October 31, 2008
October 29, 2008
"To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist Professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets."
There is probably some context in which this statement can be taken another way. I can't imagine what, but it's theoretically possible. There is another thing I wasn't very aware of; I tend to, as I've said before, immerse myself in deliberately far-leftist blogs and sites to see what they're on about, so it seems I may have lost sight of how desperately far left the mainstream media has gone itself.
"On closer inspection, the "bombshell audio" turns out to be a rather wonkish, somewhat impenetrable, discussion of the Supreme Court under Earl Warren. Obama, then a University of Chicago law professor and Illinois state senator, argued that the courts have traditionally been reluctant to get involved in income distribution questions. He suggested that the civil rights movement had made a mistake in expecting too much from the courts -- and that such issues were better decided by the legislative branch of government."
Didn't pay much attention, did you? If you had, you wouldn't have confused the legislative branch with the administrative branch. Ass. If he thought it was a legislative issue he would have been happier as a senator than running for the branch that he thinks can and should be engaging in the redistribution.
"In other words, Obama says pretty much the opposite of what the McCain camp says he said."
Actually, they were spot on. See, I actually listened to and read it, and unlike you who think it was wonkish and who couldn't "penetrate" (i.e. understand) it, I understood what he said. It wasn't that hard - he was being more honest at the time. Remember, he chose his friends well - the Marxist professors and the radical associations, the Alinski-style politics - and some of us know what Alinski taught. Obama learned it well. If you understood it, you are lying about it now, but perhaps you didn't. Also, can we dismiss this nonsense that McCain dug up this audio and publicized it? It was all over the net before McCain or his "camp" said a thing about it - we all heard it for ourselves and heard it loud and clear. No one needed McCain to interpret it for us, you get it? WE CAN HEAR IT FOR OURSELVES. A private citizen dug that up - something you, the press should have been doing all along, but didn't - and it made its way to McCain. He'd be an utter fool not to say anything about it; and believe me, he's being a lot nicer about it than he should be, or than any of us are. So can we get real here?
I am not even going into Khalidi at present - the L.A. Times reported that they have the tape, and they refuse to release it. Obama then gets away with outright denials of any relationship with the guy, despite describing a very close relationship openly in the past. I realize the media has been left-leaning for a long time - since at least the late 60s early 70s and likely before that - but decided that if talk radio and the internet were going to exist, they might as well dive in headfirst and not just bathe in the muck but generate more of it. It's not only jolting, it's disheartening. I have often seen the far left profess to "love" this country, but that love to me seems to be of the same type the little boy had for The Giving Tree. MANDATORY READING on this topic - and naturally I've been beaten to it, it's already been done, and it's already been done BETTER than I could. Thanks, Andy lol. Unbelievably smug quote today: "We might just turn to you, and in a voice that sounds just like a “real” American voice, destroy your fragile faith by saying, “Have you ever considered that if god is all powerful and all good, then there shouldn’t be evil in the world?" My non-God, NO - no no no, for all that is holy, NO - we have NEVER thought of that, because as you smart people know, we don't THINK at all - and now that you have mentioned it, my faith is destroyed. You pompous asshole. Daily Humor: Obinfomercial Outtakes Trick Or Treat Obama Parody
October 28, 2008
October 27, 2008
Biden finally got questioned hard and had to flat-out lie about his own words (as I quoted below) and about his and Obama's intentions...unless perhaps he really doesn't understand himself what he's into. I'm going to embed that video because it's pretty good, at least for showing the obvious lies, but first I am curious. Now Obama has been pretty open from the beginning of his political career that he was a radical deconstructionist, Alinski-ite, Chicago socialist, friend to other radicals like himself and pontificating on his radicalism. It's the thing open socialist bloggers like most about him; that he is indeed a full-out socialist, a lot farther to the left than Hillary is willing to openly be. Than almost any of them are willing to be, really. I didn't realize the extent to which he and his team, once you finally call it what it is, were trying to deny these things. Why deny it? It's why people like you. At least, the hard left, and who the hell else would vote for this guy? How is it that people are missing this fact so badly, that they get excited when this old audio surfaces showing exactly what Obama believes...and surprise, it's literally scrapping the Constitution and redistributing via force/law. I mean...he's BEEN GOING AROUND PROMISING TO DO JUST THAT so why the hell would this audio be some kind of smoking gun? Because he openly says he wants to trash the constitution and as president he'll have to make a false promise to execute and defend it? Does he think anyone cares? His supporters will not be impressed; they believe the constitution is passe, bullshit, and even if it wasn't that Bush had made it into toilet paper long ago (yes, they think it started with him lol - not the Great Society or even Lincoln, but I digress; that's just the current media brainwashing of everything being Bush's fault.)
