Once Again, Progressives Prove Willing to Politicize Everything
Last week’s mass murder at Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’s meet-up with her Arizona constituents was immediately politicized by progressive politicians and media figures. But it’s wrong to see this as an unusual event. It’s the way things are always done when progressives have any power to reach the public: everything is political. And President Obama is doing his very best to take advantage of the situation.
The politicization of all things is a tactic derived from the foundations of the progressive mentality and in fact necessitated by it. Progressivism assumes that all things should be made fully subject to the rule of experts. In the present case, an atrocity has been used as the pretext for arguing that progressives should be given even greater and more explicit control over what people can say in public, by giving the federal government additional power over the media.
That’s what this really has been about. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman started the ball rolling by asserting that “violent acts are what happen when you create a climate of hate. And it’s long past time for the GOP’s leaders to take a stand against the hate-mongers.”
This is in fact a notion that the progressives have offered with increasing boldness, indeed shamelessness, over the past few decades, and not only in op-eds and editorials but also in allegedly scientific studies (frequently, in fact) and in movies and TV shows. Soon after Krugman made his fatuous and contemptible assertion, the deluge came.
The hypocrisy of this campaign of vilification is obvious. One remembers the explicit calls among progressives for the assassination of President George W. Bush, and this very week countless people tweeted their desire that conservative political figure Sarah Palin be murdered. This sort of demonization of one’s enemies is not the exclusive property of any political position, but as the present instance demonstrates with charming vividness, it is the progressive movement that practices it most shamelessly.
Most sensible people surely saw from the start that the killer, Jared Lee Loughner, was not just a Rush Limbaugh listener, if at all. In the days since the attack, the evidence has mounted, suggesting he was likely suffering from a serious mental illness, probably schizophrenia. On Tuesday, in a poignant story from the Associated Press, a neighbor of Loughner was quoted as observing strange behavior by him as a child:
Linda McKinley, 62, has lived down the street from the Loughner family for decades and said the parents could not be nicer — but that she had misgivings about Jared as he got older.
“As a parent, my heart aches for them,” she said.
She added that when she was outside watering her plants she would see Jared riding down the street on his bike, often talking to himself or yelling out randomly to no one.
McKinley recalled that once he yelled to some children on the street: “I’m coming to get you!”
At that point, at least, the media attacks by the progressive left should have abated. They did not, because the actual cause of the attacks was never the point. Muzzling all opposition to the progressive agenda was the sole intent of the crusade. Thus the assault against the right intensified even as more evidence arose to characterize the attack as motivated by Loughner’s personal demons, such as the observations of the prominent psychiatrist Dr. E. Fuller Torrey, who pointed out that the particular type of mass killing Loughner committed is characteristic of certain kinds of schizophrenia and typically has nothing to do with the political climate.
Additional direct evidence of instability on Loughner’s part was provided by revelations of his scary postings on online gamer sites and the fears expressed by students and faculty at Pima Community College when he attended classes on the campus last year. Yet the progressive commentariat and its political satraps were unwilling to allow this crisis to go to waste, intensifying their campaign to turn it to their political advantage.
Indeed, one of the few really slick and skillful uses of the murders to tar the right was that of President Obama, in his speech at Wednesday night’s memorial service and political pep rally. Obama merits praise for injecting some much-needed dignity into the proceedings and explicitly calling for an end to the political blame game:
Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let us use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy.
The main thrust of his speech, however, confirmed the progressives’ take on the situation: that it was about what people can and should be allowed to say in public. “If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate, as it should,” the president said, “let’s make sure it’s worthy of those we have lost. Let’s make sure it’s not on the usual plane of politics and point scoring and pettiness that drifts away with the next news cycle.”
One presumes that he was not referring to his own widely documented use of martial metaphors and gangster talk when referring to his political opponents, and given that the whole “climate of hate” bugbear is a progressive trope, it’s clear enough to whom he was referring. In the context of the past week’s unjustified, blanket attacks against the political right, the president’s statement that “what we can’t do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on one another” was in fact darkly comic.






It so happens that:
1. The massacre occurred on a Saturday, when there isn’t talk radio on.
2. It occurred in Arizona, a State that BHO has taken to Court.
3. The primary (intended) victim was a Democratic Congresswoman.
4. Immediately afterwords it was pointed out that this congressional district was one “targeted” by Sarah Palin in her Facebook page.
5. The incident happened about two months after the Democrats lost big in the November 2 elections.
So many coincidences, so many random events, only two days after W. Daley (one of the sons of that Chicago Daley) is named new chief of staff for BHO. He must be so lucky this Daley/BHO.
I don’t think they planned it, but I do think they planned what they would do when a suitable event occured.
If they hadn’t, little Paulie would not have been able to produce his attack piece within two hours of the murders. It would have taken him at least an hour to write it and edit it. He was summoned within minutes of the killings.
And the immediate piling on, en masse, by every one of the loons is a clear indication that the dog whistle was blown at maximum decible levels.
Since none of these rise to the level of a coincidence I can only conclude you hear voices in your head. If you remove your dental fillings it might help your reception or at least crowd out Rush Limbaugh.
As usual progressives seek to undermine the sane individuals “RIGHT” to choose. Crazy is crazy is crazy. Words do not kill, people kill..
If you want to blame anyone for this debacle the first step should be our compassionate ex-president Jimma’ Carter. He made it practically impossible to commit someone to a mental facility. He also made it politically incorrect to admit that you can’t handle you personal of family problems, we should all “take care” each other, even though most of us are not either trained or able to handle mental problems.
Maybe those on the left should stop the vitriolic, violent, and inappropriate language and making up lies about people they have never listened to. If they did they would probably find that while they disagree with them, these “enemies” are no more abhorrent than the Daily Kos, Huffington Post or John “the most unfunny man on TV” Stewart. Actually they are less so. They don’t wish others would die for one thing or that they are damaged in any way. They do wish they’d stop trying to destroy democracy, freedom and liberty and are willing to fight to make sure they can’t do anymore harm.
So if that’s you problem, get used to it. We are done shutting up and sitting down just to be nice. Shoving socialism down people’s throats makes us cranky. We learned our lessons from the left very well, we’re very good students. Get used to it.
Would you mind define for us your (presumably, Rush-free) “interpretation” of the term “coincidence” ?
The poster didn’t make the statement that these components were “chosen” by somebody, (s)he stated that they were “chance” events and considered the Daley/BHO individual(s) to be “lucky;” now, where did you presume what you seem to have presumed, May? Are YOU hearing voices?
Yes, I’m hearing one right now but it doesn’t make any sense in that it doesn’t understand that if I link the thought of a pick up truck and an owl then I am positing a link between the two.
The poster’s list had the exact opposite of a dialectic of a dog and a fire hydrant.
Pick up truck and owl – both on planet Earth – coincidence? NOT ON YOUR LIFE!
Enter Twilight Zone music.
Absolutely, JM. The Chicago mob is well known to be an eleemosinary institution, dedicated to good deeds, like electing JFK President in 1960. They don’t know what “conspiracy” is, and in fact in our innocent and crime-free, perfect world conspiracies don’t exist, except in the minds of “rightwing nuts.”
Or, here’s the happy, happy, fun, fun, version:
Nancy Pelosi and Obama sitting in an office:
Obama: “Well, Nance, Can you imagine those profiling bastards in AZ I sued were unlucky enough to have a DEM shot in the head right after ‘Bloody’ Palin put up a political map with cross-hairs targeting Gifford? And only 2 months after we had our hind ends handed to us in those irritating elections. We’re on the comeback trail now, baby, yeah! HA HA HA HA HA HA!”
