Another Blog From

Archive for May, 2012|Monthly archive page

Voices Of Freedom Will Not Be Silenced By Leftist Cowards/Agitators

In bullying, crime, Freedom Of Speech, politics, terrorism on May 28, 2012 at 4:10 pm

From The Neosecularist – Brett Kimberlin’s reign of terror continues.  Whether or not this was Kimberlin himself, or one of his associates is not yet known.  However, it was to be expected. And, likely it will occur again.  Every single one of us must remain vigilant, strong and united.  Kimberlin will go after the big fish; those bloggers who are well-known, established and have an enormous reach.  What that means for the rest of us is – keep on this story.  Those of us with more leg room, more freedom of movement because we are under Kimberlin’s, and his associates, radar, ought to use that to our advantage.  This dirty, illegal tactic of “swatting” must be dealt with.  It is incumbent upon us to relate and reblog these stories as they occur.  What is being done to those bloggers who have been “swatted” is revenge by Kimberlin and his associates for their daring to speak the truth about Kimberlin.  Kimberlin is a coward, hiding behind frivilous lawsuits and criminal “swatting” activities.  Law enforcement will catch up to him.  They at least, by now, ought to be on to him.  We can’t be the only ones.  But right now – we are the only ones.  It is up to each and every one of us to change that. We can, we will, make that difference that is essential and imperative to ending Kimberlin’s reign of terror.  Our voices will not be silenced.  Not by Kimberlin, not by anyone.  The only person that can silence your voice is – you.  This is political theater, not a movie theater.  Silence on this matter is not “golden”.  It’s dangerous, and it could be deadly, literally, for those bloggers Kimberlin or his associates specifically goes after.  We must stand behind them, and with them.  We must stand and fight.  What say you?


Weaken Brett Kimberlin By Going After Barbara Streisand, Teresa Heinz-Kerry, George Soros And Everyone Who Backs Kimberlin With Financial Donations

In crime, politics, terrorism on May 24, 2012 at 12:38 pm

Freedom of speech is under assault in America by liberals, radicals, Leftists, and known convicted terrorists like Brett Kimberlin, whose anti-America agenda is being funded and financially supported right now by some of the most well-known Americans.

However, instead of attacking terrorist Brett Kimberlin directly, which many bloggers have found to be a dangerous method, go after those people who are supporting him through financial donations either directly or through his Justice Through Music Project.  Hammer Streisand; hammer Heinz-Kerry; hammer Soros.  These people know what they are doing; they know who they are donating money to; they know they are contributing their money to a known and convicted terrorist.  However, there are many people who donate money via Brett Kimberlin’s JTMP who may legitimately not know that the money they are contributing is actually going to help fund Kimberlin’s radical anti-American agenda.  The JTMP, which, in its “About” page, does not mention Kimberlin as one of the founders (and probably for obvious reasons) is a radical, left-wing, “Occupy” movement supporting, anti-capitalist feeding trough for other liberals, socialists and Leftists who want to transform America into a totalitarian Left-wing autocracy.  By positioning and setting itself up as a website dedicated to “music” it entices, and entraps young teens into a world of liberal activism, pretending to be, and disguised as, a website that uses music merely to promote voter registration among America’s youth.

We must be vigilant, courageous and persistent in demanding Kimberlin’s backers (especially those like Streisand, Kerry and Soros who are public celebrities) be held accountable for their wicked, sinister and corrupt actions.

We must demand, directly, why Barbara Streisand supports a known convicted terrorist.  Why then, Barbara Streisand, do you support a known convicted terrorist, Brett Kimberlin?  Since Streisand remains silent, we must accept Streisand supports the type of terrorism that Kimberlin has conducted.

We must demand, directly, why Teresa Heinz-Kerry supports a known convicted terrorist.  Why then, Teresa Heinz-Kerry, do you support a known convicted terrorist, Brett Kimberlin?  Since Kerry remains silent, we must accept Kerry supports the type of terrorism that Kimberlin has conducted.

We must demand, directly, why George Soros supports a known convicted terrorist.  Why then, George Soros, do you support a known convicted terrorist, Brett Kimberlin?  Since Soros remains silent, we must accept Soros supports the type of terrorism that Kimberlin has conducted.

