Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Just Say no Deal’

 A few words about justice and justification.

People can find a way to justify pretty much anything. The only requirement is the ability to momentarily (or in some cases permanently) suspend reality. It’s like a different facet of denial in that way.

Consider this, Al Capone, notorious mobster, murderer, breaker of the law, considered himself to be a misunderstood and persecuted individual who , in his own words, was a “great benefactor to the people”.

I guess he thought that his running of the gambling, prostitution and illegal liquor establishments was somehow a humanitarian effort. All those murders committed by him and at his request were obviously acts of “public service” and he should have gotten the keys to the city!  

Apparently to Capone the law and it’s enforcers were unfairly and unjustly persecuting him because they expected him to obey the laws of the land and they intended to stop him and prosecute him for not doing so. I suppose every criminal in the prison system probably thinks the same way. It’s part of their make up. If they admitted to themselves, or anyone for that matter, that they were in the wrong they might be forced to really think about their actions and the repercussions of them. Thus to them they are innocent and wronged by the system.

The Justice system sees things quite differently indeed. If you break the law you will pay the price. Message: Don’t break the law and you won’t have a problem.

We’ve seen an awful lot of this in the last 19 months. It seems lots of law breaking has been “justified” and gone unpunished.

A prime example is the recent hacking into the personal email account of Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. It’s old news to anybody who surfs the net and it’s starting to get some exposure on MSM. Her personal email account was hacked, password changed and screen shots of her emails, contact list, photos of her family and email addresses and cell phone numbers of her family were published on the web by the hacker.

I have heard time and again from Obama supporters that the hacker was supposedly justified because there were reports she might be using her personal email to hide work related things she doesn’t want the public to see. Bullshit! Even if that were the case it is for officials and law enforcement to find out not some snot-nosed college punk who proudly calls himself an Obamacrat.

We are not allowed to take the law into our own hands in this country for a reason. So even if the allegations were true (the hacker himself admitted there was nothing incriminating in the emails) it is not the “job” of non-professionals to break the law to find out.

I have also heard that Sarah Palin supposedly “deserved” it or that this should prove she is incapeable of being VP because her email was hacked. First off who deserves to have their privacy invaded? Second how in the hell is that her fault or does it prove that she is not up for the job? Someone broke the law and invaded her privacy but we’re told that this makes her unqualified?

So what about when Obama’s, Hillary’s and McCain’s passport info was accessed illegally?  (by people connected with the Obama campaign no less) Wouldn’t that make Obama unqualified too by those standards? I mean if it makes Palin unqualified how come Obama was just a “victim” when it happened to him? Answer: because according to Obama and the Obamacrats he is ALWAYS the victim in any circumstance. It’s just a given.

When ever there is any question they automatically give the points to their guy just like the RBC meeting in May when the DNC gave Obama the uncommitted delegates and then the gave him 4 delegates that Senator Clinton earned even though his name wasn’t even on the ballot. Yup! And they broke their own sunshine rules to do it with a secret vote during their 2 1/2 hour lunch break.

Oh but they were “justified” in doing so because, well, because they wanted Obama to win. We’re up to here with their “justification”.

This is far from the first time Obama and his supporters have broken the law. Hillary supporters have been hacked, threatened, had their blogs shut down, been kicked off of previously democratic web sites that are nothing more than Obama shills now and the list goes on and on. Alot of these activities are illegal but we’re told that the Bots are justified and if we didn’t have the sites there they wouldn’t be able to hack them. It’s our own fault according to these people because we won’t just shut up and go away.

So I guess in their view if you speak out against them or speak out for what is right you are standing in their way and according to them that is a crime. I have news for them it is not a crime to refuse to vote for someone. It is not a crime to speak out for what you beleive is right. In fact is the opposite. Speaking out against corruption and evil is a civil duty of the highest order!

Then we have the fact that the hacker in question turns out to be the 20 year old son of a Democratic Senator from Tennessee. According to one MSM source he says “he was just playing around” and there are supposedly no charges being filed? That’s what I heard on CBS last night anyway.

