Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

Posts Tagged ‘leftists’

Which is harder, voting or buying a gun?

Posted by Richard on October 29, 2018

Ho hum. Another anti-gun leftist betrays his abysmal ignorance of gun laws. And of voting.

Executive Director for Build the Wave, Nate Lerner, wants to make it as hard to buy a gun as it is to vote.

Huh.

We are totally good with making it as hard to buy a gun as it is to vote.

Totally.

EL OH EL.

I suppose a case could be made for flipping his argument around.

Suppose the opposite side of Nate’s tweet could work as well, maybe we do need to make it harder for some people to vote. Oh, don’t worry, just the illegal people … and the dumb ones.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 7 Comments »

Not the Onion: Lesbians protest against transgenders

Posted by Richard on July 9, 2018

I’m sure this is troubling to advocates of intersectionality theory, but it left me grinning from ear to ear:

In a bizarre scene Saturday, a group of “lesbian activists” disrupted and stalled the London Pride Parade, in what they called a protest against the event’s inclusion of transgender individuals.

Local media reported that the protesters stalled the parade for around ten minutes, and as they were carted off, one could be heard screaming that, “A man who says he’s a lesbian is a rapist” — an apparent reference to male-to-female transgender individuals.

… The lesbian activists who disrupted the parade said they’ve felt left out of Pride events this year, after noting to organizers that lesbians prefer sex with only biological females, not transgender men who might dress and live as women but who have not completed gender reassignment surgery.

“We don’t want any kind of penis in our bedroom,” an activist told media. “I’m really sad I have to reassert this again.”

Men who don’t want a relationship with a “woman” who has a penis are routinely excoriated by the “woke” left as hate-filled cis bigots. How are they going to deal with women who feel the same way?

Grab the popcorn!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

OMG! Conservatives have “weaponized” the First Amendment!!

Posted by Richard on July 7, 2018

I’m old enough to remember the Berkeley Free Speech Movement. But anyone who’s been paying attention knows that we’re far removed from the time when the left argued that the right of free speech was absolute and applied especially to speech that some people found offensive or disturbing. (Of course, they argued that in the context of defending speech about how racist and imperialistic the US was, so there may never have been much principled consistency to their stand, just a self-serving posture.)

For some time now, the left, and especially the academic left (and thus a good 90% of academia), has argued exactly the opposite: that there is no right to say anything that offends or disturbs anyone (at least, anyone on the left). Just take a look at the battles that the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has been fighting for almost 20 years. Or look at the scores of times that leftist professors and students have used violence or the threat of violence to silence or prevent the appearance of “fascist” speakers on campuses across the country (“fascist,” in their usage, means anyone to the right of Hillary Clinton).

For a look at where the left stands now with regard to free speech (with the apparent approval of the New York Times), see this Ben Shapiro column.

On Sunday, The New York Times ran a front-page, 2,000-word report on how “conservatives weaponized the First Amendment.” Now, you might ask yourself why the most famous press institution in American history is questioning the wisdom of the First Amendment. You might also ask yourself how conservatives could have weaponized a freedom. This is sort of like saying that law-abiding citizens weaponized the right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure. But according to the Times’ Adam Liptak, conservatives have twisted the definition of free speech to enhance their own political goals.

“Twisted the definition of free speech” apparently means “applied it equally to those we disagree with.”

Shapiro unpacks Liptak’s summary of the current leftist argument against a content-neutral application of the First Amendment:

… Many on the left have traded an absolutist commitment to free speech for one sensitive to the harms it can inflict.

This is inane, of course. As soon as we subvert the commitment to free speech in favor of curbing the harms attendant on free speech, free speech is no longer a right. This view of the First Amendment is anti-Constitutional; the founders believed that rights pre-existed government, not that the government created rights. But if you believe the government created and gives you rights, then anything the government deems to be bad can countermand such rights. That’s the perspective of Democrats these days: conservative speech is bad for the country, and thus ought to be curbed, while Leftist speech ought to be promoted.

Liptak further states that “Some liberals now say that free speech disproportionately protects the powerful and the status quo” (note: when a journalist writes “some … say,” it’s safe to conclude that what follows is what the journalist believes). Let’s apply “some liberals'” thinking to other rights, shall we? It would follow that only socialists, minorities, and the poor should:

  • be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
  • have the right to a trial by jury and to not incriminate themselves.
  • be able to keep and bear arms.
  • be free from cruel or unusual punishment.
  • be able to peaceably assemble.

You get the picture. The left’s view is (and always has been; they’ve just become more open about it) that there are no rights; there are only privileges that ought to be granted to those of whom the left approves and denied to those of whom it disapproves (e.g., white males and the owners of corporations).

Read the whole thing. Note especially how the contemptible law professor Catharine MacKinnon characterizes the First Amendment as a “shield” when used to the benefit of those she approves of, but a “sword” when used to the benefit of the deplorables.

This, as Shapiro notes, is how we got Trump.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

How to get liberals to like the GOP tax plan

Posted by Richard on December 23, 2017

It’s easy! Just don’t let them know it’s the GOP’s plan.


[YouTube link]

 
[YouTube link]

There’s nothing new about this phenomenon. Back before the election, Jimmy Kimmel did a couple of similar “man/woman in the street” interviews attributing Trump’s tax proposals and some Trump quotes to Hillary. Predictably, Hillary supporters loved them.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Welcome to Boulder! Hope you enjoy our slippery slope!

Posted by Richard on August 19, 2017

Old woke: Speech is violence!

New, even more woke: Failure to speak is violence!

I’d raise my eyebrows, but that would be a microaggression.

A group called Showing Up for Racial Justice marched in Boulder today “in support of diversity and racial justice.” Since it’s Boulder, the group was approximately 100% white. But these are very woke white people. They had many signs like this:

Marchers with Silence is Violence sign

Click the link or picture for the 9News story if you want to know more about how caring and sensitive the participants are and how they want to “ensure the community is accessible and safe for people of color.”

Of course, making Boulder more diverse and accessible to people of color would probably require doing something about their egregious zoning laws and land use regulations that have driven the average home price above $1 million.

But I’m sure the people of color who visit Boulder every day feel safe. You know, the people who wash the arugula and prepare the gluten-free avocado toast in the chi-chi restaurants.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Poking fun at Emory University

Posted by Richard on March 27, 2016

You probably heard about the kerfuffle at Emory University, where some of the special snowflakes attending the exclusive school were upset that someone had written “Trump 2016” in chalk on various surfaces. Snopes calls much of the reporting of the incident false:

WHAT’S FALSE: “Emergency counseling” was offered to or demanded by students; Emory students complained that their “safe spaces” had been violated; students were afraid of or traumatized by the chalk markings.

Snopes’ leftist leanings have made it completely unreliable regarding anything even vaguely political. The “emergency counseling” claim may be false; regarding non-emergency counseling, it depends on whether you draw the same inferences from a student government email as Snopes.

Snopes dismisses the “safe spaces” issue because the phrase “was included as a paraphrase (meaning the purportedly oversensitive students invoking the concept hadn’t actually used the words)” in a student newspaper article. Their parenthetical claim is nonsense, and the rest of their claim is undermined by the very quote they cite, which also makes it clear that suppression of pro-Trump speech is at least one protester’s goal (emphases added):

Grievances were not restricted to shortcomings of the administration. “[Faculty] are supporting this rhetoric by not ending it,” said one student, who went on to say that “people of color are struggling academically because they are so focused on trying to have a safe community and focus on these issues [related to having safe spaces on campus].”

For a deeper, on-the-spot view, see the Weekly Standard column by Emory professor Harvey Klehr. Klehr begins by recounting an earlier “Black Lives Matter” protest on campus (I’m willing to bet many of the same people were involved in both protests). During it, protesters spoke of “the trauma of being on campus every day” and the “micro-aggressions” they endured, which left “some students in need of additional counselors in the Psychological Center specifically trained to work with black students.” Maybe that’s the source of the counseling claim in the more recent Trump incident.

But if you prefer to laugh at these ninnies instead wading through more infuriating details about them, I recommend this Atlanta Banana parody:

Emory Student Pain So Deep Heated Land Rover Seats Can’t Evaporate the Tears 

“Do you know how much it costs to get tears and snot out of a Range Rover leather seat?” bellowed Dusty Pirkins, Gender Indeterminate Non-Factual Research major. “Well, I don’t, but you can bet my Dad does!”

“We had no idea we’d be exposed to facts when we came to college,” screamed Summer Frock-Waters, basket blanket artisan. She then collapsed onto her AMG Mercedes, spilling a delicious mocha latte onto a smartphone the size of a baking sheet and howling, “My pain is so real and it’s my pain!”

RTWT. Then watch this from Comedy Central’s Nightly Show. It includes a fake student interview, the end of which reveals why this kind of nonsense tends to occur on campuses at specific times of the year.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Brussels bombings and liberal insanity

Posted by Richard on March 23, 2016

In the wake of the terrible terrorist bombings in Brussels, elements of the mainstream media and left (but I repeat myself) are doubling down on their commitment to the postmodernist belief that there are no objective facts, only their socially-constructed subjective narrative. Case in point (emphasis in original):

The knowledge that the attacks were bombings didn’t stop Atlantic Washington editor Steve Clemons, who phoned into MSNBC and was inside the country, from criticizing Belgium for their “ease of getting guns here.

See there? If, according to your subjective narrative, guns are evil and cause violence, mayhem, and murder, then you can blame guns for jihadist bombings.

Never mind that Belgium has extremely tough gun control laws (which, surprisingly, jihadists and criminals don’t always comply with).

And if, according to your subjective narrative, the real problem facing the West isn’t supremacist radical Islam’s desire to impose its 7th-century religio-political system globally, the real problem is Islamophobia, then you’ll fret not about the possibility of more terrorist attacks, but about how less enlightened people react to such things (emphasis in original):

Appearing on a special extended edition of NBC’s Today on Tuesday, Daily Beast world news editor Christopher Dickey fretted that “rampant Islamophobia” in Europe would intensify following the terrorist attacks in Belgium.

Talking to co-hosts Savannah Guthrie and Matt Lauer early in the 11 a.m. ET hour, Dickey warned: “It’s a huge political issue because there already was rampant Islamophobia in this part of the world. And now, you have a situation where people who were not inclined to look suspiciously at Arabs and Muslims, now they’re terrified.”

Meanwhile, our postmodernist, socialist, anti-colonial President schmoozed with totalitarian racist murderers, “welcomed” Castro’s criticisms of the U.S., and praised Cuba’s “human rights advances” in health care and education. But he did devote 51 seconds to the Brussels bombings, mouthing the usual platitudes about “thoughts and prayers,” “solidarity,” etc. And he stuck to “the Obama doctrine” on Islamofascist terrorism:

Obama explained why he attended the game as planned: “It’s always a challenge when you have a terrorist attack anywhere in the world, particularly in this age of 24/7 news coverage, you wanna be respectful and understand the gravity of the situation but the whole premise of terrorism is to try to disrupt people’s ordinary lives.”

Heaven forbid that anything should disrupt President Barack Hussein Obama’s “ordinary” life.

One of the illuminating passages in Jeffrey Goldberg’s compilation of the wit and wisdom of Barack Obama addresses the subject of terrorism. When it comes to terrorism, this is “the Obama doctrine.” Cool out and learn to live with it. His attitude is complacent. His take on ISIS to Valerie Jarrett represents it: “They’re not coming here to chop our heads off.”

Well, one of them did exactly that in Oklahoma.

Today, we got more of the Obama doctrine (emphasis added):

Speaking to reporters in Argentina Wednesday, President Obama downplayed the gravity of Tuesday’s terror attacks in Brussels by saying ISIS does not pose “an existential threat” to national security.

Earlier in the press conference, Obama showed displeasure when an Associated Press reporter asked whether the Brussels attacks “changed anything.”

I’ve got a lot of things on my plate,” he responded before assuring reporters his top priority is “to eliminate the scourge of this barbaric terrorism that’s been taking place around the world.”
Given utterances such as these from our “thought leaders” — pundits, journalists, and politicians — it’s understandable (but extremely unfortunate) that many non-postmodern Americans (i.e., the real reality-based community) find the broad-brush, over-the-top, no-nonsense rhetoric of Donald Trump increasingly attractive.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The left’s religious double standard

Posted by Richard on November 28, 2015

The echoes of gunfire at the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood clinic had barely died down before practically every leftist in the country was screaming about “white Christian terrorism”  and blaming the Project Veritas undercover videos about PP’s fetal tissue sales. Also the entire Republican Party, even though the shooter is not a Republican (I’ll refrain from commenting on Robert Dear’s designation as female on his voter registration, since that may just be a clerical error).

Of course, these are the same people who, after every mass-casualty attack by jihadists shouting “Allahu akbar,” insist that it had nothing whatsoever to do with religion and condemn any mention of radical Islam as racist (as if the desire to impose 7th-century sharia law across the globe and kill or subjugate anyone who doesn’t submit to “the will of Allah” were a racial characteristic).

There was, in fact, at least one pro-life Christian at the scene of the shootings: Garrett Swasey, the police officer who was killed while defending those inside the Planned Parenthood clinic. Four other cops were wounded.

Meanwhile, Black Lives Matter activist DeRay Mckesson and Twinkies addict Michael Moore agree that the cops “made sure not 2 kill him” (shooter Robert Dear) because he’s white.

So there are people out there who seriously believe that the officers who watched Dear shoot five of their own spared his life out of sympathy for his whiteness.

I can’t begin to fathom how the leftist mind works. SMDH.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Leftists threaten Romney

Posted by Richard on October 17, 2012

At Infowars.com, Paul Joseph Watson collected some of the more interesting tweets from the left after last night’s debate:

 Despite numerous media outlets attempting to downplay the issue, Twitter exploded last night following the debate with new threats from Obama supporters to assassinate Mitt Romney if he defeats Obama in the presidential race.

As we reported yesterday, in addition to threats by Obama supporters to riot if Romney wins, innumerable Twitter users are also making direct death threats against Romney.

If the tables were turned and conservatives were making death threats against Obama in these numbers, it would be a national news story. Indeed, the mere act of hanging empty chairs from trees as a reference to Clint Eastwood’s RNC speech was hyped by the media as a deadly sign that conservatives were out to lynch black people if Obama won.

However, the major networks have remained completely silent on the disturbing trend of Obama supporters threatening to resort to violence if their candidate fails to secure a second term.

As Infowars has stressed, we are non-partisan and have encouraged people to vote for neither candidate. However, the hypocrisy of leftists in trying to either downplay or deny this issue altogether is jaw-dropping given how they routinely try to portray conservatives as violent and extremist by pointing to angry comments made online.

See the Watson post for a sampling of the threatening tweets and a link to many more.

In a way, this is encouraging. If significant numbers of leftist moonbats went berserk after the debate, that’s evidence that Romney won.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Another gun control hypocrite hoist by his own petard

Posted by Richard on January 28, 2012

San Francisco’s new sheriff, Ross Mirkarimi, helped found the Green Party of California, worked for Ralph Nader in 2000, and was a strident advocate of gun control. Even MSNBC described him as “fiercely liberal –even in the context of progressive San Francisco.” Before being elected sheriff, he served for seven years on the Board of Supervisors, where he worked hard to strengthen San Francisco’s already-stringent gun control laws.

Recently, Mirkarimi was charged with misdemeanor domestic violence battery, child endangerment, and “dissuading a witness” (Is that like intimidating a witness, but more polite? Or just more politically connected?) for an incident involving his wife. Since the initial charges, two former girlfriends have come forward alleging that he abused them, too. And it’s been reported that Mirkarimi has a bad temper and tyrannizes his staff.

As a result of the arrest, and to the surprise of many, he was forced to surrender three handguns that he owns. According to CBS San Francisco, “Mirkarimi would not comment about any aspect of his gun ownership, where he kept the weapons or in what manner the firearms were stored.” That’s interesting because one of the gun control laws he helped strengthen last year mandates that all guns be securely locked up (and unavailable for self-defense).

David Cordrea, while not exactly sympathetic to Mirkarimi’s plight, pointed out the injustice of the laws Mirkarimi and his ilk have long supported, and which are now applied to him:

“If Mirkarimi were convicted on the domestic violence charge, he would not be able to carry a gun as sheriff,” reporter Joshua Sabatini claims.

True, but it would entail more than that. If convicted, “thanks” to the infamous Lautenberg Amendment, he would be a prohibited person under federal law, forbidden not only to carry a gun, but to own or even touch one—forever.

And a protective order is enough to disenfranchise him from his fundamental right to keep and bear arms prior to being convicted of anything.

But even if convicted, a prohibition of a fundamental natural right over a misdemeanor is overkill. …

CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb was less measured:

“Mirkarimi’s case presents a massive irony,” Gottlieb observed. “Here’s a man who has supported restrictive gun control measures while on the Board of Supervisors, and yet he had three handguns. He just was elected sheriff, and now he’s accused of a crime that, if he is convicted, could cost him his gun rights for the rest of his life under federal law.

“Perhaps Mirkarimi’s biggest problem is that he is now exposed as a double-standard elitist,” he continued. “News reports about this case over the past few days suggest that he may also have an anger-management problem.”

…“Someone who has been legally disarmed over a criminal charge,” he concluded, “should not be permitted to serve as a chief law enforcement officer. Someone like Mirkarimi, who has done whatever he could to discourage others from owning firearms, should admit his world-class hypocrisy and walk away from the public arena.”

Admit his hypocrisy? I’m not holding my breath. But I look forward to hearing him argue that he can continue to fulfill the duties of sheriff without so much as touching a gun.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

UN inquiry: Israel’s blockade of Gaza is legal

Posted by Richard on July 10, 2011

Well, this is something that doesn't happen every day: a UN committee siding with Israel! Both DEBKAfiles and Canada's National Post report that the UN inquiry into last year's Gaza flotilla incident has ruled that Israel's naval blockade of Gaza is legal and that it doesn't owe Turkey either an apology or reparations. According to the National Post's Michael Ross:

The UN investigative committee, headed by former Prime Minister of New Zealand and internationally renowned jurist, Geoffrey Palmer, actually criticizes Turkey for not doing enough to prevent the flotilla from setting sail and for also providing a somewhat anaemic and lacking investigation into the events of May 2010.

Now the part that is going to really take the starch out of the flotilla activist’s kafiyehs is that in its examination of the Turkel Committee’s report – the committee conducting Israel’s official investigation – aided by Nobel Peace Prize winner David Trimble and former Canadian Forces former Judge Advocate General, Ken Watkin QC, is its conclusion that the Israeli investigation (in stark contrast to Turkey’s) was conducted in a professional and independent manner.

For a UN report, the summary is astoundingly tepid in its criticism of Israel’s actions and constitutes a very mild slap on the wrist. The report mentions that while international law allows Israel to intercept ships far from its territorial waters, the navy would have been better off waiting until the flotilla was closer to the blockade line some 20 miles off shore. There is also the bromide of Israel using excessive force, but nobody disputes that when faced with attackers wielding iron bars, knives or axes, there is every justification for ditching the paintball gun for a real weapon in self-defence.

Greece is currently preventing this year's ten flotilla boats of "peace activists" from sailing for Gaza, so this seems to have been a bad week for leftist Hamas-lovers and Jew-haters.

In celebration, I'll repost the Latma TV Flotilla Choir's marvelous "We Con the World." Enjoy! 


[YouTube link]

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Kansas farmer puts former crackhead NYTimes columnist in his place

Posted by Richard on June 29, 2011

If you've been cruising the interwebs, by now you know about New York Times columnist David Carr's contemptuous reference to those of us in flyover country as people with "low-sloping foreheads." You may even know, thanks to Ann Althouse, that the supercilious Carr is an admitted former crackhead.

But you may have missed, in that Althouse post, the response of Kansas farmer Bart Hall. It's a doozy, and here it is (emphasis in original):

< rant > The essence of his position is that anyone voting Republican is subhuman. It's even worse when, as I do, the cretins farm for a living, or reside anywhere you actually have to drive in order to move around.

This particular "slope" of a farmer is completely fluent in three languages, quite comfortable in three more, and able to be polite in several others. How about you Mr. Carr?

I am part of a family which has brought forth officers for the defense of this nation in every generation since 1701. How about you Mr. Carr?

One of my closest neighbors (also a farmer) has two Ph.Ds. Another worked for many years as an engineer. He could even calculate the median slope of our foreheads out here.

I can grow truckloads of vegetables from a few handfuls of seed, or design and build a house from scratch. Or, for that matter work as an analytical chemist should I choose, or explore for valuable minerals. Mr. Carr wouldn't even know a monazite if it came up and bit him in the arse.

Yet Carr and his colleagues consider themselves the "creative class". Yet what do the really create apart from putrid puddles of petulant pig piffle? < /rant >

I can assure you, the chief political goal out here in the heartland is simply to be left alone. In order to achieve it, however, we must find ways of restricting the intellectual left's political power and influence to something like the 15% of society they actually represent.

And the biggest difference of all? Mr. Carr could show up at my door next week and I'd be very polite to him, feed him well, show him around, and if he got into a serious problem … do my utmost to help him out of it.

Any of my neighbors would do the same, but I doubt it would be reciprocated should circumstances be reversed.

Bravo, Mr. Hall! Mr. Carr, you obnoxious little elitist turd, you've been pwned!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Wienergate triggers time warp

Posted by Richard on June 12, 2011

(With apologies to David Spade) 1998 called. It wants its lame justification for Democratic misbehavior back.

Before I even clicked the Instapundit link (Actress defends Weiner, says 'everyone lies about sex'), I just knew it was going to be Janeane Garofolo:

A liberal actress and comedian is strongly defending embattled Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.), saying "everyone lies about sex" and expressing hope he becomes the mayor of New York City.

During an appearance on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher," Janeane Garofalo said, "Anthony Weiner deserves to be supported and hopefully he will be mayor of New York one day. I'm serious. He is a Democrat [who] actually fights for the things liberals and progressive and rational people care about.

"I don't know why he's being thrown under the bus. He hasn't done any — he hasn't broke any laws," she said.

What's next — the reprise of stories like this? Or maybe the MSM will offer a new, updated meme: sexting to strangers is OK sometimes, like when it's a substitute for actual infidelity (although that line may be a hard sell given the rumors about Wiener that are floating around). 

Like Glenn Reynolds, I don't recall anyone recycling the "it's just lying about sex" argument regarding Mark Foley. Or Mark Souder. Or Christopher Lee (OMG, he sent a picture of his bare chest to a woman he met on Craigslist!)? And can we ever forget all the sympathy and support Hollywood and the MSM offered to the obviously sexual-identity-conflicted Larry "wide stance" Craig

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Leftist death threats continue

Posted by Richard on April 2, 2011

The liberal talking heads continue to prattle on about the "extremism" of Tea Party members and their lack of "civility," while ignoring union thuggery and a plethora of leftist threats and intimidation.

In Wisconsin, the  teacher who threatened to kill 16 state senators and their families has finally been charged (but still not arrested):

Charges have been filed in an investigation of e-mailed death threats to Republican state Senators last month during the budget-repair debate — but oddly, no arrest has taken place. Prosecutors filed two felony counts and two misdemeanor counts against 26-year-old Katherine Windels of Cross Plains, Wisconsin, but only after the Wisconsin Department of Justice sent the district attorney a sharply-worded memo of its own, wondering why prosecutors hadn’t done anything with the referral. …

Windels claimed to have already constructed bombs. Yet the police investigators (undoubtedly members of a public employee union) to whom she confessed to making the threats a month ago did nothing. 

Gateway Pundit has more about Windels and links to yet more. 

In neighboring Michigan, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy had the temerity to send Freedom of Information Act requests to the labor studies departments of three universities for specific emails related to the collective bargaining issue in Wisconsin and Gov. Scott Walker. After various leftist "news" sources like Talking Points Memo, Rachel Maddow, and the New York Times publicized/criticized the requests, the center received "a deluge of hate mail and calls," including five messages containing death threats or bomb threats.

The center has contacted law enforcement. Good luck with that. I'm sure that, just as in the Wisconsin case, police officers who are members of public employee unions will investigate, discover that the alleged perps are on their side, and do nothing for as long as they can get away with it.

We have a serious problem, folks. The fiscal chickens are coming home to roost all across the country, and the generous pay, pensions, and benefits of public employees have become unsustainable. So we're going to see increasingly angry and confrontational battles in state after state pitting the public employee unions against the private citizens. The problem is that law enforcement, in most places, is in the hands of the public employee unions.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Best line yet about Libya War

Posted by Richard on March 22, 2011

Last Saturday, I wondered when the left would declare President Obama a war criminal and call for his impeachment. The wait wasn't actually too long, but so far it's only the far left fringe, like Ralph Nader and Dennis Kucinich.

Cindy Sheehan made a statement, but nobody noticed. As Tommy De Seno observed, the MSM once granted Sheehan "absolute moral authority" regarding matters of war and endlessly covered her every utterance and camp-out, but today they're just not interested in her point of view:

It’s not like Cindy Sheehan hasn’t said anything yet.  Upon passage of the UN resolution for the Libyan no-fly zone, Cindy’s statement was posted at a website called “United Progressives.”  No offense to whomever they are, but I doubt they are saved in enough people’s “favorites” list to be called “main-stream media.”

While refusing to mention President Obama by name, Cindy at least continued her eloquent anti-war soliloquy by saying our leaders are “criminally insane.”  Newsworthy?

I’d give only long-shot odds that Cindy Sheehan becomes a camera magnet for mainstream media over Libya. Maybe there's just not enough time in today's newscasts to fit in a story about Cindy Sheehan, in between the ceaseless parade of liberal pundits booked to call Obama's bombing of Libya a humanitarian effort.

The best line I've heard regarding the war in Libya came from Rush Limbaugh

"Imagine how upset the left will be when Khadafy's weapons of mass destruction are not found."

That one really cracked me up. 🙂

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »