Back on February 17th, Dr. Ben Carson appeared on ABC's This Week to talk about his speech at the National Prayer breakfast, during which he politely ripped Obama. During his appearance on This Week, Carson said that he thought "both sides" need to "tone down the rhetoric" and that such people are acting like children.
About six weeks later, after having to endure endless attacks on him from the left, Dr. Carson accused white liberals as being 'the most racist people' during an interview with Mark Levin.
Dr. Ben Carson, a black Johns Hopkins University neurosurgeon and conservative favorite after challenging President Barack Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast, said Monday on "The Mark Levin Show" that white liberals are "racist."
"And you're attacked in many respects because of your race. You're not supposed to think like this, and supposed to talk like this. A lot of white liberals just don't like it, do they?" said Levin, host of the syndicated radio show.
"Well, they're the most racist people there are. You know, they put you in a little category, a little box -- you have to think this way. How could you dare come off the plantation?" responded Carson.
While it would appear that Dr. Carson isn't following his own advice, we can cut him some slack because he's realizing that conservatives don't need to tone down the rhetoric at all. We need to ratchet it up because the left will only continue to smear and bully unless we do.
After the Republican National convention, S.E. Cupp, who is billed as the lone conservative among three liberals on the MSNBC show The Cycle, expressed outrage over Clint Eastwood's bit with an empty chair starring as Barack Obama. Now, when the subject of a Barack Obama campaign ad that features Lena Dunham blatantly comparing sex with voting for Obama, Cupp is fine with it.
As I wrote at the time, Cupp seems to be coming down with Scarborough syndrome (named after Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough), which can be defined as follows (yes, it's satire):
A condition in which conservatives who are surrounded by liberals every day, find their views increasingly malleable as they incrementally cede what they believe to be minor points in the hopes of gaining acceptance and / or avoiding conflict. This often results in a slow transformation toward the adoption of a new ideology. An interesting dynamic that can help expedite this process occurs when conservatives attempt to challenge the subject on his / her new views. The subject can feel as if he / she is being attacked instead of warned. This, coupled with the subject being defended by his / her newfound liberal friends, facilitates that transformation. Thinking that the conservatives are the ones who changed, the subject identifies even more closely with his / her liberal friends.
In the case of Cupp, all one has to do is look at her reactions in these two instances. She was offended by Clint Eastwood's attempt to use humor at Obama's expense but she's not offended at the Obama campaign's attempt to compare voting for the first time to losing one's virginity in the name of humor.
Earlier this week, liberal talk show host Bill Press impugned the national anthem, saying it was "un-singable" and that it was a "major crusade" of his to "get rid of the Star Spangled Banner." After saying "there's so much wrong with it, I don't know where to start," Press proceeded to deride the fact that the lyrics glorified war. Have a listen before watching Meathead from 'All in the Family' echo very similar complaints.
Here is an exchange between Archie Bunker and his freeloading liberal son-in-law, Meathead from forty years ago. Archie - who was the one who actually worked while putting up his daughter's husband so Meathead could go to college and learn how to be a "subversive" - was trying to watch a football game when the national anthem comes on. Meathead, a disrespectful liberal punk, who had no respect for the fact that Archie was sustaining his very existence, insults the Star Spangled Banner after attempting to get Archie to sing it.
The best part? All in the Family was created by far left liberal whacko, Norman Lear and Archie (the embodiment of Lear's attempt to mock conservatives) actually stole the show.
Liberals lie. It's what they do. Once you accept that premise, this exchange on Meet the Press is much easier to process. The narrative among the establishment is that Mitt Romney has the best chance to beat Obama. I still haven't figured out the thick-headedness of the Republican establishment and why it believes that. Mitt Romney will be filleted if he wins the nomination.
Enter Helene Cooper, the White House correspondent for the New York Times. As such, she is an undeniable liberal. Therefore, she lies. Take note of what she says here. The Obama administration thinks it will "crush" Santorum or Gingrich but is just confident that it can beat Romney. Assuming that liberals lie - which they do - why would the White House issue that message? Because it really wants to face Romney. Think about it. Why would a liberal tell the truth?