So I'm going to embed this audio and parse it a little, but for crying out loud, how can this possibly be a coup or a surprise when this is what he's been promising to do and who he has been all along? Enjoy:
OBAMA: If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples so that, uh, I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and -- and as long as I could pay for it I'd be okay. But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. As radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted -- and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you. But it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn't shifted, and one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused, uh, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change. And, uh, in some ways we still suffer from that.
Yes, that's EXACTLY what the constitution is, Mr. Constitutional "Scholar." It is first a list of what the scope and sphere of the government is, and then the bill of rights is a SPECIFIC and EXPLICIT list of what the government MUST NEVER DO TO US. The government is not a body that is intended to DO THINGS TO US - it is supposed to stay out of the way so we can reserve the full liberty and the full rights that human beings are endowed with by nature and nature's God. That's what it is. Or did you miss the Ninth Amendment completely? The constitution does indeed spell out what they may do in order to engender liberty - the distribution of powers, checks and balances, promoting free trade between the various sovereign states by minting money and looking after interstate travel. It was not put in place to do other things TO us - the fact that you look at it as such is frightening to anyone with belief in their own rights and sovereignty as individuals. The fact that you want to so irresponsibly sweep aside checks and balances in order to promote a radical, from-the-roots restructuring of what society IS and throw out our liberty in the process, was an obvious fact - I'm not sure why you're trying to hide it now, but it won't work. And now you're trying to deny it not by denying it, but by saying "Well, we're not going to have TIME to make all these lurches to the left that John McCain is saying we're going to do." You WON'T HAVE TIME? Are you kidding me? THAT'S your excuse for openly wanting to throw out the constitutional protections we've had for 200 years - don't worry, we WANT to but we won't really have TIME for all that anyway, so no need to fuss and fret; we just want to take care of you." Thanks, but NO THANKS, sir.
Of course Biden is still just denying it outright, which is kind of funny, but my god, how is it anyone wants these radical deconstructionists in the positions of power that are sworn to uphold those very constructions??? Because it feels good? Because you can assuage your liberal guilt, or think you're doing people of color some imaginary good by putting the constitution in the shredder and spreading the wealth?
Then he goes onstage with his God-reverb microphone/sound system and promises, in his deal-sealer, that MCCAIN calls this redistribution "socialism" and they call it "opportunity", and that that's HOW WE'VE ALWAYS GROWN THE ECONOMY - FROM THE BOTTOM UP? Not by fiat, sir. Never. Ever. It does indeed originally grow from the ground up - by people who start out with nothing and MAKE something of value for themselves and their communities, and it progresses from there so long as government stays out of the way. But no sir, it does NOT and NEVER HAS grown from government taking that money at the point of a gun, through theft, and distribution to those who currently have less. It never, never has grown that way in the slightest. All that has ever done is cause ruin for everyone. And I think you know that, Mr. Alinski-disciple. (I would like to note, read Alinski sometime if you wonder what that means - read about how community organizers must never have a static notion of "truth" - that truth is relative, and it changes all the time, and the idea is to destroy what has been built and remake society a la Stalin and every other radical from Che to Mussolini to Adolph.) And by the way, McCain doesn't have to call it anything - THAT'S WHAT IT IS. Socialism HAS A DEFINITION, SIR - and everything you are fighting for and promising FITS THE DEFINITION OF SOCIALISM. I realize a lot of people now believe that's a good thing, but with all due respect, they're morons. They have never lived through really hard times and they don't have a clue the kind of ruin you are promising for us all, or what liberty they will forfeit to get there. It's infuriating.
