Showing posts with label attack. Show all posts
Showing posts with label attack. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Get Angry

Two days ago I started a blog on why the liberal talking point, "The whole world hates us," is an absolutely ridiculous non-argument. After reams of research, pouring over immigration and emigration data, digging up obscure quotes and complicated election results I found myself with another long, but ultimately unsatisfying post. It took me a while to understand why, but then it came to me... I was unsatisfied because I was, I am, angry.

For years Democrats have been warning Republicans that we need to maintain a level of respect for the oppostition, that we need to keep an open mind and "reach across the aisle" to get things done. They've been telling us that getting angry, that getting tough on issues and explaining our disagreements with passion and confidence will, "cost Republicans the votes of undecided voters." And all the while they have been the ones setting the angry tone, they have been the ones hiding behind the thin veil of socialism - defining "reaching across the aisle" as compromising our core beliefs to cave to their failed policies and radical social views - even as they accuse us of being too committed to our conservative values.

Well I, for one, am sick of it.

I'm sick about the fact that it has gotten so bad, that we let as dangerous, anti-American, anti-millitary and anit-capitalist individual as Barrack Obama get as close as he has to our highest office. And when we question his policies, his statements, his associations - when we question anything about him, we're told that we're, "injecting race into the process." Meanwhile, we're expected to sit idly by as he and his party attack our country, our character, our finances and our security. Not to mention the terrible attacks launched against one of, if not the most, inspiring women ever to enter the political process.

It angers me because of what he stands for. Barrack Obama's values are radically different than the values held sacred by so much of this country and yet he has been given a pass by the "media," a conglomerate that has served more as wrote propagandists than as independent journalists.

Barrack Obama's values disgust, his lies enfuriate and his arrogance astounds.

DISGUST

Robert George, a professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University, prolific writer, former fellow at the United States Supreme Court and proud Catholic, writes that, "Senator Obama's views on life issues ranging from abortion to embryonic stem cell research mark him as not merely a pro-choice politician, but rather as the most extreme pro-abortion candidate to have ever run on a major party ticket.

He stated that signing the Freedom of Choice Act would be the first thing he'd do as president.



This is a bill that states, "It is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child, to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability, or to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability" and will retroactively apply to, "...every Federal, State, and local statute, ordinance, regulation, administrative order, decision, policy, practice, or other action enacted, adopted, or implemented before, on, or after the date of enactment of this Act." It will effectively dismantle, in one fell swoop, every single gain the Pro-Life movement has made in the past forty years and sweep away bans on even the latest forms of Partial Birth abortions.

He argued and voted four times against providing medical care for abortion survivors, childen born of women induced to give birth to "previable" babies in the hope that the child would die during childbirth. When, miraculously, children survived, hospital workers would not provide medical care but instead, would leave them to die on metal shelves in storage closets.

ENFURIATING



But then when Hillary Clinton called him on it, Obama's advisor David Axelrod said, "What he meant was, as a government, he’d be willing and eager to initiate those kinds of talks." While at the same time barrackobama.com said, "Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions." But then Obama said, "I think that what I said in response was that I would, at my time and choosing, be willing to meet with any leader if I thought it would promote the national security interests of the United States of America." Except he didn't say any of that in the debate!

The latest presidential debate featured the following exchange:

Obama: "And 100 percent, John, of your ads — 100 percent of them have been negative."

McCain: "It’s not true."

Obama: "It absolutely is true."

But how about this study which calls out Obama's forceful statement as a complete lie.

Or we could look at a few examples. How about this ad?

Or this one?

How about my personal favorite?

Or what about this one?!



ASTOUNDING

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
By astiron at 2008-10-19

Thursday, September 4, 2008

The Hits Keep on Coming

This morning the media has shifted their spin and is now criticizing the media for asking the questions they have of Sarah Palin and her family... you read that right.

What follows is a transcript of the most despicable attack on Palin and her family that I've seen to date. Run a Google search of this to see how its being praised on Liberal Blogs...

Sally Quinn to Soledad O'Brien (mother of three) - on CNN

I've been a working mother for 26 years and practically every friend I have is a working mother and works full time. So, uh, I think we are so far beyond that issue of whether women should work or not, in -- uh, certainly in your world and my world. But in the world of evangelicals, that's not the case. Women are supposed to be subservient to their husbands and they are meant to be stay-at-home moms. And women, in fact, are not allowed to be pastors in the Southern Baptist church.

NOTE: Prominent Southern Baptists include Jimmy Carter, Al Gore and Bill Clinton

She continued...

It's one thing to have one or two or three children, especially if they're healthy children, and everyone knows that women and men are different and that moms and dads are different and that women -- the burden of child care almost always falls on the woman. But I think when you have five children -- one a four-month-old Down syndrome baby, and a daughter who's 17 who's also a child and who is going to need her mother very much in the next few months and years with her own baby coming -- that I don't see how you can not make your family your first priority.


It got worse...
We're supposed to say, at least in the old feminist world, that women and men are the same and they should be equal and that, you know, we have double standards. It's extremely time-consuming. We are talking about John McCain, who has chosen a woman with five children, one with special needs and a daughter, 17-year-old child who's pregnant. That is a distraction, and when you are in a position like that, suppose she became president in the next several months, she would have an enormous number of distractions on her hand. And I can't believe that she would be the dad and her husband would be the mom.