I don’t care if he was playing around or not it is a crime to access someone’s personal correspondence and it should be treated as such. Plus they said he was the son of a “prominent democrat” but failed to mention just how prominent. Just one more example of how Obama has the media in his pocket.

If this was my email account, or yours, or anybody else’s they would be steaming mad and rightly so. Why is it only a crime if it’s against Obama but not when it’s against his opponents? This kid should be prosecuted for breaking the law and the media should be honest about the fact this is a crime and who his father really is. We are tired of them protecting the politicians they want to protect and crucifying the ones they don’t.

Actually we are tired of the media as a whole period. They should just go find jobs as hot dog vendors or carnival workers and leave the news to real journalists with scruples and ethics.

What about the crime Obama committed by trying to stall the troops withdrawal from Iraq for his own political gain? It is a crime. It is a felony. He violated the Logan Act. It is treason.

Thanks to Shtuey at http://ohmyvalve.blogspot.com/ for the excellent video!

Not to mention the fact it’s about as phony and hypocritical as you can get to campaign on the whole “Stop the war and bring our troops home” all the while wheeling and dealing behind the scenes to manipulate the public.

I suppose IF we hear anything about it from the MSM it will be somehow “justified” too. I suppose Obama is “justifying” any deaths that occur because of the delays caused by his meddling as a sacrifice that must be made in order for him to gain control and therefore “save” us! Pfffft! Don’t even get me started on that one!

Every single one of the soldiers serving overseas is worth more than a hundred Obamas! Every single one of them is out there fighting to protect the rights Obama would bargain away at the drop of a hat and issue some lame “justification” afterwords. He is not worth the spit they shine their boots with!

On a lighter note I found this on http://harddriller.wordpress.com/2008/09/20/new-nickel-design/ while tag surfing!

It was just too funny not to steal!

 

Oh such sweet truth!

 

CQ

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Nice! Real patriotic NOT! Here is the first of three articles that tell the truth about how Obama feels about Iraq and our troops there.

Obama Interferes In US-Iraq Agreement

 

In direct interference in US foreign policy and the execution of the war in Iraq, Barack Obama today told the Iraqi foreign minister, according to the New York Times’ Caucus blog report,

While the Bush administration would like to see an agreement reached before the summer’s political conventions, Mr. Obama said today that he opposed such a timetable. 

“My concern is that the Bush administration, in a weakened state politically, ends up trying to rush an agreement that in some ways might be binding to the next administration, whether it’s my administration or Senator McCain’s administration,” Mr. Obama said.

According to Obama, “The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that’s currently made.”
What else could he say when confronted with such effrontery by someone not the president who might be.

The CBS reporton the phone conversation doesn’t think it’s significant enough to mention this part of their conversation, nor that regardless of the progress that’s been made Obama says he’s firm on withdrawing US troops quickly. Jenifer Rubin at Commentary’s Contentions blog, however, correctly sums it up: “Great Surge, Let’s Quit.”

The Washington Post’s editorial today says of the agreement,

It means that Iraq, a country with the world’s second largest oil reserves and a strategic linchpin of the Middle East, just might emerge from the last five years of war and turmoil as an American ally, even if its relations with Iran remain warm. So it’s hard to fathom why Democrats in Congress have joined Ayatollah Khamenei in denouncing the U.S.-Iraqi agreements even before they are written….

 

Ed Morrissey comments,

So why haven’t the Democrats shown more enthusiasm? They would have to admit that they were wrong about the surge, wrong about Maliki, and wrong to declare defeat fourteen months ago. Democrats from Barack Obama down have insisted that the US should abandon Iraq as a failed mission rather than adjust to better strategies. Had the Bush administration listened to them, Iran would already be in charge of Iraq through Moqtada al-Sadr.

 

Another example to add to the many that Barack Obama is a dangerous poseur.

