries to boost its citizens’ economic prospects, it still seeks to control the information they receive… hence the reason why Shangai police warned journalists to stay away from protests sites, physically blocking them at times.
Any country that so adamantly opposes the dissemination of free speech or the educational enrichment of its people has little hope of making any long-lasting splash on the international community, despite its current weight.
The U.S. might want to keep that in mind as it treads ever closer to tyranny itself.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Today, I’d like to applaud the state of Virginia for taking steps against the abortion industry.
They’re not attacking it directly as a destructive force against the sanctity of life and women’s rights, which it is on both counts, considering how it destroys vulnerable, innocent beating hearts and allows men to treat women like disposable goods with little fear of consequences.
Instead, Virginia legislators are approaching it from a health and safety perspective, a rather ironic approach considering how abortions are never healthy or safe: They’re designed to end in death. Period.
Nonetheless, Virginia just passed a bill requiring its 21 abortion clinics to stop acting like they’re inspecting people for whooping cough and start admitting that they’re performing life altering and dangerous operations.
As of right now, abortionists in Virginia have to be state-sanctioned according to the same standards a family doctor or dentist have to meet. But as soon as Republican Governor Bob McDonnell signs the newly passed bill into law like he says he will, those murderers – Sorry, but let’s be blunt here: At the moment of conception, a child has its own unique physical traits waiting to emerge and before even a month is up, his or her heart has begun to beat – will have to widen their hallways, increase staff training, and introduce new equipment to their places of business if they want to continue operating legally.
Critics say this will only result in forcing most of the state’s abortion clinics to close up shop, as they won’t be able to afford the costly makeovers.
And wouldn’t that be a shame.
Abortion: an Invasive Medical Procedure
Like it or not, this is not an unreasonable demand considering what even first trimester abortions involve. They are invasive surgeries and anything but foolproof, no matter what the pro-“choice” group might say.
Do any internet search and you’ll find multiple sites attesting that suction aspiration is the most common method of killing unborn children during the first three months. And that involves:
“A powerful suction tube with a sharp cutting edge is inserted into the womb through the dilated cervix. The suction dismembers the body of the developing baby and tears the placenta from the wall of the uterus, sucking blood, amniotic fluid, placental tissue, and fetal parts into a collection bottle.
“Great care must be taken to prevent the uterus from being punctured during this procedure, which may cause hemorrhage and necessitate further surgery. Also, infection can easily develop if any fetal or placental tissue is left behind in the uterus. This is the most frequent post-abortion complication.”
That’s an invasive medical procedure, just as much as a tonsillectomy or other “standard” procedure that happens in an operating room.
So when State Senator Jill Vogel says this bill is about “caring for women who are about to have an invasive surgical procedure and creating an environment for them where they have an opportunity to do that in a place that is safe,” she makes a good point that even the staunchest abortion supporter touting “women’s rights” should be able to support.
The same goes for Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s statement that: “For over 25 years, Virginia abortion clinics have not been held to minimal health and safety standards. As a result, women who walk into these clinics are often not treated with the care and respect that any human being deserves.”
Those are solid arguments, even for those who can somehow convince themselves that a baby isn’t involved in the procedure. At the very least, it should make people stop and really think about what really happens during an abortion.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
There’s the breathtaking scenery, of course, ranging from towering red ridges above royal blue lakes to bleak desert scenes that transform into jaw dropping panoramas under a setting sun. And anybody who has ever been to the Grand Canyon – one of the world’s wonders – never forgets the experience.
But it’s not just the tourist attractions and photo opportunities that make Arizona great. It’s the residents’ moxy, as exemplified in Governor Jan Brewer, who fearlessly took on illegal immigration and the Obama administration last year.
In the face of what should have been intimidating opposition from the president, liberals and even the U.N., Governor Brewer didn’t just stick to her guns; she fired back with style at a time when too many other Republicans were cowering in the shadows.
Now, it appears that she isn’t the only elected official there that has the backbone the state – and the country – needs.
An Arizona Senate committee managed to approve a bill that denies automatic citizenship to illegal immigrants’ children, and requires anybody receiving government benefits to actually be a citizen.
As Republican state Senator Russel Pearce, the author of the controversial legislation, says: “If you’re in the country illegally, you don’t have a right to public benefits. Period.”
Of course, there are dissenting voices, such as his Democrat counterpart, Paula Aboud. She says, “This is totally the wrong time for the leader of our Senate to throw our state into another state of chaos.”
But isn’t it already, what with the debt it’s under, fueled by government handouts to undeserving individuals, such as illegal immigrants who don’t respect our laws?
I understand that, from certain angles, the debate seems complicated. The human element makes it difficult to pass judgment, when many illegal immigrants are simply looking for a better life.
But even with that consideration, this is the unfortunate but deadly accurate bigger picture: If Arizona and the rest of the nation continue spending the way they are, we’re going to be no good for anybody… including our own citizens and certainly for outsiders.
Fortunately, Arizona legislators get that, if only by a slim majority. But hey, a slim majority is all they need to start setting things right.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
After all, we owe it going on $900 billion at this point, hardly a trifling sum. It owns us to a certain extent, and both Chinese and U.S. officials understand that all too clearly.
Their creditor-debtor relationship became evident last year, when North Korea was busy blowing up South Korean ships and shelling South Korean islands.
During those provocations, the Obama administration, not surprisingly, did nothing. But that inaction probably had more to it than just the whims of a weak or uncaring president.
China has a fatherly relationship towards Kim Jong Il. And much like a parent to his child, the larger nation does get exasperated with its smaller neighbor. But that doesn’t mean it wants outside help – especially from the likes of the United States, a country it both dislikes and envies – to hold its kid in check.
Moreover, it has the weight to throw around to intimidate any other nation that might try to step in. And it has little qualm about using that power.
Now, through the likes of WikiLeaks, we have further evidence that the Asian giant has us on a leash.
According to Breitbart, newly revealed documents cite China’s warning against an arms sale between the U.S. and Taiwan. And while the transaction still went through, it did so without the F-16 jets Taiwan wanted.
If the United States continues to spend outside its means, such pressures are bound to escalate. And nobody on the right side of law and order wants that to happen.
Monday, February 21, 2011
You would think that a group of people intent on promoting peace would be, well, peaceful. But you’ll find no such thing at Columbia University, where they’re trying to decide whether to allow ROTC programs back on the campus.
