Tag Archives: hypocrites

No, Joe, you didn’t make me proud

by

Joe Biden, I found your behavior at the VP debate to be rude and obnoxious.  I found nothing amusing and definitely nothing to be proud of.

Personally, I like to hear both sides and make my own decisions about what I hear.  I don’t appreciate people, like you, Joe, who try to distract, make it impossible for me to hear, or simply interrupt and take the conversation away from the very thing I wanted the answer to.

Of course, I guess that all works for Obama and you, Joe.  Apparently, you aren’t interested in the American people “hearing” the answers and therefore allowed a chance of making up their own minds.  No, you seem to want to make up our minds for us by signaling what you think is amusing or serious and, therefore, just how you suppose we should react to whatever the topic is at hand.

You’re wrong, Joe.

As a Catholic, I find you even more offensive than your mere inappropriate behavior at the debate.  How dare you say there is no attack on religious freedom?  Do you think we (most of us) are so stupid that we don’t get it?  Is that what you are having so much trouble not laughing your fool head off about?

Well, Joe, I have a secret for you — we do get it.  We know where you and your Obama leader stand.  You stand against the Catholic Church you claim to be a part of.  You stand against religious freedom, if it is Christian — especially Catholic.  Then, you mock any who dare suggest this is obviously so?

I’m not impressed, Joe.

That’s right, Joe, I’m really not impressed.  Just who is your God and what is your religion, when you think it is quite okay to support so many things that go against the teachings of the church you claim to be a part of?

When did you suddenly think it was okay to tell the rest of us that it was (and is) okay to believe in your “new” view of the Catholic religion in the “new” political style?  You know… politicians deciding what the Catholic Church should (and does) stand for and then all the while ignoring the Pope, Bishops and real church beliefs?

I don’t know when you got there, Joe, but I do think you have a few surprises in store for you and I’m not so sure you will be laughing and mocking, when it’s time for you to be evaluated by the One with the most important and ultimate vote.

Good luck.

 

The Dangers of Trusting Claire McCaskill

by

1

Todd Akin made a statement relying upon outdated scientific material.  He said that pregnancy from a rape was rare because of what a woman’s body does during the trauma of a “legitimate rape.”  People pounced on the allegation that women rarely get pregnant from a rape and the term of “legitimate.”

Perhaps Candidate Akin should have verified his information, but at least he didn’t pull that belief out of nowhere and put it out there to simply support his position.  He was going on an actual scientific study that had once been put out there as verified fact.  He had every reason to believe his information was accurate.  When he found out differently — he admitted so.

As for the term “legitimate rape”… people knew what he meant, or should have.  He wasn’t trying to downplay the horrors of rape or insult victims.   He said that pregnancy resulting from rape was rare, not that it never happened.  Therefore, it shouldn’t have been considered another case of the victimizing the victim.  At worse, it was merely poorly chosen words in this nit-pick society we have become.

Akin may have relied upon outdated material, but it was once the current medical findings.  He may have used the wrong adjective and set the world on fire.  However, it was Claire McCaskill that has shown her true colors over this matter.

On August 21st and updated September 4, 2012, KCTV5 reported:

> U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill said Tuesday that her GOP opponent should be given the benefit of the doubt about his unfortunate choice of words.

The Kansas City news channel quoted McCaskill as saying:

> “Congressman Akin and I disagree on some things, but he is sincere,” McCaskill said. “And while I disagree with what he said, he has now, just in the last few hours, really apologized for what he said.”

Claire McCaskill was being fair and calling for others to be as well, right?

On September 26, 2012, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, published “Todd Akin moves forward as Claire McCaskill deepens attack with ‘legitimate rape’ ad”, which says in part:

> McCaskill, meanwhile, wasted no time in opening up on Akin over his controversial comments last month on rape and pregnancy, now that she can do so without fear of driving him off the ballot and getting a new opponent.

> “Todd Akin said only some rapes are legitimate,” an announcer says in a McCaskill ad, marking her campaign’s first real foray into an issue that has rocked the national political landscape. “What will he say next?”

Claire McCaskill said her opponent really apologized and should be given the benefit of the doubt.  Well, apparently she meant “only” until she was sure he wasn’t going to bow out of the race.  Now, she seems to want us to doubt him and the misstatement has become something for her to attack him for.

Akin may have said it poorly, but at least he said what he believed to be true.  McCaskill?  Well, it looks like what she says is not always what she believes, but hey, this is politics, isn’t it?  Fight dirty and hope the people are too dumbed-down to see what is going on right in front of them.

Oh, and next time Claire tells you something, you might want to wait a few days and find out what she is saying then.  After all, the Akin situation does show the dangers of trusting Claire McCaskill, the honorable appearing candidate today, but the real politician tomorrow — not so much so.

Offensive Thoughts or Political Games?

by

I’ve just read, “Ark. GOP calls candidates’ statements ‘offensive'”, via Yahoo news and I just don’t know what my reaction should be towards Rep. John Hubbard, the title or article itself, but I do know what my reaction is in the over-all scheme of it all.

A quote from that piece regarding Rep. John Hubbard is:

 

Hubbard wrote in his 2009 self-published book, “Letters To The Editor: Confessions Of A Frustrated Conservative,” that “the institution of slavery that the black race has long believed to be an abomination upon its people may actually have been a blessing in disguise.” He also wrote that African-Americans were better off than they would have been had they not been captured and shipped to the United States.