Well, might as well see Biden lying through his teeth (or just being incredibly stupid - neither is any good) and a very surprising interview...in fact, it sure took him by surprise; Dems are not used to being asked tough questions by the media, and he finally says he can't believe the questions...but they're all legitimate. That's why he has to lie (or be incredibly stupid - still don't know which for sure.)
October 25, 2008
October 23, 2008
It's just a little genocide. Who cares? All in the name of human rights, world peace, love and a shared community. Heh.
He's now (and has been) a "respectable" (strange choice of word, but OK) education person, spreading Marxism, anarchism, and anti-Americanism to children. Which is a perfect Alinski move - that's what you do; you don't destroy the institutions with bombs, you infiltrate them, become part of them, lead them, and render them meaningless. Really the only thing that irks me about this is that the left is CONSTANTLY portraying themselves as the downtrodden underdog outsiders, the "counter-culture" railing against the entrenched patriarchal white masculine establishment that oppresses them, and the reality is that you're no counterculture anymore. You ARE the establishment. You ARE the dominant paradigm. If you want to subvert the dominant paradigm, you've got your work cut out for you because the dominant paradigm IS your brand of subversion - you're going to have to eliminate yourselves to subvert the dominant paradigm now. I even heard a feminist saying feminism doesn't have access to the mainstream yet - girl, you and your ilk OWN the mainstream and the institutions, along with your buddies like Ayers and all the leftover 60s radicals you want to emulate.
Actually at the end of that video there is a link to a buttload of excellent videos. Go watch them.
________________________________________________________________________ In the meantime, I'm going to tell you a funny story - and it's true. It's true on a pretty big scale, I might add. Big enough that you just might not need to worry so much about the voter fraud by which Obama plans to steal this election just like Kennedy did in 1960.
It concerns polls. Now I do spend some time on the largest conservative message forum on the internet, and this is pretty universal there. Today, my husband encountered it en masse in real life. He was working with thousands of men, most of them contractors from out of state. He was shocked because the parking lot was full of McCain/Palin stickers, and you just don't see that in New Jersey. Of course he quickly realized they were mostly out of state contractors.
So they're working, and he's talking to some veterans and some other men about this election, only this time he isn't getting furious, because they're sane. One veteran from Florida says he had already put in his McCain/Palin vote in Florida. "But I told them I voted Obama."
You mean, they asked you on the way out who you voted for and you said Obama?
"Yes, I always do that. Everybody I know does that. Always have. And lemme tell you something, I have a lot of friends, a lot of veterans, and THEY have a lot of friends, and everyone we know of does it too."
Everyone at the internet community not only does that, but some have managed to continue to be the people who get polled - you don't often get called if you're a registered Republican, but if you're a registered Dem you have a good chance of being polled. In order to ensure that the polls keep coming their way, they not only register as Dem, they always answer the polls as if they're supporting the Dem candidate with their vote. In the straw polls, in the exit polls - everywhere but in the voting booth.
So all I'm saying is, conservatives have been doing this a long time, and a LOT of them do it. Don't let these polls to get you too worried. Of course the voter fraud could still take it, but remember, it has to be pretty close to be able to cheat successfully, and it just might not even be that close. Get out there if you're voting and don't let the fact that they've been trying to CALL the election for the past 2 months stop you, discourage you, from getting in your own ballot.
