Archive for the 'Politics' Category

Barack Obama and Will Smith – Separated at birth?

Friday, February 9th, 2007

Will Smith — I’m No Barack!

Will Smith spoke today at the Motion Picture Association of America in Washington D.C. Mr. Smith told the crowd a hilarious story.

It happened this morning on his way to the event. An older couple approached Smith and said, “We love what you’re doing. You’re so great for the country!”

In true Hollywood fashion, Smith said, “Thank you!”

As the star walked away, the old man said, “And we’ll be sure to vote for you.”

Come to think of it, Will and Barack have never been seen together. Coincidence?

I don’t see the resemblance, do you?  One of the commenters to the article above said that maybe it had to do with their ears.  I think it takes more than similarly large ears to make people look alike.  Maybe it’s because they both look so “clean.”  Another commenter said that the story was made up – just something to get a laugh at the beginning of a program.   Then again, maybe this story is part of Will’s strategy to play Obama in a movie.

Sphere: Related Content

Boston Legal – Stereotypes and Intolerance in Action

Wednesday, February 7th, 2007

At one time Boston Legal was one of my favorite TV shows.  It was funny and outrageous.  Unfortunately, it has gone the way of most shows that last beyond a few years.  The storylines are getting more and more absurd, and apparently they no longer are happy with their “progressive-friendly” scripts.  Now they simply MUST have scripts that preach their anti-conservative and anti-religion biases and intolerance. 

Last night’s show, in particular, was a constant barage of derision and disdain for conservatives and for religion.  It has stopped amazing me at the extent of intolerance the “progressives” can display toward anyone who doesn’t agree with them.   Their “accept everyone as they are” mantra only applies to other progressives – and certainly not towards conservatives or Christians.

If past blogging history is any indication and this post receives comments from the progressive side, they will most likely be laced with profanity and personal attacks and charges.   To progressives, conservatives are the “other America” that Denny and Alan discussed with so much disdain in last night’s show.  The “other America” that doesn’t believe in giving people equal rights and the “other America that elected a president.”  And I have yet to hear a progressive admit or even recognize that such a discussion is the epitomy of intolerance and stereotyping.

In last night’s episode, Denise told Brad that he was the father of the child she is carrying.  Immediately they put Brad in the dunce category as he started talking about getting schools  lined up for the baby – “It’s never too early.” 

Then Denise told him she hadn’t decided definitely about continuing the pregnancy.  So now it looks like that storyline will be one in which Brad will be portrayed as an  idiot male trying to exert his “father’s rights” while Denise will be portrayed as the brave and liberated woman guarding her “right to decide.”

I wish that “entertainment” shows would stick to entertainment – and leave the political commentary to the political shows.

Sphere: Related Content

The Patriotic Terrorist

Sunday, January 28th, 2007

At The Huffington Post, Greg Gutfeld has written a thoughtful post that is generating quite a stir among leftwingers.  Reading the comments to his post is almost more fun than reading the post.  Leftwingers never cease to confirm that they can be the most venomous and vile commenters. 

Here’s what Gutfeld’s wrote:

Whenever I visit this lovely blog, I usually run into someone – a “leftist,” if you will – who finds pleasure in things that make our country or the President look bad. I suppose I could say these angry types are no better than cheerleaders for terrorism. After all, both entities – the left and terrorists – seem to share the same desire: to put the US, humiliatingly, in its place.

But I would be wrong to say such things. Very wrong. Of course, “dissent is patriotic,” and the left is only critical of America because it simply loves our country much more than I do.

That’s why calling them terrorists would be intolerant and pretty shameful.

But what about “patriotic terrorists?”

That’s kinda neat.

What is a patriotic terrorist?

It is an American who claims to love his or her country while enjoying the enemy’s success against said country. It is a person who gets deeply offended if you question their patriotism, while also appearing to share the same ideals of the more spirited folk who like to blow up innocent people.

