Posts Tagged ‘reality’

As “Global Warming”/”Climate Change” crowd decides to go the full acorn and play naming games:

An administration that goes out of its way to make terrorism sound less dangerous than it really is (i.e. “man-caused disaster”) makes the push to sell “global warming” as more dangerous than it really is. Sounds like somebody’s starting to feel uncomfortable because the icecaps and Greenland ice sheets aren’t melting fast enough. Switching “warming” to “disruption” is like Chicken Little — finally realizing that everybody’s catching on — switching to crying “the ground is rising!”

Re-branding shams is standard operating procedure for this bunch. The first thing that’s usually done with a scheme that has been exposed is to fall back, re-name it, and present the same thing all over again under a different label. An example of that is ACORN switching its name to “Communities for Change” or any other number of things that didn’t sound like “ACORN.”

Unfortunately for the administration you have an electorate that is paying attention and informed these days and just aren’t going to fall for it. No wonder you have the Net Neutrality debate.

Update: Nice Deb sums it up in one sentence:

Libs wake up every morning and ask themselves, “How can we fool them, today?”

That’s about it.

…is encapsulated in this quote from the Anchoress:

Papal Mass Ends in Scotland: First leg of the trip is over, tomorrow the real drama, the passionate engagement begins. I loved the Scots singing Auld Lang Syne and Loch Lomand at the end of Papal Mass; great joy amid crowd. Christ, blest and broken, for the life and light of the world. No wonder the secularists hate it all so much! A pal in UK tells me some in punditry are aghast at the enthusiastic attendance of the youth; doesn’t fit the “Benedict is evil, and you must hate him” narrative. Just now, as he appeared on the jumbotron, almost ready to take his leave, the young people cried out for him.

They cry out for Christ, for the constant reality of the love of Christ. — 2:11 PM emphasis mine

The Pope will always be hated by the world, because he is an ambassador for the cause of Christ and that is as opposed to the world as you can get.

“If the world hates you, realize that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own; but because you do not belong to the world, and I have chosen you out of the world, the world hates you. Remember the word I spoke to you, ‘No slave is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. And they will do all these things to you on account of my name, because they do not know the one who sent me. If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin; but as it is they have no excuse for their sin. Whoever hates me also hates my Father. John 15:18-23

This is the message of absolute truth you can embrace it for your salvation or you can combat it, but you can’t ignore it.

Q: What is the difference between a candidate the National Republican shuns and the National Republican party embraces:

Before anyone becomes carried away by the beauty of it all, it should be said that the developments are not really a Kumbaya moment. GOP officials have been astounded by the amount of money — $1 million — that O’Donnell has raised in the hours since her surprise primary victory over Republican Rep. Mike Castle. As much as anything, it is O’Donnell’s fundraising bonanza that is warming hearts at the NRSC. “We have 45 days until the election,” the source said. “We need to be united.”

How many thousands of $10 & $20 & $100 dollar donations did that include. How many voters does that add up to that you don’t want to get angry and hope to hit up for contributions later.

When you have one million in the bank it isn’t hard to get a date is it?

Update: Make sure you aren’t drinking when you read this quote from Karl “I was with her all the time” Rove:

I Endorsed O’Donnell the Other Night… I Helped Her Raise That $750,000

I’m surprised Jim (Gateway Pundit) Hoff was able to type it out, he must have been cracking up at the sight of it.
(Video)

Just a thought, since democrats keep talking about new spending as an “investment” does that mean they should have to run that warning whenever they talk about spending?

I think so.

Speaking of things that deserve a big warning label:

So, like Stimulus I, which was initially intended to put infrastructure spending first, but evolved into a multi-purpose slush fund that put infrastructure last, the “infrastructure bank” envisioned by progressives on Capitol Hill would be “looking at a broader base” to finance “green energy” and “other large-scale works” based on “social benefits” determined by a panel appointed by the president.

What could go wrong?