Pelosi: “Yeah, And on a day with no talk radio! HA HA HA HA HA!”
Obama: “I’m not following that one but HA HA HA HA HA!”
Pelosi: “Too bad the shooter wasn’t wearing a Fox News t-shirt. Otherwise we must have the stars perfectly aligned for that amazing series of events to have occurred. HA HA HA HA HA!”
Obama: “Not really. I put a Kenyan curse on AZ I learned in a dream from my father called the ‘Bloody Blood Evil’. More tea? HA HA HA HA HA!”
Pelosi: “HA HA HA HA HA!”
The End.
Since your reply isn’t responsive to either what I asked you, or the original post states, I must conclude that you’re of limited comprehension, and thus unworthy of a serious dialogue or response.
An article in the Washington Post today is quite telling:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/14/AR2011011405029.html?hpid=topnews
Written by a former Weather Underground member (way to go WaPo, giving a forum to a former terrorist to talk about revolution and armed struggle during the hey days of the 1960s and 70s) linking his thoughts back then to the possible thoughts of this mass murderer in Arizona. No, the left never conspired to do anything Richard May, you’re so right.
Of course, it’s “James May” not “Richard May” (the latter being a dear friend of mine).
Why don’t you just make an effigy of the little girls head and dunk it in a basket on your garage so Right and Left can run up the score? You can argue that one side or the other has cornered the market on conspiracy or link everyone on the Right and Left to the actions of what everyone in history who aligned themselves politically has done til you wear out your Harry Potter mouse pad and you only rise to the level of saying the Sun is bright and go downhill from there.
It’s “James May” not “Richard May” (of the latter name being a dear friend of mine).
Let me parse my own reply for you. The idea that the death of a 9 year old girl is part of a series of fortunate events is an obscenity.
The idea that anyone benefited from that obscenity and that President Obama, the Democratic Party or the liberal Left are the happy recipients of these deaths requires the soul of a pig.
The only “chance event” in this scenario is that “pro reason” can reason and that “x marks the smart”. If you’re not embarrassed for politicizing the future of this young girl which has disappeared while accusing the Left of being ready to blithely do the same than I am certainly embarrassed for you.
Only a pig like Limbaugh would say that the Dems “were rubbing hands together” and “‘A-ha, this might be the one!’” as if they were Nazis laughing over the deaths of their own sons and daughters because some Jews were inconvenienced. How many Nazis do you think actually rubbed their hands together at the deaths of children? And you want to talk about demonizing people and Bush’s Hitler mustaches?
Enough with the pious hand wringing over the outing of our evil President and his laughing minions. I’m no fan of Obama but people on both sides are debased and the clear recipients of the very bile they spew in the finest traditions of Nazi propaganda which never saw a death they weren’t happy to spin.
It’s just like the Europeans after 9/11: “Well it was a tragedy but…” The only targets I see are the ones on our own moronic hind ends. I ache at the photo of that young girl and the moment of silence we give over to her should have extended from the moment of her death to the next century instead of all this blather about the gift that keeps on giving.
The 9-year old girl wasn’t “the primary target” (the Sheriff’s words) the congresswoman was. The left knows a thing or two about “collateral damage” read the article I cited.
Speaking of the “sole of a pig” – what pig’s soul was it that accused Sarah Palin as accessory to that mass murder?
So much for a teachable moment.
I was made a little uncomfortably by Obama’s urging (I paraphrase) that “we not vilify people who do not agree with us”. Who is “we” and who are the “people who do not agree with us”? I was expecting this article to mention something about that phrasing. Perhaps I was the only one who found that “we” discomfiting?
I too noticed that little phrase “at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do”.
I just posted below on this very divisive words he used. I’m quite sure they were put there on purpose. It plays to his loon/left.
Obama uses “we” in the “royal we” meaning. “Royal we” refers to Kings and Queens saying “we”, because they thought saying “I” all the time was tacky and because they believed everyone should think as the did.
Liberals can change they’re names a thousand times,but they’re still Liberals. The name Progressives change nothing.
Progressives. Progs has a reptilian connotation that fits perfectly.
ignore them, laugh at them ,scoff at them, turn your back on them, commit them …just stop giving them so damn much face time…its like gawking at an accident…just stop it!
Please provide citations for the following:
-Your assertion that progressives are trying to give the federal government power over the media.
-You assertion that progressives repeatedly called for the assassination of President Bush.
I think without providing adequate support the reader can only confirm what they already suspect: you’re making most of this up.
You’re either dissembling or ignorant. Tell us which, please?
Mr. Poretto:
“You’re either dissembling or ignorant. Tell us which, please?”
He CAN be BOTH, y’know.
Aaron might be a tenured college professor or an Odministration Czar.
Just sayin’
Look at photos of any anti gov’t rally during the Bush years and the signs of a beheaded Bush, Bush hung in effigy etc is all you see.
And they made a movie called “Assassination of a President” starring a George Bush look a like.
And the Dem calls for reinstatment of the Fairness doctrine and a look at the FCC website regarding internet regulation shows that they are trying to control (the parts they don’t already control) the media.
You either need to do a little research (and very little is needed) or go back to huffpo.
In the wake of the shooting, the National Hispanic Media Coalition used the incident to reiterate its call for the FCC to update its definitions of hate speech in media. It also asked the FCC to “examine the extent and effects of hate speech in media, and non-regulatory options for counteracting the violence that extreme rhetoric breeds.”
Rep. Robert Brady, D-Pa., said he has no knowledge about what motivated Loughner to attack Giffords and the others, but he still wants legislation that bans the use of certain imagery when talking about congressional targets.
“I want to eliminate what may have been,” Brady told Fox News. “I’m not a psychologist…. All I’m saying is you can’t put a bull’s eye or a crosshair on a member of Congress.”
…
[Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY)] said that while she’s not up to speed on current regulations, the Federal Communications Commission should work to sanction broadcasts that could incite people to violence.
“No one owns the airwaves,” Slaughter said. “They are owned by the people.”
If lawmakers were to seek remedies to quiet distasteful discussion, the so-called Fairness Doctrine is at the top of lists inspiring supporters and alarming opponents.
Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., told National Public Radio said he “came up in a time that the Fairness Doctrine did not allow media outlets to say things about a candidate or a person in public office without giving that person equal time to respond. And I really believe that everybody needs to take a look at where we are pushing things, and may need to take a serious step back and evaluate what’s going on here.”
Did you even Read the article?
I’ve said this before: one of the best things about moving out of Rochester, NY was no longer having Louise Slaughter as my Rep. As an aside – is she going to have to legally change her last name? I mean, the denotation of the word ‘slaughter’ is going to incite someone to violence!
Aaron-
Have you heard of the saying love is blind?
It takes no effort to find any number of statements or photos that show Bush hung, burned or guillotined. The same goes for Sarah. There are plenty of facebook pages like I hate Sarah Palin.
And as for first question – Obama himself stated that he wanted FOX shut down.
Aaron, are you Matthew’s brother?
Completely the wrong testament.
It helps to have a generation educated using DOEd funded Obama initiated Ayers programmed ProgBot producing high schools.
Democrats are no longer a political party; they’ve become a pathology.
Thus Obama’s ostensibly irreproachable rhetoric set the agenda for what the progressives really want, and which was the real purpose behind this entire brouhaha: a campaign for even more unconstitutional federal government power over what people can say and write.
I agree that there is a very dangerous undercurrent to all of this, which, briefly put, is an attack on freedom of speech.
It remains, however, that the more reasonable people (call them conservatives, call them godzilla, call them what you want) defend themselves against egregious and outrageous attacks by this huge pack of Krugmans, progressives & morons (call them what you want), the happier said pack is.