Let not your heart be troubled :)
October 22, 2008
October 19, 2008
Ok, well that and spin. See above and see "Michelle Malkin says it’s not because of his race, it’s just because of all the black-ass liberalism they share." Wow that's terrible. She said that? Oh, wait, she totally didn't. "It’s a mistake, though, to attribute Powell’s endorsement primarily to some kind of race loyalty. It’s Obama’s social liberalism, not his skin color, that attracts Powell most." Insert the Paul Shanklin parody, "Spinnin' spinnin', spinnin' the lies away!" Heh
October 18, 2008
October 17, 2008
Are you kidding me? This guy is cited all the time (he looks exactly like the swishy health-food-political-know-it-all-disrespects-women-and-his-mother jerk-off I work with, except one smiles and one doesn't. Guess which.) Dude, you're not even trying. That was the piss-poorest critique/analysis of an economic issue, ever. I know you can do better, because to my surprise one of those "wonk" leftist sites actually made me think for a quarter of a second the other day by reporting what you just said and then having the decency to at least take it a tiny bit further. God.
Also, citing Krugman isn't going to impress people - he's very good at creating a stir, but that doesn't make him right. He also touts the positive economic powers of war, citing WWII and the Iraq war as positive economic boosts for our economy. He might have won a prize for his Keynesian (ugh) economics but he wasn't going to win the peace prize, now was he? Of course the Nobel committee only mentions his trade writing and not his cycle writing; no surprise there. Plus, I think even a Keynesian would know what's wrong with that silly calculator style of "X dollars per year for Joe the plumber is better than Y dollars per year for Joe the plumber." I tend to suspect that the people writing such pap are smarter than that, and know they are just spinning it in the most infantile manner possible, but then maybe they aren't. Is that really possible?
October 16, 2008
October 15, 2008
October 14, 2008
October 12, 2008
"The resurgence of ugly right wing populism reminds me of one of the more amusing ironies that makes liberals feel superior, which is the disconnect between Springsteen (humongous liberal) and the right wing leaning of so many working and middle class white people who relate to his music. It’s a microcosm of this major frustration---they can get so close, identifying the forces that make their lives harder, and yet can’t make that final leap into realizing what has to be done to make it better, instead pouring out their bitterness into a vote for Republicans."That's so rife I don't know where to start. Holy shit. Right wing populism never went anywhere. So cut it out with the assertions. Also, it's only ironic to you because you misunderstand it. In reality there's nothing ironic going on. But of course we know you're a *little bit superior*; you wear your feeling of young urban superiority like those quietly desperate people you loathe wear workboots. All the time and twice on Sunday. On to your non-irony. Springsteen is not one of the people he sings about. He might have been, once.
October 10, 2008
Especially when they bark and it just comes out like a little whine.
So a Barking Moonbat goes to a McCain/Palin rally and proceeds to harass people while calling them a "mob." Most act pretty disinterested, though a few get annoyed at his constant insistence on putting words in their mouths which they did not say. His questions are really inane - ok, stupid. A few seem to be having some fun tossing off flip answers to his dumb questions. Being the racist that he is, he can't fathom why the black man he speaks to is voting for McCain/Palin and not Obama - he asks how he can justify this. That make sense to you? Me either. Being the pussy that he is, he made a little fudgie in his undies when the man rumbled in a very deep voice that he wanted to be left alone by this gadfly. It looked like the question had RIGHTLY offended him and he wasn't there to be putting up with racist nonsense from some snot-nosed little moonbat. The "mob" aspect seems to be entirely missing, but one woman does hold up a pretty funny Obama puppet, and when asked why, she says it's a free country and she's gonna mock him with it. To the Moonbat's undying horror, a kid says "You need gloves to touch him!" Clearly racial hatred from a future KKK member. Or, you know, a joke.
This is being lauded everywhere on the moonbatosphere as evidence that the Palin/McCain crowds are turning ugly, scary, and violent - but what it really looks like is said Moonbat with guano-for-brains wanted to taunt a mob into saying dumb things, failed miserably, looked like a huge pest and pain in the ass (or really, sort of like that gnat that just WON'T stop flying in front of your face while you're trying to type on the computer) and then posted the video with false commentary trying to start a meme. The meme worked and has been picked up all over the media, even some allegedly reputable ones. Except how anyone looks at it and sees what he wants them to see is very much undetermined. Collective delusion maybe. Take a look for yourself.