The fact that they have to decide whether to allow diversity of thinking in the first place is rather telling. But even more so is the treatment Anthony Maschek, a Columbia University student – and Purple Heart recipient after getting shot 11 times in a firefight in Iraq three years ago – received when he tried to offer his opinion.
The 28-year old tried to share his view that “It doesn’t matter how you feel about the war. It doesn’t matter how you feel about fighting. There are bad men out there plotting to kill you.” But he was met with immediate cries of “Racist!” and booed, hissed, laughed and jeered at as he tried to speak.
I’m not sure which is more tragic, the hypocritical stance of a crowd demanding respect for only their own opinions, or the fact that he’s right and our supposed best and brightest don’t care.
Terrorist attacks such as those of 9/11 should have shown us that we’re in danger and need to protect ourselves. So should repeated messages from powerful people such as Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who said on Sunday:
“The main problem in the Muslim world is the presence of the United States. It is the biggest problem. We need to address that… It is necessary to remove the US from the Islamic world.”
But too much like Khamenei and his ilk, it is becoming blatantly apparent that the anti-war crowd and the rest of their liberal friends don’t really care about peace; they care about totalitarian control.
Otherwise, they’d let a dissenting voice speak up.
Friday, February 18, 2011
Wisconsin, like just about every other state in the union, is broke. In fact, it’s worse than broke; it’s in debt, with a $3.6 billion budget shortfall.
Normal individuals and organizations, when faced with too much red ink, do the intelligent thing and cut back on spending wherever they can.
If they go out to eat twice a week, they’ll change that to once every other week. If they have a penchant for Starbucks, they’ll settle for the break room’s joe instead. Or, in the case of a company, they might cancel pricey company events or sell off assets.
While there’s no guarantee that those actions will save an individual or business from bankruptcy, they certainly have a better chance than… let’s say… doing nothing or spending even more.
This is not rocket science; it’s simple logic and math. One plus one equals two, and seven minus four equals three: concepts that average elementary school students understand.
Apparently – and to no big surprise – liberals are not smarter than a fifth grader. In fact, they don’t seem to be smarter than a first grader. Nor can they compete with such children for maturity, as evidenced by this latest conservative v. liberal fight.
Walker Calls for Reason; Unions Throw a Temper Tantrum
States everywhere – even California, for heaven’s sake! – are looking to cut their expenses wherever possible, so who can blame Scott Walker for looking at one of the most logical places to restore fiscal sanity.
Everybody knows – or should know – by now that union members, on average, make significantly more than their non-union counterparts in most industries. So it makes sense, when those union workers are state employees, to reduce that difference a bit, as Walker has proposed.
His plan entails state employees investing an additional 8% to their pension and health care costs. That change would save the state $30 million by June 30 alone, and $300 million over the next two years.
It also involves banning unions – who would still be allowed to represent workers – from asking for unreasonable pay increases, as measured by the Consumer Price Index. (The nerve!) And as a result of making those concessions, Walker says he wouldn’t have to layoff any public employees.
The other option is to reduce their ranks by 6,000.
Liberals Compare Walker to Hitler and Run Away Like Little Girls
While Scott Walker’s ultimatum seems perfectly reasonable – and dare I say, even fair – the unions and their partners in crime (i.e. liberals) are up in arms. His admonishments that the state is “at a point of crisis” and that taxpayers “need to be heard as well” have fallen on completely deaf and unreasonable ears.
Embracing the “vitriol” they were so against just a month ago, liberals are busy comparing Walker to Hitler, while Democrat state senators have actually fled the state in protest. (Whatever happened to just voting “no?”)
But that childish behavior isn’t fazing Governor Walker. “If anything,” he says, “I think it’s made the Republicans in the Assembly and the Senate stronger. They’re not going to be intimidated.”
Meanwhile, in Washington, Speaker of the House John Boehner echoed his resolve: “[These governors] are daring to speak the truth about the dire fiscal challenges Americans face at all levels of government, and daring to commit themselves to solutions that will liberate our economy and help put our citizens on a path to prosperity.”
I couldn’t have said it better myself.
Boehner Shows He Has a Spine
Incidentally, Speaker Boehner successfully passed an amendment yesterday that would deny funding to the FCC decision to implement net neutrality, a blatant attempt to swipe our freedom of speech. That was next to an amendment to get rid of Obama’s unconstitutionally appointed “czars,” which also passed yesterday.
Liberals chose to protest those victories in front of his house, an extremely insensitive and even threatening move. If they want to resort to their constitutional rights of expression, they should do so in a civilized fashion in front of Boehner’s place of business, not at his private property like a bunch of intimidating thugs.
In the end though, it doesn’t really matter whether they act becomingly or not, which is good considering their penchant for the latter. The conservative movement is spreading, from Alaska, where Governor Sean Parnell is saying “no” to implementing Obamacare to the Supreme Court, which has scheduled a conference on a legal challenge to Obama’s presidential eligibility.
If the mid-term elections didn’t prove it last November, these actions certainly do: The conservative movement is something to be reckoned with.
Mess with it at your own risk.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Since it’s all far too much to deal with individually without sending you into a 10-page, repetitive coma, here’s the breakdown:
- Despite President Mubarak stepping down and the military taking over for an alleged short time, protests are continuing in Egypt.
- Libya is having difficulty joining the growing list of revolutionary actions in the Middle East. Activists there tried to get things going via Facebook, but government security forces are currently staging an effective kibosh on that effort, arresting 14 people in connection with the “crime.”
- Tunisia, Jordan and Iran have staged their own copycat protests. What will come of them is still left to be seen.
- Bahrain has now gotten national attention for its uprising, as at least two protestors have died thanks to the actions of riot police.
For those of you who didn’t hear, Lara Logan, a CBS news correspondent was beaten and sexually assaulted in Cairo last week… by protestors.
With that said, the various governments haven’t been exactly peachy to our media members over there either. Logan – so far the worst American casualty – is just one of a growing number of U.S. reporters who have been abused by one side of the Middle East’s political mayhem or the other.
ABC News correspondent Miguel Marquez was beaten with billy clubs by Bahrainian government forces; his colleague Christiane Amanpour, along with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, got slapped around in Egypt, I believe by protestors; Fox News’ Greg Palkot and Olaf Wiig were rounded up and roughed up by Egyptian military police; and ABC reported that another four of its employees were carjacked by Egyptian protestors who threatened to behead them.
