The Terrorist Gays
Aug 16, 2012 Political
Janet Napolitano of Homeland Security is quick to label people who are affiliated with the TEA Party or right wing as terrorists even though none of these people have been shown to cause violence against government or any group of people. TEA Party rallies have been peaceful and the places where they gather are always left in better shape than when they arrived.
The violence committed has been committed by the left. The recent violence has been caused by people with leftist beliefs.
Despite this, the Democrat media contorts itself to make some connection to the right. They will falsely claim that a right winger is the cause or blame Sarah Palin or Rush Limbaugh for the violence when the truth is that left wing nut jobs cause the problems. The left loves to try and make right wingers out to be terrorists (the DHS calls them potential terrorists).
The latest terror attack was against a conservative group by a radical gay activist who has taken the violence of the gay movement to a new level. The gays have been physically violent and verbally abusive when they do not get their way. They have been known to attack little old ladies just because those ladies disagree with the gay agenda.
Now, gay activist and terrorist Floyd Corkins II of Virginia is the latest left wing nut job to commit violence and this time the violence was against a conservative group. Corkins walked into the Family Research Council and opened fire after denouncing their policies. He shot a guard who was able to subdue him despite his injuries.
The media that is quick to label anyone as a right wing terrorist when the target is a left wing entity has remained relatively silent about this shooting. Perhaps this is because the media is happy about it. The left wing groups have labeled FRC as a hate group so it only stands to reason that those who attached the label are responsible for the violence.
After any other shooting involving a left wing victim the media goes out of its way to blame Palin, Limbaugh, Malkin, Hannity and any other right wing public figure. It is their “hate speech” that incited the violence, they say.
If that is the case then it stands to reason that the various liberal entities that have labeled the FRC as a hate group are responsible for the FRC shooting.
Though I doubt you will hear anyone in the liberal media jump to make that claim. Hell, I doubt they will ever make that claim. If anything the media will claim that the gunman was pushed to it by the right.
When a nut uses a gun to cause harm the liberal left is always ready to ban guns and blame the right (even though most of the violence is caused by the left) so I want to know if the FRC shooting shows we need to ban gays…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: conservative, dhs, gay activist, liberal violence, media, terrorist
We Need To Find A Generic Republican
Jun 17, 2011 Political
In recent polls for the 2012 presidential contest, a contest that is a year and a half away, Barack Obama beats or ties most of the announced or potential Republican candidates. Romney has traded places atop the polls but for the most part, Obama is ahead of the pack.
The polling that asks about the generic Republican shows that Obama loses. Obama loses to an unnamed, unknown generic Republican but beats the current field. This shows two things. America is generally tired of Obama and wants a change in leadership and that the current crop (thus far) is not the change in leadership that they want.
This could change over time as right now allegiances are spread across a wide Republican field but as it stands right now, Obama beats them when he can’t beat the generic candidate.
Unless someone jumps out of the pack of Republicans and espouses what those polled see in the “generic” candidate, Republicans need to find that generic candidate somewhere else.
The population is looking for a conservative with a proven record of financial experience who has not wavered on core principles. The current pack has few of those in it. Romney gave us Obamacare light and has changed his positions on several issues. He is a smart money man but to many, Obamacare light is a deal breaker.
People have a right to change positions over time based on experience and knowledge but too often positions change based on politics and that is not the mark of a principled person. Plenty of politicians opposed abortion (or federal funding of it) but changed over time for political gain. Look at how many have no problem with federal funding of abortion under Obamacare. Al Gore changed his position completely when being pro life was not to his political advantage.
These are not principled positions. The Republicans need that person who has a solid record of conservative values and have been principled in the approach to these sensitive issues.
Who will that generic person be?
Right now it is hard to say if one of the current contenders is the one or if a new person will have to emerge.
But one thing is certain, whomever it is, the left and its media wing will wage a full scale assault on that person. Power is a strong incentive to many people who have less than honorable intentions.
The Rasmussen poll linked above shows that voters are likely to vote for whomever the Republicans nominate and that is the generic Republican. This is misleading when one considers that the individuals currently in the race lose when polled head to head against Obama (except Romney who trades places depending upon the poll). If current economic conditions persist it is possible for Obama to lose to any candidate but if they improve the Republicans will need a strong, principled candidate in order to win.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: abortion, conservative, democrat, generic, lies, obamacare, republican
Why Not Vote For The Republican?
