Category: Liberals suck

  • VoteVets’s concern isn’t really veterans

    Remember this video from VoteVets’ campaign to support the President’s “clean energy program”?

    The video used Iraq War veterans as puppets to push the idea that if we started burning unicorn farts instead of oil in our cars, we could get out of the Middle East. At the time, over two years ago, we questioned the motives of VoteVets’ expenditure of a million bucks to run that ad campaign.

    Thanks to the efforts of the good folks at OpenSecrets, we now know what Soltz’ motivation was. See, VoteVets never released the source of the funding and as a 501(c)(4) they aren’t required to do so. So Open Secrets searched through tax filings of environment organizations and turned up this nugget;

    The Sierra Club gave $670,000 to the liberal VoteVets Action Fund, and the NRDC Action Fund donated $500,000. The largest total came from the Alliance for Climate Protection, the group founded by former Vice President Al Gore: $2.6 million, research by OpenSecrets Blog has found.

    So, just like these other organizations who act like they care about the troops, all VoteVets cares about is money, as demonstrated by this ad which requires a suspension of common sense in order to believe. They didn’t do anything to actually push a military-friendly program, but they used veterans as props to push a liberal, environmental agenda funded by the towering intellect that is Al Gore.

  • The real war on women

    Photobucket

    The Left has been whining lately about the Republicans’ supposed “war on women”. The reasons women should not vote for Republicans are listed at this MoveOn campaign link. But where do I think is the real war against women? Well, I’ve been reading links from our buddy Michelle Malkin to the disgusting hate mail she gets from the Left, and I think the real war against women is being leveled against women on the Right.

    If you’ve missed Michelle’s latest postings on Facebook, John Hawkins from Right Wing News has compiled some screen shots of Michelle’s Twitter communications.

    Now, I love Michelle and the one time I told her so, she quickly responded that her husband loves her, too. I guess she was trying to tell me something. But the two times we’ve talked, I’ve found her to be one of the sweetest and most gracious people I’ve ever met. She’s certainly not deserving of these vicious attacks. And pretty much all she does is shine light on the Left, and she’s certainly not as vicious as the attacks she tolerates.

    Now, I’m no feminist, because I think feminism was devised at a frat house kegger in the 60s, but I do believe that women should be treated equally…mostly because I’ve fathered three women who I love very much and I have granddaughter and a great granddaughter. I think I’d strangle anyone who talked to my girls the way they talk to Michelle. As long as these creeps hide behind their keyboards and spew their filth, I think all women are being mistreated. So, why does the Left hate women?

    ADDED: Just this morning, Malkin got another one from some brave soul;

  • A Bit of Good News

    Still out there and driving the liberal anti-war loons nuts.

    Act of Valor STILL in the top five!

    Jonn’s review is here.

    I’ve seen it and certainly recommend it too.

    More than anything it serves as a valuable counterpoint to other recent events. 

    Sure gonna try to catch it again.

  • Limbaugh’s apology

    So Rush Limbaugh apologized to Sandra Fluke yesterday for calling her a slut and a prostitute. I don’t know why he needed to apologize, I haven’t heard any apologies over the years for calling Sarah Palin names, including “slut”. The Left differentiates their behavior from Rush by explaining that Fluke isn’t a public figure. Well, she did become a public figure the minute she decided to tell Congress how the rest of us taxpayers should have our money spent to subsidize her sexual proclivities.

    But Rush’s apology, as reported by the Washington Post;

    “My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir,” Limbaugh said on his website. “I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.”

    So that’s the end of it, right? 75 members of Congress demanded an apology from Rush, so that should satisfy the Left, right? Nope. Michael Moore tweets last night;

    So you remedy one situation of a guy calling a woman a “slut” by calling that guy a “bitch” when he apologizes. Classy, Jabba the Moore.

    The Propagandist calls it a non-apology. The Talking Points Memo says it falls on deaf ears. So why did he even bother?

    The whole situation reminds of the issue we discussed over two years ago when Major General Anthony Cucolo, the commander of Multi-National Division-North, Iraq, decided to make pregnancy in a war zone a violation of command policy and threatened his command with court martials for violating that policy. The Left made it about the right to have sex, while the issue was really about making sound choices. Saying “no” is cheap in my experience.

    So show me in the Constitution where it says Americans have a right to expect the government to fund their sexual activities.