Egypt’s Factions Are Looking Ugly
Based on the evidence so far, it seems especially difficult to take sides in Egypt, when the very people who are demanding consideration are apparently too willing to violate other people’s rights in fairly grotesque ways.
I’m all for the oppressed – as far too many men and women are in the Middle East – rising up and claiming their own. But Egypt is showing early signs of trading one kind of tyranny for another, much like Iran did decades ago.
If they refuse to respect rules of common decency, they’ll be hard pressed to successfully demand the same from others.
Idiot American Politics Thrust onto Egyptian Scene
That doesn’t seem to matter to certain press members, however, who are bound and determined to show the protests in a positive light… and then connect President Obama to that glowing ray of hope and freedom.
From the physical evidence of our people being abused by both sides to more peaceful – and accurate – statements made by Egyptians on the street, it’s easy to conclude that the country doesn’t feel very fond of anything American right now, including its president.
Yet CNN’s Nic Robertson somehow concluded that Egyptian “protestors are very supportive of having Obama on their side”… after conducting face-to-face interviews with locals who say just the opposite!
Adding to the madness, as usual, former President Carter is vouching for the whole situation over there, saying that he’s sure everything will turn out all right. Reassuring, right? So, too, is his opinion that:
“… the Muslim Brotherhood [a powerful minority force in Egypt that has ties to Hezbollah and declared during the early days of the protests that Israel had to go, as if it already had control of the political reigns] is not anything to be afraid of in the upcoming political situation and the evolution I see as most likely. They will be subsumed in the overwhelming demonstration of desire for freedom and true democracy.”
It’s nice to hear a man with such a strong track record of success and competency comfort us, isn’t it? (Might as well start picking out an Ahmadinejad type for Egypt now.)
Thanks for Getting Rid of Saddam. Now Here’s the Bill.
Finally, in London, there’s Rafid Ahmed Alwan, an Iraqi man who the AP reports was crucial in “build[ing] a case for war in Iraq,” says his testimony was all a lie. And he doesn’t regret it a bit:
“I had the chance to fabricate something to topple the regime. I and my sons are proud of that.”
A reasonably intelligent person should be able to glean from those two simple sentences that:
- The U.S. was deliberately given faulty information.
- It came from an Iraqi citizen.
- Saddam Hussein was perceived to be a horrible enough leader that lying and helping to start a war was worth it.
Yet now the Iraqi government – which wouldn’t be in place if it weren’t for billions (and the Washington Post claims trillions) of U.S. dollars, hundreds of lives and countless hours of effort – is demanding an apology and $1 billion in compensation for changing Baghdad into “a camp in an ugly and destructive way.”
Worse yet, I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if Obama pays him back. And as for that apology, well… that’s practically guaranteed.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
While country after country in the Middle East are trying to take a stand against blatant oppression (no comment on how well they’re going about it or how some of them are apparently perfectly fine treating other people like dirt in the process), American lawmakers are softly inching their way into dictatorship.
It’s easy to focus on the unconstitutional power plays by the federal government and, to a lesser degree, by each individual state.
But what’s happening at the county level is just as important. After all, the further we allow our local representatives to overstep their boundaries, the more we’re conditioned to not notice or care when it happens elsewhere.
Carl Baldwin Stands His Legally Purchased Ground
Take the case of Carl Behr, a Baldwin, PA resident who is being told he has to take down a 25-foot, lighted cross from his property.
Not gonna happen, he says. “Somebody’s gotta make a stand against these people and I’m here to make it.”
From the looks of things, he’s taking the issue as religious persecution, but from the details CBS Pittsburgh gives, I’m not convinced that’s so. I think this is just one more case of plain vanilla nanny state-ism in play.
According to the local council, Behr didn’t apply for a permit. And even if he does break down, fill out the paperwork and pay the (assumed) fee for permission to treat his property how he chooses, a recently passed lighting ordinance gives authorities the right “to place restrictions on residential lighting that would be deemed a nuisance.”
In other words, they can say no.
Lighting Today; What Tomorrow?
But who gave them that right? Who decided they could encroach on another citizen’s legally purchased property and tell him what he can and cannot do with it?
More than likely, they did. Or their predecessors. For little better reason than that they could play dictator and so they did.
So where does it stop?
It might seem silly to get up in arms over a non-life threatening instance like this, but it also seems silly to legislate such a non-life threatening issue in the first place.
So, again, where does the “silliness” stop and the frightening begin?
If we look around the nation and what this continuing push towards nanny state socialism has already taken us, it appears that we’ve already crossed that line.
Freedom – in all of its varieties – is on its way out.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Trillion isn’t a word that most people can really comprehend, so here it is in black and white, without the shading grace of flowery language and lofty plans:
But those simplistic symbols don’t really do justice to the concept (believe me, when we’re talking about U.S. dollars, one trillion is just a concept, not a reality), so next check out this simplistic but compelling visualization of what a trillion really looks like.
Keep that picture in your head… and now triple it… and even that doesn’t match what Obama wants to force on the country he swore to uphold and protect.
Now, he may very well have created such a sinfully enormous budget in order to open opportunities to appear bipartisan in slashing it in a few places. And he also might have thrown in some very pretty programs to “help” various groups of Americans.
But those possibilities mean less than nothing when a sitting president starts talking about trillions. Considering the state of the economy, the size of our debt and deficit, and the results of last year’s elections, no reasonable person can apologize for President Obama’s actions anymore.
Nor can we interpret his actions as foolish or uniformed.
The fact that he wants to rack up a federal deficit larger than the worth of the entire U.S. economy makes it safe to conclude that Obama is purposely trying to destroy this nation.
Obama’s Numbers Broken Down
Breaking down Obama’s 2012 budget, The Washington Examiner explains:
“President Obama’s budget, released Monday, was conceived as a blueprint for future spending, but it also paints the bleakest picture yet of the current fiscal year, which is on track for a record federal deficit and will see the government’s overall debt surpass the size of the total U.S. economy.
“Mr. Obama’s budget projects that 2011 will see the biggest one-year debt jump in history, or nearly $2 trillion, to reach $15.476 trillion by Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year. That would be 102.6 percent of GDP — the first time since World War II that dubious figure has been reached.