Bruce Kesler | Jun. 16, 2008 | 4:52 PM

So not only did he meddle to try and influence the elections he used the troops that he claims he is so concerned about to do it! The media did know but said nothing. I see the pattern is not straying from the traditional Obama “whatever it takes to climb the ladder” mindset that we’ve all come to know so well.

Here’s more:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07292008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/os_tour_de_farce_122049.htm?page=0

 

O’s Tour de Farce  by Amir Taheri 

Posted: 3:24 am
July 29, 2008

TERMED a “learning” trip, Sen. Barack Obama‘s eight- day tour of eight nations in the Middle East and Europe turned out to be little more than a series of photo ops to enhance his international credentials.

“He looked like a man in a hurry,” a source close to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said last week. “He was not interested in what we had to say.”

Still, many Iraqis liked Obama’s claim that the improved situation in Iraq owed to Iraqi efforts rather than the Gen. David Petraeus-led surge. In public and private comments, Obama tried to give the impression that the Iraqis would’ve achieved the same results even without the greater resources America has poured into the country since 2007.

In private, though, Iraqi officials admit that Obama’s analysis is “way off the mark.” Without the surge, the Sunni tribes wouldn’t have switched sides to help flush out al Qaeda. And the strong US military presence enabled the new Iraqi army to defeat Iran-backed Shiite militias in Basra and Baghdad.

Nevertheless, in public at least, no Iraqi politician wants to appear more appreciative of American sacrifices than the man who may become the next US president.

Iraqis were most surprised by Obama’s apparent readiness to throw away all the gains madein Iraq simply to prove that he’d been right in opposing the 2003 overthrow of Saddam Hussein. “He gave us the impression that the last thing he wanted was for Iraq to look anything like a success for the United States,” a senior Iraqi officialtold me. “As far as he is concerned, this is Bush’s war and must end in lack of success, if not actual defeat.”

Even so, Obama knows that most Americans believe they’re still at war with an enemy prepared to use terror against them. So he can’t do what his antiwar base wants – declare an end to the War on Terror and the start of a period of love and peace in which “citizens of the world” build bridges between civilizations.

That’s why Obama is trying to adopt Afghanistan as “his” war. He claims that Bush’s focus on Iraq has left Afghanistan an orphan in need of love and attention. Even though US military strategy is to enable America to fight two major wars simultaneously, Obama seems to believe that only one war is possible at a time.

But what does that mean practically?

Obama says he wants to shift two brigades (some of his advisers say two battalions) from Iraq to Afghanistan. But where did that magicalfigure come from? From NATO, which has been calling on its members to provide more troops since 2006.

NATO wants the added troops mainly to improve the position of its reserves in Afghanistan. The alliance doesn’t face an actual shortage of combat units – it’s merely facing a rotation schedule that obliges some units to stay in the field for up to six weeks longer than is normal for NATO armies.

Overall, NATO hopes that its members will have no difficulty providing the 5,000 more troops it needs for a “surge.” So there’s no need for the US to abandon Iraq in order to help Afghanistan.

The immediate effect of Obama’s plan to abandon Iraq and send more troops to Afghanistan is to ease pressure on other NATO members to make a greater contribution. Even in Paris, some critics think that President Nicolas Sarkozyshould postpone sending more troops until after the US presidential election. “If President Obamacan provide all the manpower needed in Afghanistan, there is no need for us to commit more troops,” said a Sarkozy security adviser.

Obama’s move would suit Sarkozy fine because he’s reducing the size of the French army and closing more than 80 garrisons. Other Europeans would also be pleased. German Chancellor Angela Merkelwill soon face a difficult general election in which her main rivals will be calling for an end to “the Afghan adventure.”

Today, with the sole exception of Spain (where the mildly anti-American Socialist Party is in power), pro-US parties govern Europe. These parties feel pressure from the Bush administration to translate their pro-American claims into actual support for the Afghanistan war effort. By promising to shoulder the burden, Obama is letting the European allies off the hook.

