Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Quote of the day, “Palin’s smackdown of Obama” edition

Torn between two lovers, I am: hetero man-crush on Newt or hetero crush on the Alaskan hot chick?  Here’s a snippet of things to come from Palin’s speech:

Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown. And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves. I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities.

Day-um!  Red meat for the masses!  :D

September 3, 2008 Posted by | Obama, Palin, quote of the day | 8 Comments

Biden’s lofty goals for highest office

I’m gonna be charitable and assume he didn’t plagiarize this observation (via NRO):

Joe Biden, in the Democratic primary, assessing who should serve on the Supreme Court:

I have taken on those justices who, in fact, show no balance — they are ideologues. We have enough ideologues. We have enough professors on the bench. I want someone who ran for dog catcher. I want someone — literally, not a joke. When Hillary’s husband asked me for his advice when he was appointing people, I wanted to go to people and so did he — we couldn’t. Four people turned it down. We wanted to get someone who, in fact, knew what it was to live life.

So let me get this straight… a dog-catcher is qualified to be on the Supreme Court, but a former mayor and recently-elected governor is not qualified for the presidency?

Boy, it sure is a good thing Barry O picked such an esteemed running mate to counterbalance his own skimpy resume.

September 3, 2008 Posted by | Biden | 3 Comments

Quote of the day, “Newt vs. MSM edition”

I may have just developed a platonic heterosexual man-crush on Newt Gingrich (“Not that there’s anything wrong with that!”  :lol:   ) for publicly schooling MSNBC’s Ron Allen!  From the ‘Busters:

Such marvelously occurred Tuesday evening on the convention floor in St. Paul when MSNBC’s Ron Allen said to the former Speaker, “But to be fair, her resume is not something we’re familiar seeing with presidential candidates.”

This didn’t sit well with Gingrich who strongly replied (video embedded right, h/t NB readers Matt Noll and Patrick):

It’s stronger than Barack Obama’s. I don’t know why you guys walk around saying this baloney. She has a stronger resume than Obama. She’s been a real mayor, he hasn’t. She has been a real governor, he hasn’t. She’s been in charge of the Alaskan National Guard, he hasn’t. She was a whistleblower who defeated an incumbent mayor. He has never once shown that kind of courage. She’s a whistleblower who turned in the chairman of her own party and got him fined $12,000. I’ve never seen Obama do one thing like that. She took on the incumbent governor of her own party and beat him, and then she beat a former Democratic governor in the general election. I don’t know of a single thing Obama’s done except talk and write.

Newt then challenged Allen:

I’d like you to tell me one thing Sen. Obama’s done.

With that, Allen retreated, and said:

Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to leave it there. I’m not going to argue the case. Thanks very much.

Hmmm. Imagine that. I guess folks like Allen are only willing to argue the case when there’s nobody playing the part of the defense attorney.

Game, set, match!  Thanks for playing, MSM!  :lol:

September 3, 2008 Posted by | media bias, Newt Gingrich, Obama, Palin | 5 Comments

Washington comPost: adding more money to a program is a “cut”

The left has used this perversion of the English language for years, and that the MSM is parroting the same lie in a “news story” is proof that the MSM gets its talking points from the DNC.  From the comPost:

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee who revealed Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, earlier this year used her line-item veto to slash funding for a state program benefiting teen mothers in need of a place to live.

After the legislature passed a spending bill in April, Palin went through the measure reducing and eliminating funds for programs she opposed. Inking her initials on the legislation — “SP” — Palin reduced funding for Covenant House Alaska by more than 20 percent, cutting funds from $5 million to $3.9 million. Covenant House is a mix of programs and shelters for troubled youths, including Passage House, which is a transitional home for teenage mothers.

Oh, snap…they went after the mother with the knocked-up teenager and just nailed her on her hypocrisy!  Except there’s just one problem with that: she increased the funding by an extra $3.9 million!

See, the initial amount of the proposed expansion was $5 million.  She thought the program could do just fine with an additional $3.9 million.  So does the left see an increase of $3.9 million?  Nope, they see a “cut” to the program of the difference between the proposed amount and the final amount, i.e. a $1.1 million cut.