In an ideal world, as “progressives” repeatedly try to use any and all instances and events as they’ve tried for the past week to use Jared Loughner, one shouldn’t even begin to accept the premise of their arguments and/or expend energy proving that they’re full of horse manure.
The Pack is happy when they can reduce the argument, any argument, to their asinine terms, will lie and dissemble at will, and doesn’t even seem fazed when shown that “facts” don’t support their narrative.
The Clyburns, Krugmans and Dupniks (the sheriff trying to deflect his own blame, undoubtedly) & all the planet’s idiotlogues are delighted to distract you.
And, meanwhile, carve another notch into their attack on your liberty.
You are dead on. Marxism/Progressivism aims to politicize EVERYTHING. Look around you folks. EVERYTHING YOU DO, THINK, WEAR, SAY ETC. is allegedly a political expression. That is the definition of life in a totalitarian/communist/left wing hell hole. We are almost there. Resist, defy, disobey. These bastards have to be outed and routed.
One of the hallmarks of a “progressive” is that they’re very thin-skinned. Also, as élitists, they assume they’re correct about everything and, therefore, others don’t have have the “right” to dispute them.
Barack (“I won, shut up”) Obama is the poster child for this thin-skinnedness.
His obsession with some of his attackers has been apparent, as in early on in his presidency when he advised the Congress not to listen to Rush Limbaugh or when he advised graduating seniors to get some “balance” in their news and read the HuffPo (Oh yeah, baby, nutty and shallow Arianna is so balanced; reportedly, George Soros’ cash helps her maintain that famous balance)
In the best of all possible worlds, these people (people like like Dicky Durbin who says certain speech may be “constitutional” but is not “acceptable”) should be laughed at.
Unfortunately, they’re deadly serious and are crawling all over this nation’s capital.
Mr. (Ms.?) Karnik:
“It’s the way things are always done when progressives have any power to reach the public: everything is political.”
Excuse me, but…this is…news?
Here is Drew Barrymore on the political act of defecating:
http://www.punditguy.com/drew-barrymore-quote-of-the-day/
And here is Sheryl Crow on the political implications of wiping yourself after defecating:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/223399/sheryl_crow_says_one_square_of_toilet.html?cat=7
If you’ll pardon my turn of phrase…you just cannot make up shit like this.
Don’t forget the Dave Matthews band dumping their bus sewage on tourists:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3597180.stm
Leftists are full of it all right!
I’m reminded of the leftwing phrase “the personal is political”
Mayhem in Tucson VI: Sarah Palin and Bloody Libel
As a relatively literate and informed person, I was initially mystified, and annoyed, at the latest brickbat tossed Sarah Palin’s way, until it all started to make devious, sick sense.
It wasn’t nearly sufficient to continue to accuse the former Alaska governor of the canard of almost singlehandedly causing fruitcake Jared Loughner to go berserk in Tucson. She now is being accused of anti-Semitism because she used the common term “blood libel,” a charge as patently ridiculous and baseless as the allegation that she in any way influenced Loughner or his rampage.
Historically, the term was applied against Jews and related to the ancient myth that they murdered innocents, usually children, for the purpose of ritualistically drinking their blood and making matzohs. However, it’s not unusual today to employ the term to mean a degrading falsehood as Palin used it in saying her detractors “manufactured a blood libel” against her.
A more sane reaction to the “blood libel” insanity came from none other than Jewish activist and arch-liberal attorney, Alan Dershowitz, who asserted Palin used the term correctly.
It’s relevant to quote Dershowitz at some length on the subject: “The term ‘blood libel’ has taken on a broad metaphorical meaning in public discourse . . . its current use has become part of the English parlance to refer to anyone being falsely accused.” Dershowitz added, “I myself have used it . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3409)
Sir, nothing mystic about American Left’s behaviour. If you udertook the short study of post WW2 Eastern Europe’s history, you would notice that it is exactly how the Communist operated during the process of taking over the countries of that region.
For the two-three years after the war they concentrated mainly on bullying, intimidating all those democratic elements that managed somehow to survive the ravages of WW2.
We are talking, of course, about the most prominent figures of the democratic sector. Those who operated locally and were much less known to the general public would be physically eliminated.
In my former country of Poland, for example, the Communists have murdered some 50 thousand patriots between 1944 and 1956.
In the countries like Bulgaria, Romania, Albania things were even worse.
The barbaric attack on Palin and other prominent figures of TEA party and the movement itself are taken right out the manual created in post WW2 Europe.
The same approach was planed by the communists in Australia. Few years
ago I read an interviev in The Australian with a former leading memeber of the now defunct Austrlian Communist Party – a living fossil, who freely admitted that indeed the Australian commies had a developed plans to eliminate all real and potential enemies upon taking over Down Under.
Exactly like in the case of the terrorist organisation Weathermen to which Bill Ayears belonged. The difference was that the Australian commies were much more numerous and better organised.
If American Left manages somechow to entrenchitsel in power, they shal for sure apply that method in the US.
As a big fan of Sarah it was almost a relief to see her being unjustly attacked for supposedly misusing an historical-literary term, rather than being attacked for inciting murder.
Okay I’m going to make a prediction. You tell me how far off you think it is.
1. Sometime in the future, probably within the next 5 years or so someone is going to do something very bad. Be it fly an airplane into something, blow up a bomb somewhere, go on a shooting spree, or even just drive into a crowd.
2. IF the suspect’s name doesn’t sound Islamic THEN the following will probably be said some talking head in the media and/or a Democrat:
“This disturbed individual was probably influenced by the hate filled rhetoric.”
“When more is learned about his past he’ll probably be a member of the Tea Party.”
“It is thanks to the NRA that he was able to do this.”
“People like Rush, Hannity, Beck, and Levin have pumped this kids head full of hate and vitriol it’s no wonder he did this!”
ELSE IF the suspect has an Islamic name they’ll say he’s mental disturbed or something and completely ignore any possibility that he’s Muslim.
What do you think?
Five years from now President Palin will take a minute for her phenomenal multi-tasking efforts, which are steadily improving America, to suggest that it defies common sense to speculate about this and we should just go about our lives until the facts become known.
Obama knows how to use words. People detect him using words which place him on, or above both sides; ok, the point would be? Last night the Foxies and others were acknowledging that despite earlier doubts that he could do it, Obama has triangulated effectively, something I have been saying all along that he would probably be skillful.practical enough to do.
Yes, the lefties function as described, more or less, and with other events the righty outrage/attack industry will spring into action. The other side’s “discussion” is always too robust and we will robustly tell you so.
Otherwise, evidently, we get bored. Let us all carry on.
Obama knows how to use words. People detect him using words which place him on, or above both sides;
Obama knows how to read a speech which has been written for him by someone else. ( He’s as familiar with Job as he is with American history.) He’s okay as long as he sticks to the script prepared for him. People are impressed by the smooth delivery and fail to put the speech in context.
The context here is that Obama praised demagogue Dupnik, even as Dupnik was spreading a blood-libel against Palin. He then turns a memorial service into a campaign rally and calls for more civilized speech as if it was both sides engaging in demagoguery. He is as partisan as any president in memory but he projects himself as a healer who is above the fray.
One of Loughner’s victims, a man named Eric Fuller, is blaming Beck and Palin for the shootings. If Obama were truly interested in civil discourse, as opposed to stifling dissent, he would denounce Fuller’s statements.
He’s a hypocrite and I don’t care how uncivil that sounds.
Visit: Ameritianity . com
Republicans, Tea Partiers, Independents, Conservatives, Patriotic Americans all must remain engaged and strongly work to dismantle all of the Obama / Socialist / Marxist / Communist / Statist efforts and gains of the past four years of Democrat control. We must anticipate attacks, dirty tricks, misinformation, and revisionist history, from the Leftists. We must realize how close we have come to losing our real America.
