It’s just sad, really sad. 🙁 Whatever happened to blogger ethics, integrity and moral values?
UPDATE: I feel the need to post this update to say the following: I don’t claim to be any sort of a moral authority or anything like that. In fact, I will readily admit to have done some incredibly stupid stuff, when I started blogging. However, I just do not believe that the conservative right is going to help their cause any; especially among the blogging community,by lobbing tasteless and stupid accusations such as this one.
For one, the accusation comes from an anonymous source and from blogs that are simply not reliable. I think if the conservative right believes that lobbing accusations such as this is going to help their cause or even help defeat Harry Reid; then I believe they’re going to be highly mistaken.
I will simply say this: this little idea here is simply out of hand and I believe that it is going to hurt everyone on the right even in 2016 especially if the mainstream media like Fox News picks this up.
I can understand the entire Anthony Weiner scenario. But this here; this could damage someone’s marriage and family. Even if it is proven to be untrue. I simply do not understand how people can do this and look at themselves in the mirror this goes well beyond slander this is simply uncalled for.
I think the conservative blogosphere needs to really look at themselves in the mirror and think long and hard about this and ask themselves this; is this what the conservative blogosphere wants to be known for? Slandering people who they disagree with politically or don’t like what they did politically?
It simply does not make sense to this former left of center turned Paleoconservative.
And I simply ask those who have blogged about this and now have it on their site; do the ends justify the means? Does destroying a man’s reputation simply because you disagree with him justify blogging an unreliable story reported by anonymous sources by unreliable blogs?
I shudder to think the responses by those who I linked to, I really do.
I could understand the liberal left doing this to a Republican. However, I never thought I would see the day when conservatives, who are supposed to be better than the nasty liberal left, would actually do something like this? It is a sad state of affairs and shows you where America and the political blogosphere, especially on the right has come. It is simply a sad parody of what it was in 2006 when I started.
I happen to read on Populist Jim Hightower’s website about this one here and I went and looked it up and sure enough; there it was in black and white:
The story:
WASHINGTON –– To Wall Street, this town might seem like enemy territory. But even as federal regulators and prosecutors extract multibillion-dollar penalties from the nation’s biggest banks, Wall Street can rely on at least one ally here: the House of Representatives.
The House is scheduled to vote on two bills this week that would undercut new financial regulations and hand Wall Street a victory. The legislation has garnered broad bipartisan support in the House, even after lawmakers learned that Citigroup lobbyists helped write one of the bills, which would exempt a wide array of derivatives trading from new regulation.
The bills are part of a broader campaign in the House, among Republicans and business-friendly Democrats, to roll back elements of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, the most comprehensive regulatory overhaul since the Depression. Of 10 recent bills that alter Dodd-Frank or other financial regulation, six have passed the House this year. This week, if the House approves Citigroup’s legislation and another bill that would delay heightened standards for firms that offer investment advice to retirees, the tally would rise to eight.
Both the Treasury Department and consumer groups have urged lawmakers to reject the bills, warning that they could leave the nation vulnerable again to excessive financial risk taking. The House proposals stand little chance of becoming law, having received a much chillier reception in the Senate and at the White Ho
You believe those greedy bastards? Jim Hightower is not amused and rightly so:
Audio:
[podcast]
Partial Quote:
On the day before Halloween, the ethically-challenged members of our lobbyist-haunted House of Representatives did a perverse imitation of “Profiles in Courage,” turning that body into “Profiles in Spinelessness.”
In particular, they cravenly caved in to an outrageous and dangerous demand by Wall Street whiners. Such financial powerhouses as Citigroup just hate having their profiteering recklessness restrained by the regulatory reforms passed after their 2008 financial meltdown. Even though the shockwaves from that Wall Street collapse continue to devastate America’s middle class, the banking elite have completely recovered – including recovering their swaggering arrogance and ability to sway money-hungry congress critters with rich campaign donations. — Read the rest at Jim Hightower’s site
I am shocked that more Conservatives are not swinging from the trees on this one here! To their credit, there are some Democrat Party house members that are opposed to this bill and rightly so. This is the same idiotic crap that brought down the stock market and killed our economy; thank goodness there is some semblance of sanity up on the hill.