Obama doesn’t seem to have noticed the European scene’s subtleties. Despite his claim that he came to listen, he seems to have heard nothing of interest during his 10,000-mile trip.

Having announced his strategy before embarking on his “listening tour,” he couldn’t be expected to change his mind simply because facts on the ground offered a different picture.

In Paris, a friendly reporter asked the Illinois senator if there was anything that he’d heard or seen during his visit that might persuade him to alter anyaspect of his polices. Obama’s answer was clear: no.

Amir Taheri’s next book, “The Persian Night: Iran Under the Khomeinist Revolution,” is due out this fall.

 

So Obama saw the whole tour as a photo op. Not news. That he tried to interfere in foreign affairs for his own political gain? Big, game changing news. This article was from July, the previous one from June yet we haven’t really heard much about this until now. The media for the most part is beyond not doing their job they are now doing Obama’s job.

The latest again from the New York Post is by the same author and is dated today. Really informative.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_tried_to_stall_gis_iraq_withdrawal_129150.htm?page=0

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview.

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops – and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its “state of weakness and political confusion.”

“However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open.” Zebari says.

There’s more. Click the link to read the entire article.

The idea you might get here from reading these things about Senator Obama is that he really doesn’t care as much as he claims about the troops and getting them home. He cares about how he can spin this to favor him in the election. How refreshingly new and full of hope and change! (Sarcasm off sorry  couldn’t resist)

Mr. We need to Just admit defeat and bring our guys home decided he wants them to stay a bit longer because he doesn’t want the Republicans to look less lik the Devil if people know that they did at least one thing right. The surge that Obama did not support actually worked to some degree and the American officials are actually working with the Iraqis to get things under control and get our troops headed home. Remember how hard he fought to admit the surge actually worked? How about the NAFTA thing with Canada anybody remember that? How he denied it all and then had to admit that he did just what he said he would not do. Pander to the guys he was railing against just to make him look “good”.

That’s a joke. Nothing could make him look good to me. Everthing about him screams narcicistic, arrogant fraud. He is not above using anybody and anything to further his own career and adgenda.

Oh I forgot to mention that what Obama did by trying to interfere in the politics of a foriegn country without authorization from our government is illegal. It is against The Logan Act.

So yes by any other name it is still a stinky, fake, hypocritical rose just the same! (Sorry Shakesphere!)

CQ

Read Full Post »

 

You know I’ve been back and forth with this many times over the last year or so. Should I just change my registration to Independent or Unaffiliated? Or should I stay a Dem because the only way I can affect real change is from within? Many of my fellow Dems and Hillary Supporters have been agonizing over this for quite a while now. Some have already left the party and I, for one, consider it a great loss.

Many of us have been considering who to give our votes to as we know we will not be voting for Obama. Most of us have been subjected to ridicule, scorn, Internet flaming and even real threats, stalking and in some cases abuse. We’ve lost friendships and family over it or at the very least those relationships are strained.

I’ve had several friends who have tried to convince me “for my own good” of course that it doesn’t really matter what happened in the primaries that it’s over now and I should just move forward.

In my experience “moving forward” is not going to do anything other than condoning the fraudulent process that got us here and therefore rewarding and inviting more of the same. If they get away with it this time they will use more voter suppression tactics and threats and intimidation to subvert the process next time. You can count on it. If you give in to it you are feeding it and it will grow.

You do not fix a problem by ignoring it’s existence or by allowing it to go on unchecked.

I have other friends who say I just need to get over my anger. Hillary lost, she endorsed Obama end of story. He has a D beside his name what else do I need to know?

Did she really lose? Who won the popular vote? Who got the most votes of any primary candidate ever? Why do Caucuses only represent about 3% of the population but they are allotted delegates in the same manner as primaries which represent a much larger percentage of the population?

What was the final delegate count really? I mean BEFORE the forced and scripted roll call that was halted for a fake show of unity. The pledged delegate count was very close before Obama decided to restore Michigan and Florida to full vote status yet they never reported how that changed the actual delegate counts.