Plus, did you catch the name of the spending bill?  It’s right there in the comPost’s own picture: The Covenant House Alaska- Covenant House Facility Expansion (HD-1732).  And these morons say that Bush has trouble with English?

Here’s a link that shows that in fiscal year 2006, the AK government funded the program $1.1 million.  In 2008, the aforementioned EXPANSION added an additional $3.9 million.  For those of you on the left, $3.9 million is more than $1.1 million.

Peggy Noonan is right: the MSM and the left (pardon the redundancy) are so petrified of this American girl that they see her as a genuine threat to their electoral and political goals…and thus, she must be mauled with reckless abandon:

She could become a transformative political presence.

So they are going to have to kill her, and kill her quick

Nope…no liberal media bias!  BTW, feel free to contact the ombudsman at the comPost and correct them on this “cut” business.

September 3, 2008 Posted by | economic ignorance, media bias, Palin, shameful | 3 Comments

UN: Respect Islam…oh, yeah, and other religions, too

The U.N. is more useless than a football bat.  From the Washington Times:
The Bush administration, European governments and religious rights organizations are mounting a new effort to defeat a General Assembly resolution that demands respect for Islam and other religions but has been used to justify persecution of religious minorities.

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES SPEAKING THEIR MINDS: Pakistani Shi’ite Muslims shout anti-Taliban slogans during a protest Monday in Islamabad.

The resolution, called “Combating Defamation of Religion,” is sponsored by the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and has been approved by the world body annually since 2005. It comes up for renewal this fall.

U.S. officials said they hope to persuade moderate Muslim nations – among them Senegal, Mali, Nigeria and Indonesia – to reject the measure, which lacks the force of law but has provided diplomatic cover for regimes that repress critical speech. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic.

Religious rights groups say other U.N. measures, including statements by the Human Rights Council in Geneva, replicate the language of the resolution.

“Before, it was one resolution with no impact and no implementation,” said Felice Gaer, chairman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, a bipartisan federal body that investigates abuses and proposes policies to advance “freedom of thought, conscience and religion.”

“Now we are seeing a clear attempt by OIC countries to mainstream the concept and insert it into just about every other topic they can,” Miss Gaer said. “They are turning freedom of expression into restriction of expression.”
…
Incidents cited include remarks last year about Islam by Pope Benedict XVI, the publication of cartoons in Danish newspapers that contained unflattering images of the prophet Muhammad and religious rulings issued against iconoclastic Muslim writers such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Salman Rushdie.

The most recent version of the anti-defamation resolution, passed by the world body in December, cites the erroneous connection of Islam to terrorism and “stresses the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions and incitement to religious hatred, against Islam and Muslims in particular.” …

Let’s get something straight: there is NO “the erroneous connection of Islam to terrorism”!  The connection is crystal freakin’ clear!  A majority of Muslims are not terrorists, but a majority of terrorists are Muslim fanatics.  Instead of confronting those who use Islam as a “reason” to perpetuate violence, it seems that the Muslim world would rather just shut the rest of us up.

I don’t know how to break it to those geniuses (genii?) at the United Nations, but we have this pesky thingy in America called a Constitution, which has an even peskier component called the First Amendment.  Give it a once-over and get back to us Americans when it makes sense, m’kay?  Thanks in advance.

Exit question: Notice that the UN resolution mentions Islam by name but does not mention the “other religions” by name?

September 3, 2008 Posted by | political correctness, religion of peace, United Nations | 4 Comments

“New feminism”

Jeff Goldstein witnessed an exchange between liberal radio show host Ed Schultz and former Republican Congresswoman Susan Molinari.  Here’s what Schultz had to say about Palin’s daughter getting pregnant:

SCHULTZ: The facts are this. What kind of mother is she? Is she prepared to be the vice president? Is she going to be totally focused on the issues.
…
MOLINARI: So every — so every person out there who has an unwanted pregnancy in their family is a result of bad mothering? Wow. That’s really bold to say that.

SCHULTZ: Don’t tell me she’s a role model. …

Jeff’s retort:

Of course, by this logic, the fact that Hillary’s hubby was getting his gear shaft polished under the desk means Hillary is not qualified to lead. But no matter.

