Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Liberals and the truth

An old friend of mine from high school keeps sending me these messages about this or that horrible truth about Romney or conservatives.

Every single time it turns out that not only is there no basis for his claim but it's easy to find that his claim is factually in error.

Yet he doesn't ever seem to be bothered. If I posted something that turned out to be factually wrong, not just a matter of opinion, I'd be really apologetic and upset with myself.

But he, and most other liberals, have no problem posting things that are proven to be false. They don't question future "revelations" from the same source.  They seem almost unconcerned about the truth.

They then turn around and accuse those who don't agree with them of being bigots and liars; this is exemplified by Obama the liar in chief, and I'm not referring to his musical skills, calling Romney a bullshitter--sorry for the language, it used to be you could quote a President in mixed company.

I'm beginning to think that at least the hard core vocal liberals, as opposed to most who vote for liberal candidates because they have only heard one side of the story, really don't care about truth but only about power.

It's amazing how totalitarian liberals are.  They have no problem telling us how to run the most miniscule aspects of our lives--no you can't have plastic food bags at the store; we know what's best for you--even though their lives are usually a complete mess.

Sunday, October 28, 2012


Friday, October 26, 2012

Gravitas?

Americans want their Presidents to be one of the people while simultaneously having a certain aura of authority.

Presidents wear suits while working but are expected to dress down when goofing off.

While it's hard to define that special gravitas that marks a President that Americans can be happy with I'm fairly sure it doesn't include calling an opponent a "bullshiter" or posting a picture of your opponent wearing a dunce cap on your web page.

It is said that the true character of a man is revealed when he is facing his greatest challenge.  If so we have discovered that Obama is a petulant and easily offended man who maintains one standard for himself and another for those he dislikes.

Thursday, October 25, 2012


Obama Anti-diversity zealot

Obama hates diversity.

What else can one conclude when Obama says that Catholics must pay for abortions?

What happened to respecting diversity?

Did we make Quakers fight when we had the draft?  No because America respects diversity.

But under Mr Anti-Diversity Obama no longer wants us to be a diverse nation. Rather we must all believe as Obama does or risk being crushed by the massive Federal government.

Obama: Scrooge or Liar

Just how selfish is Obama? What could there possibly be in Obama's college transcripts and passport records that's so worth hiding it makes sense to deny $5,000,000 to a charity of Obama's choosing?

Why is it the Dems say that there must be something wrong with Romney's tax records because he wouldn't release them but when Obama turns down $5.000.000 for charity in order to keep his college transcripts and passport records under wraps it's fine?

There are only two conclusions. Either there is something truly horrible in Obama's college transcripts or passport records or Obama doesn't really care about the charities he supposedly supports.

Monday, October 22, 2012

He died for us


Sunday, October 21, 2012

If you're pro-choice which candidate is more like you?

Mitt Romney supports abortions in cases of rape, incest, and threats to the life of the mother.  His position is shared by roughly 75% of Americans.

Romney does not believe that tax dollars should go to pay for abortions.

President Obama supports abortion for rape, incest, and threat to the life of the mother.

President Obama supports sex selection abortions where the unborn are killed because they're a girl and the parents want a boy.

President Obama supports abortions in the third trimester; when the baby is viable.

President Obama supports abortions for any reason at any time in the pregnancy.

President Obama supports partial birth abortion where a viable fetus is fully delivered except for her head and then her brain is mulched up with a knife and her skull is crushed.

President Obama believes that Catholics should have to offer insurance policies that fund abortion inducing chemicals.

President Obama supports abortion after the 20th week of a pregnancy even though scientific studies have shown that the fetus will suffer severe pain before dying in an abortion

President Obama opposes requiring medical care for a baby that survives a botched abortion attempt and is born alive.

President Obama is not bothered that a Black woman is 3 times more likely to abort her child than a white woman.  He doesn't agree with Jesse Jackson who said that abortion was genocide directed at Black people.

I'm pro-life; I don't think any problem is solved by killing an innocent member of the human species.

But if you're pro-choice odds are your beliefs are far closer to Mitt Romney's than to Barrack Obama's extreme position.

If abortion influences how you vote consider this; unless you are one of the small group of Americans who believe that it's ok to kill the unborn at any time for any reason Romney is the candidate closest to you.

Friday, October 19, 2012

That HHS mandate

The important thing to realize is that if the HHS mandate is allowed to stand a precedent will be set that there is nothing to constrain the government from forcing anyone to do anything.

The intent of the Framers was to give American's liberty but how can there be liberty if the government can force people to do what those people believe is immoral?