We must demand directly, why the Democrat Party has opened itself up and invited Brett Kimberlin into its fold.  By not rejecting Kimberlin, by not distancing itself from Kimberlin, by not renouncing Kimberlin, the Democrat Party is guilty of supporting this known convicted terrorist.  Therefore we must accept that the Democrat Party, because of its silence, supports the type of terrorism that Kimberlin has conducted.

If a known convicted terrorist was ever outed to be a conservative, and to have infiltrated the republican Party; if well-known conservative activists had ever donated money to such a person and the liberal MSM ever got hold of that information – what the hell does anyone think the response to that would be?

Barbara Streisand supports terrorism as long as it is directed at American capitalism and meant to thwart conservatism.

Teresa Heinz-Kerry supports terrorism as long as it is directed at American capitalism and meant to thwart conservatism.

George Soros supports terrorism as long as it is directed at American capitalism and meant to thwart conservatism.

The Democrat Party supports terrorism as long as it is directed at American capitalism and meant to thwart conservatism.

The “Justice Through Music Project”, which may be a shill non-profit organization with a hidden agenda, supports terrorism as long as it is directed at American capitalism and meant to thwart conservatism.

What other conclusions can we draw?

Hammer the donors, publicly expose them, and the finances Kimberlin needs to continue his operations will dry up.  Or, does Barbara Streisand think she can bolster her image among her fan base when her fans know she is contributing her money to a known convicted terrorist?  Does Teresa Heinz-Kerry think she can bolster her image, and help her husband’s (John Kerry) image by contributing her money to a known convicted terrorist?

American who support terrorism directed against America are traitors.  What does that tell you about Streisand, Kerry, Soros and all the others who support a known and convicted terrorist, Brett Kimberlin?

Another “Yawner” For The MSM – White Woman Beaten By Three Blacks

In hate crime, politics, racism on May 23, 2012 at 10:40 am

My, how loudly the crickets are chirping.  Yet another story of a white person (a woman this time) being attacked and beaten up by blacks, and although the woman was referenced as a “white b*tch” by her black assailant, there has not been even a murmur, a hushed whisper within the MSM.  Granted, this does not appear to be a premeditated crime.  However, if a white gets out of his car because he does not like something the person in the car ahead of him has said, or done, without knowing the person is black, and the white assaults the black, even if it is not premeditated or predicated on the basis of race, wouldn’t the white still be charged with a hate crime anyway?  Wouldn’t Jesse “Wormtongue” Jackson and Al “Uncle Tom” Sharpton spearhead the unruly mob to demand that this white person be charged with a hate crime and sentenced appropriately?  These typical double standards by the MSM need to be thrown back in their hypocritical faces constantly.  What if it turns out this white woman who was attacked by three blacks is a liberal, pro-abortion, pro-Obama, Democrat feminist?  What is the MSM to do then?  Either abolish “hate” crimes, or apply the rule to everyone equally.  The “can’t we all just get along” idea won’t become a reality until we all realize that race as defined by color of skin is irrelevant, and that culture or ethnic background is a wedge issue not part of the so-called melting pot.  We are all humans and we are all part of the human race.  DNA is absolutely indistinguishable from one human to the next, regardless of color, ethnicity, etc.  And one American citizen is no more superior, or no less inferior, to another American citizen.  Race- baiters and hustlers like Jackson and Sharpton, Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam, and even the New Black Panther Party will not abide by this.  They will continue their assault on the human race for their own financial profit and gain.  For their own racist views, for their own “hate” they and their followers will be sucked into that vacuous, infinite nothingness that awaits them all.  Is it worth it to you to get sucked in as well?  Or can you finally accept that crime against anyone is crime against humanity, and ought to be punished for the sake, for the good of humanity?