“And the budget projects the government will run a deficit of $1.645 trillion this year, topping 2009’s previous record by more than $230 billion. By contrast, 2007’s deficit was just $160 billion altogether.”
No wonder one South Carolina lawmaker wants his state to develop its own metal-backed currency.
Meanwhile, even socialist-leaning Europe is trying to wash its hands of our criminal fiscal responsibility. Even France is joining so much of the global community in calling to ditch the dollar altogether.
In other words, everybody knows that a $3.73 trillion budget won’t lead us – or anybody who allies with us – in any direction we want to go.
Obama just doesn’t care.
Monday, February 14, 2011
Seeing people making romantic plans, exchanging gifts and saying “I love you” to each other usually isn’t that big of a deal. It can even be rather cute, I’ll admit.
But when absolutely everybody around you is doing it all in a 24-hour period, well, let’s just say it can get very old very fast. There’s only so much cuteness a single gal can take before she wants to go find a county where the holiday is banned.
I hear Iran is nice this time of year.
Fortunately, before I could start shopping for burkas and low self-esteem, I found a sure-shot cure for romantic blues: politics. And I’m not talking about cheating spouses like the recently-caught cad, Christopher Lee. That’d be far too easy.
I’m referring to the marriage advice coming from the First Lady, Mrs. Obama.
Michelle Obama: Sugar and Spice, with a Dash of Arsenic
For those of you in relationships, Mrs. Obama says it’s all about laughter:
“I think a lot of laughing. I think in our house, we don’t take ourselves too seriously, and laughter is the best form of unity, I think, in a marriage.”
Of course, she adds, it doesn’t hurt that the president is “very romantic.” He allegedly never forgets a date or a birthday.
Not surprisingly, there was no mention that he also checks out underage girl’s derrieres when not on his wife’s leash.
In Mrs. Obama’s defense, I’m sure that she’s under a lot of pressure to keep a positive profile in front of the cameras, especially after the Anti-American rhetoric she became so well known for during the 2008 elections.
You know, stuff like saying she’d never been proud of her country until her hubby was doing well in the polls or calling the U.S. a place that was “just downright mean.”
Those hardly seem like the words of a happy person who’s accustomed to laughing… at least about something other than her enemies falling on their faces.
We could speculate that the president has a positive effect on her seemingly dour disposition, but considering repeated allegations that he takes himself way too seriously, I highly doubt that.
Please, Michelle, Please! Just Make It Stop!
Regardless of whether the First Lady was lying through her teeth or not really isn’t the issue. I actually do sincerely hope that she and the President are very happy together, even if I’m not sure how two such seemingly unpleasant people can be happy at all.
I’m just rather tired of seeing her held up as such an amazing standard to the rest of us poor slobs. It’s rather like Hollywood celebrities who are lauded as absolute beauties that other women can only ever dream of looking like… until the make-up comes off and we see that they’re really pretty ordinary.
Maybe I’m naïve; maybe I just never noticed that they interview the First Lady on or about Valentine’s Day every year. But it seems to me that Mrs. Obama is given far more props than she deserves.
Her gardening, her fashion sense, her romantic advice… None of it is all-that ground breaking, and yet we’re all told how amazing she is over and over again. It just gets a bit much after a while, especially when her husband has such loathsome policies.
So while I welcome her to have as many romantic dinners with her husband as she can, my fellow Americans and myself simply don’t need to know the details.
We’re much better served knowing the truth about her husband’s agenda.
Friday, February 11, 2011
And she says that we’re being rather naughty.
Politico reports how Oprah Winfrey appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” this morning and had a few things to say about all of the criticism thrown at Obama these days.
“I feel that everybody has a learning curve, and I feel that the reason why I was willing to step out for him was because I believed in his integrity and I believed in his heart.”
She also had these pearls of wisdom to impart to the nation:
- “I think everybody complaining ought to try it for once.”
- The position of president “holds a sense of authority and governance over us all.”
- “Even if you’re not in support of his policies, there needs to be a certain level of respect.”
I don’t know about you, but suddenly, I feel highly ashamed of myself for saying what I have about our president.
Or do I?
Oprah’s Exceedingly Generous “Learning Curve”
With no disrespect meant to the esteemed Oprah Winfrey, who is clearly qualified to chastise us for our uncivil rhetoric, it is rather curious that she never spoke up on the subject three or four or seven years ago when Bush was in the hot seat.
For that matter, I didn’t know that we typically gave presidents two-year learning curves.
Businesses certainly don’t.
When people are hired based on their purported skills and know-how, they are expected to live up to the self-promotion they did in their cover letter, resume and interview. And if they don’t – and certainly if they mess up so badly and so frequently that they affect the company’s future sustainability – they get canned… well before the two year mark.
Besides, the very fact that Oprah feels the need to use the term “learning curve” is a tacit admission that Obama is not performing like the expert he claimed to be during the 2008 elections.
You see, learning curves are for beginners. They’re for people who are not the best and the brightest. They’re for people who, for whatever reason, can’t get it right on their own.
Nobody gives anybody with a modicum of intelligence in any position of authority or importance a two-year learning curve. It’s both unreasonable and dangerous to do so.
A Few Words about Oprah’s other Words
Oprah may or may not be right about President Obama’s “integrity” and “heart.” I tend to go off of facts rather than feelings, however, which means I can’t help but notice how:
- Obama’s faithful adherence to reversing climate change at the expense of American businesses, jobs and the larger economy is looking more and more foolish… not that he pays any mind to differing opinions.
- Obama’s continuing speeches about the superiority of his health care reform law over the status quo (at the expense of taxpayers’ money and patients’ safety) are becoming more and more ridiculous… not that he accepts any facts or figures other than his own.
- Obama’s repeated stances, policies and lawsuits that broadcast our willingness to encourage illegal immigration by making it easy for them to enter and stay in our country are becoming more and more obvious… not that he seems to care how blatant he is about it.
All of that indicates not only that Oprah is destructively incorrect about her continuing endorsement of the president, but that America can’t afford to endure another two years of his policies, learning curve or not.
His alienation of our traditional allies; accommodation of countries that hate us, such as Russia, Iran, China and North Korea; tendency to favor one race over another, as demonstrated in the policies of his attorney general, Eric Holder; and blatant disregard for America’s opinion on everything, including cutting back on national spending, all support the same conclusion.
