You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Democrats’ category.

The good “Reverend” just never ceases to amaze me with the hypocrisy that spews out of his mouth.

April 29, 2008 —

Barack Obama made a call for nonviolence in the aftermath of the Sean Bell verdict – infuriating the Rev. Al Sharpton, who accused the presidential candidate of trying to “grandstand in front of white people,” sources told The Post.

During what a source described as a “heated” phone call yesterday, Sharpton told Obama he was disappointed with the Illinois senator’s words on Friday, when Obama said “resorting to violence to express displeasure” was “completely unacceptable and counterproductive.”

“[Obama] issues this statement and not a single rock had been thrown,” said a source. “How does the candidate of change ask people to accept a verdict that is unjust?”

The source said Sharpton had hoped Obama would “side with the Bell family” and not use it as an “opportunity to grandstand in front of white people.”

An Obama spokesman described the conversation as a chance to “hear [Sharpton’s] views and to get his perspective.”

Grandstanding in front of white people? Really?!? So saying that violent protest is not in the best interest of either the law enforcement or the black community is not only siding against the family of Mr. Bell but is also a slap in the face of black Americans and selling out to white voters? As a “typical white person” I think I can answer emphatically that Baracks comments didnt appeal to me, but came across as standard political double speak. He managed to remain completely neutral in admonishing any side in this matter, while allowing that some form of protest could be acceptable as long as it was nonviolent. Well, kudos to him for not endorsing violence anyway. 

 Even more amazing is the fact that even if  the allegations were true, “Reverend” Al would accuse anyone of grandstanding. I guess that grandstanding only becomes grandstanding when its done for white people.  Just another day of life in the US of KKKA.

Not shut it down… shut it up!

The amazing 4 page response to the “Reverend” Al Sharpton via the New York Post.

Most impressive!

April 26, 2008 — JUSTICE has been served in the Sean Bell case.

However horrific Bell’s slaying by police gunfire, Judge Arthur Cooperman yesterday resisted pressure to make the verdict an alleged test of civil rights – a test which, according to the city’s race agitators, had only one proper and predetermined outcome – and instead decided the case on the facts before him.

The New York Police Department has already begun scouring its training to try to drive down even further the chance that such a blood-curdling tragedy is repeated. Now it falls on Mayor Bloomberg to explain to the city how rare such tragedies are and to lay out the case that the NYPD is the greatest protector of civil rights in New York – given that the No. 1 civil right is freedom from fear and violence.

THE prosecution’s case began falling apart almost from the start. As Judge Cooperman noted, its witnesses contradicted their own prior statements and made claims on the stand that ballistics evidence clearly disproved.

In addition, many of the prosecutions’ witnesses corroborated the officers’ narrative of that night’s events:

* They confirmed that there’d been a tense exchange outside the Club Kalua (a crime-ridden strip joint in Queens) between an apparently armed man and Sean Bell and his companions (who had been celebrating Bell’s wedding the next day with a bachelor party at the club).

* Several acknowledged that Bell and his friends had referred to getting a gun.

* Some prosecution witnesses also verified what forensics evidence unambiguously demonstrated: that Sean Bell’s car had sped twice into Detective Gerald Isnora and an unmarked police van as Detective Isnora was trying to signal the car to stop.

Please read the full article in the link to the post above but the final page tells the real story that the race hustlers don’t want you to hear.

ANTI-COP agitators and politicians are fond of claiming that the police are a threat to black lives. In fact, no single private or public agency has saved more minority lives than the NYPD.

Had murders stayed at their early 1990s levels, before the NYPD got smart about policing, 13,000-plus more New Yorkers – the overwhelming majority of them black and Hispanic – would be dead today.

In fact, even as the NYPD brought down homicide a remarkable 70 percent, it was driving down its own use of force. In 1973, there were 1.82 fatal police shootings per 1,000 New York officers; in 2006, there were .36 such shootings per 1,000 officers. And the vast majority of those police shootings are against criminals who are threatening the officer with force.