He seems disturbed by the charge of Obama being a Communist/Marxist (even though this is hardly considered a slur by moonbats, and Obama IS in fact a Communist/Marxist.) But what really bugged him was the guy didn't know how Obama had become a communist/Marxist. He mentions the father, but I doubt that - more like the grandparents and then the Kellman/Alinski connection. Alinski also had close ties with Hillary Clinton, which was one reason Barack was probably the only other Dem who could have beat her; those Alinski disciples are tough. Read about Hillary's Black Panther days sometime.
"Among the primary goals of Alinsky was radical socialism and redistribution of wealth. Alinsky taught his proteges to "HIDE" their true goals by any means necessary. Lying was fine. The objective of Alinsky and Kellman was to turn people against the white establishment."
Just today I heard the clips of Farrakhan (Calypso Louie) CALLING OBAMA THE MESSIAH. And what about this Ayers guy eh? Or that lunatic "Wright"? (The one that mysteriously disappeared from Obama's website as soon as people heard the God Damn America tirade? The one of the two of them standing together beaming?) Yes, it's safe to say Obama is presenting a false image of himself - some toned-down guy who just happens to have all these violent and terroristic type people AROUND him - they just live in the hood, he doesn't KNOW know them. You know? And Marxist, oh please. And dare you, DARE you question his patriotism? When you know that Michele has never once felt pride in her country until Barack got the nod? (I'm assuming that was the night pride bloomed for that one, too.) It's only something to be proud of when the free market can be destroyed and the Alinski-ites in charge I guess. Accomplished through whatever means necessary.
Another moonbat tells us Bill Ayers is the new Vince Foster. "And by that, I mean that the repetition of the name will get to the point where it’s drained of all meaning, but is just a bell whistle to extract a Pavlovian hate response towards Obama from right wingers. That sort of toxic wingnuttery is exactly the sort of thing that tends to turn off middle of the road people, and so I find myself a bit baffled as to why McCain/Palin are ramping it up."
Speak for yourself, Moony. I know exactly why I react to the name Vince Foster the way I do, and it's nothing to do with wingnuttery. It's to do with a man who had the ability, possibly, to stop the mass murder at Waco by the government and did not do it. Who then felt so guilty he took his own life. On which night Hillary Clinton, good good friend to the Fosters, ordered the office immediately ransacked and all Waco files removed. The man charged with the task, when asked why, said he was told that the First Lady (Hillary Clinton) needed them. That she needed to check them first. The files were apparently shredded because they never resurfaced again. Meaning that there was something in there so damning to Hillary or Bill Clinton regarding the Waco massacre/mass murder, that it had to be destroyed immediately.
So yes, there is a REASON people react to the name Vince Foster, even if you don't know what it is because you haven't bothered to learn. Also, this bears no resemblance to what is going on with Ayers, so your comparison is beyond murky and down into impassable muck.
There is also a reason people are reacting to Ayers and his association with Obama - who has a VERY POOR TRACK RECORD of trying to HIDE former associations when they become dangerous to his campaign. His pastor of 20 years that officiated his wedding, baptized his daughters, inspired and preached to him every Sunday - that radical hatemonger? - was deleted from Obama's website the instant people caught sight of the tape. ACORN? The organization he bragged for years about working with and for, building up the South Side of Chicago like a good community organizer? He's now lying on his website and saying he had nothing to do with ACORN. But we're supposed to believe him that Ayers is just some guy in the neighborhood (who happened to what, buy his house on the same day) and he doesn't really know him at all - yeah, pardon me while I don't freaking believe you on that. YOU certainly don't know; and it is possible we will not know for years when all the REAL investigations come out, just like we didn't know why Vince Foster killed himself for years when the REAL investigations took place. But it'll come out someday. You'll be onto slamming the latest "wingnuts" and touting socialism and continuing to blame free markets for your failings, but we'll remember. You were wrong then, and you're wrong now. And you will keep being wrong. It seems the most dangerous position to be in is "radical friend or grandmother of Obama who will help his ambitions and then be thrown under the bus when you are no longer politically expedient for him to acknowledge you." Next most dangerous position will be serviceman in harm's way when Obama wields the ax of defense cuts and brings about the new Cambodia, followed shortly by loyal US citizen who holds views deemed "incorrect" by the "Truth Squads." Or, if he loses, unfortunate bystander during the coming riots - at least that's what Carville says.
October 9, 2008
October 8, 2008
October 7, 2008
“One other note…the image of dragging that handicapped infant around and having IT on stage has caused consternation in some quarters as to how tasteful this is”Yeah I can see your concern, assmunch. Calling a baby "it" is a lot more tasteful than bringing him onstage. She can't win if she's with her nursing baby and she can't win if she's not with her nursing baby. Or should I say, if she's with "it" or without "it." Disgusting. It sorta kills me that anyone could say anything bad about that poor little fuzzy-headed man in his little suit who never did anyone wrong. :(
October 6, 2008
October 4, 2008
October 3, 2008
October 2, 2008
So let’s review: both Barack and his wife were admitted to prestigious colleges as “legacy” students; Barack’s work as a community organizer consisted of two modest projects, only one of which was ever completed; Barack became a state senator by slipping his first mentor, Alice Palmer, the stiletto and then getting all of his remaining political opponents scrubbed from the ballot. Barack won both his primary and general elections for the U.S. Senate because of last-minute revelations from his opponents’ divorce files, which spared Obama from the necessity of debating any tough issues. As soon as he arrived in Washington he began his quest for the Oval Office. He has spent most of 2007 and 2008 campaigning for the presidency. He has said, “I am new enough on the national political scene that I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views. As such, I am bound to disappoint some, if not all, of them.”Barack Obama has always run unopposed. Whether slipping his mentor the stiletto in the back alley or having his operatives manufacture slimy scandals, he has gotten nowhere on effort and hard work; but through Chicago street thug politics that have allowed him to run without an opponent. The press, willing and eager operatives themselves, are doing their best to see that he runs unopposed this time. They might get away with it. Like the children of Hamelin, there is every possibility that enough of the public will fall for it. Looking around online it seems untold numbers of people already have - even allegedly "intelligent" people. They've never sat in gas lines while the president told them to just put on a sweater. (Or inflate their tires.) They don't know what it was like having US civilians hostage in Iran and a president so stupid he thought being "nice" and covering his eyes and ears would make it all go away. They laugh at Palin's alleged bad answers during the Katie Couric barbecue session (they weren't), never noticing that most of the answers were excellent and that KC BBQ didn't bother to press Joe Biden even when he lied, or made unforgivably stupid statements like claiming FDR went on television in 1929. Actually, she's stupid enough that she probably didn't know what was wrong with that sentence either. Hell, she was too stupid (or deliberately didn't bother) to ask him what in hell the VAWA had to do with interstate commerce. Like all of you, I hope it doesn't happen. I don't want to find out that so many people are that gullible and/or stupid. I don't want a president who got in by rubbing out the opposition by hook and crook instead of by being better or simply more welcome. It would have been nice to have a fair race, but we aren't getting one. We aren't even getting close. A fair race would have run four-square in the direction of McCain/Palin, and after 8 years of a president the left believes didn't even win the election, and much rage, bitterness and derangement, that must not be allowed. A Chicago-style, Alinski disciple, street thug politician with the full cooperation of the media was necessary to accomplish such a coup, I suppose. They are going to have it - and if they don't, there will be riots that will make Florence and Normandy look like a church bake sale. Truth Squads. Interviews with communist torturers. No legitimate press or journalists. The politics of personal destruction. If we're lucky I suppose we'll only get four years (and as we know from the Carter debacle, that's PLENTY of time for the short-attention-span skulls-full-of-mush on the left to get mighty sick of the results of their own politics) and then a shot at another Reagan. But we'll have to see how powerful the fascist thug squads become during that time. Obama & Co. are a lot more fascist and dishonest than Carter, so it could get really really interesting. Of course I'll be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes, so when the blog goes silent, just remember the Muslin Truth Squads got me. :D