Sorry Oprah, but Obama Has Got to Go
Possibly, regardless of whether Oprah wants to admit it or not, those grievances are why the American people are complaining. Perhaps, the majority of us do believe in the dignity of the office of President of the United States of America, and that’s the reason why we’re so disgusted at seeing it misused to this degree.
Maybe, just maybe, we have every reason to demand a higher standard in the governance of our nation, crazy though that idea might seem.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Unfortunately, it looks like we have a case of both in the form of one Representative Christopher Lee, a Republican congressman from the 26th District of New York and apparently an utter moron.
The married man just got outed as a cheating cad, thanks to his blatant posts on Craigslist. And the accompanying topless picture is humiliating, to say the least. Sure, he has a nice enough body, but anytime a man older than 15 is caught taking a picture of himself flexing in front of a mirror… well, it’s just pathetic… on so many levels.
You’d think that such unfaithful imbeciles would get a clue from past infidelities amongst politicians, men like Larry Craig, Mark Sanford, John Edwards, John Ensign, Eliot Spitzer, Mark Foley, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, and just about every single Kennedy.
If none of those men got away with it, why in the world did Lee think he could? I’d imagine there is no way to cover all of your bases when cheating on one’s spouse, as even Spitzer, who dealt with professionals, found out the hard way. And Lee wasn’t even close to being so careful, as evident by how he took to Craigslist in the first place.
That level of stupidity is on par with Sanford, who disappeared for 7 days to be with his mistress, or Clinton, who trolled through so many women that the law of averages demanded one of them get him into trouble.
Christopher Lee’s Blatantly Obvious Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
Worse yet, Lee sent this message as part of a larger email train on January 14, 2011:
“how do people think you aren't going to figure it out once you see them in person.”
Now, that was about people sending inaccurate pictures of themselves to potential dates, but still. The words are such an obvious case of foreshadowing that you’d think a talent-less author wrote it in a tacky novel.
Plus, for a supposedly educated Congressman, he certainly plays fast and loose with grammar. Is he really so lazy that he can’t capitalize the first letter of a sentence or end one with the proper punctuation?
That’s quite possibly almost as pathetic as his readiness to cheat or his frat-boy way of going about it. Why didn’t he just troll bars for tramps like most losers? At least then it could have been a case of he-said-she-said or mistaken identity.
Clearly, this man was stupid and selfish enough to get caught. Hopefully, he’ll grow up someday.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Or any sense of decency for that matter.
This is a man whose presidency is in shambles after last year’s mid-term elections, which soundly trounced his party and his policies. At this point, even 51% of CNN poll respondents can’t picture him winning a reelection bid.
This is CNN we’re talking about. They should be able to do better than that with their statistical tweaks and carefully pruned population groups. But apparently they can’t.
Perhaps that’s because the economy is so horrible that, despite the unemployment rate miraculously falling from 9.4% to 9.0% last month, the same number of people are out of work and there are precious few job openings.
Or maybe it’s because, while Republicans are gearing up to hack away at Obamacare again, even Democrats are jumping off the liberal bandwagon in favor of significantly altering it… much more to save their own jobs, I’m sure, than out of any respect for their constituents or the country as a whole.
Obamacare – the president’s signature piece of legislation, the apple of his eye, his administration’s crowning jewel – is already a failure well before it’s even been completely set in place.
Obama’s High-Speed Rail to Nowhere
It’s not as if the Democrat party and their supposedly omnipotent leader didn’t know Obamacare wasn’t popular, or that it had extreme and unmanageable flaws, or that such policies are even now bankrupting other countries.
I refuse to believe the Democrat elites are that stupid. They’re just narcissistic enough not to care.
Case in point: a $53 billion, high-speed, national rail network.
Why do we need this at a time when the country is suffering heavily under debt and deficit obligations?
Because Obama says so, of course.
Everybody knows that it’s going to end up costing far much more than $53 billion.
This is the government we’re talking about. It always does.
High-Speed Rail Hardly a Necessity… No Matter What Obama Says
Besides, who says we really need it in the first place? Do you hear poor people crying in the streets for high-speed rail? Will building such a mode of transportation fix our economy? Will it suddenly cure our budget problems? Or will it just make it worse?
And more than that, haven’t we given Obama enough chances to invest in our future?
We already know how poorly money was distributed under his various stimulus plans so far: how federal funding has gone to bailout irresponsible banks, automotive corporations and other undeserving institutions; how dead people have received checks; how taxpayers funds have been designated overseas or to groups such as the National Endowment for the Arts in order to stage nude and homoerotic performances… and how that money has most decidedly not improved America in any visible, collective or realized way.
That’s hundreds of billions of dollars – if not a solid trillion – that we’re talking about.
So why in the world should we believe that this high-speed rail will be any different?
The answer is simply that we shouldn’t.
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Joshua Greenman’s article, “Republicans wrote the political dictionary: It’s proof Democrats don’t control the media,” on NYDailyNews.com is one such derailed opinion.
Mr. Greenman begins his silly attempt at credibility by lamenting, “It’s hard to know where to begin in dismantling the Republican canard that Democrats control the media.”
I have to congratulate him on using an antiquated term like “canard” and will even admit that I had to look up its actual definition. According to dictionary.com, it is a “false or baseless, usually derogatory story, report, or rumor.”
Other meanings include: a duck intended or used for food, or a type or part of an airplane. Though we can probably safely assume Greenman intended readers to accept the first definition in his usage, the way that liberal logic works, you can never be quite too sure.
Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and the Drudge Report Apparently Write the English Language
Case in point: Greenman’s very next lines, which bemoan – and admit – that Fox News trumps all other 24-hour news networks, Rush Limbaugh easily demolishes competitors in the talk radio business, Sarah Palin “is the biggest media-political crossover star,” and the Drudge Report “continues to drive more political traffic than any other website.”
All true allegations, so I won’t even try to refute them. In fact, as a conservative myself, I take great pride in all four facts. They are an indication that the United States of America is getting sick of the typical liberal bias that spews out of CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, the Associated Press, Hollywood, the music industry and far too many other sources.
