politicalpartypoop.com

From Hot Air

He doesn’t say who’ll be doing the rating but he digs the idea of Congress yanking Rush Limbaugh off of Armed Forces Radio so presumably they’d be okay to head that up, too. The point he’s ostensibly trying to make is a simple one — that the U.S. government shouldn’t be broadcasting anything that harms its own military’s morale — but a standard that narrow wouldn’t let you regulate very much speech.
So he broadens it with a magnificently Orwellian invocation of “propriety” that has no discernible definition except his own arbitrary judgment about what does and doesn’t “cross the line.” Just laying a little groundwork for the Fairness Doctrine, planting a few seeds which he hopes will flower a few years from now.

I understand that I’m a very partisan guy and I have strong political views, I make fun of Democrats and liberals and some who may peep this site who may be left leaning may find some of my comments mildly offensive, but Wesley Clark is a fool however he is not alone.

I know some liberals that would listen to what Clark says and would think nothing of his ridiculously moronic statements.
How do seemingly reasonable people come to this moronic thinking?
Now forget that Clark has had ample time to get his facts straight on this Rush/Media Matters issue, but he chooses to STILL ignore the facts of the issue and is willing to go on television and distort facts.

Ya know during my work day I come in contact with a lot of folks in social settings all participating in some sort of educational forum or conference.
As I was setting up for one of the events the speaker had some clips from Fox News, I can’t remember the specific topic, but as one of the audience members who came to attend the presentation said to this presenter “you are not going to make us watch the Fox propaganda channel all day are you?” Another individual said, “news source for the less educated and ill informed, I don’t understand how people can watch that”
Man I was fuming, I wanted so bad to say something, these were two old white dudes, who lets just say works in the judicial system.

I still don’t get how any reasonable individual can make a determination on the quality and “truthfulness” of a broadcast network they don’t watch! Or a radio talk show host they don’t listen too.
I have heard more than a few national political pundits (in person) chastise the viewing audience of Fox News and listeners of Rush.

The will for “our” side to WIN, is so prevalent that reasonable processing of political discourse goes out the window.
Even if you don’t like how Fox News reports its stories with a right leaning slant, to make a determination of an individual’s intelligence based on where he or she chooses to get his or her information is just absurd.

I also overheard in a conversation during a presentation by an individual on Iraq, this was during casual conversation before the event, by a former U.S. Ambassador that “this war is purposefully sending poor kids to war as political fodder”, and “today’s military is made up of uneducated poor kids desperate to get a few dollars to feed their families.”

Folks this is the benefit of just listening to people. I rarely have conversations with people on politics or societal issues. That is why doing this blog is more for my self education, and as an outlet to express what is going on in my head than trying to “influence” anybody or anything.

As the lone darkie in so many social situations and because of the nature of my work many times as the fly on the wall, it’s safe for white liberal types to express their true biases and hang-ups during friendly conversation.
“Negros are one of us”, so it’s ok to spew retarded rhetoric, it’s likely that he is either ill informed or is incapable of processing our infallible and insightful liberal logic.

I learned a lot by listening to the leftist protesters in D.C. back in March of this year, the campaign slogans flowing freely from sufficiently programmed young skulls full of mush and the typical mindless liberal chants found at any Code Pink rally or Gay rights parade.

I learned much more from liberals at the 06 Daily Kos convention, as angry radicals leftists made their case promoting progressive causes and castigating the evil conservative propaganda machine.

As silly and inane as Clark sounded in the video, he is only doing his duty; he is on someone’s payroll. He simply sounds like every other clueless liberal promoting the voice of many mindless liberals who applaud the notion that people like Rush should be silenced at all cost, Negros like Clarence Thomas should be kept in his place, teaching kids about same sex partnerships in second grade is acceptable, abortion is birth control and we the taxpayers should be paying for it, God is a myth, income distribution is “necessary,” capitalism is evil, military personnel are uneducated puppets.

I guarantee you liberals will one day want to have blogs “rated” since bloggers are able to successfully filter and scrutinize liberal Democrat rhetoric.

From Michelle Malkin

Is there any doubt that Tom Harkin is a MoveOn.org Democrat?None. None at all.Harkin attacking Rush Limbaugh on the Senate floor:

Well, I don’t know. Maybe he was just high on his drugs again. I don’t know whether he was or not. If so, he ought to let us know. But that shouldn’t be an excuse.

Why is Harkin counter-attacking so viciously?

Maybe this has something to do with it:

Instapundit flashback: TOM HARKIN, FAKE WAR HERO.

Read more here

More on Harkin

In 2002, Senator Harkin gave a nationally televised and controversial eulogy for Senator Paul Wellstone, a close ally in the Senate who perished in a plane crash 11 days before his potential re-election. In the eulogy, Harkin urged the crowd to “stand up for Paul” and talked about “passing on Paul’s legacy” and to win the 2002 Senate election “For Paul” — statements that drew loud cheers and were interpreted by some as overt political references and inappropriate for a memorial service.

While running for his Senate seat in 1984, and again while running for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1992, Harkin has faced criticism for claiming that he had flown combat missions over North Vietnam. In a 1979 round table discussion with other Congressional Veterans, Harkin said of his service as a Navy pilot: “One year was in Vietnam. I was flying F-4s and F-8s on combat air patrols and photo-reconnaissance support missions”. These comments were later published in a 1981 book by David Broder. After subsequent inquiries by Barry Goldwater and The Wall Street Journal, Harkin clarified that that he had been stationed in Japan and sometimes flew recently repaired aircraft on test missions over Vietnam. His service flying F-4s and F-8s was later, while he was stationed in Cuba. References to this controversy were deleted from Wikipedia by staffers from Harkin’s senate office.

In June 2001, the Des Moines Register reported that Senator Harkin had “inadvertently omitted” $200,000 in Conoco stock owned by his wife Ruth and some $15,000 owned by their daughter Amy on his Senate financial statement.