This recent piece by CNN shows exactly why the White House wants to face Romney. His religion will become a central issue if he wins the nomination. Look for the media to pull back on pieces like this for a while, as long as Romney's nomination is in doubt:
If this clip wasn't the result of extremely good editing, the liberal mind is sicker than we thought. The woman who appears to be intellectually vacant is Froma Harrop and she runs a journalism outfit that has teaching people how to engage in argument / debate without being uncivil, as its primary goal. When Comedy Central's John Oliver confronted Harrop on her use of the term 'economic terrorism' to describe Tea Party conservatives, she failed to see any modicum of irony or hypocrisy.
In fact, she doubled down while Oliver ratcheted up the mocking quotient, which continued to remain lost on Harrop.
I realize that rubbing the noses of people who have been proven wrong into the 'I told you so' dirt can often be counter-productive and is the quintessential win/lose dynamic; it shouldn't be used often but this is the PERFECT time to whip out that card.
When the 'Arab Spring' was first in bloom, those of us who have studied history, actually pointed to it. The left - to include the likes of the mainstream media - wanted none of it. They preferred instead, to cry along with the liberal youth in Egypt, rooting for them as if they were the best hope for a free Egypt.
We told them: Hey whackos, look at Iran in 1978-79. That was a left-wing / socialist uprising too. The Islamists and the leftists joined hands and helped each other overthrow the Shah. Once that happened, the Islamists executed the leftists. But you didn't want to hear any of that.
Egypt's top reformist leader has said the liberal youth behind the country's uprising have been "decimated" in parliamentary elections dominated by Islamists and expressed concern about the rise of hard-line religious elements advocating extremist ideas such as banning women from driving.
Mohamed ElBaradei, a Nobel Prize laureate and possible presidential candidate, said Sunday he hopes moderate Islamists will rein in the extremists and send a reassuring message to the world that Egypt will not go down an ultraconservative religious path.
"The youth feel let down. They don't feel that any of the revolution's goals have been achieved," ElBaradei told The Associated Press in an interview on the same day electoral authorities announced that Islamist parties captured an overwhelming majority of votes in the first round of elections last week. "They got decimated," he said, adding the youth failed to unify and form "one essential critical mass."
The High Election Commission announced that the Islamic fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party garnered 36.6 percent of the 9.7 million valid ballots cast last week for party lists. The Nour Party, representing the more hard-line Salafi Islamists, captured 24.4 percent.
All of this was beyond predictable by those of us who knew better. This is not 'Armchair Quarterback' stuff either. If it were, it'd be like questioning the decision to punt on first down.
If a liberal every gives you a stock tip or tells you a certain horse is a 'sure thing,' RUN!
The only thing left to discover is the depth of left-wing pride. My guess is that it's somewhere down the abyss.
The husband of Gabrielle Giffords, the congresswoman who was shot last January, is shockingly playing politics with his wife's shooting and 'targeting' Sarah Palin. If you remember, the left began politicizing the shooting within a few short hours; Paul Krugman comes to mind. The left continued to fish for a narrative and found one to beat on. Before the 2010 elections, Palin's team released a map of congressional districts with targets on them to illustrate 'targeted districts.' One of those districts was Giffords. The left actually drew a connection between those targets and the motive of Jared Loughner.
Conveniently absent from the left was the fact that Loughner was not motivated by those targets at all; if he was in the least bit political, he was a leftist (communist manifesto was a favorite book).
Yet, Mark Kelly has decided nearly one year later to go after Palin instead of do the responsible thing and categorically reject that narrative. This is really disgraceful.
Mark Kelly has spoken candidly about the moment he learned his wife, Arizona congresswoman Gabby Giffords, was shot at a voting event in Tuscon - and his disappointment at not having been contacted by Sarah Palin following the tragedy.
In a guest appearance on last night's CNN Piers Morgan Tonight show, the husband and father berated Ms Palin's irresponsibility, while Mr Morgan said he found her lack of contact 'extraordinary.'