In addition, I find it amusing that Greenman only points out how Fox News is pulling more and more business away from its leftist competitors, but doesn’t mention that Fox News is the only traditional major media outlet of it’s kind: an accused rightwing device.
It’s just like a liberal to leave out such inconvenient details though.
Instead, Greenman focuses heavily on how the public responds much more quickly to the term “Obamacare” than the “Affordable Care Act.” “Compare this,” he points out, “to, say, ‘No Child Left Behind,’ which has never for a second been called Bushducation – though that would have been pretty catchy.”
First off, it’s hardly our fault that they’re not as cute and clever as we are. Not everybody can be. And secondly, the liberal media might not have managed to give it a demeaning moniker, but they did sway public opinion heavily on the subject, always attributing the education act to Bush, while rarely if ever mentioning its creation under Clinton.
Liberals a Product of their Own Poor Educational Policies
Fortunately for Greenman, despite his biased and inaccurate arguments, he would still get an A on this assignment should he hand it in to a school teacher today, mainly because of the abysmal standards set for America’s children long before Bush came into office.
That means it doesn’t matter how he cites such insignificant examples as the “pro-life” vs. “pro-choice” debate, even though the conservative term is almost never used outside of blatantly conservative circles. Because even It-That-Must-Not-Be-Named (i.e. Fox News) uses the much less inspiring “anti-abortion.”
Nor does it affect his job as a writer that he has to really go digging for the next example of conservative coinage: Democrat Party (instead of Democratic Party). “Nobody understands why ‘Democrat Party’ is a slur,” he maintains, “but everyone knows that it is. That’s the beauty of the Republicans continuing to use their devious little dig.”
Honestly, I don’t even know what he’s so riled up about on that one. Please somebody explain it to me.
After also citing the term “Apology Tour” and “mainstream media” to further prove that Republicans rule the world, Greenman finally admits that liberals have managed to coin a term or two as well, including trickle-down economics, birthers and teabaggers.
“But these are minor and mostly meaningless,” he quickly apologizes. “It’s a Republican language. The rest of us, we’re just speaking it.”
Paranoid, Delusional and Logical: Look Them Up
Maybe he should look up “paranoid,” “delusional” and “logical” in the dictionary before he writes his next entry on language. Because while he can apparently use “canard” with finesse, he clearly doesn’t understand other, much more oft-used multi-syllabic words.
How else did he miss the recent, repeated and ridiculous diatribes against Sarah Palin and the rest of the right’s vitriolic language that supposedly incited Jared Lee Loughner to pick up a gun and shoot Representative Gabrielle Giffords and the crowd she was speaking to in Arizona?
How can he overlook how that same media singled out only conservative examples of hatred, blatantly ignoring CNN and other leftwing outlets use of the term “crosshairs” as well, without a second thought of the hatred and violence they might be inciting in deranged satanists’ minds everywhere? For that matter, how can he – or the rest of his liberal cronies – ignore how Loughner turned out to be a die-hard leftist who didn’t even watch the news?
Yet most news outlets – including Fox News – at the time, ran little more than accusations against Palin and her attempts at defending herself… not the larger message that the vilification was baseless.
Along those same lines, how many people know that Carnegie Institution recently lauded mass-murderer, rapist and all-around cretin Genghis Khan as an environmental hero? Now compare that extremely unflattering depiction of the left to the press coverage given to the idiot pastor down in Florida who wanted to burn the Quran last year. Which got more attention?
Even Greenman should be able to answer that question.
Then again, it really has little to do with having the ability to answer it and everything to do with the integrity of doing so.
Monday, February 7, 2011
- Christina Aguilera’s off-key, off-quoted and frankly unattractive rendition of the Star Spangled Banner started the whole shindig off with a whimper. For somebody obsessed with promoting her looks, I was frankly surprised at how unattractively she could contort her mouth. Sorry for the pettiness, but it’s true.
- The first half had me openly declaring my happiness that the Steelers were only my second favorite team. (Admittedly, my #1 pick of the Broncos did decidedly worse this year, but apparently Pittsburgh didn’t deserve to make it through the Playoffs either, judging by the way they played last night.) I mean, come on… They practically gift-wrapped those touchdowns for the Packers. Pathetic.
- The Black Eyed Peas halftime show was just flat-out weird. Forget the technical difficulties the group seemed to be having, from their microphones going in and out to a large chunk of the lights in the V part of the platform – which spelled out LOVE – going oddly unlit. Fergie’s outfit stunk, Will.i.am’s head cap made me wonder if they had dragged him out of the shower or something, and they all sounded extremely sub par. Oh, and with all of those writhing bodies glowing red out on the football field… it rather reminded me of some Hollywood hell scene. Maybe from the Mummy 2? Indiana Jones? I don’t know, but it was not normal.
- The second half seemed to pick up for a short while as the Steelers came into their own and the Packers faltered a bit, but the game was really never nail-biting the way a Super Bowl should be, and so I found myself largely more interested in the assorted snacks then in supporting my team… or watching them get manhandled up and down the field.
At least make it a good game, for heaven’s sake!
Lackluster Super Bowl Commercials
Then there were the commercials, which I didn’t include above for a reason.
For the most part, those were mediocre at best. Justin Bieber and Ozzy Osbourne barely deserved a chuckle, and Snickers had me saying “Huh?” much more than “Yum!”
Admittedly, Volkswagen’s Darth Vader was quite cute, and watching the guys watch – or try not to watch – Joan Rivers in her skimpy GoDaddy.com outfit was highly amusing. Plus, Pepsi Max scored big in my book with both commercials I saw aired.
But other than that, the advertisements were just plain dumb. Oh, and could somebody please tell Coke to get a new marketing department already? Haven’t they tired of their world peace schtick yet? It’s old, it’s boring and it’s borderline egomaniacal.
Chrysler Embracing Its Inner Thug after Sticking up Taxpayers
And then there was Chrysler, which also failed to please, despite its desperate attempt to generate Detroit pride through the likes of Eminem.
I could point out that Eminem is hardly an aboveboard role model to choose, considering his glorification of drugs, violence, misogyny and egomania, but that would be far too easy. (Plus, his beats are so darn catchy. And that clearly makes everything better.)
But more telling than whom Chrysler chose to represent is its choice to spend just under $9 million with one hand while reaching out for more government favors with the other.