In 2003/2004 Harkin remained neutral in the race for the Democratic nomination for president, until 11 days before the Iowa caucus, when he endorsed Vermont Governor Howard Dean. Dean was then considered the front runner, but his support plummeted in the final week and he finished a weak third, twenty points behind the winner John Kerry. Harkin stood behind Dean as the Governor delivered his now infamous “Scream” speech on the night of his defeat. Some criticized Harkin for jumping on the Dean bandwagon, while he admitted to some that Missouri Congressman Richard Gephardt was actually his favorite candidate. Harkin soon distanced himself from Dean and urged him to drop out of the race.

In September of 2006 Senator Harkin commented on Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s September 20th 2006 United Nations speech in which Chavez referred to President George Bush as the devil. Senator Harkin said that while Chavez’s comments were “incendiary,” he could “… understand the frustration, ah, and the anger of certain people around the world because of George Bush’s policies”.

 In September of 2007, Harkin demanded apology from General Pace - the week before Pace’s military retirement - for condemning homosexuality and adultery in the military (remember his “Roman Catholic” designation). After Pace mentioned that the UCMJ prohibits both of these activites, Harkin voiced his desire to have the code changed to accommodate homosexuality and adultery. (AP, Sept 27, 2007)

Candidate Harkin Stretches the Truth
Harkin even lied about his deaf brother’s employment history……

By NICHOLAS WAPSHOTT
Staff Reporter New York Sun - Article Link

Justice Thomas, in his first public statement about the circumstances leading to his appointment to the Supreme Court, said he became the target of a political smear campaign because of his presumed beliefs about abortion and because, as a conservative African-American, he was thought to have betrayed his roots.

The vehemence of his contention that he was made the victim of false allegations to keep him from joining the court, and the clarity of his statements about the propensity for black Americans to paint themselves, and agree to be painted, as victims, is certain to raise the issue of race in a presidential election contest in which for the first time one of the front-runners, Senator Obama, is an African-American.

Justice Thomas’s remarks also will bring to the fore the complexion of the Supreme Court as a potent election issue. The suggestion by Justice Thomas, an appointee of President George H.W. Bush, that the future of Roe v. Wade was behind opposition to his Supreme Court candidacy confirms that the future direction of the court — and the future of legal abortions — will depend on who is elected in November 2008.

In an extended interview on CBS News’s “60 Minutes,” broadcast last night and tonight, to accompany his memoir, “My Grandfather’s Son,” out today, Justice Thomas explained why he believes he was accused of sexual harassment by a female colleague, Anita Hill. “The issue was abortion,” he said.

He fiercely defended his description of the Senate confirmation hearings, at which Ms. Hill presented her allegations, as “a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves.”

Related piece worth reading LaShawn Barber: Black Conservatives and Black Liberals: What’s the Difference?

More Clarence Thomas:

FYI I will post both the 60 Minutes interview and the Rush interview and add to my sidebar (no commercials) in the next day or so.

Have you heard about the latest “controversy” involving Rush Limbaugh that has been made up from scratch by Media Matters and relentlessly promoted by the left side of the blogosphere? Well, no worries, I’ll tell you all about it.Here’s what Media Matters is claiming Rush Limbaugh said, Limbaugh: Service members who support U.S. withdrawal are “phony soldiers.”

Now, you might actually conclude from reading that headline that Rush Limbaugh said that, Service members who support U.S. withdrawal are “phony soldiers.”

Actually, he didn’t.

Once again, here’s the headline, from Media Matters,

Limbaugh: Service members who support U.S. withdrawal are “phony soldiers.”

Continue reading here what Rush Limbaugh actually said, during a conversation with a caller. Also go to his site Rushlimbaugh.com if you REALLY give a shit.

More: Background Material…

Seattle Post Intelligencer: Poster soldier for anti-war movement was a fake
RCP: Winter Soldier Syndrome - Michelle Malkin
Hot Air: Jesse Macbeth: I admit it, I’m a filthy liar
AP: 8-month sentence for man who lied about Iraq fighting
Feds nab VA cheaters in ‘Operation Stolen Valor’

But first My two cents:

Ah hell I was not sure I wanted to post this, but since dude on Right Wing did a piece on this “phony” outrage, I figured my Poop readers should get the 411.

You know while on one hand I really getting tired of Media Matters and their blatant distortion of the facts on shit they have on their site, I kinda understand why they do what they do and why they are so successful at smear.

I heard on Rush’s show some of the comments made by some liberal Democrats denouncing what Rush said, I always have to remind myself that Democrats and liberals are never interested in truth, it’s simply about winning and Media Matters knows that the majority of their kook constituents only priority is getting their people in office at all costs.

Now don’t get me wrong, the purpose of this blog is to post stuff that interests me and my political views and yes, I want “my side to win.”
But I have never knowingly posted 411 here that I knew was bullshit just so I can make a fucking cheep political point.

Democrats must use deception to stay in power, but the scary thing is it works like a charm.
I’m dumbfounded at how many websites posted bullshit about O’Reilly and how they took his comments out of context when after reading further, few if any actually read or heard the comments themselves.

I’m perplexed at the vast differences in simple logic between the right blogsphere and the left.
Blogger on the right, in most cases go out of their way to get to the bottom of a story or issue and actively seek to get as much firm details on an issue as possible and the rarely comment and post shit unless they have their fucken facts straight.

Media Matters has these crackpot liberals by the mental ballz. It’s apparent that liberals can’t process information unless it has been pissed on by Media Matters.

Here are a few examples:

(link) Media Matters for America is calling attention to a Rush Limbaugh rant from his show on Wednesday in which he dismisses U.S. troops, including those now serving in Iraq, who disagree with President Bush’s stay-until-victory strategy as “phony soldiers.”
And my colleague Jeff Fecke at Blog of the Moderate Left wonders whether those, including Sen. Norm Coleman, who were outraged by the MoveOn.org ad that was insufficiently respectful toward Gen. David Petraeus, will bring equal energy to denouncing Limbaugh for being insufficiently respectful toward some of the troops.

*********

(link) Following the MoveOn non-controversy, some of our local dingbats went on a largely unnoticed mini-crusade to get WA-08 Congressional candidate Darcy Burner to condemn the anti-war organization’s ad. Now that Rush Limbaugh has said something that was considerably more offensive to our men and women in uniform, we’re certain that Mark Gardner and the rest of the fair and balanced wingnutosphere will demand WA-08 Congressman Dave Reichert condemn Limbaugh’s remarks.