END THE CZARS NOW – SOVEREIGNTY – BORDER CONTROL – CONSTITUTIONAL COMPLIANCE – FREE ENTERPRISE / CAPITALISM – FEDERALISM – REDUCE DEBT – ENERGY INDEPENDENCE – ECONOMIC INDEPENDENCE – MINIMIZE U.N. INTRUSION – FREEDOM – JOBS – RECOGNITION OF AMERICA’S JUDEO-CHRISTIAN FOUNDATION AND ROOTS – END TO ANCHOR BABIES (ONE PARENT SHOULD ALREADY BE A US CITIZEN) – A “RELIGION” THAT NEITHER RECOGNIZES OUR CONSTITUTION NOR BELIEVES IN “FREEDOM OF RELIGION” IS NOT A PROTECTED “RELIGION” UNDER OUR CONSTITUTION – FOREIGN / GLOBAL / SHARIA LAW WILL NOT BE USED IN AMERICA
Let’s look at “World Government.” World Government today is dominated by Islam, Communism, Dictatorships, Marxism, … only the USA and a handful of other nations are truly free. We need to get OUT OF THE UN and form a UNITED FREE NATIONS Organization for the few Democracies and quit doing business with our enemies. Would we have purchased vehicles from the Germans or clothes from the Japanese in WWII?? Why do we support economic systems – some using forced labor to gain a cost advantage – and political systems that would FAIL were it not for our doing business with them? STOP IT!
THE LEFTISTS PLAN: “The way to overthrow a Government/Economic System is to create an environment in which it seems that the existing system can no longer work.”
Just look at the mess the Democrat / Progressive / Liberal / Hate America First Group has CREATED since taking control of Congress in 2007 as part of the plan to destroy America. We are seeing their plan in action today in all of these areas:
Home mortgages – Banking – Defense – Gays in the military – Border Security – Illegal aliens – Drug Cartels – Foreign Relations – Treaties about our defense – Reparations – Freedom of Speech & Press – Education failures – Healthcare – Automobile Mfg. – Unemployment – the Deficit – the Debt – Massive Spending – Massive Redistribution of our Wealth even to foreign nations – Islamic Invasion. Why? To destroy our institutions and individual wealth and power so that it can all be consolidated into the State which can then be controlled by the political elite.
THE LEFTISTS PLAN: “The disruption of the present organization is the first step toward community organization…. All change means disorganization of the old and organization of the new.” Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky, the Marxist “organizer” whose disciples mentored Obama.
(1) Obama still does not care about the fact that Americans now know that he is a Socialist / Marxist / Statist and the vast majority of American People do not support his agenda of moving America into the Socialist column.
(2) Obama still thinks it is the government that should be the creates jobs. The only way government creates jobs is to get out of the way of business and allow business to create jobs.
(3) Obama is still committed to Government Healthcare which the American people and business soundly reject. It is the Free Enterprise System that creates competition and economic delivery of services.
(4) Obama still believes that the American people elected him President knowing where he stood on issues and what his agenda was. The American people were not aware of Obama’s Socialist agenda because he tried to keep as much about himself secret as possible.
(5) Obama still pretends that if the American people only understood what he is doing, they would support him. We do know what he is doing, and we don’t support him.
(6) Obama is still an incrementalist, as were many of the Democrats who lost their re-election bids. Obama is willing to be a one-term President if it enables him to further destroy America’s political, economic, and social system.
(7) Obama is now and always will be a narcissist. He can’t help it. He still wants the American people to place their trust and faith in him rather than in the systems that have made and can still make America exceptional.
(8) Obama still doesn’t believe in American Exceptionalism. He still doesn’t believe in the superiority of the sum total of the ideas of the American people over that of an elite minority.
(9) Obama still does not want to prevent the invasion into America by those outside America who do not share the values, culture, and support the system that exist in America which have made this nation great.
(10) Obama still has an approval rating of 100% from pro-abortion groups. The heart and soul of Obama have not been changed by the American people’s rejection of him as an individual and his agenda.
(11) Obama will still attempt to move his agenda forward, continue to use un-constitutional means to bypass the separations of power, and checks and balances built into our system.
“There is nothing more EVIL than to refuse to call that which is EVIL, EVIL.”
“If there is nothing that is Un-American, then to be American means nothing.”
VISIT: Ameritianity . com
No, no, yes, no, yes, yes, no, yes, no, no, yes, no, yes, yes and no.
No to the way you formatted your response, Mr. May.
Dear Leftists,
You’ve spent nearly a week now foaming at the mouth about heated political rhetoric supposedly coming from the Right and driving a crazy man to violence. You seek to blame this attack on us to your advantage. And in your desperation to recover lost ground among the electorate I can understand the attempt. What you can’t or won’t understand is that the violence you are doing to our Constitutional republic is what is ratcheting up the anger among conservatives that may, unfortunately, result in real political violence. In a nation of over 300 million people there are bound to be people who act on their anger. Although I believe we conservatives will ultimately prevail at the ballot box as long as your party is dominated by socialists far removed from traditional democrats like JFK, I think that your continuing and even stepped up efforts to impose on an unwilling populace your socialist, big government policies will cause increased unrest and really hot political rhetoric. It is your unyielding drive to enslave We the People to your vision of Utopia that is causing most of the discord in our country. If you really want to tone down the rhetoric then the method is clear; stop. Stop forcing us into big government programs we tell you we don’t want, stop taking our earnings from us to give to others, stop regulating our employers to the point they lay us off and/or depart for more friendly nations, stop trying to tell us how to live our lives, stop lecturing us, stop claiming that every one of life’s problems has a government solution, stop telling us that socialism will work if only the “right” people are allowed to give it a try, stop limiting our access to our own energy resources, stop telling us that our middle-class lifestyles are destroying the planet, stop it all, just…stop and leave us alone. Then and only then will the nation’s political temperature cool.
Further, until they stop, any request to tone down the rhetoric is disingenuous. They don’t want to cool the rhetoric; they want to silence their critics. Well I say, let’s redouble the heated rhetoric!
My dislike of this administration’s policies is second to none. However, Ihave to disagree with Mr. Karmick on the President’s intent. He reads the polls and those polls told him that the his base has taken a beating in the court of public opinion. He wants them to shut up before they guarantee his defeat in 2012.
tdinva:
“He wants them to shut up before they guarantee his defeat in 2012.”
See, I think differently. He wants them to amplify the cray-zee so that he can look “moderate” and “Presidential”.
The whole Tucson thing played out like a Journolister scam to make The Alleged Hawaiian look good.
(And it DID take Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie’s blab about releasing Barack Obama’s vault copy birth certificate right off the radar, didn’t it?)
So now “mack-daddy” Barack is going to use the Great Big Moonbat Yammering Machine to “pump up the volume” in order to sell America that “Awwww, gee….look, he isn’t SO bad!”.
I prefer your opinion. It’s hard to lose an election when you have 90% of the media in your tank, but I’m confident Obama can still do it.
There is no question this planned and orchestrated attack has been successful.
When CK and Rush are arguing, they won. When Scarborough says that Palin is finished politically, they won. When Ailes tells Fox News to cool it, they won. When the most prestiguous Fox panel bubbles about a pep rally with a pablum speech from chuckie president and he doesn’t come close to condemning the villains, they won.
Conservatives need wake up and realize it isn’t a game. The other side is waging war.
There are only 2 years left. The gulag is scheduled to open in the spring of 2013.