Of course, every company needs to advertise in some way or another, and the Super Bowl is a great place to do just that. But in this economy, how many people are really going to respond to the advertisement in the way Chrysler so desperately wants them to?
Somehow, I’m not really confident the ends come even close to justifying the means in this case.
Not to mention that if you’re going to spend big boy money, you need to be able to accept big boy consequences, like the “shyster rates” CEO Sergio Marchionne is currently complaining his company suffers under.
Has he forgotten that Chrysler really has no business being in business at all right now? The only reason it is still technically afloat is because it received copious amounts of government assistance.
Somehow, I’m sure the Obama administration was up front about all of the fine print. After all, there were unions involved! And everybody knows that unions have a special place in any true liberal’s heart.
Mr. Marchionne might have better spent that $9 million on buying a clue… or big boy pants.
Friday, February 4, 2011
I knew right then that I had my blogging topic to end the week.
Sometimes it takes a bit of searching before I can get passionate enough about any one news item to give it the time of day. And there are other times I am, frankly, just not knowledgeable enough about a subject to comment on it, especially when it comes to complicated financial issues like QE2.
But no such problems today, as I feel pretty darn competent in discussing the unemployment rate. That’s because, while I do still have a job, I am currently looking for a new one. And I have been off and on for about a year now.
The fact that I’ve been looking for a new job off and on for that amount of time – with my experience – logically indicates one of two things: Number one, I’m extraordinarily lazy. Or number two, there are no jobs to be had out there.
I am not an extraordinarily lazy person. But I can sympathize with the unemployed out there who have simply given up trying to find one. Because that’s the reason why my searches were so sporadic in 2010: It’s depressing constantly finding nothing!
Even this week, I hopped onto Monster.com and a few other jobs-focused sites to see what I could apply to. After looking for editorial positions in three different states, I found depressingly little and absolutely nothing that I actually qualified for.
Let me summarize that into a single short sentence:
I searched open positions in three states and found nothing.
That's hardly a good sign.
The U.S. Unemployment Rate Doesn’t Even Cover Half the Story… Literally
So who cares that government data says the unemployment rate dropped from 9.8% in November to 9.4% in December to 9% flat last month? It’s all a trumped up number, and everybody knows it.
Even more indicative of just how bad things really are, everybody is admitting it… including the mainstream media – a term apparently coined and disseminated by the evil right-wing media, which controls all according to the New York Daily News.
Incidentally, the link above will take you down a fascinating and far-stretching journey into the manic mind of the leftist conspiracy theorist.
Yet even the most clinically paranoid of the left’s propaganda machine – a.k.a. the Associated Press – had to end their evaluation of the supposed drop in unemployment on an extremely negative note:
“The January report also includes the government’s annual revisions to the employment data, which showed that fewer jobs were created in 2010 than previously thought. All told, about 950,000 net new jobs were added last year, down from a previous estimate of 1.1 million. The economy lost about 8 million jobs in 2008 and 2009.
“In the past three months, the economy generated an average of 83,000 net jobs per month. That’s not enough to keep up with population growth.”
Shockingly enough, that depressed tone is rather prevalent in the entire article, from the title – Unemployment falls to 9.0 pct., only 36K new jobs – to the first paragraph, which reiterates the headline and therefore really sets the tone.
And sure, there are some namby pamby excuses about the weather factoring in and brief praises about how far the unemployment rate has fallen as of late, but those are half-hearted – at best – attempts at painting a prettier picture.
They know it and we know it. And if anybody tries to say otherwise, just send them to Gallup, which reported yesterday of a January unemployment rate of 9.8% and an underemployment rate of 18.9%.
Told you 9% was literally only half the story.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
For those of you who don’t know, CAIR stands for “Council on American-Islamic Relations,” an organization that has been repeatedly accused of having terrorist ties, specifically with Hamas. Meanwhile, Allen West is the Tea Party special – complete with backbone – that won one of Florida’s House seats back in November.
Upon taking questions from constituents, West was met by the following question from Nezar Hamze, CAIR’s executive director:
“Me and my children choose to follow the faith of Islam. You consistently insult it. How can we expect you to defend our right and practice Islam as far as the Constitution is concerned?”
Try to ignore the poor grammar of Hamze’s opening line and focus instead on West’s reponse…
“I will always defend your right to practice a free religion under the First Amendment. But what you must understand, if I am speaking the truth, I am not going to stop speaking the truth. The truth is not subjective.”
Is it just me or does anybody else feel like giving Representative West a (purely non-violent) war whoop for addressing what far too many other politicians – both Democrat and Republican – are too cowardly or PC to mention?
Allen West’s “Inflammatory” Speech… or Is It Just Common Sense?
Of course, it’s only fair to explore exactly where Hamze’s criticism was coming from.
It could very well have been West’s recent comments about the situation in Egypt:
“President Carter, President Obama,” he compared. “Iran, Egypt; the Shah, Mubarak; the Ayatollah, the Muslim Brotherhood: It is a scary parallel. We cannot allow the Muslim Brotherhood to fill the void of leadership that can occur in Egypt.”
Admittedly, that is a very direct statement. But calling it anti-Islamic is like calling criticism of the KKK anti-American.
It’s that stupid. And no amount of outrage – feigned or real – can change that.
Yes, the Muslim Brotherhood is composed of Muslims. Just like the KKK is composed of Americans. But that hardly even implies that they equal each other.
CAIR, You’re either with Us or with Them
Besides, shouldn’t common decency automatically demand that we condemn a group that is wholly devoted to hatred and destruction? As Leslie H. Gelb recently wrote in the Daily Beast:
“The MB [Muslim Brotherhood] supports Hamas and other terrorist groups, makes friendly noises to Iranian dictators and torturers, would be uncertain landlords of the critical Suez Canal, and opposes the Egyptian-Israeli agreement of 1979, widely regarded as the foundation of peace in the Mideast.”
That last part about opposing “the Egyptian-Israeli agreement of 1979” is far too tamely worded. Because the Muslim Brotherhood doesn’t just oppose the pact; it has already flat-out begun calling for war against Israel, well before it has even “solved” the current crisis in Egypt.
I think that’s what we would call “war-mongers.”
In short, anybody who stands up for the Muslim Brotherhood stands up for everything the group supports… and therefore is no friend to this country.