Recalling the horrific moments he learned of the fatal shooting in January - and the ensuing misinformation that led him to believe his wife had been killed - the co-author of Gabby: A Story of Courage and Hope revealed that he believed his wife's strength saved her.
But it was the lack of any contact from former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin that was 'surprising' said Mr Kelly.
In order for Kelly to be surprised by the fact that he didn't receive a call from Sarah Palin necessarily means that he accepted the absurd premise that she had any degree of culpability in his wife's shooting. Obviously, the media narrative was effective in this regard. It actually caused Kelly to buy into it to some degree.
No doubt, he was angry and wanted to blame someone; it's human nature, which is what highlights the irresponsibility of the media.
The fact remains, however. Sarah Palin had absolutely nothing to do with Giffords' shooting. NOTHING. Logically, why would he call the Giffords? Wouldn't the media exploit that as an admission that she did?
Mr Kelly said that while he believes Ms Palin is not responsible for what happened that day, her actions were irresponsible.
'You know, this was no surprise to us,' he said. 'Gabby even spoke about it before January 8th, during the election cycle, leading up to the election, in an interview... She made is very clear that, hey, this is what's going on, and this could ultimately incite people to do violent things.
'
So it wasn't a big surprise on January 8th...having said that, you know, Sarah Palin certainly is not responsible for what happened. But I think the angry rhetoric in an election year is not - it's not helpful.'
Here's all you need to know. "Sarah Palin certainly is not responsible for what happened. But..." This is really, really shameful.
The word "but" in that regard means that Kelly is implying Palin had a degree of culpability when she had NONE. Isn't he doing the same thing to Palin that she is allegedly responsible for doing to his wife - putting her in danger?
This guy is an astronaut and obviously very intelligent, which is what makes his amazingly dumb behavior all the more troubling.
Occupy Buffalo leader Christopher Simmance has been touting his military record as one that includes tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as claims that he was badly wounded by an RPG. There's a big problem that he has, to this point, not been able to resolve. All of Simmance's military paperwork says he left the Army months before the 9/11 attacks. There are also multiple holes in his story.
Via Buffalo News:
The claims of a dedicated member of the Occupy Buffalo movement that he saw combat in Iraq and Afghanistan are not supported by Army records.
Christopher M. Simmance has told several media outlets, including The Buffalo News, that he served as many as three tours of duty in those war zones and that he was severely injured in Afghanistan.
Service records obtained from the Army, however, show he was stationed at Fort Lewis, Wash., for three years and he left the active-duty Army in January 2001 -- before the 9/11 terror attacks.
Simmance insists his Army records are incomplete. He told The News he stands by his claims of seeing combat.
"Everything I've told you is completely true; I've got nothing to hide," Simmance said in one of three interviews.
People close to Simmance told The News they initially believed his claims of wartime deployments but they grew disenchanted when they discovered he was exaggerating his military service.
"I cannot confirm any of what he said," Denise Simmance, his mother, told The News.
There are other discrepancies like the locations Simmance lists as places he served. For example, his claim that he served in the Valley of Efah in Afghanistan is belied by the fact that the Valley of Efah is where David slew Goliath; that battle did not take place in Afghanistan.
These exaggerations haven't just caused problems for Simmance at Occupy Buffalo:
Christopher's mother gave an interview to a News columnist in November 2008 in which she shared details of Simmance's experiences in Iraq, including the horrific task of pulling body parts out of the rubble of a bombed home. Now, she doesn't believe any of it.
When she challenged him on his assertions, Christopher Simmance became defensive.
"Our relationship is severely damaged," his mother said.
Denise Simmance said she believes his need to exaggerate his service stems from a mental illness, and she worries for him.
A leader of the Occupy Buffalo movement has a mental illness? Really?
Two of the most successful capitalists in today's 'entertainment' market - Russell Simmons and Kanye West - showed up in New York to express their solidarity with the anti-capitalist Occupy Wall Street protesters. It is utterly mind-boggling to actually grasp how devoid of intelligence these two are. At least the protesters don't like capitalism because they've either been unwilling or unable to 'capitalize' on it. These two doofuses are protesting that which has made them successful. It's like cursing the food in front of you because you're hungry.
