Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Kos kooks: US needs to be conquered to be compassionate

A reminder of my moonbat rule: I do not link to moonbat blogs.  It’s over at Kos’ krazy playground, if you want to meander over there.  But here’s all you need to know:

As a nation the United States no longer has the remotest idea about what it really feels like to be part of a war zone. Americans have lost the empathy that is necessary to make an informed, meaningful, compassionate decision about whether or not war should be waged. While candidates fight over who has the required experience to properly oversee our republic’s international interests, none realize that none of them have ever felt what it is like to have war waged in their neighborhood and occupied by intruders. While they may claim to know when to wage wars and to know the horrors of war, they only know them intellectually. They can’t claim that they have emotionally felt them. No one who was born and raised in the United States can claim that and none can really feel it. We have allowed a Congress and an administration to encourage hate and to hi-jack our compassion. In fact, as a nation we have lost our compassion.

Unfortunately, America is at a point that to be able to really feel again, to regain that compassion, it needs to be invaded and occupied in the same way that we have invaded and occupied Iraq. Then there might be a greater chance that Americans will be more reluctant to accept the invasion of another country. Maybe seeing and feeling the same level of destruction that we have inflicted on Iraq, at least the American public will understand why invading another country is unconscionable except in the most dire circumstances – which means after that country has directly attacked the United States. And that has not happened since World War II. 

Got that?  If only America could be invaded, butchered, and taken over, then and only then would we achieve the type of “compassion” that the moonbats think we should have.  You know, the same type of compassion that the Kos kooks showed when they said “Screw ‘em” to Americans killed (and dragged and had their corpses hung in effigy) in Iraq?  And the same type of compassion that the Kos kooks demonstrated when they said “Not another damned dime” to New Orleans or other Gulf areas after Katrina hit, since those were red states (hey, they moderated their stance a bit, and said that New Orleans should be helped, since they in fact are a Democrat stronghold who supported Kerry in 2004…compassion apparently is contingent upon the electorate’s overall party affiliation)?  Yeah, that “compassion”!

If you have not yet afforded yourself the opportunity to do so, feel free to go ahead and question their patriotism.

March 17, 2008 Posted by | moonbats | 8 Comments

AP: good enough for me, but not for thee

From Patterico:

So let me get this straight.

Brian Ledbetter republishes AP photos to criticize the AP, without making money, and he gets threatened with a copyright lawsuit.

Meanwhile, Ashley Alexandra Dupre has equally copyrighted photos of herself on her website — photos that no doubt would have netted her considerable cash had she been paid for reproduction rights — and those photos are taken and reproduced without permission by (among many others) . . . the AP. Which (unlike Ledbetter) no doubt made significant money from the photos’ redistribution, as they were clearly in high demand.

You might think that Ledbetter has noticed the irony — and indeed, he has.

I think Ledbetter and other bloggers have a much better fair use argument for repoducing AP photos when relevant to a story than the AP has for this use of Dupre’s photos. Who do you think has the better argument that their use does not diminish the market for the image? Yeah, me too.

But in reality, it seems the limits of fair use are determined, not by concepts like permission, market diminishment, and newsworthiness, but rather by who has the highest-priced lawyers.

I guess that makes fair use like a lot of other things in our society. 

Nope…no liberal media bias chutzpah!

March 17, 2008 Posted by | hypocrisy, media bias | Leave a Comment

Republican legislator in OK: Gays more dangerous than terrorists

Until I see some dude decked out in a pair of leather #ssless chaps with a pink feather boa screaming “Cher rocks, m’kay?” through his lipstick-caked piehole before self-detonating in a mall, I’m gonna have to disagree with this wingnut on that contention.  From FNC:

A YouTube audio clip of a state lawmaker’s screed against homosexuality, which she called a bigger threat than terrorism, has outraged gay activists and brought death threats rolling in.

“The homosexual agenda is destroying this nation, OK, it’s just a fact,” Rep. Sally Kern said recently to a gathering of fellow Republicans outside the Capitol.

“Studies show no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted, you know, more than a few decades. So it’s the death knell in this country.

“I honestly think it’s the biggest threat that our nation has, even more so than terrorism or Islam, which I think is a big threat,” she said. … 

While I don’t disagree with her on the insidiousness at times of the gay agenda (such as attempting to force kindergartners to hear Heather Has Two Mommies and King and King), comparing rump-humping sodomites to camel-humping jihadists is way beyond the pale.  Two dudes behind closed doors plotting what to do to each other with Crisco and some jumper cables poses no threat to me or my countrymen.  Two weirdbeards behind closed doors plotting what to do to the NYC subway system with some C-4 or cell phone detonators does pose a threat.  Quite frankly, that was a moronic comparison.

March 17, 2008 Posted by | gay, wingnuts | 17 Comments

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 44 other followers