The department is one of the more restrained big-city police outfits in the country. Its fatal shooting rate is a tenth those of the Phoenix and Philadelphia departments, for example. While every mistaken shooting of an unarmed innocent civilian is an unmitigated disaster, the number of such NYPD shootings over the last two decades can be counted on the fingers of one hand.

ABOVE all else, remember this: The risk posed to New Yorkers by the police is negligible compared to the risk posed by criminals – and NYPD New York officers work their hearts out every day to try to protect law-abiding residents from crime.

If Al Sharpton and Charles Barron really cared as much about law-abiding minorities as they say they do, they would join the police in that mission -they’d stigmatize criminals, not the cops. They’d protest outside the jail cells of rapists and robbers who terrorize the elderly and frail; they’d call on crime witnesses to cooperate with investigators.

The sad fact is, had Sean Bell been killed by a fellow club-goer, Al Sharpton and Charles Barron wouldn’t have taken the slightest interest in him. The world knows about him only because he was killed by police officers.

Need proof? A week after Bell’s death, another groom-to-be was fatally gunned down by some robbers in Brooklyn who had just pistol-whipped three other victims.

His name was Earl Williams – and no one ever protested his death. But New York’s police force worked to find his killer – and continue today to risk their own lives to safeguard ours.

Some people never learn the lessons that have cost us so dearly. In yet another example of Democrats efforts for peace at any price, Jimmy Carter has decided to meet with Hamas in Syria.

NEW YORK CITY —  Former President Jimmy Carter is reportedly preparing an unprecedented meeting with the leader of Hamas, an organization that the U.S. government considers one of the leading terrorist threats in the world.

The Arabic-language newspaper Al-Hayat reported Tuesday that Carter was planning a trip to Syria for mid-April, during which he would meet with Khaled Meshal, the exiled head of the Palestinian terror group Hamas, on April 18.

Deanna Congileo, Carter’s press secretary, confirmed in an e-mail to FOXNews.com that Carter will be in the Mideast in April. Pressed for comment, Congileo did not deny that the former president is considering visiting Meshal.

“President Carter is planning a trip to the Mideast next week; however, we are still confirming details of the trip and will issue a press release by the end of this week,” wrote Congileo. “I cannot confirm any specific meetings at this point in time.”

Meshal, who lives in Syria to avoid being arrested by the Israeli government, leads Hamas from his seat in Damascus, where he is a guest of Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

The State Department has designated Hamas a “foreign terrorist organization,” and some groups hold Meshal personally responsible for ordering the kidnapping of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack once said of the prospect of meeting with Meshal, “That’s not something that we could possibly conceive of.”

Some Carter critics called the latest reports typical of the ex-president.

“It’s about par for the course from President Carter, demonstrating a lack of judgment typical of what he does,” said John Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. “To go to Syria to visit Hamas at this point is just an ill-timed, ill-advised decision on his part.”

“I’m not surprised that Carter would do this, as he has been supporting Palestinian extremism for many years,” said Steve Emerson, director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, a watchdog group.

Carter would be the first Western leader of his stature to meet with the Hamas chief. Though Meshal met with Clinton officials in the 1990s, the Bush administration has sought to isolate Hamas, enforcing rigid sanctions on its government in Gaza and refusing to meet with its leaders unless it recognizes Israel and abandons terror.

“I think this [visit] undermines the U.S. policy of isolating Hamas,” said Emerson. “I think this encourages Europeans to further dilute their sanctions against the Hamas government.”

“When you put the prestige of a former president of the United States in a meeting with one of its terrorist leaders, you’re giving it a legitimacy and currency it never had,” said Bolton.

But Ibrahim Hooper, communications director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a non-profit advocacy group, said Carter’s efforts demonstrate he’s a true partner in peace.

“I think if true, this report would indicate that President Carter is willing to travel any road in search of peace,” he said. “I think President Carter would only undertake such a mission if he believed that something could be achieved in terms of peace and reconciliation in the region.”

Hooper added that because of Carter’s reputation among Palestinians he might be able to bring some pressure to bear.