    And where are the apologies for members of Congressman Issa’s staff whom he reports have been abused by his ideological opponents, according to the Washington Times;

    “My staff, particularly female staff, have also been the subject of intense and disgusting accusations and insults — ‘hag,’ ‘traitor,’ and numerous references to anatomy have been among the milder expressions hurled over the phone,” Mr. Issa wrote.

    Also, according to the Washington Times, Fluke’s whole point was moot, because according to Georgetown spokeswoman, Stacy Kerr, although the University requires students to have healthcare insurance, they’re free to make a choice and purchase other health insurance outside of the University’s policy which could include birth control. But there’s that pesky word “choice” again.

  • Iowa legislature Democrats go AWOL on gun rights

    John sends us a tip that Iowa Democrats walked out on their session rather than debate gun rights for Iowans. At issue, is a constitutional amendment for Iowans to bear arms and the reasonable right to defend themselves and their property with firearms. The Democrats are outnumbered 60-40.

    Other reaction has been predictable. Iowa Democratic Party Chairwoman Sue Dvorsky praised the House caucus have “absolutely done the right thing by refusing to allow House Republicans to misuse their power in this manner.”

    Meanwhile, Alan Gottlieb of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms blasted the Democrats for painting “themselves as the party of gun control by disappearing rather than debating” firearm civil rights of Iowa citizens.

    Apparently the “misuse of power” is having a vote on an issue that Democrats don’t want to face. Cowardice, on the other hand, is running away from the issue. If they feel strongly about the issue, they should stand and convince the other side of their merit.

  • Oh, my! Elevating the tone of the discussion.

    In case you think that Democrats are interested in having a discussion about solutions to the problems in this country, witness this from the DailyKos, written by some peawit douchenozzle who bravely calls him/herself “Troubadour”;

    Yup, how do you have a rational discussion with a cretin like that?

  • What the Heck… More Good News for a Sunday

    As an added bonus this bit has some liberals in a snit.
    ‘Act Of Valor’ #1 With $25M Weekend

    Relativity’s R-rated Act Of Valor has stayed No. 1 all weekend. It’s the the Bandito Brothers’ independently financed low-budget U.S. Navy fighting force tale using actual SEALs from an original screenplay by Kurt Johnstad (300).

    Jonn’s review is here.

  • New York Times: US Constitution is “old and terse”

    Old Trooper sent us a link to an opinion piece by Adam Liptak, the New York Time’s Supreme Court correspondent, who laments that the US Constitution is outdated and no longer befitting the shining city on the hill. Of course, his entire premise is based on the opinions of morons;

    In a television interview during a visit to Egypt last week, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the Supreme Court seemed to agree. “I would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,” she said. She recommended, instead, the South African Constitution, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the European Convention on Human Rights.

    If Ginsburg isn’t a moron, I don’t know morons. It was the Canadian Charter of Rights that allowed the Canadian government to attempt to prosecute Mark Steyn for publicly expressing his opinion, so that’s a real model, isn’t it? It was under the European Convention of Human Rights that Bridgette Bardot was prosecuted five times for expressing her opinion in public.

    Of course, the new York Times has a gripe mostly with the Second Amendment;

    It has its idiosyncrasies. Only 2 percent of the world’s constitutions protect, as the Second Amendment does, a right to bear arms.

    And the heartless Founders didn’t include entitlements in the Constitution;

    Americans recognize rights not widely protected, including ones to a speedy and public trial, and are outliers in prohibiting government establishment of religion. But the Constitution is out of step with the rest of the world in failing to protect, at least in so many words, a right to travel, the presumption of innocence and entitlement to food, education and health care.

    Since when do natural human rights include an entitlement to food, education and healthcare? I’ve noticed that the South African Bill of Rights has it listed in number 27 of their 32 rights. I wonder how that’s working out for them?

    I don’t know it looks like the line for sick call on the day Headquarters Company schedules their quarterly 12 mile road march.

    The Times continues;

    “America is in danger, I think, of becoming something of a legal backwater,” Justice Michael Kirby of the High Court of Australia said in a 2001 interview. He said that he looked instead to India, South Africa and New Zealand.

    I don’t understand the fascination with the opinions of other countries. Our Constitution was written to protect the people from overarching government, most of the rest of the world depends on their governments to protect them from the consequences of their bad choices. They depend on government for their rights, whereas, we recognize the need to be protected from our government’s excesses.

    And, oh, Ruth Bader Ginsberg should be impeached for that statement. And as TSO said in an email, the NY Times should become the Montreal Times if they’re so in love with Canada. The Constitution doesn’t begin “We, the New York Times…”