Sure enough the Bill passed the house, But it is not expected to make it through the Senate and the White House has said that they would veto the thing, if it made it to the President’s desk. Which in this instance is a very good thing. However, this is not the point. What is the point is this: Those same bastards who caused the great meltdown of 2008, are now lobbying our Government to put things back as they were, so that this sort of thing could happy again. That my friends is enough to make an economic populist, like myself, to want to bite a nail in two! 😡
The people that caused the Wall Street meltdown and downturn in our economy ought to be brought up on treason charges, and lined up against a wall and shot! 😡 But, instead, they are trying to buy their way back to lawlessness. This my friends, is an outrage.
Then she accuses me of feeling like I am entitled to be followed. The conversation basically degenerated after that. Basically the truth is this: Julie Borowski is a protected minority, she is polish. Now, whether she is Jewish or not, is not relevant. What is relevant is when I told her, that she should be careful using code words like “neocon” she got quite defensive and unfollowed me. The truth is the woman wears her ethnicity on her sleeve. But, she pawns herself off as some sort of a libertarian. I call bullcrap on that one. She’s nothing more than a neoconservative.
I won’t delete her videos here that I have posted before; but I won’t post anyone’s videos who act like that on twitter. Besides all that; the only reason anyone gives two flips about her, is because she has a pretty face and sounds like a one point that she was deaf. So, they pity her and watch her videos. Not me. I pity no one; I gave her a chance here, because she sounded pretty smart. I guess I was wrong about that one.
Update: Besides mocking my dead cousin, this liberal, whom I assume is black, made this statement on his blog:
I wuz robbed. Farewell, Unca Cletus
That right there is a racist statement. Calling a white person Cletus or Roscoe; which is a reference to the 1980’s show, “The Dukes of Hazzard”, is nothing more than an underhanded swipe at me, for being a white person. It is another way of calling me a stupid white redneck.
Nice to see that the Democrats are still living up to their historical reputation of being nothing, but a bunch of racist bigots. It was that whites were bigoted against blacks. Now, it has changed, it is the blacks which are bigoted against the whites. Same hatred, different players.
What I am referring to is this little display here.
…and of course, the atheists responded in kind. You can head over to gateway pundit to see all of that silliness.
As much as I know that this is going to do absolutely nothing for my credos as an American Nationalist, I have to tell the truth. The truth is my friends is that what Dana Perino said is absolutely wrong and bit ignorant coming from someone of her ilk.
For Dana Perino to say, “If you don’t like it, leave!” is the Christian American moral equivalent of radical Islamists saying “Convert or Die!” It smacks of religious theocratic intolerance towards those who choose not to be of some sort of a faith.
As I have repeatedly stated on this blog, I happen to be a libertarian-minded Conservative, who just happens to be a Christian as well. However, I am not one of those types who preaches intolerance towards anyone who disagrees with my religious beliefs. I am one who truly believes in individual liberty and part of that means tolerating those who are not of a faith of any kind.
Now as for the atheists who vented their spleens at Ms. Perino, they too are wrong and they also seem to have an intolerance towards those who happen to think that this lawsuit is idiotic at best. Therefore, basically, one could say that both sides of this rather moronic conflagration are both wrong, when it comes to tolerance towards those who disagree.