The “Enough Rush” Campaign, The National Organization Of Women And It’s Seven Little Dwarves

In politics, women on May 19, 2012 at 2:18 pm

Well, what an absolute embarrassment for NOW, for feminism and for anyone who thought they could make a persuasive and compelling argument for why Rush Limbaugh ought to be off the radio airways, and for why advertisers ought to fear these pathetic and worthless “femi-nazis”.  Weeks in the planning, the Washington D.C. protest at one of the radio affiliates Rush Limbaugh is heard, brought together a whopping seven women.  Seven!  That is not a misprint.  Seven little women is all that could be mustered for Rush’s “war on women”.  We won’t call these women “babes”.  Not only are they not babes, it would be offensive to the real babes out there that do support Limbaugh, conservatism and American values, and are intelligent enough to know that Limbaugh is not at war with women.  How can NOW ever again be taken seriously for anything it says?  The question is – will NOW be able to regain its composure after being shellacked before we regain our composure and stop laughing at these ridiculous “femi-nazis” making public fools of themselves?

The One And Only Time Liberals Oppose Minority Rule

In Filibuster Rule, Majority Rule, politics on May 15, 2012 at 12:06 pm

Liberals make a big deal about “minority rights” and how the majority tries to disadvantage the minority.  Here, we have an instance, probably the only such instance where liberals are in absolute opposition to minority rule, or where the minority usurps the majority.  S. S. blogger, Bob Edgar, writing for the Arianna Nation, decries, bemoans, laments and cries “Not fair” to the minority Senate Republicans who use the filibuster rule to block the majority Senate Democrats.  Edgar must cringe during the part in Mr. Smith Goes To Washington where one Senator, played by Jimmy Stewart, was able to filibuster for so many hours.

Moans Edgar:

Things are especially bad in the Senate. Both parties have figured out that the minority, currently the Republicans, can use the filibuster rule to pretty much shut the place down.”

Democrats and liberals fully support the use anarchy and OWS protests to shut cities down; they certainly support the filibuster rule when they are in the minority.  Check here, here and here.  It is only when they, Democrats and liberals, are in the majority, that they oppose the minority.

Simply put, that’s [the filibuster rule] unacceptable. It’s an affront to our democracy and not the way the Senate was supposed to work. And it has real consequences for real people.

But somehow it is not an “affront to our democracy” when the minority (when that minority is democrats and liberals) tries to usurp power from the majority of American people by taking away their right, as the majority, to rule.  That, too “has real consequences for real people”.

Let’s be truthful.  Democrats and liberals want to be in control, and they want to have all the power, regardless of whether they are in the minority or the majority.  If they are in the minority, like all liberals and Democrats, they allow their emotions to swell and overtake them to the point where they can no longer hold in their tears and must wail and whine like a spoiled little brat, crying, “not fair, not fair”.  On the other hand, when liberals and Democrats are in the majority, they simply claim they are in the majority and they exclaim, “Majority rules”!  Huh?  Scratch your head all you want, but that is how a Democrat and a liberal thinks.  When they are in the majority, they completely disregard the minority and they throw them all under the bus.  That is who liberals and Democrats are.  And that is why it is imperative we keep in tact the “majority rules” idea, even when Democrats are in the majority.  As for the filibuster, although Edgar was “careful” to only include Democrats being filibustered by Republicans, Democrats love it too.  So,other than the mindless people who actually believe the Arianna Nation provides real and substantive news, who is Edgar fooling?

On This Mother’s Day – Would You Help A Woman Kill Her Unborn Child?