MSNBC’s Joe Scarbourgh has said Palin is finished. I guess we should curl up in the corner and die, If Joe Scarbourgh said that Palin must be a shoe-in for President.
The attack has been successful? You are reading a different set of polls then I have. A majority of the people have not only rejected the MSM narrative, they blamed the left for the hate driven political climate. This entire episode has been disaster for the leftwing media and the death knell of the old media. The print media was a day late and published already refuted stories. The broadcast media merely reported what the new media (both sides of the spectrum) said first. Now that old media has forever been discredited the Democrats have lost their information advantage. 90% of nothing is still nothing.
You people are beginning to sound like the nutroots talking about W as being a Machiavellian moron. Which is Obama — dummy or genius? He can’t be both.
“Which is Obama — dummy or genius? He can’t be both.”
The answer to that is rather irrelevant, frankly.
What he IS is lazy, narcissistic, and a shameless opportunist.
(For the record, I think he’s probably got an above-average intellect…when he feels like or needs to actually use it. The problem is that with an ego like his, he probably always thinks that he’s the smartest, fastest, tallest, and bestest guy in the room, so he’s liable to underestimate everyone else, which is a fatal character flaw.)
Did I say anything about Obama? And what makes you think he is making the decisions anyway? When did he learn how? By not editing anything at the Harvard Law Review? By failing to write his own books? By voting present hundreds of times? By talking out of three sides of his mouth?
He’s a figurehead. Neither an idiot of a genius. He’s the multi-everything suit. His entire purpose is to meet every demographic.
And somehow I don’t see the people who orchestrated this attack caring a hoot about the polls about it. What they care about are the polls for 2012; and the way the scheme was played, Obama is going to get a bounce. That’s another reason it was the most successful scheme since 2008.
Here are the indisputable results:
- conservative fissures widen between factions
- Palin is further damaged with swing voters
- some easily led who only listen to the msm think conservatives caused the murders
- Obama comes across as a “healer” as key Fox News pundits rally to the ruling class and climb on board (and also denigrate Palin)
- the marxists now have a screaming point about “getting along”, just in time for the repeal of health care and the debt ceiling
- conservatives who will never vote for Obama will now not vote for him
- conservatives who despise the Slimes have more reasons than before
If that isn’t a success, then what is? Well actually, it isn’t a success, it’s a triumph. Anyone who thinks the left was hurt by this is deluded. Prominent among them is the already delusional Bill O’Reilly.
Like many other things about him, we don’t know what BHO really is (smart or stupid), because he has handlers who choreograph each and every move/speech he makes/does.
Some of his add lips (57 States, the “Austrian language” etc etc) may suggest that, if left on his own, he might act stupid.
Krugman crossed a line here. Even for liberals. I think he is toast.
He’s not toast. You overestimate the decency of liberals and the resolve of conservatives. Liberals rationalize the killing of the most innocent and vulnerable of all human beings. They in fact demand that the state pay for the slaughter. Liberals can rationalize anything.
If liberals were decent, John Kerry would have been sent to prison for treason, not to the U.S. Senate. Among a million examples.
Progressives, Democrats, liberals, Marxists… they’re all the same now and the suck. “Have you no shame?”… they don’t. Vote Republican in 2012 and keep voting Republican if you want a country where you children can freely complian about the government.
We don’t need more speech restrictions; we need more facilities for locking up the dangerously deranged and removal of the legal impediments to restraining them against their will — for their own protection and that of the community. Once again “progressive” social theory puts us all at risk. In the 1960s, Democrats passed legislation closing mental hospitals and asserting the “rights” of the mentally ill to be out on the streets, where many are living today. When will the Republicans stop playing defense and step in to right the egregious wrongs perpetrated upon all of us by the destructive Democrats.
Mark Levin said something the other night that pulls this all together quite well. (Not an exact quote) ‘Imagine what the country would be like if the liberals/progressives had unchallenged control over the country. If everything was done, if everything ran the way they want it to work.’ One hell of a scary place IMHO.
That is why we have a two party system.
‘The wicked flee where none pursueth.’ but even 1000 feet is not enough.
The Progressives are coming undone because, with their goal in sight,
their political machine has run out of money to pay their supporters.
Pot. Kettle.
How long do you think your high will last Matthew? You are obviously still pumped about it. But you are also upset that the congresswoman didn’t die. That would be an even greater thrill. But don’t despair. She might be a vegetable for life. Wouldn’t THAT be great! You could put her face on t-shirts. She could be your poster child forever to bash the people who refuse to give you what your want.
Do you get a bonus if the crisis lasts a few more days? How many posts do you need to make? just asking
“proreason”
I think your handle should be “projection”
I have yet to see anyone on this site come even close to accepting that political vitriol is unhealthy to democracy, that veiled threats about political cadidates are unacceptable, that the choice of crosshairs to represent political opponents might have been even slightly unfortunate … given what happened.
Now, I know you guys aren’t trying to claim that violent rhetoric doesn’t exist – you’ve all been working hard grepping everything that obama has ever said which might be considered “fightin’ words” (and you’re even getting a few of the quotes right, but keep trying), while simultaneously trying to argue that anything that conservatives say, no matter how extreme, can be explained away as “metaphor” (I’m still waiting to hear what that “second amendment remedy” was a metaphor for – any thoughts?)
You COULD say “yes, we believe this sort of personal attack is inappropriate and we want to see an end to it on both sides of politics”. But you don’t. So we’ve got a situation where the entirety of one side of politics (and a small slice of the other) is saying that they think violent and vitriolic rhetoric is wrong, and getting out of hand. They’ve been saying it for a while, incidentally. And a dedicated slice of the other side refuses to even admit that there might be an issue, and sure as heck refuses to accept that any change might ever be appropriate. And you want to know how long this will go on? Think about it.
Meanwhile, check out the comments on various blog sites about this very debate – it’s pretty darn clear who wants the aggro to end, and who doesn’t.
Meanwhile, the queen bee of the apparent supporters of personal attack speech works very hard on a video to claim that it’s all a beat-up … and chooses the two words to defend herself that are utterly guaranteed to be offensive to a jewish woman who lies in a hospital after saying that palin’s approach to politics might have consequences. Even frikkin’ jonah goldberg agrees that was a bad choice. I personally don’t think it was an accident. Nothing in that speech was an accident. She had days to work on it.
I think it would be a lot simpler, and more honest, for you guys to just say “no more – we won’t accept it from our leaders, and we won’t accept it from their leaders”. Why won’t you do that?
And if you can’t see why the rest of your post – basically accusing me of being an opportunistic sociopath – is a problem, then I doubt you ever will ever get it.
Do you get a bonus if the crisis lasts a few more days? How many posts do you need to make? just asking
Avoid ad hominem attacks. It’s getting a bit tedious to have to keep repeating the site’s rules.
A list of murders political or otherwise in this nation’s history done within the parameters you are laying out would be helpful because honestly your logic as applied to real events escapes me.
Yep, I said something similar in a response above. I think that you nailed this one.
The other side is always vicious and duplicitous while we are always rowdy and robust. Being a true believer must bring such a high. I’m almost jealous.
Well, Son, you WON’T hear anyone say here that vitriolic language should be bannned as “unhelpful” or anything else, despite the fact that the vast majority of it comes out of the left. It’s called “FREE SPEECH,” or is that a concept with which you’re unfamiliar? Do we find it “unhelpful?” Sure, but we (unlike the left) would rather put up with a thousand “unhelpful” vicious comments out of the leftists than have a single one of our TRUTHS blocked by government edict.
‘the choice of crosshairs to represent political opponents might have been even slightly unfortunate’
And so on. Your entire comment is dishonest, disingenuous, and really comes done to nothing but the base accusations of a liar.