“Obviously President Carter has a great amount of credibility in the region because of his past efforts seeking peace internationally,” Hooper said.

The Al-Hayat report stated that Carter would be traveling in his capacity as head of the Carter Center, and not in his capacity as a former president.

“That’s a distinction that’s absurd,” said Emerson.

“Maybe he’ll give up his pension, but he’s always a former president,” said Bolton.

Unfortunately, this is just the latest in the trend of diplomatic efforts by Democratic party leaders.  Nancy Pelosi, Jim McDermont, both had smashingly successful talks in the middle east (yes thats called sarcasm). Even leading presidential candidate Barack H. Obama wants to start a new dialog with Iran. Maybe Jimmy is on to something here though. No matter that the Hamas charter calls for the destruction of the Jewish state, removal of infidels from muslim lands and even states that peace conferences are “ways of setting the infidels in the land of the Muslims as arbitraters.” Yes no matter how useless and wasteful negotiating with this group is Mr. Peanut may one day yet be able to say we again have “Peace for our time.”

Kudos to Walter Williams for speaking the truth.

Obama’s success is truly a remarkable commentary on the goodness of Americans and how far we’ve come in resolving matters of race. I’m 72 years old. For almost all of my life, a black having a real chance at becoming the president of the United States was at best a pipe dream. Obama has convincingly won primaries in states with insignificant black populations. As such, it further confirms what I’ve often said: The civil rights struggle in America is over and it’s won. At one time black Americans did not have the constitutional guarantees enjoyed by white Americans; now we do. The fact that the civil rights struggle is over and won does not mean that there are not major problems confronting many members of the black community but they are not civil rights problems and have little or nothing to do with racial discrimination.

Here you go America!

text from the article at Politico.com

The Clinton’s joint returns show them earning more than $109 million over a period of seven years.

The biggest source of income is Bill Clinton’s speeches — source of $51 million. He made another $30 million from books; Hillary made about $10 million from her book.

Spokesman Jay Carson says, in a statement:

The Clintons have now made public thirty years of tax returns, a record matched by few people in public service. None of Hillary Clinton’s presidential opponents have revealed anything close to this amount of personal financial information.

What the Clintons’ tax returns show is that they paid more than $33,000,000 in federal taxes and donated more than $10,000,000 to charities over the past eight years. They paid taxes and made charitable contributions at a higher rate than taxpayers at their income level.

You can download them, and see a summary, here. They include detailed returns for 2000 through 2006, and the request for an extension for last year.

If you’re poring over them, let me know what you find.

ALSO: The returns went early to Drudge — who has been extremely hard on Hillary for months — as good proof as any since the time of Machiavelli that it’s better to be feared than loved.

UPDATE: The interesting part, of course, is the roughly $18 million that the summary doesn’t account for.

18 million you say? You mean the Clinton’s have $18 million that no one know’s where it could have come from? Ok… Ill be that guy. Here’s an idea where all that money could have come from.  In all fairness though, we have never seen illegal funds finding its way into the Clintons pockets in the past or even recently. Thats right people… move along! Nothing to see here!

Wow!

How can you argue with brilliance like that? The mouth of the south inserts foot again. My favorite part has got to be when he was asked what would happen if Global warming was not addressed. Thanks to Newsbusters for the transcripts.

TED TURNER: “Not doing it will be catastrophic. We’ll be eight degrees hotter in ten, not ten but 30 or 40 years and basically none of the crops will grow. Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals. Civilization will have broken down. The few people left will be living in a failed state — like Somalia or Sudan — and living conditions will be intolerable. The droughts will be so bad there’ll be no more corn grown. Not doing it is suicide. Just like dropping bombs on each other, nuclear weapons is suicide. We’ve got to stop doing the suicidal two things, which are hanging on to our nuclear weapons and after that we’ve got to stabilize the population.”

Cannibals…really? I would usually insert something snappy and witty but I really don’t even think that this kind of “Science” needs any further comment.

However, ole Ted didn’t just stop there. He continues on China and the War in Iraq

TED TURNER: I also said war doesn’t make any sense anymore. And we need to cut the military budgets back.

