Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Oh Yeah, The Democrats Supported The Prez When George Bush Was The Prez!

Let's take the Wayback Machine back to 2003, when the current Secretary of State told her audience about dissent (strange, there was no YouTube video) in 2003:

"I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic, and we should stand up and say, 'We are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration'"

And let's take the Wayback Machine to Inauguration day 2001, what did Democrat partisans do? They protested before President Bush ascended to the office. This line really gets me:

"...protesters who hurled insults, bottles, tomatoes and an egg."

And before you say boo, tell me are bottles safe to throw at people? What if they miss? When the time came to put aside partisanship, the Democrats refused.

Now we have 9/11: Do you remember Maureen Dowd? We entered a new world on 9/11 and she is nitpicking President Bush on 9/12. As we were ready to go into Afghanistan, there were protests. Where were the Liberal leaders?

Then someone in the White House read Peter Hopkirk's, The Great Game and understood how Afghanistan is not the place the fight Al-Queda It was an idea, that as a former democrat made sense: End a dictator, build a democracy in an area surrounded by Dictators and Monarchists. Take the Wayback Machine to 1990, New York City and I was protesting against President George H. W. Bush for not installing a Democracy in the Middle East

So, President George W. Bush, following the precedent of history in Afghanistan and following Wilsonian ideals as a way to defeat terrorism (and one of it's sponsors) endorses the Democrats 1990 ideals. Kumbaya, right? Wrong.

The Iraq war begets Daily Kos, Huffington Post and Code Pink. On almost every leftist Blog since Rush Limbaugh gave his speech, there have been two excuses:

1. "We expected President Bush to fail,"

2. "We'd support him, but..."

If you wrote or believed #1, then why didn't Democrats lift a finger to help Bush win his war and bring the troops home? If you wrote or believed #2, is that the attitude you have at work? "I'd do this job on the movie set, but I think the plot sucks," "I'd work on your computer but I think PC's suck," How fast would you be fired?

Once upon a time, Democrats believed in spreading Democracy -- when a Republican President signed onto the cause, the Democrats rejected that philosophy.

My question is this, given the historical precedent of "politics stops at the water's edge," what did you do to support the president at the water's edge? If you did not, how do you rid the world of a Dictator without a military force? Give a historical example using the UN showing how it is done.

Saturday, July 18, 2009

Officer Crowley vs. Proffessor gates

unbelievable! Prof Gates has already said he will take the police dept to court - you know "for the least among us" (WAVES BS flag)
Officer Crowley was responding to a 911 call from another Harvard employee who told the police she knew the professor was away on a trip. The cops were trying to do their job. He should sue for slander - for those of you outside this area Officer Crowley teaches sensitivity and race relations classes, also there were two other officers on the scene one black, the other Hispanic both stand by officer Crowley.
The officers were responding to a 911 call - the woman said two black men had broken open the door (true - the prof said the door was jammed had to break it open)- the cops wanted to see some identification proving it was his home and to make sure everything was ok - around here it isn't a race thing it's a class thing and much like the president this professor is an elitist snob who thinks he above answering to the police. A 911 call in a wealthy neighborhood that has been having a lot break ins recently (INCLUDING Prof Gates own house!!),Could there have been someone hiding threatening the guy at the door, could there have been a restraining order and domestic violence... if he weren't "partly black"they would be saying the police were doing their job and the home owner was obnoxious.

The professor was a rude abusive jerk, a neighbor reported a crime and the police officers were responding to a citizen report. it is stupid to think in this day and age, that cops have nothing better to do than stop a person just cause they are black, give me a freaking break. they always gotta play the racial card, its stupid, we dont owe black or whites any special treatment, dont matter the color, and the fact that it happens , is human error, they dropped the charges so he wasnt harmed, he just got his panties in a wad and used the racial card, its bull!!!!!!!!!!! then Obama getting on tv and making the situation worse, that doesnt help moral in our police departments for sure, he should have stayed the heck out of it, turn that coin around if the guy had been white, do ya think Obama would have spoken about it on tv, i rather doubt it, .talk about being racial.

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

What was that Joe Biden said about patriotism?

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Sotomayor, Gates and Race

Soon-to-be-Justice Sonia Sotomayor has called herself "a product of affirmative action" who was "accepted rather readily into Princeton" despite test scores that were lower than those of more privileged classmates due to "cultural biases built into testing."

Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., capitalizing on the avalanche of publicity he touched off by attributing to racism his July 16 arrest at his home by a white police officer, has declared that America is "racist" and "classist" and that "there haven't been fundamental structural changes in America.... The only black people who truly live in a post-racial world in America all live in a very nice house on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue."

What Sotomayor and Gates share is a habit of drawing dubious lessons about race from their own experiences.
"Affirmative action" that may have helped her get into Princeton, and her admission was resoundingly vindicated by her stellar academic performance there."

That the problem with "equal opportunity" - does anybody think that, after a little help getting into Princeton, she made it the rest of the way on her own. That she was never given extra credits to keep up with whites
. Blacks have had a foot up for at least 45 years. It is time for all of us to be equal now. Either fish or cut bait. Cut out the 'my Granny was a slave' act. It's getting to be boring.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

The Tragedy of Michael Jackson

I always concede it’s possible that Jackson never sexually molested anyone. Possible. But even if he never did, the way he carried out his interest in children was still inappropriate. At best, he used them as props for his own therapy. That would be the best realistic interpretation. The remaining realistic interpretations go downhill from there.
Possible? Yes, but not Probable.
For sure there is something very wrong with this man. Aside from molesting children, he cheated and reneged on many of his business contracts as well. Always got a pass, people always making excuses for him. Maybe all of those people are responsible for enabling this man to become the monster inside as well as out.
that much body mutilation isn’t normal by any account.

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Rush's statement, "I want Obama's Policies to Fail.


I guess Rush was more in tune with Most Americans when he said he wanted Obamas Policies to fail,

Monday, June 8, 2009

American Conservatism

One reason I believe modern American conservatism, if true to its basic tenets, is better for gay people, is that it trusts the private sector to address social concerns and social change. It doesn’t ask that the government mandate that individuals adopt certain precepts to guide their lives or follow certain codes of conduct. It trusts us to do that on our own and to turn to institutions of our own choosing, whether religious or secular, to help us make important personal decisions.

We don’t believe the state should place particular burdens on us, or grant us special favors. It shouldn’t restrict our freedom nor that of those who don’t want to associate with us. After all, if they’re free not to associate with us, that means we’re free not to associate with them.

When the state gets out of the way, private institutions can more readily adapt to meet social changes, as have the growing number of businesses which have adopted non-discrimation policies and which offer benefits to same-sex domestic partners of their employees.

Liberals, however, believe that social change comes from the state. And while those advocating state action on our behalf may do so out of the most noble of motives, once the state starts acting on our behalf, when does it stop? How far must the state go to reach the oft-stated goal of gay rights’ activists–the achievement of “full equality” (whatever that means)