In abortion, politics, pro-life on May 12, 2012 at 11:43 am

How successful was this year’s St. Valentines Day Unborn Baby Massacre?  Well, liberals and Democrats are at it again, hoping to make another killing this Mother’s Day.  Pro-abortion murderess, Kirstin Gillibrand, is urging women to donate money to Emily’s List, which is a pro-abortion organization that helps to elect other pro-abortion Democrat women to congress.  Disguised as “reproductive freedom”, it’s really all about abortion to them.  How?  Birth control and contraception are legal, and nobody is going to take that away from women.  We just aren’t going to pay for it for them.  But a woman cannot have “reproductive freedom” in its truest sense, if she does not also have the ‘freedom” to have an abortion, which we know to be the killing of an unborn child.  Although liberals and Democrats are proud to be, and to label themselves as “pro-choice”, most of them are extremely ashamed when they are challenged on just what abortion is.  No convinced?  Challenge Kirstin Gillibrand on what abortion is and see what her response it; see her fluster; see her evade the question; see her backtrack; see her inject non-sequitors and other useless information into her response.  That is the epitome of liberalism.  Liberals deal strictly, religiously, in emotions.  Not facts, not reality.  The reality is – donating money to Emily’s List helps that organization provide campaign funding to pro-abortion Democrat women.  There is no guarantee any pro-abortion Democrat women will win, of course.  But if any of them do – there is good and strong indication all that money initially donated to Emily’s List, which was then dispersed and used to spread more awareness of, and about, their candidates of “choice” might have been a factor in their victories.  This Mother’s Day, do you really want to celebrate the woman who gave birth to you by supporting a cause that works tirelessly to prevent, by killing them, future children from celebrating their mother’s on Mother’s day?  Because these dead children will not have mothers, or fathers, to celebrate on any day of the year.  And they won’t have birthday’s of their own to celebrate either.  That is the legacy of abortion.  over 50 million dead unborn children.  That is the legacy of liberalism.  What would have been the legacy of all those 50 million unborn children slaughtered in the womb?

Gay Arianna Nation Blogger, Aly Windsor, Smears North Carolina (And Demeans Gays)

In gay marriage, politics, states rights on May 9, 2012 at 8:24 am

Are gays sissies?  Or just those gays affiliated with the Arianna Nation?  Aly Windsor, blogging for the Arianna Nation (HuffPost) is crying all the way to that liberal media outlet about her “harrowing” experience at a North Carolina voting poll, where she breaks down and whines that she was made and forced to endure a slow and painful walk into the polling center that no one ought to endure.  Aly was there to vote early on “Amendment 1”, an amendment to the state’s Constitution that would effectively and decisively ban same-sex marriage and uphold the one man/one woman model.  (That amendment has since passed)  Aly writes that her “family was harassed” while she made her way into the polling center.  But other than a verbal word of discourse here and there, Aly made her way in without ever being touched.  She complains her feeling were hurt by what was said verbally to her, and what was written on the signs people held out in front of them.  Are we supposed to feel sorry for Aly?  Are we supposed to feel her pain?  This is the Democratic process, and liberals “harass” conservatives and conservative value every day.  To say she was “harassed” is libelous, in the legal sense, silly in the real sense.  So there were people out in the streets, their streets too, peacefully protesting against gay marriage.  Nobody was throwing rocks at voters, or smashing windows, upturning cars, setting fire to the city.  But Aly still feels these people ought not have the right to even stand and protest against a measure she supports.  Because, in her liberal mind, that’s not fair, and that’s not nice.  In Aly’s childish mind it’s mean people being mean.  Hmm.  Were any of the “scary” protesters holding clubs in their hands, intimidating voters and being intentionally menacing like they did in front of polling stations during the 2008 Presidential election?  Aly Windsor is nothing more than a sham and a canard, and she is using the Arianna Nation as a sympathy platform for her own selfishness and egotism, and she demeans all gays and lesbians with her unbecoming hissy-fit.  She would work to have laws passed to make it illegal for this to happen to anyone again.  But – if one form of protesting can be made illegal, how soon will it be that all forms of protesting will be made illegal?  Or is it only conservatives protesters, and those protesters who are out in their communities supporting measures that Aly doesn’t like she wants to see banned?  Because if another measure comes up for a vote that liberals strongly disapprove of, like an anti-abortion amendment, does anyone believe the pro-abortion crowd would not be out in those same streets “harassing” voters (and using more than the “hurtful” and “spiteful” words than were directed at Aly) as they went into the polling stations?  Does anyone believe Aly would want their voices silenced?  Isn’t protesting a two-way street?  Or is it only the one-way thoroughfare Aly wants it to be, where liberal ideas and measures can pass through unhindered but where conservatives ideas and measures would be, in essence, “going the wrong way”?