I’ve told you to look up Alinsky, but instead you claim ignorance about him. I again suggest you look him up. You could search ‘handbook for progressive a$$holes’ if you can’t manage typing Saul Alinsky into the searchbar.
Alinsky believes that the progressive left can gain control of any part of the political narrative, and by doing so eventually the whole political narrative, by finding issues that force the conservative right into defending against lies. His idea is that when events present progressives with the opportunity to push an advantageous and powerful lie, and push it repeatedly, the defensive reaction from the right helps plants the idea in the public consciousness that the lie as an valid charge that the right cannot answer.
The Alinsky tactic of forcing conservatives to debate on the left’s terms by repeating lies ad nauseum only works if the left can both bait the right into a defensive posture and at the same time suppress the demand that the lie be defended on it’s own merits. Alinsky’s problem, and yours, is that the left no longer has the critical level of control of the sources of information to dodge the call that THEY defend the lie, not that the target of the lie defend against it. And it’s a deadly spiral for the left, because as more lies are exposed, the liars and the information sources they do control lose more credibility.
After the shooting the lie the shooting was related to vitriol from the right could not be defended on it’s own merits and the underlying theme – the IMPORTANT lie, the REAL lie – that it is vitriol from the right that the left must defend itself from was easily exposed as contrary to all evidence.
And so it backfires, as I specifically told you before. See, Matty, if the evidence that the lie is indeed a lie is freely available, well, no matter how many times you repeat that lie it will never assume validity – it remains a lie. The repeater (in this case, you) reinforces the perception that he is a liar until, as in your case, the perception solidifies into the sense that he is nothing but a liar.
Being dishonest, disingenuous – quite frankly a liar – is no way to go through life, Matty.
That whole response had nothing to do with what I posted. Read it again.
At no point have I ever said “palin made loughlin pull the trigger”. Try to engage with the actual argument, not the argument you find more convenient.
‘That whole response had nothing to do with what I posted. Read it again.’
Nonsense. Stop lying. It has EVERYTHING to do with what you posted.
‘At no point have I ever said “palin made loughlin pull the trigger”…’
Look, and I’ve said this before. You assume that the readers here are stupid. That you can get away with being disingenuous and play the aggrieved innocent because you didn’t really, actually say…. The readers aren’t stupid. You can’t get away with it. They see right through you. You do not seem to be able to grasp this. Which simply means that you are stupid.
Let’s play with an example, shall we? In just one paragraph:
‘I have yet to see anyone on this site come even close to accepting that political vitriol is unhealthy to democracy, that veiled threats about political cadidates are unacceptable, that the choice of crosshairs to represent political opponents might have been even slightly unfortunate …’
This is an attempt to force a narrative that is based on several lies. This is dishonest. This is disingenuous. This alone makes you a liar.
”I have yet to see anyone on this site come even close to accepting that political vitriol is unhealthy to democracy’
No. No one on this site will accept your pushing the narrative, the talking point, that the shooting had anything to do with political vitriol. You don’t get to pass over defending that first lie and go straight to the accusation that not admitting to this is the same as not accepting ‘that political vitriol is unhealthy to democracy’. That is the intent of your statement. I went into this tactic in the comment you answered. YOU defend YOUR lie on it’s merits. See Alinsky.
‘…that veiled threats about political cadidates are unacceptable,…’
No one on this site will accept your pushing the narrative, the talking point, that the shooting had anything to do with veiled threats against political candidates. You don’t get a pass, etc, etc. See Alinsky.
‘that the choice of crosshairs to represent political opponents might have been even slightly unfortunate ‘
We’ve gone through this. This one is an out and out bold faced lie. But I agree that lie has become unfortunate. For your side. Which is why the smart ones have gone silent.
‘Try to engage with the actual argument, not the argument you find more convenient.’
You have not even once tried to establish any link between the shooting and, ‘political vitriol…’, ‘veiled threats…’, or ‘choice of crosshairs…’ so on. You cannot defend your statements on their merits because they are based on premises that are lies. Yet you continue to try to push the statements, the lies. Here. On PJM. And you’re offended when I call you stupid?
Listen up, you miserable, lying, a$$hat. CONSERVATIVES ARE NOT INTERESTED ANY LONGER IN BEING POLITE WHEN CONFRONTED WITH ALINSKY TACTICS. THEY WILL NO LONGER DEFEND AGAINST LIES. INSTEAD, THEY WILL FORCE THE LIAR TO DEFEND THE LIE ON IT’S OWN MERITS, AND BROADCAST HIS INABILITY TO DO SO.
What do you think has been going on all week? You are way behind the curve. By a couple of years at this point.
“basically accusing me of being an opportunistic sociopath”
Where did I say sociopath? You really need to stick to the facts. You are obviously not someone who will act out. What would that do to your income?
But it’s also plainly obvious that you are a person delighted to take advantage of a tragic event, and twist it to advance lunatic causes and silence people who disagree with you. You have posted about it at least 50 times, and every post has used the murders to lie about and attack conservatives. Not once have you simply said anything along the lines of “this is a sad commentary about our country, It’s horrendous that ANYBODY would use a tragedy like this to lie about thier political opponents.”, which is really the only rational response, other than sympathising with the victims.
And as for your infantile “kettle…pot” post, it’s actually proof of your mania. Every single post by conservatives on this forum is in reaction to the Left’s diseased accusations. No conservative here or on any other site I follow is threatening or has threatened violence against the left. So that is more made up lunacy.
You don’t appear to be a sociopath, but you are certainly an unbalanced person with a sick mind.
Or in other words, a normal Moveon operative
You accused me of being happy (indeed “high”) that somebody was shot, that I was upset that she didn’t die and that I would be happy to see her be a “vegetable for life”, because (according to you) it would give me a political advantage.
Nobody who isn’t exhibiting sociopathic tendencies can genuinely fit that description. Ergo, you basically described me as a sociopath. If that conclusion is awkward, then go back and reassess your accusation.
I’m sorry if you don’t know what the word means. I’m not sure what I can do about that. I’ll keep it in mind, though. Maybe I’ll add some links in future.
Well Matt, you’ve convinced me.
I didn’t call you a sociopath, but it turns out you are one, according to your own definition.
Cheers.
Relax, if she’s left a vegetable, and Leftists have any say in the matter, her life will be over in days.
Pot. Legalize. Munchies. Then kettle.
What a weak argument…
Typically for a liberal, you lack perspective.
If liberals want to cast blame, they have no further to look than their own mirror. It’s not a coincidence that the precipitous rise in homelessness came on the heels of new legislation that made it harder to move the seriously deranged into institutions. The liberals pushed the idea that by saving families from the heartache and peril of dealing in their homes with the seriously disturbed we were denying the insane their humanity has caused countless tragedies. In Texas alone, we have mothers murdering their children and then ending up in facilities with an “innocent due to insanity” plea. Look up the sad story of Schlosser who hideously killed her baby. But the laws made it where once she was stabilized, she was allowed priveleges of working the desk at Rusk State Hospital-until she stole a car and returned to scare the daylights out of people she knew. Sorry, but the idea that a person can roam around causing havoc until someone gets hurt or killed ignores the emotional pain inflicted by these people on siblings, spouses and parents. The law is no friend to these families. And they should clearly blame liberals who continue to believe that the seriously insane can self monitor and self medicate.
I have a feeling that when Krugman saw “The Thing From Another World” when he was a kid he thought the confrontational and xenophobic/racist imperialist/colonialist military adventurers at the North Pole should have only read Jane Austen at the creature rather than electrocuting it, and been sent to a military prison for being poor and deadly hosts to an illegal alien guest murderer.