The media and the DNC swept all that under the rug since they were already busy planning how to spend the profits they intended to make on this Obama Gravy Train.

Not to mention the uncommitted delegates and the four Clinton delegates that were given to him in Michigan even though he was not on the ballot. Now that those were full votes it makes twice many delegates he gained by fraudulent methods. It’s twice as many delegates for Hillary too. She won both states hands down. 

I  don’t think that’s something I want to get over. The day when there is no outrage at cheating will be a cold day in Hell in my book and the books of many, many people in this country.

Truthfully for many of us it ceased to be about Hillary Clinton on May 31st, 2008. That was the day it became about so much more than Hillary vs. Obama it became about right and wrong. it was the shock of seeing our “leadership” distort the rules and pervert the process in order to spot Obama a few points because I guess they knew he would need them to “win” that created the outrage and the movement that is PUMA.

They have only themselves to blame. In a democratic society cheating will always cause outrage. You could say it’s the expected reaction even. The fact that it was carried out by our own side does not make it acceptable. I feel as strongly about it as I do Rev. Wright and his racist, anti-American rants. There is no context in which that is acceptable.

Most people in this country are decent, hardworking people who care very much about the difference between right and wrong. They work very hard to live by those values and to instill them in their children. Party makes no difference to those people but truth does. As does honesty, integrity, loyalty and compassion. These are things most people feel very strongly about regardless of their typical voting preferences. Things like these are deal breakers.

I have also heard the Roe v Wade argument to death. Won’t happen, we have a Dem controlled congress. The Supreme Court Argument. The Palin is pro-life argument. I don’t know many republicans that aren’t so why would they think this is news? I’ve heard them all.

I’ve also gotten a chorus of defensive stuff too over the exposure of Obamabot behaviour. For instance my last post that linked to Hillbuzz and the video of Democratic Underground posters and their EBay listing of Sarah Palin’s 4 month old baby. Of course the fact that this was on a Democratic blog and the posters were long time members with 1000+ posts each would NOT suggest to me that this is a Republican strategy. Someone is faking it to make the Dems look bad. No it would not suggest that to me at all but you be the judge. Some people! Eyes rolling!

The other things they do also like the recent discovery by the custodian at Invesco Field of 84 trash bags filled with American flags, Obama/Biden campaign signs, empty pizza boxes and other assorted trash. The custodian found them in the dumpster and called around eventually getting in touch with the Veterans and the Boy Scouts who sorted, rolled and recycled them by handing them out at a GOP campaign event. Flags that people did not want to keep were to be donated to be placed on Veteran’s graves.

The fact that Democrats who were touting this convention as the “Greenest Ever” would be so wasteful and that they would treat our flag with such disrespect is appalling to most people. I have heard though that this too must have been republicans, that everybody throws flags away, that they were supposedly “stolen” and intended for reuse. I’ve heard that it wouldn’t have been the Dems’ fault the custodian would be to blame. Obviously they didn’t read the part of the story where it said the custodian found them in the dumpster and I saw photos they were not being recycled they were in with the garbage.

Anybody remember when Obama went to Oregon and his people set up a port-a-potty on the memorial for a fallen police officer? That was probably republicans too. I know LOTS of republicans who go around volunteering to help set up for Obama events. (Sarcasm OFF.)

I can identify with that a tiny bit however because I know my friends are really just in denial. They do not want to admit to themselves that people could do these kinds of things and the idea that it could be members of the party you have held dear and worked hard for, been a loyal soldier for, well that’s a bitter pill to swallow.

I have a feeling though that swallow it they will. They have 54 days to let it sink in. 54 days to decide to do the right thing. I’m confident many of my friends will do just that because in the end they are decent, hardworking and compassionate people. They will not legitimize the atrocities that took place in the name of a win at any cost quest for power. They will not give their votes or their trust to those who cannot be trusted.