Oh, and I'll at least give Simmons some credit for actually enunciating a message. Kayne West was apparently too overwhelmed to do the same, so he had Simmons do it for him. I felt like I was watching a Seinfeld episode as Simmons was talking about Kayne in the third person while Kayne stood next to him, silent.
It is truly phenomenal that Joe Scarborough and Company seemed to be completely oblivious to the Project Gunrunner scandal. After all, they are in the news business. Trumping that was a deer-in-the-headlights look on the face of the panelists as they were having the scandal explained to them for apparently the first time. CBS's Sharyl Attkisson first began reporting on it BACK IN FEBRUARY!! Scarborough's reaction to the very basic details of the scandal was inexcusable for a morning news show host.
Go figure. It's a leftwing tactic to throw glitter on conservative politicians. Aside from almost assuredly having some obvious emotional issues, this gay activist either didn't bring enough glitter or didn't get nearly close enough to Bachmann after the latter made a speech in her home state. In fact, to the untrained eye, the attempt actually carried an air of ticker-tape style celebration. After the incident, the gay activist was asked about why she would do such a thing and why glitter has become the new weapon of choice for the gay left.
Her answer was the same thing Lucifer might say: To 'Celebrate Pride.'
On its face, this is a clever tactic by a liberal Christian group to use guilt by association to paint Christians who find value in Ayn Rand's work as hypocrites. Obviously, these folks haven't heard phrases like, 'Through God, all things are possible' or 'God works in mysterious ways.' Christians the world over have seen how God has used evil to further His will. It's one of His infinite number paradoxes. For example, the holocaust gave birth to the State of Israel. It's true; Ayn Rand was an atheist but Jesus was a Capitalist (Parable of the Talents). Does that make Jesus an atheist? Absolutely not, but it confirms the desperation of the people who are doing this. In fact, God may actually be using them right now in the form of this campaign. If so, such a scenario would actually speak to why Ayn Rand may have been successful AS an atheist.
This is a good sign. The left has decided to enter the Atlas Shrugged ring by giving Ayn Rand the Sarah Palin treatment. We all know what that means.
This one has been on the internet for a few days but it's got staying power because of its sheer lunacy. While on Capitol Hill to observe the first anniversary of the BP Gulf oil spill, actress Kate Walsh was polite yet indignant over the fact that drilling is still taking place in the Gulf. She actually wants Obama to repeal all drilling permits. Walsh supported Obama's election in 2008 and defended his performance to this point by saying, 'he's been lowered into a pit of a mess.'
Liberals, in general, do not know where money comes from. This brilliant Hollywood celebrity doesn't know where energy comes from. She obviously has no clue how much oil she's personally responsible for consuming. I'm sure all the petroleum that's used in all of the shoes she's purchased would make quite a puddle.
This is destined to become a classic case study in projection. To set this up, Washington, D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray held a press conference to discuss the recently resurrected school voucher program there. As part of the budget deal in Congress, that voucher program was put back in place after reportedly being voted down. Kerry Picket of the Washington Times was on hand to ask Gray some questions after his statement. Soon thereafter, two men standing behind Pickett can be heard talking to her. When she turns the camera around (about the :45 mark), viewers are face to face with two angry leftists. The one on the left has his dander up while telling a very calm Pickett that she is 'obviously hostile and filled with contempt.'
It is this guy's hostility that makes this clip so hysterically funny.
With all that Juan Williams has been in the middle of over the last year or so, you'd think he'd be destined to convert to conservatism at some point. First, he's fired by NPR for expressing his true feelings when he sees Muslims on the same plane as him; he's then promoted by the Fox News Channel; now, courtesy of another James O'Keefe orchestrated sting video, NPR CEO Ron Schiller is caught being, well, racist.
I had barely posted a video of NPR President and CEO Vivian Schiller challenging an audience at the National Press Club to prove liberal bias at NPR. She even said she wished people could be present at their meetings to see how much effort went in to being objective.