Sorry CAIR, but you can’t serve two masters… especially when they are so vehemently opposed to each other. So stop pretending that you’re even trying to.
Fortunately, Allen West is much more upfront about his allegiances. We know very well where he firmly stands: with the American people.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
While ridiculously tramped up figures such as Jersey Shore’s Snookie and desperate sex icon has-beens like Madonna also graced the list of 10, they chose Sarah Palin as the worst of the worst.
You just have to roll your eyes at the ridiculousness of the whole juvenile concept, not to mention the alleged pièce de résistance.
It’s not hard to understand that anybody who has the time and inclination to not only put together such a list but actually publish it as well has the maturity level of Lindsey Lohan and Charlie Sheen… put together. And that shows in their frat-boy mentality displayed in just the opening paragraph:
“Early next month, AskMen will reveal its Top 99 Most Desirable Women Of 2011. It will be a list full of jaw-dropping beauties, noted intellectuals and chicks with big breasts.”
Cut! Cut! Time out! Let’s stop and think about that last line for a minute there…
“Noted intellectuals?” How can they take themselves seriously putting that phrase right before “chicks with big breasts?” It’s like dropping from Oxford University Press to Play Boy in the space of seven words, and only serves to highlight the I’m-a-big-boy… really! mentality the authors have probably struggled with their entire lives.
Take that criticism any way you want to, because it’s probably true no matter what. (Hey, if they want to descend to cretinism in objectifying women, they should expect some of the same being dished right back at them.)
AskMen.com Takes Maturity Tips from Perez Hilton
“But as a stark reminder that with light comes darkness, we must first explore the 10 women who failed to light our collective fires. Some wasted their once unlimited potential, while others, sadly, were born this way. So without further ado, please enjoy our selection of the top 10 least desirable women of 2011 -- and remember, without the sour, the sweet ain’t as sweet.”
They then try to justify themselves by throwing tawdry trash into the mix, along with former Playmate Holly Madison, who comes in at number nine. Why? Because she apparently got catty.
Ummm… Have they ever read the parable of the speck in one man’s eye and the plank in another’s?
Probably not, as that would mean they have better than a kindergarten education level.
And what about the petty and ridiculous speech that frequently comes out of Megan Fox’s mouth? Yet Fox makes the list every year since she first made her big debut in Hollywood.
Double standard much?
Then again, AskMen.com would probably jump all over Madison if they could only get drunk enough to say “yes.” They were just trying to prove that they’re not eternal pigs by throwing in some supposedly non-sexist reason into their obviously sexist list.
Just Plain Mean… and Inaccurate
Their 3rd Least Desirable Woman proves their cheapness without a shadow of a doubt, and is by far the nastiest and most unnecessary entry… one that blows Sarah Palin’s inclusion out of the water:
“If we ran into Khloe Kardashian awash in the dim light of a VIP room, under the influence of multiple shots of Ciroc, we might be tempted to compliment her hairdo and maybe even offer a kiss, as we'd be too drunk to recall her marriage to the behemoth hoopster Lamar Odom. But in the harsh light of day with the cold truth of sobriety in tow -- and especially with her next to her two far more alluring sisters, Kim and Kourtney -- well, let’s just say she’s not ‘the pretty one’ for a reason.”
Now that’s just unnecessarily catty and cruel.
Here’s the thing: Sarah Palin has a loving family and the confidence to consistently stand up for herself even in the face of continuing oppression. And, at the risk of being petty myself, she’s widely accepted as a hottie, especially for a woman her age.
I mean, as much as I hate the term, there’s a reason why she got dubbed a MILF during the 2008 elections.
Khloe Kardashian is more than likely not a confident woman with a loving family, as evidenced by said family’s reality show. Enough said.
Why give her grief that “she’s not ‘the pretty one’” on top of everything else? Especially considering that she’s not even close to being the dog they allege her to be. Beautiful hair, pretty eyes, hot figure… AskMen.com was definitely stretching on this one.
Sarah Palin: The Liberal Man’s Worst Nightmare
Then there’s Ms. Palin, of whom they have the following to say:
“We’ll be the first to admit that Sarah Palin can be construed as sexy, especially if you’re into that whole right-wing-extremist-who-loves-to-hunt-and-just-happens-to-look-like-a-porn-star-masquerading-as-a-librarian thing.”
Let me stop them right there… If Sarah Palin is an extremist, then this nation is filled with such. Because she represents the basic thinking of a significant chunk of the U.S.A.
“Unfortunately Palin was given the gift of speech…”
And there you have their main problem with her. She’s an intelligent female unafraid of speaking the truth. How dare she!
“… and every time she opens her mouth to spew anti-Obama rhetoric, she adds at least one beer on the Molson scale (a determinant of how many beers need to be consumed before one beds her).”
Do these men really have a “Molson scale?” If so, that’s hardly flattering to them since it indicates that, in the end, they’re standard-less sluts who would bed a barn animal if only given enough beers.
Hey, they said it. Not me.
Also, if Palin’s “anti-Obama rhetoric” equals “at least one beer” on that scale, then it looks like they wouldn’t want to bed me either. I’m truly devastated that I don’t attract such morons. Please excuse me while I go weep for a few minutes.
AskMen.com… The Missing Link?
“Her much-maligned speech addressing the tragedy in Arizona -- in which she foolishly evoked the derogatory term ‘Blood Libel’ in her own defense -- was the last straw. Don’t worry, Todd; we’re sure she picks up the checks.”
The truth is that they – like the vast majority of the nation – likely never even heard of the term “Blood Libel” before some liberal muckraker came along and taught everybody about its historical definition.
And she wasn’t the one who threw herself into the fray in the first place. That was the liberal media and their ongoing and classless anti-Palin agenda.
So AskMen.com, please throw away your trumped up outrage and stop pretending that you’ve evolved past dragging your knuckles on the ground as you walk. Because you’re not fooling anybody.
It would seem that, if given the legal go-ahead, your liberal selves would be perfectly content to bonk women on the head and drag them back to your caves.
Sure, some conservative men might consider a woman’s place either in the kitchen or the bedroom. But at least that’s one more area they’re allowed than when in the company of such liberal men, who apparently value looks only.
Except in Sarah Palin’s case, of course.
But if she’d just shut up, they’d add her to their “spank bank” – their term, not mine – along with the rest of the women they wish would give them the time of day… but never will.