Oct 13, 2010 Political
The Democrats are in for a good thumping in November and they know it. Right now they are trying their best at damage control but there are only so many fingers to plug the holes in the dike. Many of them are running from their records and pretending they did not support the Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda. Many hardly mention their “achievements” if at all and there are some who are proudly touting that they voted against their leaders. Some are the so called Blue Dogs but most are those who Pelosi allowed to vote against the agenda in order to pander to the folks back home.
Democrat Representative Jim Marshall of Georgia’s 8th Congressional District has an ad out in which a narrator proudly proclaims that Marshall voted with the GOP 65% of the time. Marshall wants the people of his district to vote for him because he votes more with the GOP than with his own party. Depending on how it is measured he actually voted with his party about 88% of the time but let’s go with his numbers.
If he is proud to have voted with the GOP 65% of the time (and therefore with his party only 35% of the time) and this is a reason to put him back in office then why not just vote for the Republican in the race?
The Republican will more than likely vote with the GOP in the 90% range so if 65% is a good thing and warrants reelection then more than 65% would mean the other guy deserves to be elected even more.
The Republican opponent, Austin Scott, is a business man who understands the economy and the business environment so why not vote for him?
He will give the folks of Georgia, and the rest of the country, a far better effort than 65% on conservative issues.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: 8th district, austin scott, conservative, georgia, jim marshall
The Golden Rule
Sep 18, 2010 Political
The Golden Rule is basically, the one who owns the gold makes the rules which might explain why two moron members of Congress will be holding hearings on the gold industry. Henry Waxman and Anthony Weiner (an appropriate name if ever there was one) want companies that sell gold to disclose what the resale value of the gold would be.
The government does not like individuals owning gold. In the 1930s the president signed an Executive Order making it illegal to posses gold after a certain date**. People foolishly turned their gold into the government and they lost a fortune in value. A person who owned 100 ounces of gold back then would have about $2,500 in gold which would be worth about $120,000 today. People were robbed of their future wealth and their possessions by the government.
Now Weiner and Waxman are concerned about the new gold rush. But is their concern for those who are buying the gold and how they might get ripped off or is it for the people who act as spokespersons for the gold companies? There is a fairly long list of conservatives who pitch gold for various companies. Waxman and Weiner do not like that and while they might feign indignation because they are worried the ignorant public is being duped, they really appear to be going after the conservatives who make money hawking ads for gold.
These two morons are also concerned that the people who are selling gold are fear mongers stirring up the public and making the rubes believe that things are worse than they really are. The real problem is that things are worse than they are being portrayed. Gold is the only real hedge against inflation and we will have inflation. The government cannot keep printing money without causing inflation.
Gold is the hedge against that inflation and was one of the precious metals that backed our currency until the government decided not to have our money backed any longer. So it makes sense that people would want to buy it.
So while these two morons ignore the real problems and focus on gold and the people selling it, it might be a good idea if people did what they thought was prudent and ignored these bumbling morons.
If you decide to buy gold just keep in mind that the government will illegally confiscate it if it decides to and if you are not smart enough to keep them from knowing that you have it.
**To make this clear the government made it illegal to own more than $100 worth of gold. Later that was tightened by certain licensing restrictions. People could not move their gold because of the restrictions. History
Cave Canem!
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: confiscation, conservative, gold, lies, waxman, weiner
Obamabots To Invade Talk Radio
Feb 26, 2010 Political
Not long after Obama took office he told people that they could not listen to Rush Limbaugh to get their information and he basically made Limbaugh, a private citizen who has been more successful in business than Obama will ever be, an enemy. He did this along with FOX News and conservative talk in general.
Conservative talk was insignificant, need not be listened to, was ground noise, static.
But it must be loud enough and have enough influence to make the Democrats pay attention because they are amassing the Obamabot army to call in to talk radio to talk up the health care plan. The Democratic National Committee’s Organizing for America has launched a campaign where supporters will listen to talk radio and call in when the debate is about health care so that they can talk it up.
“The fate of health reform has been a focus of debate in living rooms and offices, on TV and online — and on talk radio. And since millions of folks turn to talk radio as a trusted source of news and opinions, we need to make sure OFA supporters are calling in with a pro-reform message,” says the introduction to the online tool.
It will be fun to listen as pimple faced cellar dwellers call in to extol the virtues of a plan with their great arguments about it being a right and Republicans are mean. It will be great to listen to them get chewed up and spit out by people who are experienced at talking for a living and know how to debate an issue and who actually have knowledge of the subject.
The drawback for the left is that having these people listen to conservative radio might end up turning them away from the Democrat party and the health care takeover.
Now that would be funny.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: conservative, health care, Obama, obamabot, talk radio