“Amendment 1” And The Right Of The Majority To Decide – Except When The Majority Is Not The Liberal Side

In gay marriage, homosexuality, politics, states rights on May 8, 2012 at 10:21 am

North Caroline citizens will vote Today, May 8, on Amendment 1, a measure that would amend their state Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage.  This is as it ought to be – people deciding, not courts.  As there is strong indication that it will pass, challenge and interference in the right of the people to decide issues for themselves may ensue from so-called civil rights and civil liberties groups.  Gay marriage is not a Constitutional right, nor is it even a civil right.  It is certainly not a right to be administered by a minority of people, whether those people be lawyers, politicians or judges.  If gay marriage is ever to be, and to become, a right is must come from the people directly.  Hypocritical liberals have no concern about one lone judge, or a mere few of them, ruling from the bench and striking down any law or measure that, although it was passed either by a state’s majority congress or a state’s majority of citizens, it nonetheless does not pass mustard with liberals and liberal ideology – i.e., border enforcement; illegal alien crack-downs, voter ID requirements, and of course anti-gay marriage initiatives.  On the other hand, these same hypocritical liberals will always support the majority in any congress and in any populace when these majorities vote in favor of a liberal initiative, and these same hypocritical liberals will always condemn any attempt to override such legislation by conservatives when it suits their hypocritical. double standard wielding, two-faced fancies.  Gays and lesbians, and liberals, and even conservatives who support gay marriage, ought to understand that to force this issue on an unwilling public will only harm the progress made in gay and lesbian acceptance.  That goes for anything forced on a majority by the minority, by the way.  Will gay marriage ever be accepted in America, and if so, how soon?  How soon will depend on how patient pro-gay marriage supporters are willing to be.  Because if supporters keep forcing the issue, animosity towards gay marriage will only spread.  Or – do supporters of gay marriage think a minority can silence a majority?  And if so – for how long?

Throwing “Bottles And Other Objects” At Blacks Is Neither Taunting, Provoking Or Criminal – Just Ask Jesse Kornbluth

In culture, hate crime, racism on May 7, 2012 at 5:38 pm

A big deal has been over the Kent State killings, brought about by protesters throwing beer bottles and rocks at police from three hundred feet away, and whether the fact that police were 300 hundred away, and at a presumably “safe” distance” from actual harm, the four students killed by police, as a result of this violent activity, was unwarranted and unjustified.  Well, now we have a story out of Cornell University that  “a group of people on the roof of the Sigma Pi fraternity house reportedly threw bottles and other objects at black students who were walking by the house early Sunday morning”.  There were also, allegedly, invoking the Trayvon Martin shooting.  Now, and this is the most important part – was this group three feet away from these blacks, because just how far a distance they were is imperative to whether or not there was actually any criminal intent, or whether it was a harmless act, according to Jesse Kornbluth, who firmly believes that the protesters at Kent State were unjustifiably shot at because they were three hundred feet away from police when they threw bottles at them.  So, the question begs this answer – is there an appropriate distance at which anybody, protesters included, must remain behind when they are throwing bottles, rocks and other objects at people?  Or – is throwing anything at anyone, at any distance, inappropriate?  Or – is it only appropriate to throw bottles and other objects at police, and only when it is being done by protesters, and liberal protesters at that, as Jesse Kornbluth insinuates?  The fate of this group of people who threw “bottles and other objects” at blacks hinges on the answer to this, and to this question – if police happened to be in the area at the time the group was throwing bottles from the roof at black students, and the police opened fire, killing one or more of them, would Jesse Kornbluth have approved of this tactic, and would he have included the killing of these people among “the most popular murders ever committed in America”?

Why Government Needs To Be And To “Get In Women’s Vaginas”

In Uncategorized on May 7, 2012 at 4:19 pm

There is only one simple reason reason why government – and by that it is to mean law – needs to push, insert and penetrate its way into a woman’s vagina.  That is to protect unborn children from being killed by women who would rather not take the responsibility of carrying them to term and delivering them.  Faux Republican women, in a new Funny or Die Video featuring “actress Kate Beckinsale, Judy Greer and Andrea Savage “spread” the message that the one thing women really want in their vagina is the government.”  This video is merely an unthoughtful diversionary tactic, a non-sequitor and a blatant lie.  Would anyone challenge these actresses on why they support the killing of unborn children?  Would these actresses ever admit they do support the killing of unborn children?  Because they do, although they don’t come out and say it.  Isn’t that an act of shallow cowardice?  Millions of unborn children have been killed through abortion because of women like the actresses in this unfunny video that will leave many more unborn children dying in abortion clinic rooms until we not only do more to “get into their vaginas” but get in their faces as well and demand to know how they can support the killing of unborn children, and what value, what merit that actually has to society, and to the women having the abortions.  Or – is killing an unborn child “funny” to women like Kate Beckinsale?