****

Will Norm Coleman denounce Rush Limbaugh for “phony soldiers” comment?
*******

Pallone Blasts Rush Limbaugh, Implies Republicans are Hypocrites

Earlier today Republican hero and recovering drug addict Rush Limbaugh slandered thousands of American soldiers who are risking their lives overseas as “phony soldiers.” Why? Solely because they question the rationale for the Iraq War.

*****

(link) How about leading conservative host Rush Limbaugh, a man who has regularly interviewed the president, vice-president, and numerous other conservative Republican luminaries?

During the September 26 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh called service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq “phony soldiers.”

From the DCCC:

Chairman Chris Van Hollen Condemns Rush Limbaugh’s Outrageous Comment that Soldiers Who Support Withdrawing From Iraq Are “Phony Soldiers”

“Rush Limbaugh’s personal attack on our men and women in uniform is reprehensible. It minimizes the sacrifice our troops in Iraq and their families are making and has no place in the public discourse. Rush Limbaugh owes our military and their families an apology for his hurtful comments that minimize their service to our country.”

******

(link) John Amato: “I’m calling on the Senate to pass an amendment or uphold their latest one and condemn Rush Limbaugh’s cowardly acts on our troops! Soldiers from the 82nd Airborne in Iraq wrote a NY Times op-ed—criticizing the war in Iraq, and had the bravery to suggest that it was time to develop an exit strategy. Two of them just died. Are they phonies, Rush? Where’s the “sense of the Senate” on this outrage?

Let me be clear, I don’t give a shit that you oppose the U.S. being in Iraq, or oppose our Middle East policy, or how we use our troops or what our military priorities should be.
When I read lefty blog I’m interested in the discourse many provide and of course I don’t agree with much of it, but I think it’s important for me to be knowledgeable on issues and to remain grounded in my viewpoints I have an obligation (to myself) to be informed, understand and comprehend opposing viewpoints without filters. Whether it’s Media Matters or the MSM, John Stewart, Keith Olberman on the left, Newsbusters, Rush, O’Reilly on the right.
Especially since I dedicate so much time keeping up this paltry blog

Through my extensive blog reading on the right and left, watching the MSM, watching a lot of You Tube and taking in countless other political information sources I have a pretty fair grasp on the world around me and one thing that Rush taught me when I first started listening to his show (from day one) and why no other on air pundit comes close to him is he encourages his listeners to seek out the truth. Don’t simply take his word on issues, read and hear the bullshit on the left for yourself.
You should never be afraid at seeking opposing viewpoints and listening to opposing viewpoints.
This is why people who say they don’t watch Fox News are cowards and tells you everything you need to know about them intellectually.
I would never EVER, encourage anyone NOT to listen to a MSM network,  a liberal talk show host, or a source like the NY Times, it’s not even logical.

Far too many people are just too fucken lazy to seek the truth on issues and choose to allow their minds to be filtered.

This is not about “standing up for” Rush, dude is a fucken multi-millionaire, he could care less what I think.

This is about simple honesty. If the goal of the left and lefty blogsphere is simply to WIN then by all means distort, lie, manipulate, conceal. Ignorance is obviously bliss in the liberal world.

There are countless blog entries commenting on the useless Democrat debate last night and I have been glancing at the news networks as well.

People these Democrat debates are pointless; it is pointless to continue to try and psychoanalyze the mindset of Democrats. None of those candidates’ exhibits the characteristics of a leader, not one of them are willing to tell the American people their true core beliefs. Democrats are completely incapable of running a campaign without massive deception.

I have been telling people for years, Mrs. Snoop can verify, not only are we NEVER leaving Iraq even if a Democrat is elected president they won’t leave either.
Now that has been confirmed, these pussy whipped Democrats see the writing on the wall, now they must change the strategy and now they must explain to the loony Democratic base this change in philosophy and mindset.

I thought Bush lied and millions dies, I thought Bush mislead the Democrats, I thought Bush lied to the American people and got us into a meaningless war.

Anywho the text below is a transcript from Rush as he goes into more details.

If I did not dislike liberals and Democrats so much, I would feel sorry for them.

RUSH: I have the San Francisco Chronicle in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers here today. It’s a story by their Washington bureauette reporter Carolyn Lochhead: “Even if Democrats Win White House, Troops Likely to Remain in Iraq.” Now, where did you first hear that, and how long ago? You first heard it on this program back in March or April. The light bulbs are starting to go off there in the Drive-By Media and with the rest of the Democrats. They’re slowly getting around to seeing the point that I was making since Monday about Mrs. Clinton’s comments about staying in Iraq after she is elected president, when she said it on George Stephanopoulos’ show. “The leading Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, steadfastly refused as recently as Sunday’s round of talk shows to promise that all U.S. forces would be withdrawn if she is elected. … Charles Kupchan, who worked in the National Security Council under President Bill Clinton…”People ask, “Rush, what’s so important about this? Of course it’s true. Why do you keep harping on it?”

My friends, let me explain why I keep harping on this to you and why it is crucial. I’m glad for the question. Sometimes I assume everybody’s on the same page with me. This is not Social Security. This is not the SCHIP program. This is not some domestic policy thing. This is about the national security of our country. It is about the defense of the United States of America. For the last four years, the Democrat Party — aided and abetted by its insane, deranged, and delusional base — has been trying to undermine US victory. They have invested in — and as you’ve heard me say, now own — the concept of defeat. All along, it has been a lie. Now, they have been trying to secure it. They have been trying to secure defeat, primarily to destroy the Bush presidency, to enable their easier ascension to the White House 2008 — and they don’t care if they destroy the country in the process. Ah, they’ll fix it when they get back in power. They have been lying to the American people, and their lies have shown up throughout the Drive-By Media, and the Drive-By Media and the fringe base have all bought the notion that the Democrats in the ‘06 election was about getting out of Iraq.