“THINK WHAT WE COULD HAVE LEARNED!”, says a young Krugman turning to his cigar smoking and supremely indifferent mother.
Politicize is the wrong word. The correct word is demagogue. They demagogued and falsely blamed conservative standard bearers for inciting murder with their dissenting talk. At the end of the week some conservative pundits were so mesmerized and intimidated by the attacks on Sarah and Rush that they praised the speech of the partisan hypocrite who encouraged and benefited from the hysteria.
Here’s a summary of the week.
An insane leftist goes on an apolitical killing spree. The Sheriff in charge, without a shred of evidence, blames conservatives for the killing. The left wingnut Obama media takes up the libel and blames Palin, and other conservatives for inciting violence. Obama praises the demagogue, Sheriff Dupnik (when he should have been chastising his demagoguery). Palin is forced to defend herself, but does so eloquently. Krauthammer joins the left in attacking Palin. (She’s supposed to STFU when being accused of inciting murder.) Obama, the most partisan president in living memory, turns a memorial service into an unseemly campaign rally and then calls for civility. Krauthammer and Hume praise Obama’s hypocritical speech.
Hume and Krathammer chickened out. They didn’t want to appear to be divisive when it seemed like the entire country was attacking Sarah and Rush for inciting murder and mayhem with their divisiveness.
This has been a good week for Barack Obama.
good recap.
I would add that the facts were deliberately hidden for four days, in order to give the demagogues time to imprint theirr lies on the gullible from their msm minarets.
The reason it was a good week for Obama is that he gave a helluva speech. It’s about that simple.
The Sheriff in charge, without a shred of evidence, blames conservatives for the killing
A quote, please. The specific quote wherein the sheriff blamed conservatives. That’s a pretty big claim, so … Let’s see your evidence. It better be unequivocal or you just smeared the guy.
Matthew, you lying punk, have you been in a coma? Google Sheriff Dupnik blames conservatives
Here’s just one link you will find.
http://vodpod.com/watch/5305064-political-spin-conservatives-pile-on-sheriff-dupnik
Forgive me for feeding the dishonest troll, but here’s another link.
http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/profiles/blogs/dismantling-sheriff-dupniks
There’s nothing in that link where he blames conservatives for the shooting.
Huh? There’s almost nothing in that video about what the sheriff actually said. It’s all about what conservatives THINK about what the sheriff said. There’s nothing in that video of any use to your case whatsoever.
The Sheriff also said, “When you have people like Sharron Angle in Las Vegas running against Harry Reid making outrageous statements such as ‘we may need to resort to taking the second amendment into certain cases’, and for people like Sarah Palin to say ‘we have people like Gabby Giffords in our cross hairs’, I think those statements are totally irresponsible and they’re not without consequences and I think we may be seeing the fruit of it here.”
You can watch him here: http://www.therightscoop.com/pima-county-sheriff-blames-sarah-palin-and-sharron-angle-for-shooting
In fact, I want to know how many contacts did this Sheriff had with the mass murdered prior to the mass murders.
That’s getting closer, I have to admit. I hadn’t seen that one. But it’s still a far cry from “blaming conservatives for the killing”. It was also somewhat germane to the discussion they were having.
The sheriff has repeatedly said that the violent rhetoric is unhelpful, and that jared loughner is somebody who is (in his opinion) susceptible to that. We’ll have to wait and see if he’s right. Remember – he DOES know the guy (or at least that’s what I understand).
In that video he did name palin and angle. That’s a pity, because it’s going to be used against him. But that is the first (and only) instance I’ve seen where he mentions either side of politics at all. But, then, he WAS asked. Specifically. Twice. If you believe that heated rhetoric which specifically invokes gun metaphors might influence somebody who is unhinged (which clearly the sheriff does believe), then while I agree that he shouldn’t have let himself be baited, his position is consistent.
Meanwhile, notice that geraldo is still trying to tie those statements back to the original briefing, which was non-partisan, whether or not you believe that the public mood had an influence (which, I repeat, he clearly does … as do a lot of congresspeople who’ve received death threats, including the one in hospital)
I still personally think you’re all leaping to convenient conclusions about loughner’s mindset. You’ll all notice that the sheriff is sticking to that statement. He appears to be under no stress whatsoever. He’s not backing away from it, and he’s not attacking the people who question him. I’d say he’s fairly confident about what he’s saying. If he’s getting any pressure from above, he’s sure as heck not showing it. And also keep in mind that he’ll have access to information that you don’t. Wait and see.
But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized — at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do
— it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds.
I was fine with Obama’s speech – right up to the point in bold above. Even giving a memorial address he can’t help but divide us up into categories. Pathetic ass that he is he just can’t help being political.
And not one political pundit had the guts to point this out.
By mentioning that there are disagreements in American politics, he is “being political?” Good grief, that issue had been more publicized here and in many places than the shooting itself, and you think that he should not have mentioned it? By saying “we” he is acknowledging that he too is involved and being a healer, sort of. What is the big problem here?
For those of you who are familiar with English gematria, the system of assigning numbers to letters, if you enter Sarah L. Palin, which is her full name with the middle initial, you will get the numeric value of 666. For those who don’t understand, Google gematria. I have included two separate links to two separate gematria calculators below for you to see it first hand for yourself. See it and heed its meaning. I had always foreseen this since the 2008 election campaign. Now I proved it for everyone to see.
http://prophecy.landmarkbiblebaptist.net/count.html
http://real-world-news.org/numerics/english-gematria.html
Antichrist can’t confess that Jesus is Lord or that He came in the flesh. More obviously, Antichrist is a man.
If you run the numbers of her birthdate together, 2111964, they exactly match the dog license of Adolph Hitler’s Airedale, Shlomo.
This “Dave”, is he a former customer of yours?
Step away from the bong, Dave. It’s turning your nugget into mush.
The number one quality Democrats lack?
Humility. They have no sense of it. They are all perfect creatures.
Actually, they all should be called something that starts with “A”, ends in “E” and has an “H” in the middle. Which also explains why those folks cluster together – no one else can stand the smell.
Great article Sam.
Yup, the Monday following the Tucson incident, Washington Examiner’s ‘Congressional Senior Correspondent’ Susan Ferrechio wrote an op-ed whereas she dedicated 7 of her 9 stanzas to placating blame for the tragedy to the Right.
Her ‘evidence’? An uber liberal Poly Sci Professor (but I repeat myself..) from U Michigan, Senator Dick Durbin (hahaha) and PLENTY of conjecture.
How the, ‘Senior Congressional..’ can write, confidently, such a partisan piece was a real chuckler.
Those who refuse or sadly are incapable of understanding the backdrop/intentions of ‘contributors’, ‘professionals’ of said articles.. don’t be surprised when someone comments, ‘Your stupid is sticking out’.
PJ O’Rourke:
“If we’re going to discuss dark, paranoid corners of the Internet that have an unwholesome influence on our national life, there’s the New York Times online.”
“All the paranoid psychoses that’s fit to print”.
“The private is political.”
I read this article with sadness because I know it is all true. I grew up in a different world and had the advantage of living in the best of times. I am so sad that today’s children will never fully appreciate the greatness of this country.
We need to take advantage of the ballot box while we still can. If the leftists prevail, that will be a thing of the past. The reason they have become so shrill is because of the last election. It’s time to finish the job and take our country back. And for you leftist sheep, I am not talking about violence when I say take our country back. I am talking about voting out the dictator before it is too late. Kicking the Commies out of our schools, government, courts, media, etc. Look at the last map from the last elections and you will see that we are, indeed, in the majority and we need to use that force before it is too late. As for the suggestion of singing “cumbaya” with the left by sitting next to them at the State of the Union Address..well, this is a sign that they fear our numbers. I hope Chief Justice Rodgers is a “no show” to express his disdain for the disrespect he was shown last time by Obummer.