When A Bank (Wells Fargo) Acts Stupidly

In crime, politics, Unemployment on May 7, 2012 at 3:26 pm

We entrust banks with an incredible amount of personal information, and we expect that information to remain personal, private and secure; and we expect bank employees to have the highest standards when it comes to keeping our personal information private.  We certainly would not want any bank, or any bank employee to use our personal information to hack into our accounts and steal our money, our property, our identities.  We further would not want banks to knowingly hire anyone with a criminal record.  However, there is, and must be, a vast and fundamental difference between a bank hiring someone with a suspicious, and recent, criminal record and hiring someone who did commit a crime 40 years ago, and has atoned and made up for that very distant, very much in the past, mistake.  Yolanda Quesada was fired from her position at Wells Fargo Bank over a shoplifting incident 40 years ago.  That incident came up during a background check conducted by the bank.  And while it is not stated how long she worked at the bank, they obviously hired her before knowing about her past criminal record, which means she must have been, based on her other merits, someone Wells Fargo found would be an asset to their bank.  Why would they, now, after they had hired her, and for however long she has worked there, presumably contributing something of a positive nature to the bank, fire her over something that happened during the Nixon Administration?  This reprehensible act (if there is no further evidence against Quesada to show just cause for having fired her) needs to be challenged before it happens again.  People who have committed crimes, paid their debts to society and have rejoined society have a Constitutional right not to be retried for those crimes.  Businesses certainly have a right to not hire people based on specific criminal acts committed (murder, rape, pedophilia and crimes of that nature and magnitude).  But businesses also need to show some restraint in their firing practices, especially in dealing with employees who have committed crimes decades ago.  Or – how else are people who have committed crimes supposed to rejoin society if they always have their criminal record hanging around their necks?  And – if they cannot, or are unable, to rejoin society, what other alternative is left for them but to return to a life of crime?  How does that benefit society?

Liberal NYT Supports Terrorism Against America (Surprised?)

In politics, terrorism on May 4, 2012 at 8:25 am

NYT commitment to print the latest breaking anti-conservative news will not be hindered, or distracted, by terrorist activities against America.

There’s no other way to describe the complacency, the apathy, the complete non-interest the NYT has in reporting about the conviction of Adis Medunjanin who plotted, but failed, to blow up Grand Central Station than to say that the NYT, in its virtual non-coverage, its lack of serious attention to this thwarted terrorist attack, by literally giving cover (on page A-19 to be exact) to these types of terrorist incidents supports terrorists in a way that is suspiciously incongruous to is role and its responsibility as an American newspaper.  What was more import to the NYT than practicing any semblance or nuance of journalism?  Rupert Murdoch and his fight way the hell over in England over his own news corporation and the scandal he is involved in.  Rupert and his scandal was front page fodder.  Murdoch you know owns FOX News which hosts many leading conservatives and conservative analysis.  It is because of this hatred, this jealously, of FOX News the NYT has completely disregarded and abandoned its duties as a legitimate newspaper so it could spend its time going after Murdoch.  There is some irony here.  How many of it subscribers read the NYT while traveling the Grand Central Station Subway?  Would they be more interested in the circus in England over Murdoch, or about the safety of the subway that takes them to and from work every day?  By putting Murdoch on page one and placing the story of a convicted terrorist on page A-19, which is about the equivalent of an appendix (and unless it is the appendix to the Lord of the Rings, who reads that?), the NYT is in effect giving aid and comfort to a convicted terrorist who, if he had not been caught, might have killed hundreds of people and caused millions of dollars in damage, and just might inspire other wanna-be terrorists to do the same, knowing they too can always count on its ally, the liberal NYT, to keep their terrorist affairs as discreet as possible, and under the radar of its last few remaining subscribers.  Does anyone really want to defend the NYT editorial decision on this?