Patriotic terrorists love America with so much intensity that it appears to the untrained eye that they hate it. But it’s actually the most powerful form of “tough love” known to man, woman and Rosie O’Donnell. Patriotic terrorists love America so much that they realize it needs an intervention – and real terror is the only way to enable that intervention. In fact, to keep a mammoth, arrogant superpower like America in check, terrorism is the only thing we’ve got. Noam Chomsky knew this from the start, making him a patriotic terrorist of the highest order.

This is why he gets the chicks.

Hey, I bet you’ve probably wondered why Al Qaeda hasn’t struck in the US since 9/11. They don’t have to. It has its own offshoot franchise here at work already. Patriotic Terrorists.

Think about how much both groups have in common!

-Both patriotic terrorists and Al Qaeda want the US to abandon Iraq, for that reveals Bush and America to be monstrous, laughable failures. It does not matter to either group that the withdrawal from Iraq will make post-Vietnam look like an afternoon at Ikea shopping for a Hoggbo innerspring mattress.

-For patriotic terrorists and real terrorists, car bombs going off is music to their ears. It proves that you can’t offer democracy to troubled countries, as long as you’ve got terrorists standing in your way. And that’s great news for everyone who believes in checks and balances between the haves and the have nots! (Note: “haves” means the US. “Have nots” means those who hate the US)

-Patriotic terrorists and the more committed terrorists both believe that infractions at Guantanamo Bay are far worse than anything a genocidal dictator could muster, and such horrors possess far more PR potential in denigrating the US than anything involving Ed Begley Jr.

-Both patriotic terrorists and Al Qaeda terrorists believe the US desires to control the Middle East, empower evil Israel and expand it’s power base at the expense of innocent Arab lives. But both groups also realize that the US is too stupid to achieve these goals – and that makes being a patriotic terrorist loads of fun!

Are you a patriotic terrorist?

If you are intensely critical of the US, while tolerating homicidal enemies who condemn everything you previously claimed you are for – human rights, voting rights, gay rights, women’s rights, porn – then you’re a patriotic terrorist.

If you talk about tolerance constantly – and hilariously tolerate genocide and suicide bombers because those actions undermine your more intimate opposition, the American right – then you’re a patriotic terrorist.

The only difference between a patriotic terrorist and a real one? Real terrorists are simply patriotic terrorists who’ve taken the extra step – choosing to actually die for their beliefs – rather than simply talking about them at Spago. If Tim Robbins, Sean Penn, Michael Moore, and their ilk had real cojones, they’d all be wearing cute black vests – but stuffed with more than dog-eared copies of Deterring Democracy.

Hat tip Blue Star Chronicles.  Read more commentary there and also at Something…and a Half of Something.

Sphere: Related Content

Hanoi Jane, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Sean Penn Lead War Protest In D.C. today

Saturday, January 27th, 2007

It’s no surprise that “stars” like Jane Fonda, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn were a part of a war protest in Washington today.  It’s their right.  Unfortunately, our soldiers are being endangered, our enemies are becoming bolder and our reputation in the world is being ruined by these short-sighted, self-involved idiots who have no understanding of the concepts of patriotism and loyalty.  So be it. 

One paragraph in the news story puzzled me, though.  Isn’t this a contradiction?

The rally on the Mall unfolded peacefully, although about 300 protesters tried to rush the Capitol, running up the grassy lawn to the front of the building. Police on motorcycles tried to stop them, scuffling with some and barricading entrances.

It “unfolded peacefully” but 300 of them tried to rush the Capitol and ended up scuffling with police who had to barricade entrances.  Doesn’t sound too peaceful to  me.

Sphere: Related Content

Nancy Pelosi and John Murtha in Iraq – Don’t you know the troops are thrilled

Friday, January 26th, 2007

Plastic Nancy and Murtha are in Iraq.  Don’t you know the soldiers are just thrilled about that! 

BAGHDAD (Reuters) – U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, an outspoken critic of U.S. President George Bush‘s plan to send more troops to Iraq, arrived in Baghdad on Friday for talks with U.S. and Iraqi officials.

Pelosi, a key player in the Democratic takeover of Congress, has helped lead opposition in Washington to Bush’s retooled Iraq strategy which envisages sending 21,500 reinforcements to help quell raging sectarian violence, especially in Baghdad.

She has accused Bush, a long-time foe, of playing politics with soldiers’ lives and said after his State of the Union address to Congress this week that he had ignored the concerns of the American public over the unpopular war.

A U.S. embassy official said Pelosi, the first woman speaker of the House, had arrived in Iraq at the head of a six-member congressional delegation for meetings with Iraqi and U.S. officials but did not plan any public appearances.

The delegation includes John Murtha, a Democratic Congressman from Pennsylvania, who has also been vocal in his criticism of the Bush administration’s handling of the war.

No public appearances? I’ll bet they’ll be a few photo ops. If they can find a soldier with a strong enough stomach to pose with them.

Sphere: Related Content

Right-wing versus Left-wing Commenters

Friday, January 26th, 2007

I was just reading this post over at Little Green Footballs, and he brings up a good point – one that I’ve noticed myself.

An interesting fact: you almost never see the reverse phenomena — insane, profanity-laced rants and personal attacks by anonymous “right-wing” commenters. In fact, there are many left-wing blogs that still have open comments because it just isn’t a problem for them.

I’ve only experienced it a few times here at TMS – but I’ve read some really venomous stuff on other right-wing blogs.  I’m sure there are some ring-wingers who write hateful comments on lefty blogs, but the left seems to have a much greater sense of anger and spitefulness about them.

Just my observation . . .

Sphere: Related Content

Viewers React Positively to Bush’s SOTU Speech

Friday, January 26th, 2007

CNN is reporting that viewers reacted positively to Bush’s State of the Union Speech this past Tuesday evening.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — More than three-quarters of Americans who watched President Bush’s State of the Union address had a positive reaction to it, although the reaction was muted from that in past years, according to a poll released Tuesday.

Forty-one percent of 370 adults who watched the speech said they had a “very positive” reaction to it. Another 37 percent said their response was “somewhat positive.” In 2006, however, the “very positive” number was 48 percent; in 2005, it was 60 percent.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll was conducted by telephone just after the speech. The sampling error is plus or minus 5 percentage points. (Key poll results)

Of those responding, 32 percent identified themselves as Republican, 31 percent as Democrats and 36 percent as independent.

Sixty-seven percent of speech watchers said they believe Bush’s policies will move the country in the right direction, the lowest total of his presidency. In 2006, the number was 68 percent; in 2005, it was 77 percent.

Meanwhile, 53 percent said they believe the speech will lead to more cooperation between Bush and the Democrats who control Congress. Forty-three percent said it will lead to more disagreements.

It’s interesting to me that every single “positive” statement in the report had to be qualified with a comparison to other years.  However, at least it gives those positive statements.  Maybe that’s a step forward for the MSM anyway.

Sphere: Related Content

Kerry Bows out of 2008 Race – As IF he had a chance anyway!

Wednesday, January 24th, 2007

Big news! Not. Kerry has decided not to run for president in 2008. I mean, really – who would vote for him? What a pathetic loser! Of course Americans never cease to astound me with their gullibility. Look how many voted for him 2004. Sad.

Sphere: Related Content

President George Bush’s State of the Union Address

Tuesday, January 23rd, 2007

I watched the State of the Union speech tonight.  I thought President Bush was outstanding. Here is an exerpt from the speech:

“I have spoken with many of you in person. I respect you and the arguments you made.  We went into this largely united, in our assumptions and in our convictions. And whatever you voted for, you did not vote for failure.

“Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq and I ask you to give it a chance to work.  And I ask you to support our troops in the field and those on their way.”

. . . .This is not the fight we entered in Iraq, but it is the fight we are in.  Every one of us wishes that this war were over and won. Yet it would not be like us to leave our promises unkept, our friends abandoned and our own security at risk.”

It was a great speech by a great man.  No man is perfect, but I believe George Bush is the best man for this job at this time in American history.  No one else could have withstood such a concerted attack from the left.  I am continually saddened at how they’ve demonized the man.  Even reasonable people I know have taken up the idiotic charges.  It has become the “politically correct” thing to do.  And the really sad – and frightening – thing is that many people believe the crap that the liberals are flinging around.

I chose not to watch the Democratic response.  What’s the point?  I almost didn’t watch the State of the Union speech because I knew I would just get angry at the lack of support shown by the Democrats.  And, of course, they weren’t supportive.  Supporting OUR President would mean that we could win in Iraq .  And a win in Iraq would mean they wouldn’t prevail in the next election.  So withdrawal and defeat is their mantra.  Politics above country – whatever the cost.  It’s a sad day for America when politicians can’t put the good of our country above their own political ambitions.

Someday the Democrats will answer to a higher power for the damage they have caused our country and the deaths of our service men and women caused by their widespread and deliberate emboldening of our enemies.  A united America would have defeated the Islamic extremists long ago.

Sphere: Related Content

If Thomas Jefferson were president now . . .

Thursday, January 18th, 2007

In looking through my blogroll this afternoon, I found that The Random Yak has an interesting post on what Thomas Jefferson might say about the Iraq war. What do you think?

Learning from Islam: War is the Only Solution, per Thomas Jefferson

Filed under: Just Yaks, PoliYaks, News Yaks — Maniyak @ 10:08 am on January 18, 2007

One prominent Democrat enthusiastically supports the war in Iraq against Islamic terrorism and oppression, President Thomas Jefferson.Most Americans (at least those of us who are not majority members of Congress) heartily agree with the declaration of President Thomas Jefferson, “Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute!” About whom was he speaking when he stated this American national policy? About Islamic terrorists, the Muslim pirates and slave traders from Tripoli and the Barbary Coast in the Mediterranean Sea, who who killed, kidnapped, and sold millions of innocent people into slavery and attacked American ships and enslaved their crews from 1776-1800 and on. The Muslim attackers had no previous contact with the United States (which had just become a nation) but they already hated us. The answer to the Islamic propaganda question, “America, ask yourselves, why do we hate you?” is not that America has done anything against Islam but that most Americans are Christians or non-Muslim. Muslims hate Americans and Christians because that is their theology and the teaching of the Qur’an and always has been. Happily some peace-loving Muslims dissent from this religious bigotry and hatred, but where Islamists can make national and public policy, this anti-Christian hatred is the uniform attitude.

Thomas Jefferson was elected President in part because he was pro-war. He despised the ransoms and blood money that the appeasers in Congress had been paying to the Muslim nations to reduce their bloody slave trade and piracy, and as President he sent troops against the Barbary Coast pirates and eventually destroyed the piracy and illicit trade in human souls practiced by the Islamic Barbary States.

What does the Marine anthem say? ”From the halls of Montezuma, to the shores of Tripoli, we will fight our country’s battles on the land and on the sea.”

America’s military defeated Islamic terrorism in the early 19th century, and if Thomas Jefferson were leading the Democratic Party today he would despise their cries of appeasement and submission (which is the meaning of the term “Muslim”)and he would support the war in Iraq against Islamic terrorism today.

By the way, that First American-Muslim War against the Barbary States which began in 1801 achieved military victory in 1805, but the Islamic terrorists were not totally defeated, and all the fighting finished, until 1815. The timetable in the present war in Iraq fits the same pattern.

The Muslims are right about one thing: War is the only solution to the conflict between Islam, Christianity and the democratic nations of the West.

Sphere: Related Content