Obama and his supporters will understand in November when people go to the polls with determination to do what is right and what is best for our country.

In the end it is far less important who you vote for than who you vote against.

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Very interesting post on   http://obambi.wordpress.com/2008/08/13/payoffmedia/ makes one wonder if this is all bought and paid for. As in The One must have the best agent money can buy. Hollywood probably hand picked for him. If anybody knows how to fool the public it’s Hollywood right? It’s not to far a stretch to specualte this after all The One was taking acting lessons from George Clooney too.

Listen I have nothing against Hollywood in general. I like that they produce entertainment even if I don’t like everything produced. I simply excersise my right to free choice and change the channel/DVD/CD or whatever. Problem solved. Crisis averted.  I’m not one  who believes in restricting artists just what I choose to view/hear ect. (I confess I really, really wish the Reality TV folks would just get their own channel so I didn’t have to surf past them but I digress.)

I’m also not one who believes in restricting what news does/does not get reported with a few exceptions for National Security and such. I don’t think it’s smart to report that you are in such and such place with the troops getting ready to attack …or such and such precautions have been taken to prevent access from terrorists. You know I understand we have to censor things like that to protect ourselves but should that extend to protecting political candidates from scandals of their own making? Isn’t that helping to create a false image? Is that even ethical by any standard of journalism?

Yes, I do want to know if someone paid the media to keep the Edwards fiasco under wraps. I want to know if someone is being paid NOT to vet Obama in a serious manner. Are the Media being paid to keep the Larry Sinclair story under wraps? How about the Odinga, Rezco, Auchi and Ayers stories? George Soros’ real connections to Obama and the coup of the Democratic Party? How about ACORN and the falsified voter registration scandal? Um…. the (fake) birth certificate?

We know that the media has colluded with the DNC in protecting The One for their own reasons. The question is what are those reasons and/or are they related in any way to money and/or special considerations?

We know that most of the media refuses to report that the PUMA and JSND movement is real, headed by real democrats who are fed up not closet republicans and that they are gaining any traction. They are for the most part participating in the DNC created myth that the party is unified. Paid for?

How about the latest article from the “Seriously You’re Still Calling Yourselves A News Network?” folks at CNN.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/12/clinton/index.html

But it would be the first time in the modern era of presidential primaries that a losing candidate has so visibly endorsed an opponent so many months before the convention, and then gone on to have his or her name placed in nomination.

According to this phony bit we are supposed to imagine that it is not customary to have a traditional roll call vote at the Democratic Convention. No, of couse it’s not! That’s why it’s always refered to as TRADITIONAL. Because it’s not CUSTOMARY right? Cheeeez and Crackers! Who is paying for this tripe might we ask? Who indeed?

This couldn’t possibly be a smoke screen to hide the fact that The One is afraid, yes VERY AFRAID of his former opponent could it?

CQ

Read Full Post »

This information is coming to light through the blogger’s network. I think it is extremely important that we get the word out about this. We are NOT saying that Barrack Obama himself is involved although we don’t know either way I would highly doubt it. I don’t think he would be so stupid as to be personally involved in this kind of thing.  Having said that what is being said is that at least three seperate IP’s linked to the Blogger accounts that were shut down by a coordinated spam flagging attack were traced back to mybarrackobama.com by law enforcement and are currently being investigated.

Citizen Wells has an excellent post on the matter:

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/08/03/obama-camp-stops-free-speech-democrat-party-left-wing-brown-shirts-nazi-germany-revisited-barackobamacom-fairness-doctrine-nancy-pelosi/#comment-3064

Here is another from bloggasm:

http://bloggasm.com/whos-responsible-for-shutting-down-a-number-of-anti-obama-blogspot-accounts#comment-77765

Finally here is a link to macsmind where the proof was uncovered:

http://macsmind.com/wordpress/2008/08/02/macsmind-hacking-update/#comment-47531

Truthfully I believe Senator Obama though he is not personally responsable, SHOULD DENOUNCE THIS KIND OF ABUSE OF THE INTERNET! I believe he should come out publicly and denounce this sort of behaviour and let people know it will not be tolerated on his official website. If he does not then he is by proxy condoning such behaviour!