Hi Ho – Homeowner’s Association’s Got To Go (Or; Swing Low Sweet Swing Set)

In Army vets, politics on May 3, 2012 at 11:22 am

A swing set has become the focal point of a major, major controversy brewing in Mineola, Texas between a returning Army vet and his purely uppity, despicable, worthless excuse for a homeowner’s association.

What an absolutely disgusting display of gratitude for our military vets, as well as common sense, from one homeowner’s association in Mineola, Texas.  A returning Army vet built a swing set for his children only to be sued by his homeowner’s associating.

They’re in the wrong only because they declined to make the proper application and submit the drawings,” homeowner’s association chairman Harold Lemmon told KLTV.

An application for a swing set?  It’s high time somebody started suing homeowner’s associations themselves for their abuse of power.  Where is the Constitutionality of these groups anyway?  Where in the constitution does it allow an associating to dictate to a home owner what he can and cannot do on his own land?  It’s one thing entirely if a homeowner was to neglect their lawn and let it become overrun with weeds, littered with garbage, animal waste, or any type of health hazard.  But when a homeowner (put aside he is an Army vet for a minute) wants to build a swing set, or perform any improvement to their own home, who the hell are these damn, foolish, useless, repugnant homeowner associations to tell him he can’t do it?  These are self-righteous, indignant, uppity little cliques made up of people who are born with an insatiable urge to be nosy busy-bodies who will not mind their own business.

“The lawsuit states that the swing set is “not in harmony with the design and location in relation to surrounding structures and topography,”

Does anyone want to make a bet the only reason, the real reason, why this homeowner was singled out for building a swing set is because he is an Army vet and the people in his community, or at least this particular homeowner’s association, is biased and prejudiced against our military?  Would that surprise anyone?

Democrat Neo-Nazi Kills Family, He’s Dead Too…

In politics, racism, slavery on May 3, 2012 at 10:20 am

Democrat Wolves in Sheets For Clothing

Liberals will not like this.  A neo-Nazi who was running for sheriff of Pinal County as a Democrat has killed his family.  He’s dead too.  When do we ever hear about a Republican neo-Nazi running for any political office?  For that matter, when do we ever hear about a Republican neo-Nazi?  Throughout American history it has been Democrats, not Republicans, who have support slavery; who have supported segregation; who have been members of the KKK; who have been the real racists.  Juan Williams, as a liberal, will continue to have the audacity, as all liberals do, to call Tea party members racist, but refuse to offer one solid piece of evidence.  And, as always, the liberal MSM will continue to ignore it.  This story of the Democrat neo-Nazi serves as at least one piece of evidence that Democrats can be racists and are more prone, more capable, more committed to, more sympathetic to, more likely to be and to support, racism.  Want another piece of evidence?  Google Democrat Senator Robert Byrd.  Now – where’s that evidence that the Tea Party is racist?

If Juan Williams Slanders The Tea Party On The Sean Hannity Show Does Anyone Hear It?

In politics, racism, Tea Party on May 3, 2012 at 9:54 am

On the Sean Hannity Show, Juan Williams accused the Tea Party movement of being racist.  He, along with Michelle Malkin, were guests on the program discussing the Occupy Movement and the support that movement has with President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and most Democrat member of congress, despite its extremely violent nature.  When Malkin challenged, and then demanded, Williams offer one piece of evidence for racism in the Tea Party, Williams could not do that, but he refused to retract his statement.  This goes to show the hypocrisy of liberals (and Williams is still a liberal, regardless of his break with NPR).  Juan Williams has shown himself, in this segment,  to be a very shallow, unworthy man.  His disapproval of the Tea Party has allowed his emotions to get the better of him and he too has succumbed to the lies that liberals always spread about conservatives – that we are racists.  It’s easy to call anyone a racist.  But its even easier to call someone a racist and not have to back it up.  Juan’s incredible stupid, arrogant comment highlights the desperate nature of liberals, who are in fact losing their battle to take over America from conservatives.  One day liberals will wake up and wonder what happened, and how they lost their struggle to redefine America, never knowing, never conceiving, never once accepting it was through their own sheer arrogance, willful deceit of facts and extremely violent nature that did them in.  Has anyone ever heard or known of a liberal accepting blame for anything they have done?