This kind of argument — which, let’s face it, Schultz would never be making were the candidate a man (must be part of the new feminism, incidentally: working women, for all their professional accomplishments, are to be judged by the mistakes of their children — not how they react to those mistakes, which, in the masculine Obama’s case, we know would be to get rid of the “punishment”) — suggests that Sarah Palin is a bad mother, not because of a mistake made by her teenage daughter, but because she wasn’t there to stop it.

Or, to put it another way, what was this Palin woman thinking taking a job while she should have been home, in the kitchen, each morning fastening a chastity belt around her daughter’s honeypot?

I mean, it’s one thing to want to work and act like a man when you haven’t the burden of children — or when you are at least prepared to pony up for a strict Catholic nanny from South America to beat some respect into the child. But, c’mon, honey: playtime is over. Tend your garden, like a good little squaw. Then you might not have yourself a knocked up trailer trash daughter.

Jesus. Can you imaging a “liberal” radio host making this same argument were Palin and her daughter Democrats and black? Of course not. Instead, we’d be treated to a nonstop narrative of sacrifice and the difficulties of growing up black in America — of cultural pressures, the differences between black and white, etc.

Question for Schultz and like-minded brain-dead liberals: Since Al Gore’s kid got busted for driving while a stoner, does that make Al Gore a bad father and Tipper a lousy mom?  Maybe Obama’s grandparents were lousy parental figures because Barry O was a coke snorter while in their care?

It’s clear that when you hear the term “feminism”, the implication is “batshiite crazy leftist hypocritical feminism”, so keep that in mind whenever you see the term.

September 3, 2008 Posted by | feminism, hypocrisy, moonbats, Palin, shameful | 22 Comments

MSM: Moonbatosphere influences our stories

The hell you say!  From LGF:

Reuters headlines their article on the Sarah Palin blog-o-smears story: Palin hubbub shows bloggers’ influence on race.

My take is a little different. I think it shows the influence of a bunch of borderline sociopaths on a mainstream media that often consists of the same sort of people. 

Nope…no liberal media bias!

September 3, 2008 Posted by | media bias, moonbats, Palin | 1 Comment

Schumer: American side is “the other side”

Joe Lieberman gave a great speech at the RNC last night.  Naturally, the Dems were fuming.  From WCBS:

Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman said America needs a president that can be counted on in a time of war. For him, the candidate is Republican McCain. 

Lieberman, a Democrat-turned-independent who was the blue side’s candidate for vice president in 2000, said that while Sen. Barack Obama was voting to cut off funding for troops in Iraq, McCain took the unpopular position to support a surge in troops.

“Because of that, today, our troops are at last beginning to come home, not in failure, but in honor,” Lieberman said.

Lieberman said that in times like these, country matters more than political parties.
“I’m here tonight because John McCain is the best choice to bring our country together and lead our country forward. I’m here because John McCain’s whole life testifies to a great truth: being a Democrat or a Republican is important. But it is not more important than being an American,” Lieberman said.

Charles Schumer, the senior Senator from New York, begs to differ. In fact, most Democrats are furious with Lieberman.

“I like Joe Lieberman, but that’s a big mistake for him,” Schumer said. “To be pro-war and to have his views on the issues, everyone respects that. But you don’t go over to the other side.”

Got that?  Chuch the Schmuck thinks that being a Democrat is more important than being an American.  But hey, don’t you go and question the left’s patriotism or anything.  Maybe Liebs wouldn’t have to “go over to the other side” if his own side wasn’t so shamefully invested in defeat.

Wasn’t Schmuckie thrilled when Jumpin’ Jim Jeffords had a “moment of clarity” and opportunistically switched party affiliation in order to get a Senate committee chair?  Jeffords did not have a “change of heart”…he wanted more power, influence, and media adulation (and boy, did he get it).  Liebs isn’t doing what he’s doing for any of those reasons, since the Dems are all but certain to pick up new Senate seats (thus diminishing Liebs’ influence).  I disagree with Joe on nearly everything, but I salute the man’s love of country above his love of party.

September 3, 2008 Posted by | Chuck Schumer, defeatism, Lieberman, McCain, shameful | 1 Comment

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 32 other followers