As for the lawsuit, and Beckels ignorance towards the history of the words, “Under God” in the pledge. Here is the history via Wikipedia:
Louis A. Bowman, an attorney from Illinois, was the first to initiate the addition of “under God” to the Pledge. The National Society of theDaughters of the American Revolutiongave him an Award of Merit as the originator of this idea.[14][15]He spent his adult life in the Chicago area and was Chaplain of the Illinois Society of theSons of the American Revolution. At a meeting on February 12, 1948,[14]Lincoln’s Birthday, he led the Society in swearing the Pledge with two words added, “under God.” He stated that the words came from Lincoln’sGettysburg Address. Though not all manuscript versions of theGettysburg Address contain the words “under God”, all the reporters’ transcripts of the speech as delivered do, as perhaps Lincoln may have deviated from his prepared text and inserted the phrase when he said “that the nation shall, under God, have a new birth of freedom.” Bowman repeated his revised version of the Pledge at other meetings.[14]
In 1951, theKnights of Columbus, the world’s largestCatholicfraternal service organization, also began including the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance.[16]In New York City, on April 30, 1951, the Board of Directors of the Knights of Columbus adopted a resolution to amend the text of their Pledge of Allegiance at the opening of each of the meetings of the 800 Fourth Degree Assemblies of the Knights of Columbus by addition of the words “under God” after the words “one nation.” Over the next two years, the idea spread throughout Knights of Columbus organizations nationwide. On August 21, 1952, the Supreme Council of the Knights of Columbus at its annual meeting adopted a resolution urging that the change be made universal and copies of this resolution were sent to the President, the Vice President (as Presiding Officer of the Senate) and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The National Fraternal Congress meeting in Boston on September 24, 1952, adopted a similar resolution upon the recommendation of its president, Supreme KnightLuke E. Hart. Several State Fraternal Congresses acted likewise almost immediately thereafter. This campaign led to several official attempts to prompt Congress to adopt the Knights of Columbus’ policy for the entire nation. These attempts were eventually a success.[17]
In 1952, Susan Anald wrote a letter to President Truman suggesting the inclusion of “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Langmack was a Danish philosopher and educator who came to the United States in 1911. He was one of the originators of thePrayer Breakfastand a religious leader in Washington, D.C. President Truman met with him along with several others to discuss the inclusion of “under God” just before “with liberty and justice”.[citation needed]
At the suggestion of a correspondent, RepresentativeLouis C. Rabautof Michigan sponsored a resolution to add the words “under God” to the Pledge in 1953.
Prior to February 1954, no endeavor to get the Pledge officially amended succeeded. The final successful push came fromGeorge MacPherson Docherty. Some American presidents honored Lincoln’s birthday by attending services at the church Lincoln attended,New York Avenue Presbyterian Churchby sitting in Lincoln’s pew on the Sunday nearest February 12. On February 7, 1954, with President Eisenhower sitting in Lincoln’s pew, the church’s pastor,George MacPherson Docherty, delivered a sermon based on the Gettysburg Address titled “A New Birth of Freedom.” He argued that the nation’s might lay not in arms but its spirit and higher purpose. He noted that the Pledge’s sentiments could be those of any nation, that “there was something missing in the pledge, and that which was missing was the characteristic and definitive factor in the American way of life.” He cited Lincoln’s words “under God” as defining words that set the United States apart from other nations.
PresidentEisenhowerhad been baptized aPresbyterianvery recently, just a year before. He responded enthusiastically to Docherty in a conversation following the service. Eisenhower acted on his suggestion the next day and on February 8, 1954, Rep.Charles Oakman(R–Mich.), introduced a bill to that effect.Congresspassed the necessary legislation and Eisenhower signed the bill into law onFlag Day, June 14, 1954.[18]Eisenhower stated “From this day forward, the millions of our school children will daily proclaim in every city and town, every village and rural school house, the dedication of our nation and our people to the Almighty…. In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America’s heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country’s most powerful resource, in peace or in war.”[19]
The phrase “under God” was incorporated into the Pledge of Allegiance June 14, 1954, by aJoint Resolutionof Congress amending §4 of theFlag Codeenacted in 1942.[18]
On October 6, 1954 the National Executive Committee of the American Legion adopted a resolution, first approved by the Illinois American Legion Convention in August 1954, that formally recognized the Knights of Columbus for having initiated and brought forward the amendment to the Pledge of Allegiance.[17]
That, Mr. Beckel is the facts. Also too, I felt that Bob Beckel’s swipe at the female to his left was classless and uncalled for. Whether or not he was joking with her, it was uncalled for and he should apologize to her for that.
In closing: This Nation would be a better one, if everyone would just learn to tolerate others. I am not referring to people that do stuff like this here; I am referring to those who are different than we are, when it comes to personal beliefs.
While many Americans were tuned into news coverage of the massive damage from tornadoes ravaging the state of Oklahoma, Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse took to the Senate floor to rail against his Republican colleagues for denying the theory of anthropogenic global warming.
Whitehouse spent 15 minutes chastising GOP senators and justified his remarks by alluding to states that seek federal assistance in the wake of natural disasters.
