Boy, I tell ya. The liberal crowd is some seriously stupid people anymore. 🙄
I guess most of you know that now the liberal crowd is all in a tizzy, because some protesters let their true feelings be known about this healthcare bill.
My question to them is; seriously guys, what the fuck do you expect? I mean, nobody wants this stupid bill passed and yet, this liberal Congress is hell-bent on passing this moronic bill anyhow; all to appease this President. Is it not any wonder the American people and yes, those protesters are a little bit pissed off?
I mean, and I how to do I put this? Ah, I know! The liberal media and I mean the one’s who are reporting this; You should be glad it was just words. I mean, it could have very well been worse. Luckily and thankfully, it was not. But it could have very well have been. So, to the Race hustlers and Gay Blades; be glad it was just words, signs and insults. Because the alternative could have been much worse.
But again, to the more important point —– What the hell do you people expect? I mean, you want to destroy this Country’s health-care system, all to fulfill a stupid, idiotic socialist agenda; and you wonder why some people are pissed off about it?
It’s time to get real boys and girls. Not everyone is on the same page with you. This should not be a surprise. 🙄
Check out the story, which is just rife with hatred towards Conservative Bloggers, Race Baiting and has a rather horrible photo-shop of Michelle Malkin.
I mean, even HotAir covered this and dismissed it. Did they bother to mention that? Nope. Which is why I never bothered blogging about it. Most usually, if a story doesn’t pass AllahPundit’s or Ed’s smell test, I usually refrain.
I seem to remember that on March 4, 2010, word came that a liberal satirist blogger, Al Weisel AKA as Jon Swift passed away. I, thinking that no one on my side of political aisle cared, wrote a rather harsh piece. Well, it turned out that many Bloggers on the Conservative side of the aisle liked the guy and went out of their way to remember the guy. I even dedicated a music video to the damned guy. Much class was shown that day, and I had hoped that my actions would be the start of the beginning of civility in this Blogosphere. Maybe that was too lofty of a goal.
The point I am trying to make is this; why the hell does someone have to die in the blogosphere or anywhere else for that matter; for anyone to even remotely try and show any respect to that person?
I say all this, because I have flogged time and time again for some of the stuff that I have said on here. I have even lost advertisers because of something I did once on this blog. But, yet, this guy gets a free pass? Unbelievable. 🙄
Remember folks, THIS is your Democratic Party of today. Do you really want to vote for people that promote this sort of vile filth? Think about it.
First off, Dan explains in his own way, that he is from the pre-internet generation. This is understandable. The man is just old. You have to remember, he was one of the reporters in the trenches in Vietnam. He did work under Walter Cronkite. So, he is old, as in almost my dad’s age. Even I can understand that.
He explains his rather “off the cuff” remark:
All this is the backdrop for what I said on the Matthews show. I was talking about Obama and health care and I used the analogy of selling watermelons by the side of the road. It’s an expression that stretches to my boyhood roots in Southeast Texas, when country highways were lined with stands manned by sellers of all races. Now of course watermelons have become a stereotype for African Americans and so my analogy entered a charged environment. I’m sorry people took offense. – Source Huffington Post
He goes on to say, and I believe this is important:
But anyone who knows me personally or knows my professional career would know that race was not on my mind. Reporting on the injustices of race was part of the reason I became a reporter. I grew up in segregated Texas on the same side of the tracks as the African American community. At the time, enlightened people called them Negros. Many people called them much worse. When I covered the Civil Rights movement, I saw sheer hatred in ways that still haunt and shock me. For doing my small part in reporting on the South in the 1960s, I was called a traitor to my roots and other names not fit for print. I was threatened with death by people who would have welcomed me to their church on Sunday on account of my white skin if they didn’t know what I was there to do. I do not take this issue lightly.
I am inclined to believe him here, as I do agree with his position on the subject. Also too, I believe it is important to understand the framing of the comment as well. He did just say, in his own southern style that President Obama is, in fact, a lousy salesman. Now he said something to the effect of, “That Obama isn’t nothing more than a stupid Watermelon eatin’ so and so…” it would be quite different. But it was not said in that matter. Yes, I know, Rush Limbaugh and we Conservative Bloggers did raise the “If a Conservative have said that” flag up; Which I believe is valid. There is a double standard in this country when it comes to race and political party affiliation, I know that. However, I believe this one here was just a tad bit blown out of proportion.
Finally, Dan Rather makes this very important point:
What saddens me is what this experience has made all too clear. Much of what we call news, isn’t. Much of what we Tweet, or post, or chat away at under the guise of news, are distractions.
[…]
The optimist in me believes that we are not as polarized as the partisans on the left and right would want us to believe. They make money on division. I have gotten dozens of letters from viewers for my HDNet show saying that they thought I was a left-wing partisan hack until they sat down and watched our reports. This is not meant to be self-aggrandizing. It is just evidence that if we stopped worrying about political point-scoring and sat and listened to the issues that matter, we would be less distracted and more focused on the problems that we all face and must solve together.