This country was founded on the principals of freedom and justice for all. These freedoms include the right to free speech. If we have come to the point where free speech has become a luxury only to be enjoyed by those in power or those who can intimidate, harass, threaten and over-power the voices of the rest then we must act now to restore freedom before it’s too late!

It’s a very thin line these folks are walking. One blog, who shall not be named as I refuse to give them any more free publicity for thier disgusting site, makes no bones about the fact they feel they are free to post anything they want. I would agree with them to a point. That point, which they have gone way past, is where they feel they should be allowed this freedom but those who disagree with them are fodder for their jokes and their intimadation tactics, of which I myself have been subjected to and they include hateful and threatening posts, impersonating people I know in real life to send me threats and harassment. Impersonating me in other forums and blogs saying terrible things, claiming I will “never work again” (Funny since I am self employed. I don’t know who they think will fire me.)

They have called me a racist, a republican, bitter, xenophobic (This is really funny because the person posting that one seemed as though that word wuold be out of their normal vocabulary from the rest of the post.). They posted my personal information on their blog and all this because I visit the site of Larry Sinclair who they feel does not have a right to free speech.

As a matter of fact they are so against Larry Sinclair being allowed to express himself they have threatened his life, shut down his blogs with coordinated complaints and attacks, they have gone out of their way trying to have him arrested and have suceeded on one occasion so far, they have taken it upon themselves to call the Social Security Administration claiming that Larry is a fraud, a con man and should have his disability benefits (His only sorce of income. ) and his medical coverage denied.

So this is the rub. They are allowed to freely speak or write what they want but they are not allowed according to the law to stop someone else from excersising their own free speech. Nor are they allowed to try and interfere in someone’s life, job, financial situation or medical coverage! How is any of that OK by any standard?

Yes Obama supporters have the right to free speech. No they do not have the right to silence, harass or intimidate those who disagree!

Yes Larry Sinclair has a right to free speech. Yes Barrack Obama has the right to sue him if it is a lie.

No those idiots do not have the right to harass, intimidate and threaten Larry. No they do not have the right to interfere with his right to free speech, medical coverage and his lively hood just because they don’t believe him.

These people claim to be for freedom and the American way but it is not the American way at all to engage in such a thuggish and un-American behaviour.

We must expose these people/movements for what they really are bfore it is too late! If this kind of behaviour is tolerated even sanctioned by not only those who have the power to do something about it but also by the rest of us allowing this to stand then we will be seeing more of our hard won freedoms going by the wayside! We must stand up to the thugs and bullies and Senator Obama must do so also or he is guilty of condoning it by proxy!

Speak out people! Do not let this stuff stand!

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Please sign these petitions and send them on to your friends and family. if john McCain who is a true American WAR HERO had to deal with questions about his birth and legitimacy then Obama is and should be held to the same standard! If he has nothing to hide then why they fake BC on his website?

John Mccain actually showed his birth certificate (the real one on paper not some fake on the net) to a reporter is Obama man enough to do the same???? I DARE YOU BARRACK!

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/produce-obama-embossed-birth-certificate

This one is to impeach Obama for various legal reasons like recent drug use (at least ’99), ties to corrupt and anti-American people like Tony Rezco, Bill Ayers, Auchi, Farrakan just to name a few!

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/obamaimpeachment

We need to do everything we can NOW before it’s too late! If this moron gets elected somehow I fear we would not recognize our country within a year.

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Hillary has had far worse satire made about her and has had lots of mean spirited insults hurled at her in this election season and all along but especially when she was the First Lady. Didn’t hear Obama complaining about any of that. Nope he has comedians making jokes about menopause and ho’s.