The Democrats are not going to take us out of Iraq. The reason why this is important is they have been lying to their own voters, they have been lying to the American people, and their lies have been amplified across the Drive-By Media, on an issue that matters. US national security is at the top of the list. It’s more important than Social Security reform or anything, because all that stuff’s academic if the country isn’t adequately defended against future attacks. And they have not been on the same page. They have been actively undermining that, knowing full-well that if they were in power they would do nothing different than what Bush has done, in the sense they wouldn’t pull troops out of there. They wouldn’t pull an immediate withdrawal. They wouldn’t put a date certain on it. They wouldn’t do any of this. They never have when they’ve been in the White House. Clinton never met his promised withdrawal dates out of Bosnia. FDR didn’t fight World War II this way. Well, yeah, you could say Bay of Pigs, but that was a botched operation when we got out of there. This is not a botched operation.

They’ve been trying to say that it is. So that’s the only reason I’m harping on this. I’m interested in truth, and especially on an issue like this, and if the Democrat Party is going to lie to the country and is going to have their willing accomplices in the Drive-By Media lie to the country about what Democrats actually want to do, then it’s important — because if they’re lying about this, what else are they lying about? And it’s irresponsible. So now, for some reason, Mrs. Clinton has been forced into the open and asked the question, “What will you do as president?” She could not say, “Well, I’m pulling them out of there.” She could, but it wouldn’t work. Because the bottom line is she’s not going to. She would have to pull a stunt shortly after her inauguration. “I had no idea what the Bush administration hid from me, and all of us. Why, I have been privy to information that I didn’t know. It is much, much too serious. I was in the dark. We can’t pull out,” and that would be tough.

Plus, you know, she can’t get elected if all she does is make a play for these kooks, these delusional freaks that make up the Democrat Party base. These people cannot be happy. MoveOn.org has been thrown overboard. Now Mrs. Clinton’s basically thumbed her nose at the anti-war movement and said, “Ah, we can’t pull out.” So where does the anti-war movement go? Hopefully, they will create riots at the next Democrat National Convention, like they did in 1968. And that’s not out of the realm of possibility, because these people are delusional and they are deranged, and their sole reason for existence has been to get out of Iraq and secure US defeat. And they’ve been told by their elected Democrats that that’s exactly what the Democrats are going to do, and now Mrs. Clinton just said, “You know what? I’ve been lying to you all along. I have no intention of pulling the troops out of there. Ha-ha-ha.” Now, they’re aged — these are the Sixties relics from Jurassic Park still hanging on. They can’t recruit any younger members. But we’ll see.

Ok, I’m gonna use this GOP should “woo” blacks” bullshit article below and the Donavan McNabb “black quarterbacks are under more scrutiny” bullshit article as reference sources for this rant.

First, what can I say about my man Donavan, if you have not heard about his whining like a little bitch, read article here.
Ranting like a typical Negro with nauseating levels of self-pity and victimhood, it’s just pathetic. As I have stated numerous times I’m again embarrassed, I know I did not say that stupid shit and can’t process that level of moronic thinking, but as a “brotha” it just bothers you in the gut, because all darkies suffer at the hands of such ill logic and
Self-pity. It’s a bad role model for young black men in an era where black male role models are hard to find.

He or course plays the blame-whitey card a popular play in today’s Negro world.
The black subculture and our attachment to it is very strong, and blame-whitey habits die hard or hardly die.

Now let me be very clear, you will NEVER hear me say that racism per se doesn’t exist, I’ve given my numerous examples, however Negros everywhere need to be encouraged to understand what they’re capable of despite racism.
Racism, in whatever form, is not “holding us back.” At this point in history, it is a sad reminder of how it held back many, and its residual effects will live on. Racism and bigotry are not “white” traits, however. They’re human traits. The next time you call a white person a “racist bigot,” stop and examine yourself. Someone somewhere can truthfully say the same about you.
I’m certain those who read many of my rants that I’m a racist SOB, LOL!

The GOP Negro Tent

First if you are like me a hard right leaning type the notion that the GOP should actively “woo” Negros under the GOP tent is a ridiculous notion.
I’ll ask the obvious question you white folks would love to ask your average Negro you meet. Just what issues are “specifically” black issues?

Now I’m a reasonable smart dude, (on occasion) but I have yet to read a coherent answer to this complex quandary.

• Let me guess, WELFARE, hell I don’t know, a greater proportion of Negros are on welfare, so is the issue in the Negro community will be “am I gonna get my check?”
• Ok let try CRIME, “if I smoke crack, or pop a cap in yo ass, am I going to jail or skate like O.J.?”
• Ok, JOBS, “I know I did not finish, junior high school, but can you hook a brotha up with a job payin’ one fiddy and hour or so?” or “we need to raise that minimum wage again”

The GOP tent issue will never be an option for the mass majority of Negros throughout America, EVER, because Negros must make a choice not to be pawns of idiot Democrat race baiting hysterical thinking.

As long as Negros insist on being hyphenated Americans, assuming that racism causes black failure (Mr. McNabb), cry about the incarceration rates of Negros when Negros can’t even get together at an awards show without getting into a fight, refuse to get an education, stop having babies left and right, calling black women bitches, and waist their hours and their money on trivial bullshit.

Now, GOP candidates can’t go to gatherings with an abundance of Negros in the audience and chastise Negros for their irrational logic.  So why attend any debates and try to pacify an audience that won’t vote for you anyway?

Black folks instead of encouraging education, law-abiding behavior, developing good financial practices and competitive businesses, the predictable response is to drag down standards for Negros so they are judged separately.

Why would the GOP court such nonsense? Stupidity is not a political platform I want to get behind or support. For Democrats that mindset is fine with them, because few Democrats are truly concerned about the general welfare and survival of Negros in this country, only that votes are delivered in a timely manner.
Far too many Negros rarely understand the concept of individualism and self-reliance, that obligatory finger is always pointed outward at someone else, AT YOU WHITEY!

The assumption that the concept of individualism is “mean-spirited,” black people are sometimes afraid to compete and fail, (McNabb) so they hide behind their skin. It’s true that during slavery and legal segregation, a collective mind-set may have been necessary for our survival. But times have changed, and some old things should pass away.