“So, you may have a question for me,” Whitehouse said. “Why do you care? Why do you, Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, care if we Republicans run off the climate cliff like a bunch of proverbial lemmings and disgrace ourselves? I’ll tell you why. We’re stuck in this together. We are stuck in this together. When cyclones tear up Oklahoma and hurricanes swamp Alabama and wildfires scorch Texas, you come to us, the rest of the country, for billions of dollars to recover. And the damage that your polluters and deniers are doing doesn’t just hit Oklahoma and Alabama and Texas. It hits Rhode Island with floods and storms. It hits Oregon with acidified seas, it hits Montana with dying forests. So, like it or not, we’re in this together.”
Unlike some bloggers who claim to be Independent, I point out when both sides do stupid stuff like this; because it is sick and wrong to exploit a tragic event like this for one’s political agenda. For the record, I do not totally deny climate change; I just happen to think that the science in incomplete and that the whole climate change movement became radically politicized, which I believe personally is harmful. I believe that science is a great thing; but science with a political agenda is dangerous, like unto Nazi propaganda or Soviet propaganda.
The tornado damage near Oklahoma City is still being assessed and the death toll is expected to rise, but already Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., says he will insist that any federal disaster aid be paid for with cuts elsewhere.
CQ Roll Call reporter Jennifer Scholtes wrote for CQ.com Monday evening that Coburn said he would “absolutely” demand offsets for any federal aid that Congress provides.
Coburn added, Scholtes wrote, that it is too early to guess at a damage toll but that he knows for certain he will fight to make sure disaster funding that the federal government contributes is paid for. It’s a position he has taken repeatedly during his career when Congress debates emergency funding for disaster aid.
Scholtes points out that Coburn was one of 36 Republican senators who voted against disaster funding for Superstorm Sandy in January.
However, there are many things that have come up since then, which I simply cannot defend.
They are:
The IRS targeting Jewish groups. – I mean, honestly, what the hell were the IRS and Obama’s people thinking when they let this one happen?
IRS targeting Conservative groups in Washington and Elsewhere. — Did they not know that this would be exposed?
DOJ going after the AP – This is borderline Watergate, so says a watergate player. — Again, what the hell were these people thinking?
My friends, the “Giving the benefit of the doubt” of the President and his Administration by this writer and blogger are over. There is no doubt in my mind that the Obama administration; much like the Administration of George W. Bush, became consumed with a lust for power and abused and exploited the office of President of the United States and the instruments of Governmental office for political purposes.
The Democrats have screwed themselves out of ever winning an election; for like oh, maybe the next 2 major election cycles. This is the sad part, Obama and his Administration promised Americans that he would be a clean break from the policies and practices of President George W. Bush and his Administration and sadly, it turns out that Obama and his Administration are just as bad; if not even worse. As I wrote before, it is sad ending to a Presidency that offered so much to give; but ended up delivering little or nothing at all, in the realm of change.
It is going to be a long, hot, nasty, political summer for America, Americans, Black Liberal Americans and for Washington D.C.. I just hope that cool heads prevail. But, I really do fear the worst in yet to come.
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests
10 minutes
__utmb
Used to distinguish new sessions and visits. This cookie is set when the GA.js javascript library is loaded and there is no existing __utmb cookie. The cookie is updated every time data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
30 minutes after last activity
__utmc
Used only with old Urchin versions of Google Analytics and not with GA.js. Was used to distinguish between new sessions and visits at the end of a session.
End of session (browser)
__utmz
Contains information about the traffic source or campaign that directed user to the website. The cookie is set when the GA.js javascript is loaded and updated when data is sent to the Google Anaytics server
6 months after last activity
__utmv
Contains custom information set by the web developer via the _setCustomVar method in Google Analytics. This cookie is updated every time new data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
2 years after last activity
__utmx
Used to determine whether a user is included in an A / B or Multivariate test.
18 months
_ga
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gali
Used by Google Analytics to determine which links on a page are being clicked
30 seconds
_ga_
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gid
ID used to identify users for 24 hours after last activity
24 hours
_gat
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests when using Google Tag Manager
1 minute
_gac_
Contains information related to marketing campaigns of the user. These are shared with Google AdWords / Google Ads when the Google Ads and Google Analytics accounts are linked together.