Rodgers? What are you, some kind of commie know-nothing?
Nice composition, Mr. Karnick.
“violent acts are what happen when you create a climate of hate. And it’s long past time for the GOP’s leaders to take a stand against the hate-mongers.”
Pointing out the blatant lies, deceit, doctored photo’s, factual errors, chronographic errors, threats and calls for violence, and purely absurd drivel of the Left, is what we Conservatives have been doing for centuries. But, sex (and sensationalism) sells, and is the cardinal daily bread of the Left.
Nothing seems to effect these “suicide bloggers” or pandering media.
And, as you have pointed out, any dialog not in line with their agenda, is discarded as useless.
This is completely pathetic and ignorant. It’s obvious to anyone with basic reading comprehension, that they ultimately are striving for an autocracy.
Dwight as usual focuses on things like a spelling error, a slip at the keyboard, anything but the real issues eh Dwight?
Out of respect for Chief Justice ROBERTS I wish to correct my earlier post. As for Dwight, I don’t think he is a “Dwight” at all…I think he is a teenage girl named DeeDee.
I dunno; does she live in Mr Rodger’s neighborhood?
I REALLY liked Fred Thompson’s take on all this. When Tom Brokaw said in a recent interview that he’d be nervous about going into a bar or restaurant in Arizona where people can carry guns without a permit, Thompson’s reply on Facebook was, “I can understand Brokaw’s nervousness about going into a bar in Arizona because of the lack of gun control standards. I get nervous whenever I’m in the NBC News studios because of their lack of journalistic standards.”
Humorous cartoon at http://drawfortruth.wordpress.com/2011/01/15/az-shooting-mental-illness/ on the REAL mental illness displayed this past week regarding the Arizona shooting.
S.T. Karnick, I can’t believe Hannity and O’reilly missed the truth of your words. On different days, I tried to capture the true evil hypocrisy of Mr. Obama.
Written January 13
Last night, in Tuscon, the hypocrite of hypocrites lived up to his name.
When Obama got up to speak at the University of Arizona, it was like a turkey shoot. All the targets, from Sarah to Glenn to Rush to every conservative voice in the media had been set up by the leftstream media with bulls eyes on their foreheads. It began just hours after the attack in Tuscon.
Key to setting up this conservative turkey shoot was the miscreant of miscreants; Clarence Dupnic, the imbecilic Arizona cop who primed the scurrilous pump of disingenuous partisan blame. He told us on TV that the Tea Party, Palin and Rush were to blame.
But Dupnic wasn’t alone. Hours after the attack at the Safeway, Paul Krugman wrote a heinous piece filled with the same links and lies aimed at accusing conservatives voices of murder. His article in The New York Times lit the fuse, saying they were the ones who really pulled the Glock trigger over and over again.
The mainstream media in all their biased glory did the rest. Smelling blood in conservative water, they pounced on every conservative name they could think of, proceeding to wipe the floor with the demons that created “this sharply parisan divide”; The leftstream media shouted their names from the rooftops. Among the targets in the Democratic mainstream media blame game were Rush, Sarah, Glenn, O’reilly, Savage. Fox News. The entire Tea Party.
Piling on like maggots on a dying carcass, they wrote their lying narrative; that conservative vitriol had caused the final screw to go loose in a psychpath’s brain. Then the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton chimed in, telling the world that Jarad the killer is a political extremist like so many members of the Tea Party.
It quickly became clear to Obama that all he had to do in his major speech in Tuscon was prattle on about the lack of civility. When the Obama speechwriters realized the audience would mentally fill in the blanks with the names of the conservatives responsible for creating this poisonous partisan political environment, they jumped around like school boys who had just a won a big game against an arch rival. Everybody in the audience would know who Obama, without saying it, blamed for this polarized country whose lack of civility as Obama would put it in his speech was causing awful things to happen. The mainstream media had done their dirty partisan job; blood libel of the worst kind.
Fifteen or so minutes into the memorial service (AKA political pep rally for Obama)the anointed one began using the deaths of honest, hard working, well meaning Americans as a jumping off point to demonstrate his incredible hypocrisy that we become more civil; that we lower the harshness of today’s political rhetoric; “bringing guns to knife fights. Remarks about political hand to hand combat. The demonizing of political opponents by calling them enemies.” All of which, of course, have come out of none other than Obama’s mouth as he uses lessons learned in the hypocrites’handbook.
While Obama tried to hide it, he was playing the most vile of political hardball. Leaping from the backs of the dead to grab political points.
At one point in the speech came the Obama head fake. Here’s what he said.
“If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate — as it should — let’s make sure it’s worthy of those we have lost. Let’s make sure it’s not on the usual plane of politics and point-scoring and pettiness that drifts away in the next news cycle.
Then Obama proceeded to do precisely what he just rejected.
The next paragraph made the turn that set up the attack on uncivility, which in reality was the way Barry locked and unloaded on his unnamed targets of opportunity; Palin & conservative company.
“The loss of these wonderful people should make every one of us strive to be better. To be better friends and neighbors and coworkers and parents. And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their death helps usher in more civility in our public discourse, let us remember it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy — it did not — but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to the challenges of our nation in a way that would make them proud.”
The above paragraph was built on the same thing every major Obama speech in built on: Lies.
The media called it a wonderful speech. After 400 death threats on Sarah Palin in the 24 hours since the speech, it’s apparent what Obama really participated in. A verbal bloodbath of blame.
written January 14
I’d like to present the sequence of events as I saw them played out after the Sat. Jan. 8, shooting at Tucson, Arizona where 6 were murdered and 12 wounded, including a congresswoman by a very mentally deranged man, Jarad, Loughner.
Just hours after the slaughter, Paul Krugman was preparing an article for the NY Times that blamed the event on Sarah Palin and conservative uncivility. Hours after that, Clarence Dupnic, Sheriff of Puma county who knew a mentally unstable man lived only blocks away from the shooting yet sent no one to at least make sure the political event went smoothly and safely, said, with nothing to back it up, that right wing virtriol probably caused the shooter to act.
With no evidence this was the case, the mainstream media, using the dead as a jump off point leapt to the Dupnic conclusion, naming Palin, Beck, O’reilly and other conservatives, blaming them for the actions of the murderer.
Reacting like they smelled conservative blood in the water, CBS TV, ABC TV and CBS news embraced this narrative like they had found the Holy Grail. Hate speech of every kind directed at you and the other conservatives gushed out of msnbc like they’d struck oil.
Four days after the shooting, President Obama gave his Tucson speech.
After saying thoughtful words about the dead and injured, Obama, like a relay race runner, picked up the lack of civility theme in the news for the prior four days and, even though, by then it had been shown to have no connection with the shooting, ran with it.
Keep in mind this was the President who a week before had called conservatives hostage takers and had recently called conservatives enemies. Talked about hand to hand combat with conservatives and referred to bringing a gun to a political knife fight. He’d been stoking the flames of hate and labeling conservatives racists cowards since being elected president, even let voter intimidating Black Panthers get off scot free. All of which suggests Obama acts like a classic do as I say not as I do hypocrite.
So Wednesday, I asked myself, why did Obama talk about incivility and sharply divided discourse when it was irrelevant to the memorial? Was he continuing the attack on conservatives without naming them? If not, was he directing his words at the left who had adopted that theme as the cause of the deaths?
To me, the subject of civility, unless Obama decided to chastise the left for jumping off the bodies of the dead to score political points, had a place only coming out of the mouth of a totally corrupt hypocrite. Barack Hussein Obama.