The sad reality is racism becomes a mitigating circumstance for black criminals, banks disregard qualifications and risk money on blacks with bad credit because it’s “racist” to require them to have good credit, and the government, charged with treating citizens equally before the law, create set-asides for black-owned businesses so they can get a “fair share” of the city’s business. At the same time otherwise intelligent people think all this is “fair.” as if to say to whitey, you owe us!

We fail to process that collective pigmentation grievances hold people back, not move them forward. Being handed a race-based entitlement (especially from the government) is no different to me than being handed a rotten steak served on a garbage can lid.

Individualism doesn’t mean you don’t help others. It means rather than turning to the government for handouts and solutions, you use your own mind, creativity, ingenuity, and Buddy Jesus given talents to help others and yourself.

The Negro Democratic Plantation is a secure domain, (geek lingo) represented by powerful leaders with influential voices. Being a Negro with an independent voice and mindset is difficult and tough for many to deal with.
I’ve been referred to as an Uncle Tom a sellout and an 80 year old white women and old white man (seriously), but I find it amusing and quickly tell those with that opinion to kiss my black ass.

I am hardly a GOP toady, I am not in politics, I do not work for nor have I ever worked for a political campaign, don’t belong to any political or social organizations, I’m hardly a media person, my shitty typing confirms that, I’m not paid to blog, nor do I make a penny off of blogging or any other media activity.
So what the fuck would be my motivation?

As for the GOP and “wooing” Negros I’m not sure if the GOP will ever be able to turn the tide in any significant manner. More prominent Negros are surfacing on the political scene, but until you see a significant turnaround in the number of black folks actively working within the party system, prominently featured in the campaigns of high profile white GOP candidates, prominently featured on news pundit shows representing GOP interests and platforms or more importantly credible black GOP candidates, black folks will continue to turn a deaf ear to the GOP message no matter how enticing.

This is from Wizbang, Basically this is commentary about a leftist moonbat blogger making excuses about the Move on ads.
This is typical liberal crap I know but I can’t help posting examples of twisted liberal logic, it tis always so entertaining.

It’s really sad to see children try to pretend they can keep up with adults in the arena of ideas. Take the ever talkative Larkin from Wizbang Blue who tries to put in his two cents about the “General Betray Us” ad. It seems in Larkin’s world view, the General brought it on himself.

Such attacks were predictable given the General’s apparent acquiescence in becoming the chief spokesman for the White House in what should be an entirely political debate (i.e., no generals invited) centered on the the question of the continued involvement of US forces in Iraq.

After all, in America, it’s rule by the people, not the generals. And the people’s representatives, the 435 members of the House, the 100 members of the Senate, and the President should be the ones to decide how many troops we will keep in Iraq and for how long. The input of the generals is of course informative and essential, but it should be funneled through the proper channels, namely the civilian leader of America’s impressive war-making machine, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.

Gates should have been the one to deliver testimony on the state of our mission in Iraq on Capitol Hill last week, not Petraeus.

Read the rest

By Michael J. O’Shea - The American Thinker
 

I am reminded of the time I saw my 3-year-old daughter trying and failing to tie her shoes. She got angry. Still, she kept trying.

“‘This is difficult,’ she concluded. ‘But I like difficult.’”

A child grittier than Congressional leaders, spunkier than people twenty times her age.

She’s Bill Gates’ daughter, but that’s immaterial. Her mother Melinda wrote those words, but that’s immaterial, too. What matters is what Melinda Gates also said to other philanthropists about starting the Gates Foundation.

“It turns out that her parents like difficult, too. And I suspect that you all like difficult, which is why you’ve devoted your lives to solving some of the world’s toughest problems.”
That’s what Congressmen are elected to do: solve some of America’s — and therefore the world’s — toughest problems. But Congressmen prefer childish ways instead and so play: play statesmen, play leader.

Listening to leaders in Congress one would imagine that, like a child, they still believe in the stork: Iraq, which they voted to liberate from Saddam’s rule, would go from tyranny to ally against terrorism in four-tenths of a decade.

Which it might well have, had Iran, Syria, Al Qaeda not intervened. Iran, Syria, Al Qaeda — threats all, threats each to peace in the Middle East and the world long before Operation Iraqi Freedom — rushing to Iraq to cripple Iraq; and Congressional leaders now say, “Have at it.”

We attacked Iraq when it invaded Kuwait and the world applauded: we defend Iraq from foreigners invading it and the world, Senate and House leaders included, spits in our face.

But much of that world at least is not two-faced; it didn’t back regime change in Iraq as American policy under George W’s predecessor, authorize action under W himself, approve hundreds of billions to oust Saddam and start rebuilding his country, approve every general charged with directing the Iraqi campaign, hear testimony under oath from those generals themselves on Iraq’s problems and progress — and then, bludgeoned with blogs, bail.

In starting philanthropy, Melinda Gates wrote:

“We knew what we stood for.”
Other than re-election, what do Congressional leaders stand for? As important: What can they withstand?

Mr. and Mrs. Gates believe

“Ultimately, all people, no matter where they live, deserve a chance to live a healthy, productive life.”
Congressional leaders would amend that to exclude Iraqis to whom we’ve given our word.

Leaders frequently tout their business backgrounds as signs they’re savvy, then display astounding ignorance of the struggles all businesses — including Microsoft — meet just to keep getting ahead. As if iPods wondrously appeared with nary a Newton among its ancestors, IBM never stumbled, Mercedes never goofed, Kodak never almost croaked, Xerox has the entire globe copying only it, the Big Three are still big and still three, AT&T didn’t have to be disemboweled to be reborn.

Sports isn’t without scars either. Becoming a champ is nowhere near as hard as staying a champ, as Packers and Forty-Niners and Jets and Cowboys painfully know — and, unlike Iraq, they have game films and scouting reports and player profiles and rules everyone obeys or they’re out. Terrorists don’t play fair; neither do Congressional leaders who, when it comes to Iraq, could teach jihadists tricks on sighing to the heavens while slitting throats.

Male leaders must have missed labor room or passed out; females leaders must have hired surrogate moms: none seems to recall that birth is painful and child-raising is not non-stop glee.