In Uncategorized on May 2, 2012 at 3:04 pm

The Neosecularist

With the 2012 Presidential election mere months away, would Barack Obama be daft enough to offer an open apology to China for aiding Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng, whose only crime was speaking out about the horrors and inhumanity of forced abortions in China?  Would Obama, by this apology, thereby provide Republicans their own opportunity to attack Obama on what would be his incredible weakness and insensitivity on human rights abuses?  Doesn’t the escape of Chen, and the U.S. involvement in protecting and shielding him from Chinese retribution, box, even intern, Obama into a corner he himself cannot so easily escape?

Either way, Obama is going to piss a lot of people off.  Either the Chinese government, if he doesn’t apologize.  Or – his entire pro-abortion, pro-population control, Democrat/Socialist base if he does apologize.  Will Republicans and conservatives be smart enough to use this issue to excoriate Obama and Democrats…

View original post 1,071 more words

Oh, Peas! NYT Tries To Show “Absurdity” Of Being Pro-life By Equating Living Plants With Unborn Children

In abortion, politics, satire on May 1, 2012 at 1:27 pm

The New York Times, which never met an unborn human child it would ever try to save from being aborted, or ever cared whether it was killed in or out of the womb, wants us to save plants (peas in this narrative) from being “slaughtered” on the vine and eaten.  Arguing that the chemical reactions and stimuli responses that occur within its roots are actually the peas talking to one another, Michael Marder, writing for the NYT, asserts that peas (plants in general) are capable of feelings, emotions and can feel pain, in the same way pro-lifers insist that unborn children (fetuses) do, and therefore ought to be protected from humans harvesting and consuming them.

“Imagine a being capable of processing, remembering and sharing information — a being with potentialities proper to it and inhabiting a world of its own. Given this brief description, most of us will think of a human person, some will associate it with an animal, and virtually no one’s imagination will conjure up a plant.”

In other words, how can anyone really be pro-life if they don’t also extend that argument to plants.  And if they don’t extend that pro-life argument to plants, then how can they really be pro-life?  And if they don’t extend that pro-life argument to plants, then they are hypocrites.  And if they are hypocrites, then it gives justification for continuing to ridicule them and ignore them all the while unborn children are being killed in and out of the womb and the NYT is publishing absurd opinion pieces from radical, die-hard liberals disguised as satire.  The NYT, not one liberal, thinks of an unborn child as a human being, so why would any of them ever think “a being capable of processing, remembering and sharing information — a being with potentialities proper to it and inhabiting a world of its own” would “conjure” a fetus?  But of course they would “conjure up a plant”, in a futile attempt to be absurd and to show how “absurd” the pro-life movement is, and is being, trying to protect unborn children, even though they neither believe a plant feels and reacts to its environment in the same way, or is remotely similar to, a fetus in any sense of the definition any more than they want to believe a fetus feels anything in its enclosed water-filled environment during its nine months of development and growth.  Because if a fetus can feel, then it can certainly feel pain as it is being ripped in, and to, pieces by an abortionist.  And if a fetus can feel, and feel pain, how can it do that if it is not conscious?  And if a fetus is conscious is it not alive?  The NYT has, suspiciously, not yet demanded the passage of legislation that grants “planthood” status to peas and other fruits and vegetables, whatever life-bearing seeds, they think ought to be protected from being slaughtered in or out of its root, vine, stalk, etc.  Perhaps not everyone at the very liberal NYT is yet convinced that peas ought to be granted “planthood” status.  If they need more proof to show how “human-like” peas are, perhaps they ought to employ sonograms on pea plants.  But if they do, would they know not to “rape” the plant using the “trans-carpel” type of ultrasound?