Remember all those Hillary nutcrackers and the Bros before Ho’s T-shirts? How about the very real attacks she dealt with on a daily basis in the media? Like when they said she was only in the race because Bill had an affair or when they said she was pimping out her daughter? How about when she was ridiculed for her hairstyles, not being a cookie baker, her pantsuits, her laugh, her voice?

They compared her to their mother-in-law, their ex-wife at probate and wondered if America would stand for watching a woman president age? Sound familiar? This stuff was all sanctioned by the Obama campaign although they wanted us to think the oppisite.

He attacks and then claims everyone is attacking him. He and his big mouth wife say all kinds of crude, inappropriate things in public and even on video tape and yet they whine that it’s not fair to attack them like that when they are called on it. “I’m proud of my country for the first time in my adult life..” springs to mind as does “How can you run the whitehouse if you can’t run your own” or “He’s been my spiritual mentor”, “Typical white person”, “God Damn America”? Ok paraphrasing here but we’ve all heard it so many times we know it by heart anyway.

So it’s ok to critisize and attack his opponents and he will, if forced to, make some weak comment and try to brush it off or better yet insist that although yes, there was sexisim in the campaign, it was not harmful to Mrs. Clinton (OOOHH it really pisses me off when he calls her Mrs. and NOT Senator! It’s called RESPECT and she has earned it!) and furthermore, according to Obama, there was more than one woman who was battered by it. WTF???

Seriously, he can barely admit that Hillary had to deal with a plethora of sexisim and that he and his supporters were behind a lot of it. Yet we are supposed to feel sorry for Michelle because she got attacked for stupid crap that actually came out of her own f-ing mouth! 

Sorry! I don’t feel one bit sorry for her she brought every bit of it on herself. I DON’T condone sexisim ever and do not condone it against Michelle Obama any more than I do against Hillary Clinton. Having said that I can hardly see how they can complain about attacks for something one has actually said or done!

Oh, that’s right, I forgot. The Obamas are supposed to be special and to be treated with kid gloves. After all they are both where they are today because of affirmative action and special, preferential treatment. Before you start sreaming I will say I don’t have  a problem with affirmative action in general. I think it was created to try and level the field and hopefully it will eventually die a quiet and respected death after the field has been deemed at least mostly level. Having said that I don’t think it should have any place in our political election process.

When you are talking about electing the people to represent all of us and to be in charge of our country then I beleive it is our duty to elect the people we trust to do the job best and the people who have earned the right to do so with their service and commitment to this country. I don’t believe that means propping up someone who lost a contest by huge margins and calling them the clear winner and calling the actual winner of said contest a loser!  I don’t believe a 36 or a 41 point win is meaningless regardless of what the media idiots tell me.

I also don’t believe John Edwards when he says the party has spoken and so has he because it made no sense coming on the heels of such an astronomical loss. Every time he lost big we saw a trotting out of super delegates claiming he was the clear winner and we better get behind him. Yet if he were really the clear winner as they wanted us to believe we would not have needed them to come out and tell us so. It would have been obvious. You know like the DNC bias that’s as plain as the nose on your face.

These are the tactics of Senator Obama. Throw shit as far and as fast as you can then duck and cover. You can blame it on someone else and drive over them with your bus, ‘er I mean campaign. Cry that you are being persecuted for being black and then call everyone who disagrees with you, regardless of the reason a racist or republican and every word spoken or written against you  a smear whether it’s true or not. If they complain about the shit you threw at them just say that yes there was some shit but they were not the only ones who got some on them. So what if it was on your hands!  The last rule is the most important. If the media quits bringing you presents and starts depicting you realisticly come out with a statment saying that it’s tasteless and inexcusable making sure they don’t see your guys working on your next smear campaign.

Honestly, I don’t care much for the cartoon either but if Obama wants to run for president then he should be at least as tough as his competition and not expect to be treated like royalty or some spoiled, rich brat that people cow-tow to. In short grow up and deal with it because if he were to ever get elected this is probably mild compared to the attacks he would undoubtably endure as president. If you can’t take the heat….

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »