Posts Tagged ‘double standards’

You know there is nothing as tolerant as the tolerant left:

From the video: Supporters of President Obama’s Amnesty plans attacked Tea Party Against Amnesty & Illegal Immigration demonstrators in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida on Sat. November 14, 2009. One of the men attacked is 62 years old. Dave Caulkett of FLIMEN (Floridians for Immigration Enforcement) is assaulted and then kicked in the face while he is down. The other camera man from the Tea Party is hit with several signs.

You mean to say that the left would commit violence against people who disagree with them? It is possible that Ken Gladney wasn’t an aberration? (How is it that although the police report clearly AND the video shows assault it hasn’t been pursued anyway?)

How does the left tell the tale? I’m sure they will condemn this violence… (cough cough) here is crooks and liars:

I’ve been warning for awhile that there is a violent element already involved in the immigration debate, and when they become empowered by the “tea party” types, it’s going to get ugly. Looks like the debate hasn’t even started yet, and it already is.

There that wasn’t so hard was it? FOOLED YOU he is referring to the Tea Party protesters as the violent ones. Powerline sees what is coming:

We conservatives have long talked about our willingness to fight for freedom. In a sense, that’s generally been metaphorical, especially when talking about domestic rather than foreign enemies. With the far left now on the march, however, it isn’t metaphorical any more. It’s just one more sign of the Age of Obama–fighting in the streets, as the extreme Left has been empowered as never before.

The election of president Obama and his Chicago gang has enabled the Chicago style thugs who supported. This is not a bug it is a feature.

And remember we did this to ourselves as a nation.

Will it make the MSM? Did Gladney?

In case my conservative friends still haven’t gotten it let me say one more time. I dislike this healthcare bill and believe it should be defeated.

But lets look at something interesting:

One month ago it looked like Dede the angrysmug would be elected to congress. She would be the one republican vote for this bill. She would be lionized by the media and held up as an example of moderation and bi-partisianship. She would be interviewed on every MSM outlet and held up as an example saying that Republicans need to moderate on Abortion and Gay Marriage. For a year this would be shoved down our throats.

But by the efforts of Doug Hoffman, Sarah Palin and conservatives all over the country. Dede was dropped like a bad habit and may even lose her position in the NY Republican delegation.

Although Hoffman was not elected he was just about the only republican/conservative who wasn’t on Tuesday. The democrat who defeated him Bill Owens managed to compromise himself with the voters who elected him in under 24 hours (Hoffman 2010). The president was desperate for a victory and more importantly needed one NOW! As time passed the 2010 election would be coming closer and the vote would be more painful and costly for blue dog democrats.

Now comes Joseph Cao the man who replaced William (Refrigerator) Jefferson. His district is about as democratic as you can get and he squeaked through with 49% to win. The bill is very popular there but Cao wasn’t buying and I wrote about this in August:

You know that in a district where there hasn’t been a republican congressman since 1890 and is 64% black it might be politically necessary for a newly elected republican to support the president on some key issues. Even if Abortion is paid for in it..

But Don Surber reports that when congressman Anh Cao says he is a Catholic, unlike say a John Kerry or a Nancy Pelosi he means it:

Cho bluntly stated that he would rather lose his seat than to vote for a healthcare bill that supports abortion.

Obama needed a win and wanted at least one republican so places like Think Progress could have headlines like this:

House Passes Historic, Bipartisan Health Reform Legislation

So comes the Stupak amendment and the vote for it. ONE QUARTER of the democratic caucus votes for the pro-life amendment, Pro-Abortion democrats hold their nose and vote for the final bill anyway.

Now the media has a dilemma: There is a Republican who voted for the bill. He is the first Vietnamese congressman, he has a great story and now he has been the vote for healthcare, one would expect that he would be lionized all over the place…

…however he is a DEVOUT Catholic and only was willing to vote for the bill because the Abortion provision was included and has made it clear that re-election campaign if the Abortion language goes so will he.

What is the MSM to do? Can they lionize an anti-abortion republican? Can they praise him on the talk shows? Will Obey, Maddow, the today show, the view and all the others dare to push him and praise a believing catholic who practices what he preaches?

If they don’t then they lose their bi-partisan meme if they do then they lionize faith. I think they will ignore him, I think in the end the media is so far left that even supporting Obama and this bill is not enough for them to go against their sacrament.

God works in mysterious ways, but I don’t see this as very mysterious. Bills come and go, parties rise and fall but Sin is Sin and God is constant.

I still hope the bill will fail but I’m going to enjoy watching the media squirm over the next two days over Cao.

Motive a mystery after Fort Hood Rampage

 

 

I had some weird dreams last night but I didn’t dream anything that weird.

Wasn’t this the same MSNBC that made fun of Pelosi yesterday over calling Tuesday’s election a win? (And did so today on Morning Joe)

I can’t imagine why some of us might think Jihad would have been the motive.

Doris Kerns Goodwin on Morning Joe says she can’t figure out what could drive to this. This is a Historian?

Gee maybe if she talked to the military friend I talked to last night she might get a clue from the earlier case of Sgt Hasan Akbar.

Its avoidance of reality has real consequences, increasing the dangers Americans face. “This country’s officials are in a state of denial and confusion that is almost as frightening as the terrorism they are supposed to be fighting,” observes Dennis Prager, only slightly exaggerating.

Second, the Akbar incident points to the suspect allegiance of some Muslims in government. The case of Gamal Abdel-Hafiz recently surfaced: an FBI agent whose colleagues say he twice refused to record conversations with suspected financiers of militant Islamic terrorism (“A Muslim does not record another Muslim”). [The Seattle Times reports three witnesses recalling that John Allen Muhammad, the man accused of the Washington, D.C.-area sniper murders last fall, had thrown a grenade into a tent during the 1991 war against Iraq.] Other cases are under investigation.

All of which reinforces what I wrote in January: “There is no escaping the unfortunate fact that Muslim government employees in law enforcement, the military and the diplomatic corps need to be watched for connections to terrorism, as do Muslim chaplains in prisons and the armed forces. Muslim visitors and immigrants must undergo additional background checks. Mosques require a scrutiny beyond that applied to churches and temples.”

Hasan now sits on death row.

BTW if you want to know how far LGF has fallen, none of his posts on the subject mention Islam or the fact that he is Muslim. So for the benefit of LGF readers who are convinced that this is another case of the Flemish Menace striking again, here is how you identify them.

know the flemish menace

Your guide to the Flemish Menace!

I guess Charles has joined the MSM, after all it was the same MSM that was ready to tag tea party sympathizers for the Bill Sparkman… Murder suicide?

Investigators probing the death of a Kentucky census worker found hanging from a tree with the word “fed” scrawled on his chest increasingly doubt he was killed because of his government job and are pursuing the possibility he committed suicide, law enforcement officials told The Associated Press.

Two officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the case, said no final conclusions have been made in the case. In recent weeks, however, investigators have grown more skeptical that 51-year-old Bill Sparkman died at the hands of someone angry at the federal government.

The officials said investigators continue to look closely at suicide as a possible cause of Sparkman’s death for a number of reasons. There were no defensive wounds on Sparkman’s body, and while his hands were bound with duct-tape, they were still somewhat mobile, suggesting he could have manipulated the rope, the officials said.

That still seems a stretch to me but I’ll defer for now to Robert Stacy who actually reported from there.

That article had a dateline from Washington, D.C., where Barrett is based, so you can bet money that it was Barrett’s unauthorized source at the Justice Department — and not McMurray’s sources in Kentucky — who leaked the tidbit about “fed” scrawled on the chest and the “anti-government sentiment” motive.

OK, so here’s the deal with anonymous sources: The source who gives a reporter bad information automatically forfeits his right to anonymity. Barrett’s source misled him, so that the entire premise of that Sept. 23 article was bogus.

Remember the same papers (and Charles) who were POSITIVE that this was a tea party murder has no idea why Islamic Killer Major Malik Nadal Hasan did it.

Al-Qaeda got a win yesterday, the media is trying to give them a second one. It is an insult to our intelligence. As via Glenn Phillis Chester says:

The Jihadist Is Always the Victim

 

Update: MSNBC jumped away from the new conference to talk to Jim Miklaszewski. He is reporting that he shouted “Allah Akbar” while shooting. Mika looks like someone just peed in her cereal. They now bring up the possibility that is it a “political” killing…and immediately jump to the AARP endorsing Obamacare. That’s the story of the day apparently.

Update 2: Yes I know I can’t spell to save my life, but while I’m fixing that spelling error let’s link to the Newsbusters story that reminds us of some of the Sparkman speculation. You can find my coverage of it here.

…and that’s ok. I think Hoffman’s concession is premature but that’s his decision to make not mine. There are times you are going to win and times you don’t and if this turns out to be a time we don’t then so be it.

As I’ve already said, it was MUCH more important to have this fight and prevent what would become the media’s “bi-partisan” vote for all that is Pelosi and Obama that to have the seat for the year. I would of course have preferred to have em both but when you’ve had almost the entire loaf, you can’t quibble over the last piece.

If the party had a normal primary Hoffman would have doubtless defeated Dede the (now less) angry and I suspect would have managed to pull out the win against Owens. In 2010 with a real primary in place and with one year of Owens voting with Obama this will be a much more likely outcome. Dede will celebrate the successful vendetta with our (newfound?) friends on the left and will likely see a reward both from the MSM and the administration. After all the Owens race is the one bright spot in a dismal day for democrats.

Part of being willing to fight is to risk the chance of defeat, when that comes you take it like a man, so congratulations democrats, you have one more house seat.

Now Govern! Do it wisely because if you don’t I suspect you won’t be winning it a 2nd time in 2010.

Thanks to Doug Hoffman for his efforts in sparing us an Obama Democrat, for that if nothing else the party owes him.

Update: Maybe it’s just me, but as someone who objected to the MSM stalling on calling states that were clearly for Bush in 2000 I didn’t like that Drudge didn’t bother keeping the NY-23 stats updated because Hoffman was behind. It’s no less weaselly when it’s done for our side.

Update 2: National Review agrees with me:

If Hoffman decides to run in 2010, he will probably be running against a Bill Owens whose party has forced him to take tough votes on monstrous health-care, energy and card-check bills. This is still a Republican district. Plus, Hoffman won’t have to worry about zombie Scozzafava taking 5 percent of the vote.

The president and Pelsoi will not make it easy for him, there will be one path for re-election for him and he has already articulated it and may have been the difference in the race.