Despite billions in the bank and fame Congressional leaders can only envy and do, Bill and Melinda Gates met hard knocks:

“Our foundation works hard to think through problems carefully, but it’s simply impossible to get our strategies exactly right in the beginning.”
Robert Gates would say the same, and he’s not even kin. Don Rumsfeld would, too, and did, withdrawing American troops when he thought Iraqis were ready to handle more on their own and finding they were not. Yet.

Any leader who’s actually led and not just sweet-talked knows what “sweat equity” means: life is tough, business is tough, football is tough, and they all have regulations: terrorists have none.

The military is adamant on lessons learned: and it learns. Name one lesson Congressional leaders have learned other than to emote before CSPAN cameras.

Which Congressional leader could be this blunt?

“The list of lessons Bill and I have learned since we started is just about as long as the list of mistakes we’ve made. And we’re still making mistakes and learning lessons every day.”
Who in Congress would dare be this frank?

“Seeing where we missed something can be humbling, but it helps us understand how we can be more innovative the next time. We try to bring that spirit of learning and changing to all our work.”
Look at Congressional leaders one by one: who among them has convictions as deep as Bin Laden’s? Who among them, like Bin Laden, is unwavering no matter what?

Jihadists and US troops have one thing in common and one thing alone: they’re willing to sacrifice themselves for something greater than themselves. And Congressional leaders?

Bin Laden sacrifices everything he has — wealth, health — for his beliefs. Belief: that’s Bin Laden’s power. You can see it in his eyes. And Congressional leaders? Beliefs that deep? Eyes that steady, firm?

How many thousand Iraqis will join Al Qaeda when Al Qaeda in Iraq rules over Iraq?

Any Congressional leader who can’t see that Iraqis are dying to live free, that Iraqi security forces are killed serving their country, that Iraq’s politicians need help and American politicians could give it, that the world has looked to America because America has honored its word and stood by its allies no matter what, has a jihad of his own.

And there’ll be no virgins stroking when all’s said and done.

Sphere: Related Content

.

The moonbat organization ran a full-page ad in the NYT attacking Gen. David Petraeus:

Let’s be clear: MoveOn.org is suggesting that General Petraeus has ‘betrayed’ his country. This is disgusting. To attack as a traitor an American general commanding forces in war because his ‘on the ground’ experience does not align with MoveOn.org’s political objectives is utterly shameful. It shows contempt for America’s military leadership, as well as for the troops who have confidence in him, as our fellow soldiers in Iraq certainly do.

General Petraeus has served this country for over 35 years with honor, distinction, and integrity. And this is not just about General Petraeus. After all, if General Petraeus is “cooking the books,” then the entire military chain of command in Baghdad, and all the staff, military and civilian, who have been working with General Petraeus are complicit, since Petraeus did not write his report in isolation. They are all, apparently, ‘betray[ing] us.’

MoveOn.org has been working closely with the Democratic congressional leadership –as an article in today’s Sunday New York Times Magazine makes clear. And consider this comment by a Democratic senator from Friday’s Politico: “‘No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,’ noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. ‘The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us.’

Check out more on the blog D.C. Thornton

Sphere: Related Content

If you are a shitty dad and husband or wife and are a cheating bastard can you still make a good president?

From Michelle Malkin. Left-leaning columnist Froma Harrop reports on progressive unhappiness with one of the Senate’s biggest blowhards, Teddy Kennedy. His eco-hypocrisy, it seems, is too much for them to take:

Once upon a time, Ted Kennedy could count on his daily dose of veneration. The right wing hated the Massachusetts Democrat, but progressives honored him as a defender of old-school liberalism.In a remarkable turnaround, liberals are now heaping scorn on the 73-year-old senator. Young audiences boo at his name, and the leftish “Daily Show” on Comedy Central makes fun of him.

The source of unhappiness is Kennedy’s efforts to kill an offshore wind farm on Nantucket Sound. Cape Wind was to be the first such project in the United States and a source of pride to environmentally minded New Englanders. Polls show 84 percent of Massachusetts residents in favor. But now it appears that America’s first offshore wind farm will be near Galveston, Texas.

Proposed the month before Sept. 11, 2001, Cape Wind remains in limbo. It’s been frustrated at every turn by a handful of yachtsmen, Kennedy included, who don’t want to see windmills from their verandas. Many millions have been spent spreading disinformation and smearing the wind farm’s supporters.

Read the rest here

Captain Ed has a good point, commenting on Craig’s potential boot in butt out of the Senate.

(post link) if the (Republican) party wants to start drawing these lines, then one has to wonder why David Vitter isn’t getting the same push.

He didn’t plead guilty in court, but unlike Craig, he openly admits he broke the law and solicited prostitutes. Others serving in Congress at the moment have pleaded guilty to misdemeanors of more import than disorderly conduct without being forced to resign.

 If morality and credibility are at issue, why isn’t Vitter being held to that standard? It’s either that Louisiana’s Democratic governor would appoint a Democrat in his place, or that Vitter’s transgressions involved heterosexual sex and therefore are less objectionable.

Craig will depart soon, and these questions will fade away eventually. However, people will wonder whether the GOP decided to argue for standards in public officials, or whether they just found it easy to use Craig without endangering their political balance in the Senate.

I found the following on Talking Points Memo, via Outside the Beltway.

C’mon people; is it me, or is this society getting cruder, morally bankrupt and just plain sicker each and every damm day.
I swear until this Craig mess I had no clue about this sicko culture of bathroom perusing fudge packing creeps.
Noooooo, going to a nice bar and having a normal conversation with the hook-up of your choice whether opposite sex or same sex is apparently not enough.
The lure of inhaling the stench of human excrement and the hand touching of another nasty ass germ infested bathroom troll is I guess the new aphrodisiac.

As this post does point out, that God for the internet, the masses can at least be aware of, avoid and be on the lookout for society’s biggest weirdoes.

According to an article in today’s Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune, more avid web readership might have saved Sen. Larry Craig’s (R-ID) career.

As a number of TPM Reader/Google sleuths have been telling us, there are sites out there that rate different public sex bathrooms around the country. One of them sounds sort of like it’s the Zagat’s of gay public restroom sex. And that bathroom at the Minneapolis airport is like the Spago of sex bathrooms.

In any case, this from the Strib reporters …

Another Web site lists Twin Cities-area malls, parks, health clubs and even a “cruisy toilet” at the Minnesota State Fairgrounds. Many postings list the best times to go and give graphic reviews of the venues.An airport bathroom, specifically one near a shoeshine stand behind the ticket counter, generated the most comments until Web-site users posted warnings in June that men were getting arrested there. Craig was arrested shortly after noon on June 11 in the main men’s public restroom of the North Star Crossing in the Lindbergh Terminal.

It’s not clear from the article exactly which review web site they’re referring to or whether the warnings about the sting showed up in advance of Craig’s June 11th arrest. But it seems that closer scrutiny of the web and available ratings sites could have kept Craig from his rendezvous with destiny.

.

June 19, 1954: A weary Sen. Lester C. Hunt (D.-Wyo) walked his Senate office.  At 61, the former Wyoming governor was serving his first term in the Senate and was by far his party’s strongest candidate to win the seat again — critical to his party, as the Senate was almost evenly split, with 48 Democrats, 47 Republicans, and one Independent.  But Hunt was being blackmailed — reportedly even by one of his colleagues: if he ran again, Hunt was told not so subtly, the hitherto secret police report that the senator’s son had been arrested for soliciting sex from an undercover police detective in Washington DC’s Lafayette Square the year before would be made public. 

That evening, in his office, the distraught Hunt took his own life with a self-inflicted gunshot wound.  Published reports at the time said that Hunt’s suicide resulted “because he had cancer,” as Facts on File for 1954 says.  Seasoned Capitol Hill political reporters such as Allen Drury knew better and Hunt’s dark secret, while known to colleagues and those who covered them, remained that. 

But a few years later, when Drury wrote his epic political novel Advise and Consent, the Hunt tragedy is moved to fiction, sort of:  Sen. Brigham Anderson (R.-UT.), war hero and U.S. Senator from Utah (Drury never mentions political parties in A&C, but a senator from Utah would almost certainly have to be a conservative Republican), is being blackmailed to vote for a controversial nominee for secretary of state with the story that he had a relationship with a buddy in the military while stationed overseas in World War II.  Shaken by this and what the news will do to his wife and young daughter, Anderson takes his own life in his Senate office with a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

Read the rest here by John Gizzi at Human Events

More “Larry WIDE STANCE Craig” posts -  Gay Patriot has an interesting piece on the Craig mess too: Larry Craig Story–Fitting the Media Mantra on Social Conservatives - Found via the blog: Hip Hop Republicans

So I’ve been traveling since 4am on Tuesday. So as I spent yesterday away from TV and the internet, the most I knew about the world was that both Sen. Larry Craig and QB Michael Vick had admitted guilt for respective crimes. End of story (for now), I assumed.And then last night at a work event, I turned to a colleague who is also politically-connected and asked, “So what do you think about Larry Craig?” He just shook his head and said, “Wasn’t his press conference today unbelieveable?”
My jaw dropped.“No he did NOT!”, I protested. My friend: “Oh yes he did. He must have said ‘I’m not gay’ three times.”“No he did NOT!”, I said. This time I continued: “And let me guess, his wife was standing next to him?” Well, of course!

I just shook my head. “So by the end of the week, I bet he is an alcoholic, goes to rehab, and was molested by his priest,” I deduced. Unreal. Click link above for more.

“College women are at the highest risk for unintended pregnancy because they’re sexually active, they’re very fertile, and they are away from home,” says Dr. Shulman

I thought nappy headed project skanks or toothless tobacco chewing trailer bimbos were at the highest risk, imagine that.

See, talk about us right leaning types not reading, this is the kind of crazy shit I love reading. This is supposed to be a serious story, but it’s riddled with so much comedic material I swear that it must be satire and I’m being set-up.
See for yourself.

Paula Tran, a senior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, relies on her school’s health center for affordable birth control pills. Even though she doesn’t have insurance, she bought a year supply from the clinic for only $7 per pack last fall. But when she goes back for more this September, she’ll be hit with a bill five times that amount, something she says will definitely affect her spending. “It will cut into the kinds of notebooks I buy to the kind of groceries I get to the cable package that I order,” she says.

See I told ya…what kind of fucken cable package she can order!!?

(link) For decades college campus health centers have been a resource for budget-conscious female students seeking birth control. Because of agreements with pharmaceutical companies, most campus clinics were able to distribute brand name prescription contraceptives, from pills to the patch to a monthly vaginal device like NuvaRing, for no more than a couple of bucks.That all ended earlier this year. Health experts say the price bump for college students was inadvertent — a byproduct of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, a federal law that went into effect in January. The law alters how drug makers calculate Medicaid-related rebates paid to states, but it ultimately made it expensive for companies to offer schools such deep discounts on birth control. As a result, brand name prescription prices for campus clinics rose from about the $3 to $10 range per month to the $30 to $50 range. Organon, the maker of Cyclessa and Desogen birth control pills and the NuvaRing, says the company is not happy about having to increase prices for colleges. But Nick Hart, Organon’s executive director of contraception, says they were forced to make “a business decision” after the law went into effect.

A 2006 survey conducted by the American College Health Association (ACHA) found that 39% of undergraduate women use oral contraceptives. Many providers are afraid that if the convenience of free or cheap birth control on campus is taken away, female students might just get turned off by prescription birth control methods altogether and use other less effective ones like condoms or Plan B, known as the morning after pill.

 According to Planned Parenthood, and many worry if students skip out on it or move to a method they’re not as comfortable with, it can lead to more unwanted student pregnancies. “I think there are some who will just try to wing it and see how it goes. They’ll say ‘Well I go to school here, my boyfriend is in another city and I only see him once or twice a month and I won’t use anything’ rather than pay for something they can’t afford.

Tran: “I have friends who refuse to talk to their parents about it, they’re unable to get under their insurance, can’t afford to get their own insurance and are already working just to pay tuition,” she says. “Some have stopped already and are taking stock in Plan B and having that around because they don’t have regular intercourse.”

Oh Snoop now your not going to insult millions and millions of college skanks around the nation are you?