Sorry folks, I cannot argue with that. Thanks Dan for the clarification. I know I might take heat for highlighting the above, but you know what? I do not care. I think if both sides would simply work together and stop with the decisive nonsense; we might just be able to fix the Nation’s problems; like Healthcare, like Jobs and many of the other problems that are hurting Nation right now.
First, his choice of words. People of color? Who are these colored people he’s referring to? What does that mean? It may be because I’m not a native English speaker, but I find this “people of color” business to be really bizarre. So as a Boricua, am I colored? I guess I’m olive but if I hit the beach on a sunny day I can be golden brown. Is he referring strictly to skin color? Culture? Ethnicity? I mean, I’m not that much darker than Mr. Olbermann himself. Do I fall into his “people of color” category?
Or, as I suspect, are “people of color” just code for those who deviate too much from the skin color which Olbermann seems to deem as the standard? I mean, come on, Olbermann has no color, right? He’s white. That ain’t no color. That’s just how it’s supposed to be, right? So, all I can think of is that he means “black.” Black people are colored, and everyone else is just normal and a-OK. Man, this race and colors stuff is difficult to understand!
And secondly, the question is stupid, the premise terribly moronic and the insinuation totally insulting. The Tea Party protesters aren’t racist. Are there a few kooks with nefarious motivations? Sure, every movement has them. It’s nice how, during the Bush years, the MSM did everything they could to whitewash the fringe elements of the antiwar movement, but I digress. What’s Olbermann’s evidence that Tea Parties are overwhelmingly racist? Apparently, that there are no “people of color” at these rallies. That is so blatantly false as to induce uncontrollable laughter. There are people of all backgrounds at the Tea Parties. But even if an event is dominated by a certain race group, what does that prove? Similar to what Glenn Reynolds said earlier this month, if you look at a group of white folks and the first thought that pops into your head is “racists!” then you have some serious issues.
So I put together this video response to Olbermann’s burning question. Here are his “people of color” he’s been inquiring about.
A song that I happen to like quite a bit. It has been said that music often tells a story. Paints a picture, if you will. That being said, here is a story or picture, from a very unique perspective.
This week the US Senate is debating whether to raise the national debt ceiling by $1.9 trillion, totaling a whopping $14.3 trillion, which is about the same size as the nation’s overall economy. Some estimate the cost of national healthcare would be in the ballpark of $1 trillion. The initial relief donation to Haiti by the US government was a relatively measly $100 million while the cost of the Iraq war alone has been estimated at $3 trillion dollars. Regardless, our government, and the debt to maintain it, keeps growing astronomically.
The old fashioned, biblical concept of charity is that it begins at home, and once a man has taken care of his family, property and immediate surroundings he can then afford to address greater concerns. Increasingly and sometimes tragically, America can no longer afford to address greater concerns—not that affordability will prevent our government from continuing to do so. The conservative’s task should be to prevent it from doing so, or “limiting” government–and not promoting its unlimited use at home or abroad, and certainly not to save the world.
For once; I actually agree with Jack Hunter. I am very glad that he spoke out on this. I mean, we’re fighting wars and our economy is in the toilet. But yet, we are sending millions of dollars into a Country that is so damn corrupt that they cannot even feed their own people? Give me a break. We need to deal with our own and stop trying to be the World’s rescue dog. It is not like those people even appreciate what we are even doing there. Because we have already been accused of occupying the Country.
Bottom Line: Jack Hunter is correct, Let private industry deal with that problem in Haiti and stop using the United States Government to deal every little situation that comes up.
Countdown to being called a RAAAAACIST!!!!! in 5……4…..3…..2….
Rep. Marion Berry’s parting shot, published in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette [no link, subscription only] offers a warning to moderate Democrats and border state moderates — warning of a midterm bloodbath comparable to the 54-seat D-to-R swing in 1994.
But the jaw-dropper is Berry’s claim that President Obama personally dismissed any comparison between Democrats now and under Bill Clinton 16 years ago — by saying his personal popularity would bail everybody out.
The retiring Berry, who doesn’t say when the remarks were made, now scoffs at Obama’s 50-or-below approval rating:
Writes ADG reporter Jane Fullerton:
Berry recounted meetings with White House officials, reminiscent of some during the Clinton days, where he and others urged them not to force Blue Dogs “off into that swamp” of supporting bills that would be unpopular with voters back home.
“I’ve been doing that with this White House, and they just don’t seem to give it any credibility at all,” Berry said. “They just kept telling us how good it was going to be. The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’ We’re going to see how much difference that makes now.”
“I began to preach last January that we had already seen this movie and we didn’t want to see it again because we know how it comes out,” said Arkansas’ 1st District congressman, who worked in the Clinton administration before being elected to the House in 1996… “I just began to have flashbacks to 1993 and ’94. No one that was here in ’94, or at the day after the election felt like. It certainly wasn’t a good feeling.
Translation? What President Obama is trying to say here is this; President Obama is going to to continue to push through his agenda and if any of the White Honky Republicans get in his way, he is going to have his fellow “brothers” in the Senate and elsewhere grandstand the hell out of the race card, until the Republicans back down — and you just know the Liberal media will do his bidding too. The problem with that is, it is a dangerous gamble and the American people are just not going to stand for that sort of racial grandstanding for very long. You can only play that race card so many times, before it gets stale and people begin to laugh about it and at it. Meanwhile, Barry is also pissing off his base on the far left, by basically trying to pass a hobbled Healthcare bill, which is basically a pay off to the Healthcare companies.
I look forward to watching this damned train wreck, I really do. This man is stupid enough to believe that because he is black, that he is going to be able to do just what he damn well pleases. I know one thing, if there is a huge change come November 4, 2010. The first damned thing I would do, if I were the Republicans, I would make the Birth Certificate the BIG ISSUE, make that idiot fool produce the Original or Impeach his ass. That will be the only way to really stop this crazy asshole from doing anymore damage to the United States. However, quite sadly, I highly doubt the Republican Party has the guts to do such a thing. It is days like this, that we need a modern day Joseph McCarthy.
I have two stories, first this story via the U.K. Telegraph:
Video:
The Story:
The French minister in charge of humanitarian relief called on the UN to “clarify” the American role amid claims the military build up was hampering aid efforts.
Alain Joyandet admitted he had been involved in a scuffle with a US commander in the airport’s control tower over the flight plan for a French evacuation flight.
“This is about helping Haiti, not about occupying Haiti,” Mr Joyandet said.
Geneva-based charity Medecins Sans Frontieres backed his calls saying hundreds of lives were being put at risk as planes carrying vital medical supplies were being turned away by American air traffic controllers.
But US commanders insisted their forces’ focus was on humanitarian work and last night agreed to prioritise aid arrivals to the airport over military flights, after the intervention of the UN.
The diplomatic row came amid heightened frustrations that hundreds of tons of aid was still not getting through. Charities reported violence was also worsening as desperate Haitians took matters into their own hands.
Let me get this straight —- The United States of America’s last two Presidents get together, put political differences aside and begin to raise all sorts of funds for people of Haiti and now we are the bad guys? Unreal. 🙄
The humanitarian catastrophe in Haiti is turning out to be a classic illustration of anti-Americanism in seven easy steps.
Calamitous events take place in a chaotic place (think Bosnia, think Somalia, think Iraq in 1991).
The U.N and the U.S intervene.
The civil government proves to be useless or malign, or both. The U.N isn’t up to the job. The only effective force in sight is the U.S. According to today’s Guardian, John O’Shea, the head of Goal, a medical charity, has called on the U.S to take charge of the whole operation. So has a major U.S aid agency (“which declined to be named for political reasons”).
There are only two possible outcomes.
The U.S takes over. If this happens, it will be accused of “creating a military occupation under the guise of humanitarian aid” and “occupying” the country outright. (Apologies, my memory’s failing me. These criticisms have been aired already. The first quote’s from President Chavez of Venezuela. The second’s from Alain Joyandet, France’s “Co-operation Minister”.)
The U.S doesn’t take over. If this happens, it will be criticised for “not doing enough” – and isolationism.
So either way, the U.S loses.
I’m not a fully signed-up member of the Stars-and-Stripes fan club. But there are times when I think: who’d be an American?
Sorry, I am just going to say this, and I know that some identity politics type of jackass or some minority serial complainer will bitch about it; fine, screw ’em, I just don’t give a damn anymore. What needs to happen right about now, is this — The United States of America needs to get all those supplies off of those ships and planes and get back on their ships and planes and get the hell out of Haiti now. I mean, we have ponied up for these people and other such people long enough, let them idiots deal with their problems themselves, why the hell should WE have to be the ones to go in and play captain? Not like they are going to appreciate what we do any damn way. If the U.N. does not like our forces being there, LET THE U.N. TAKE OVER THE MISSION AND LEAVE!
Yeah, I know, some liberal asshat is going to call me a racist bigot for saying it. I got two words for you: Screw You. The United States of America has wasted more money on Countries that do not like us, for whatever reason and we are doing it again; and again we are being fingered as the bad guys. Enough is Enough! It is time for the United States to say home and take care of its own problems and stop trying to help everyone who has a Earthquake or other kind of natural disaster.
It just so happens that the United States of America is going through its own sort of disaster, A man-made one, its called our Economy — and instead of us watching what we spend and keeping what we have, which is not much, when you figure that China is buying our debt, we are sending it off to a bunch of idiots, who really do not like us anyhow! No, this is not sarcasm, I am quite serious. What do we get for all this sort of charity? The above nonsense that I just quoted.
Bottom Line: I believe it is high time that the United States of America reevaluated its role abroad and got out of the rescue and charity business for Countries that really do not like us anyhow.
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.