Okay, that could sound pretty bad —  or not — especially if we don’t know the rest of what he wrote.

Sometimes bad things have to happen to create and allow for good things, or to turn a person down a different and most wondrous path they would have never otherwise traveled.

Is that what this man meant and was trying to say?

Was he trying to say that slavery was a horrendous thing, but if we couldn’t stop it (because we are here and it was then), at least some good came of it?  Was he trying to simply point out the blessings, while not condoning the horrors?

Obviously, we’ll not know what was on his mind or in his book unless we read it or ask him, or maybe even give him a chance to explain what he was trying to say.  Yet, we are to take brief quotes, (without further explanation or context clarification), as ones that defines this Representative and whether he is worthy of a vote?

I don’t think so!

I would like some more information before I decide who is the bad guy or gal in this scenario.

In short:  This smells like politics at its worst, rather than some hidden secret revealed just in time, and I think everyone should refuse to play.

Voting is not a game!  It’s time to stop acting like it is.

Walking Into A Wall: Living With the Liberal Perspective

by

Walking into a wall would be more pleasant and less of a slam than trying to live with the out-of-control liberal perspective that is tainting the world and daily in our face with lies and distortions.  Yet, while we would be trying on a strait jacket if we picked walking into the wall, it’s considered normal and sane to silently endure the liberal politicians and media game of in our face lying and telling us what we heard or saw is not what we really heard and saw?

It’s a dizzy and strange thought that we are to know something is a lie and yet accept it as the truth because it is the present popular thing to do according to they.

One day we are told it — whatever it might be — will never happen.  It is simply wrong to even consider it and the other side is definitely wrong for suggesting it.

Next day we are told it — whatever it was — has happened because it was “the right thing to do” and it was done in spite of the other side trying to block it.

Okay.  Does that then mean that yesterday was erased from the calendar or is it verifiable evidence that there is a segment of our society that seems to suffer from delusions and disconnect from the rational reality realm the rest of us live in?

Excuse me.  I think I’ll go check out the nearest wall.  Care to join me?

Senator Patty Murray & Ladies of Like-Mind, Your Spins Are Demeaning

by

1

My first response to Todd Akin’s “ladylike” comment was — you have got to be kidding!  Grown-up women in politics can’t grasp they are ladies as opposed to the guys being called gentleman or acting gentlemanly?  It’s got to be a slam?  It’s got to be demeaning?

This world, and especially politics & some politicians, have lost their common sense and comprehension skills, it would seem.  They blow up little stuff to such an extent that it is difficult to get excited or know when something actually major or inappropriate did take place.  And, instead of being upset with Akin, I’m upset with the childish cries of people such as Senator Patty Murray (D-Washington) who think the national party ought to scream that Akin is a bad boy and used the demeaning term “ladylike.”  How dare he?

I would like the Democrats to repudiate your comments, Senator Murray, because I find your remarks to be insulting and demeaning to women, who earn their votes, jobs and promotions without having to resort to stupid spins that have nothing to do with anything of importance.  It’s your behavior and reaction that makes women look bad, not some man saying some woman didn’t act as ladylike as she once had.

And, if Claire McCaskill is worried about the “ladylike” comment and having to rely upon spins to get votes — she isn’t the candidate of the past, who suggested she is person enough to stand strong for Missourians.  Instead, the citizens of Missouri would always have to wonder when she might get her little feelings hurt and have to focus her attention on getting others to repudiate whatever and make the big, bad man apologize and go away!

Murray & Ladies of Like-Mind, your willingness to spin is both demeaning and a suggestion that “some” politicians are simply too weak to do the tough job.  Are you suggesting Claire McCaskill is one of them?

Obama Lies & Then Expects Trust & Idolization?

by

I may be one of a few, if the Obama leaning polls are correct, but I’m tired of the lies coming from the president and his administration.  Likewise, I’m tired of the mainstream media that insists we blindly trust, automatically block out the lies we catch Obama & Playmates in, and dutifully take part in idolization of their “The One.”  Sorry Pals & Playmates, I’m not playing nor am I donating to your playground!

Obama & Playmates know darn good and well what Romney meant and that he wasn’t referring to 47% being on Obama’s Welfare Roll, but does the truth matter to them?  No, it’s time to spin the truth into something unrecognizable for political gain.

How many times did Obama lie and say that the death of Ambassador Stevens and the three staff members was the result of a movie?  How many times did he apologize for the movie that actually wasn’t at fault?  How much taxpayer money did he use for ads over in the Muslim world denouncing the not-responsible movie?  Yet, we are to trust and idolize him and his Playmates?  I don’t think so!

Just what is it they are thinking, especially when they tell us we didn’t hear or see what we think we saw and heard, even though we did?  Are we considered too stupid to comprehend what is truth and what is a lie or are we considered totally irrelevant?  Obama & Playmates do, after all, have his followers of ignorance.  (Listen to:  “You Can’t Make This Crap Up Alert: Howard Stern Exposes Stupidity of Obama Backers.”)  Are they plentiful enough to erase our informed opinions?  It’s something to worry about.

I don’t know how many followers of ignorance Obama & Playmates have, but I know that I’m not one of them.  My trust is saved for the truth-teller and I blindly idolize no man or woman that walks upon this earth, no matter what Obama & Playmates and the mainstream media insist upon.