ROSE: How much do you want to cut the military budgets back?

TURNER: Right now the U.S. is spending $500 billion a year on the military which is more than all 190 countries in the world put together. The two countries that the military-industrial complex and some of the politicians would like to demonize and make enemies are Russia and China. China just wants to sell us shoes. They’re not building landing craft to attack the United States. And Russia wants to be our friends, too.

China’s certainly not allocated $57 billion dollars in defense spending this fiscal year and they surely haven’t been practicing shadowing and breaching our aircraft carrier defensive positions with their shiny new nuclear submarines. 

And those Russians certain haven’t done any military muscle flexing  lately either. On top of that I’m sure they aren’t supplying weapons systems or nuclear fuel to help the Iranian nuclear program.

ROSE: Well, wait a minute. No, no, no.

TURNER: Well I know that because I spent time with the Chinese and Russians.

You spent time with them… ooooooooh well why didnt you say so? Im sure they pinky promised you that they just wanted to sell us shoes (without lead I hope) right? I mean, no one has ever lied about wanting peace before right Ted?  

ROSE: You’re telling me the Chinese military budget is not increasing? Is that what you’re saying?

TURNER: It might increase, but you know how big it is compared to ours? It’s one 20th what ours is and so is the Russian military budget. Those are not credible expenditures. However, even with our $500 billion military budget, we can’t win in Iraq. We’re being beaten by insurgents who don’t even have any tanks, they don’t have a headquarters, they don’t have a Pentagon. We don’t even know if they have any Generals.

I have several friends over there who might disagree with you Ted on losing to insurgents in Iraq. But, for the sake of argument… lets say he is correct. Wouldn’t the defeat of the greatest military force on the planet be a major news story? As a matter of fact I am flipping through the news stations right now and have yet to see anyone playing reports of the insurgents announcement of victory in Iraq. Come on Ted, call it down to the news desk… it’d be an exclusive story! Also if it were the truth would’nt we see Harry Reid’s face on every camera telling those war loving neocons that he was right?   

And since when didn’t the insurgents have any Generals? You mean that Al Sadr isnt really the leader of a militia in Iraq? Well someone needs to the tell them that… why don’t you go and tell these guys that Ted? I guess its not fair to count Abu Zarqawi since he’s dead now. That’s right Ted, he was killed by one of our F16’s while leading AQI. So tell me Ted how many of our generals have they killed in operations in Iraq? None? And you mean to tell me that we are losing? Uh huh.

I could keep pointing out the inaccuracies of Ted Turner, but I actually have better things to do with the next few years of my life. I just want you all to see just a few examples of the complete bias and blatant lies from the former head of what is suppossed to a major media news network. Im not saying that he is not entitled to his opinion. However, I dont see Rupert Murdock out spewing his OPINION about current events on a TV show. But Im sure an owners opinion never influences programing for a network broadcast… riiiiiiiiight.

In which the media suddenly discovers Hillary Clinton is a brazen, bald-faced, so-obvious-you-can-watch-her-nose-grow liar.

CBS was first to see the light. Twice.

Now, via Hot Air, the NAFTA chickens have landed. MSNBC let them into the coop.

As Rush would say, you just can’t make this stuff up, folks.

In another fine example of the liberal mantra on free speech (freedom for me, but none for thee) Forrest Lake Highscrewel in Minnesota cancelled a scheduled event in which decorated veterans from both Iraq and Afghanistan were to discuss with students the importance of the missions operating in both these countries.

Get the full story here.

The event in question was cancelled when several parents of students called Principal Steve Massey concerned according to the Minneapolis St. Paul Star Tribune that “the event was becoming political rather than educational and therefore was not suitable for a public school .” Principal Massey included that if the event went on as planned, many parents said that they would stage a protest during the event. On the decision to cancel the event Principal Massey said “The event was structured to be an academic classroom discussion around military service. We thought we’d provide an opportunity for kids to learn about service in the context of our history classes. As the day progressed, it became clear that this was becoming a political event … which would be inappropriate in a public setting.