Now, courtesy of another James O'Keefe undercover video project, Schiller's wish is granted. Something tells me she won't be apologizing to the likes of O'Keefe anytime soon, though. Another Schiller (Ron), who is an NPR Executive is caught on the video being far more than biased. He is willingly taking money from groups who would do America harm.
On the tapes, Schiller wastes little time before attacking conservatives. The Republican Party, Schiller says, has been “hijacked by this group.” The man posing as Malik finishes the sentence by adding, “the radical, racist, Islamaphobic, Tea Party people.” Schiller agrees and intensifies the criticism, saying that the Tea Party people aren’t “just Islamaphobic, but really xenophobic, I mean basically they are, they believe in sort of white, middle-America gun-toting. I mean, it’s scary. They’re seriously racist, racist people.”
Schiller goes on to describe liberals as more intelligent and informed than conservatives. “In my personal opinion, liberals today might be more educated, fair and balanced than conservatives,” he said.
This isn't just bias. It's feeding the propaganda campaign of America's enemies. There's a word for that.
HERE is Vivian Schiller before the undercover video.
Jesse Jackson Jr. wants it to be the law of the land that every kid can have an 'iPod' and a 'laptop.' He also wants to fix unemployment by changing the Constitution. The words that came out of Jesse's head hole known as mouth only come from one of two kinds of minds. Either: an uneducated child or a wicked man who wants to see the consequences of such destructive ideas being implemented. Jackson's logic is that if everyone has access to health care, it will drive demand for doctors up. If everyone has the right to a home, it will drive up demand for contractors.
Small problem, Jesse. Where does the money come from? Also completely lost on this corruptocrat is that the Community Reinvestment Act allowed minorities who couldn't afford homes to get them. The CRA(P), more than anything else, helped to put the U.S. economy in the dire straits its in.
This guy better have to testify in the next Rod Blagojevich trial. The first go round implicated JJJ as potentially being the most corrupt of all those involved in Blago's pay to play scandal.
This is beyond pathetic and it's vintage Saul Alinsky. The latest tactic by the union thugs in Wisconsin is to invoke the phrase, 'What Would Jesus Cut?' Aside from the fact that these people reject and demean Christianity all day long, this is nothing more than one of Saul Alinsky's rules for radicals. The problem is that if conservatives don't know how to respond to the tactic, it might work. Isn't it funny how the left wants religion out of politics until they can use it to their advantage?
4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity."
The far left liberal Christian (oxymoron) group known as Sojourners has placed a full page ad in POLITICO (pictured). The president of Sojourners is none other than Spiritual advisor to Barack Obama, Jim Wallis - a Marxist (social justice). Jeff Jacoby writes at the Boston Globe:
The ad, signed by Sojourners’ president, Jim Wallis, and other leaders of the Christian left, argues that “a budget is a moral document’’ and the moral test of any nation is how it treats the poor and vulnerable. It acknowledges that government debt is a serious problem, but implores lawmakers not to balance the budget by cutting the “sound investments that a just nation must protect.’’ Among the “investments’’ Sojourners mentions are school lunch programs, tax credits for the working poor, and international aid for fighting pandemics.
Jacoby then goes on to quote the part of Matthew 25 where it says to care for the naked, the sick, the hungry, etc. and rightfully points out that government is not responsible for those things - individuals are:
A more fundamental problem with the “What Would Jesus Cut?’’ campaign is its planted axiom that Jesus would want Congress to do anything at all. Yes, we are emphatically commanded by Scripture to help the poor, to comfort the afflicted, and to love the stranger. But those obligations are personal, not political. It requires a considerable leap of both faith and logic to read the Bible as mandating elaborate government assistance programs, to be funded by a vast apparatus of compulsory taxation. I admit that I am no New Testament scholar, but I cannot recall Jesus ever saying that the way to enter Heaven is to dole out money extracted from your neighbors’ pockets.
Not mentioned in Jacoby's piece is another part of Matthew 25. In particular, the Parable of the Talents, which is Matthew 25: 14-30. I'd love to see the likes of Jim Wallis fit that parable into is social justice world view.