Well with this kind of logic:

Susan Maly, a 22-year-old student at the University of Iowa, says she struggled with switching pills recently,
She finds the dramatic price increase “unfair” to women who have come to rely on birth control, and feel comfortable with the brand they are on.

Sure why not. They sure as hell don’t read this blog… 

Shit, I just got the NFL Sunday ticket and it is about $40 more than it was the last time I had it, I think the gubment should subsidize that price difference.
What is tougher, men giving up football or young college skanks giving up sex?
Tough one huh?

C’mon libs want the gubment out of their bedrooms, but when it’s time to engage in headboard banging activity you mean that these educated skanks want me to pay to keep them from fucking up their lives.

Let me think this one out, I’m in.. let’s say, med school or law school, not some bullshit major like liberal arts. I want to finish school and get that degree so I can make the big bucks and become successful, BUT that hunk Brad is looking might fine in those jeans and I could sure use a good pelvic ass clapping workout about now. Just throw down a few drinks and we can get busy!

Oh shit that evil G Dub took that money meant for my weekend skank activities and now how am I going to afford my cell phone, my (real) boyfriends cell phone, i-pod, tanning time, nail care, gas for my SUV (thanks mom and daddy), cable TV, dorm room stripper pole, batteries for my vibrator for between classes, tickets to Tori Amos, the mean green, shoes, purse….damm!

Yes the media is absolutely sure that university students are just too fucken stupid to stay out of such trouble. Shit, we can’t expect students to think of their future, finish school, get their degree and begin their lives in a planned and sensible way, can we?
We have to play nanny to hold their hands, er uh p..is, er uh contraception… for them.

It’s all Bush’s fault?

I found this last line (here) it is fitting;

Perhaps the story title should read, “Narcissistic Sex and Sex Used To Mediate Past Pain Will Now Cost College Women More Money.” LOL!

From Red State

Freshman Rep. Nancy Boyda (D.-Kan.), one of the GOP’s top targets in 2008, couldn’t stomach hearing about progress in Iraq during House Armed Services Committee testimony last month. Frustrated and agitated by the remarks of retired Gen. Jack Keane,  Boyda walked out of the hearing room only to return 10 minutes later to ridicule the architect of the surge strategy.Judging from Boyda’s behavior at last month’s hearing, she just might blow a gasket today if she reads the article in USA Today about the 50% decline in major attacks since the troop surge strategy began. (Linked by Pejman Yousefzadeh earlier this afternoon.)

Keane, the man Boyda berated in July, is quoted in the article, saying that U.S. forces have gained momentum from the enemy. Yet don’t expect Boyda to acknowledge the progress. Her spokeswoman said last month after the fiasco that she’s “frustrated with how the administration is handling the war.”

I suspect the real reason you won’t hear Democrats acknowledge progress in Iraq is that any good news is bad news for them. Their political success at home depends on failure in Iraq. That’s why Boyda didn’t want to hear about it in July and why she probably won’t acknowledge it now.

Boyda defends decision to step out of Iraq hearing

Good News Is Bad News

I wished I cared more about the departure of Rove, but I don’t, so here is Ann and her two cents.

A couple of “I HATE ROVE” liberal rants

Karl Rove can kiss my God damn ass.

I sat in my Washington, DC apartment on September 11, less than 2 miles from the White House, and watched the Pentagon burn outside my window. I sat in my apartment, alone, wondering if I was going to die, if my country was at war, and what the fuck was happening to the world. My liberal friends on the Hill had to evacuate while I was on the phone with them because there was a report that a plane was coming in. My friend liberal friend David was exposed to Anthrax. My liberal friend in California lost his friend in one of those airplanes. I interviewed the victims of September 11 and their families. I know the pain of September 11, and I don’t need a God damn lecture from some White House operative about how I just didn’t get it.

How fucking dare Karl Rove and the White House go to New York City, stand within miles of the World Trade Center remains, where nearly 3,000 Americans and foreigners of all political persuasions are forever buried, and say that liberals don’t think September 11 was any big deal.

It’s bad enough to have Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh and their ilk say that liberals hate America, and it’s bad enough that Republicans pull this “liberals hate the military crap,” but when the White House says that we don’t “get” September 11, that we didn’t think the murder of 3,000 innocents on that horrible day was “savage,” that we simply wanted to give Osama bin Laden “therapy.”

I have fucking had it with this White House. This is a story that we do NOT let die, people. Karl Rove’s sorry ass needs to leave that White House or the Democrats in Congress shouldn’t let ONE PIECE OF REPUBLICAN LEGISLATION ADVANCE, EVER AGAIN.

also…

Karl Rove’s comments are even more despicable than what we’ve come to expect from Republicans. There is no depth to which they will not sink, no tragedy they will not exploit for political gain. The next time Mr. Rove wants to come to New York to lecture us about what September 11 means, he’d better hope this New Yorker isn’t in the room.

Sphere: Related Content

Good reads from Michelle Malkin

The tale of Army Private Scott Thomas Beauchamp, the discredited “Baghdad Diarist” for the discredited New Republic magazine, is an old tale:Self-aggrandizing soldier recounts war atrocities. Media outlets disseminate soldier’s tales uncritically. Military folks smell a rat and poke holes in tales too good (or rather, bad) to be true. Soldier’s ideological sponsors blame the messengers for exposing anti-war fraud.Beauchamp belongs in the same ward as John F. Kerry, the original infectious agent of the toxic American disease known as Winter Soldier Syndrome. The ward is filling up.

U.S. military investigators concluded this week that Beauchamp concocted allegations of troop misconduct in a series of essays for The New Republic. “The investigation is complete and the allegations from PVT Beauchamp are false,” Major Steven Lamb, a spokesman for Multi National Division-Baghdad, told USA Today. The New Republic is standing by Beauchamp’s work. But Michael Goldfarb, online editor and blogger at The Weekly Standard who first challenged Beauchamp’s writing, reported Monday that Beauchamp had “signed a sworn statement admitting that all three articles he published in The New Republic were exaggerations and falsehoods — fabrications containing only ‘a smidgen of truth,’ in the words of our source.”

Read the rest here