Now, correct me if I’m wrong but I thought that liberals wanted to discuss our differences and valued diversity in opinion. Also, I must say that I’m not questioning their patriotism or their love for our troops (even though they don’t support their mission, don’t want them to recruit, and now wont even let them speak about their experiences). Contrary to the open-mindedness they preach to us, this is just the latest example of do as I say not as I do from the Anti- military and anti America crowd.

A post in which yours truly gets to continue his treasured pastime of poking fun at his favorite unindicted co-conspirator and the media.

It’s just too easy.

Today’s email newsletter from the terrorist financiers spotlighted efforts to free Sami Al-Arian, who is currently sitting in a US prison for his connections to terrorist-supporting organizations, some of which he founded. In an action item a few days ago, CAIR called for American Muslims and “people of conscious” to write letters on his behalf to members of Congress, Judge Gerald Lee of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, and to Attorney General Michael Mukasey.

In a showcase of its utter contempt for any sense of consistency or reason, in the same email, CAIR blasted Walid Shoebat again, quoting Dawud Walid in a second article specifically targeting the ex-terrorist.

“Either he’s a fraud or he should be detained by the Justice Department if he really was involved with a supposed terrorism attack in Israel,” said Dawud Walid, executive director of the Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

So if you are CAIR, real terrorist supporters should run free while those who have reformed and speak out against radicalism should be prosecuted. That makes sense.

What is even more funny is a portion of the article that also quoted Dawud Walid. The article was written by Kathleen Lavey, a reporter for the Lansing (Michigan) State Journal. FEC records show she is a contributor to the DNC.

[Walid Shoebat] will visit Michigan State University on Tuesday.

The MSU chapter of Young Americans for Freedom – classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center– has brought other controversial speakers to MSU, including Minutemen co-founder Chris Simcox and British Nationalist Nick Griffin. . .

Yup, Young Americans for Freedom is a hate group all right! That’s what William F. Buckley Jr. and Ronald Reagan were into, right?

SPLC was founded by Morris Dees and Joe Levin, two lawyers in Alabama. Dees has contributed over $15,000 to various Democrats since 1979 (plus Ralph Nader in 2000 and no Republicans ever), including Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Gary Hart (that Gary Hart), Kerry, Edwards, and even Ted Kennedy’s presidential campaign. Ick.

Joe Levin worked for the Carter Administration and contributed only to Democrats as well.

The first President of the SPLC was none other than Julian Bond. You may know him as President of the Democrat support group known as the NAACP.

Basically, noting that the SPLC designates YAF as a hate group is akin to noting that Jews are labeled by Iran as an illegitimate part of humanity in need of a serious whoopin’–it’s not news and it’s expected. In others words, to a liberal feminist like Kathleen Lavey, it should be mentioned as much as possible.

Especially if you have a symbiotic relationship with CAIR in Michigan, as Lavey seems to.

At the sunrise Easter service I attended yesterday, my pastor threatened people opposed to our church with a quote from rapper Ice Cube: “You picked the wrong folk to mess with.”

The title of my pastor’s sermon was “How to Handle a Public Lynching.” Appropriately, then, he coupled his Ice Cube quote with a little touch of blasphemy, saying that a fellow church member of mine who had …

… likened the U.S. to the Ku Klux Klan and declared it damned for its “state-sponsored terrorism,” is facing the same challenges Jesus did. “No one should start a ministry with lynching, no one should end their ministry with lynching,”

I don’t really attend Trinity United Church of Christ, where Barack Obama is a member and where these comments constituted the main points in the Easter morning message on the resurrection of Christ.

But if this sermon sounds a little off to you, you must be a “typical white person.” You see, as Barack has also said, “if you go there on Easter on this Easter Sunday and you sat down there in the pew you would think this is just like any other church.”

For some reason, I had thought that Easter Sunday was about Christ’s death and miraculous resurrection, providing salvation to all of humanity, blacks and whites, through God’s amazing saving grace.

My mistake, Messiah. My mistake.

Quote of the Week

"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it." -- Thomas Jefferson