Back when men were drafted into the Army we didn't make those who thought war was intrinsically immoral fight.  We did so because we realized our country would not be free if the government had the power to coerce people to do whatever the government decided was "good".

The HHS mandate however clearly demands that those that find abortion to be immoral can be required by the government to provide abortion to their employee's and to explain to their employee's how they can get poison that will kill unborn members of the human race.

If being able to force people to be complicit in what they believe to be murder is legal then what is there that the government could force people to do would not be legal?

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Working towards the goal

I didn't want Romney to be the Republican candidate for President.  I am far from alone in that.

However now that the choice is either Romney or Obama it's clear that voting for a third party candidate, and thereby helping Obama win, would be a shoot yourself in the foot move.

We've seen this in the past. Back in the early 1970's after abortion was legalized there was a very good chance that we could have gotten laws passed that would have restricted abortion to just the hard cases--rape, incest, life of the mother--but too many in the pro-life movement wouldn't accept that as a first step towards total abolition of abortion. As a result we got no limitations on abortion.

Demanding perfection left us far worse off than accepting, albeit temporarily, a compromise.

On all the issues that made me want someone else other than Romney Romney is infinitely better than Obama. 

Every journey begins with the first step.  For those of you thinking of throwing your vote away, and helping Obama win, by voting third party because Romney isn't "perfect" ask yourself this question: What's the likelihood that we'll be getting a "perfect" candidate in 2016,2020,2024 if Obama gets reelected this year?

Voting for Romney does not mean we stop working to make sure his administration doesn't support the causes we are passionate about like abortion and religious liberty. Neither does it mean that we shouldn't be working to get more conservatives elected to the Congress. 

Finally voting for Romney is not saying that his positions are where we want to end up. It is saying that Romney's positions are closer to what we want than Obama's and that every step towards our final objectives is a good thing.

Don't rationalize that by voting for a third party you're not helping Obama.  Obama needs to get more votes than Romney to win; especially in the key swing states.  If you vote for some third party guy who 90% of America has never even heard of it's one less vote Obama needs to get--or manufacture-- in order to win.

Don't help Obama win just because we ended up with something other than the best possible Republican candidate.  Instead help pave the way for more conservative Republicans in the future by getting Romney elected in 2012.

The ever changing Obama meme on Benghazi

In the debate Obama said that he had declared the attack on Benghazi to be a terrorist attack the day after the attack occurred.

Reading the transcript of his talk however it's clear that was not what he was saying.

The real point however is if he was willing to admit that Benghazi was a terrorist attack rather than just a mob gone wild why did the entire Obama administration keep talking about the anti-Muslim movie for weeks?

Why did Obama and Secretary of State Clinton appear in commercials, aired in Pakistan, condemning the movie?

Why did Ambassador Rice appear on all the Sunday talk shows on 9/14 declaring that it was all due to the movie?

Either Obama is lying about what he said on 9/12 or his Administration's foreign policy is totally uncoordinated.  Both of which are reasons to let someone else run America's foreign policy.

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Sunset surfer


Joe Biden Neo-Nazi

That sounds harsh.

After all the Nazi’s murdered millions of peoples and conducted a genocidal attack on Jews in Europe.



We all agree that killing innocent Jews just because they were unwanted by the racist Nazi establishment was the most extreme horror created by Hitler.   



Yet Joe Biden came out for the legalized killing of innocents in his debate with Paul Ryan.



The Catholic Church has taught since its inception, as evidenced by the Didache, that abortion is the killing of an innocent human being.



Not everyone in America agrees with that. Certainly many who support legalized abortion do not believe that abortion is the killing of an innocent human being.



But on Thursday in the debate Joe Biden said

"

Life begins at conception, that’s the Church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life. But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews, and I just refuse to impose that on others..."

That means that Joe Biden believes that every abortion is the killing of an innocent human being, for what crime or sin can a newly conceived person be guilty of?, whose life began at conception.

It doesn’t matter if his belief is objectively true or not; what matters is that it is what he believes. 



But even though Joe Biden believes that every abortion is the killing of an innocent human being he does not feel that it is a good thing to end that killing. 

If Biden had lived in Nazi Germany he might have said that he personally believed that killing innocent Jews was bad but that he, Biden, couldn’t impose his personal beliefs on those Nazi’s.



It’s one thing to have a politician like Bill Clinton who just denies the scientific evidence about abortion and says that he believes that abortion is not the killing of a human being.  While one can doubt Clinton’s reasoning one can still hope that he is not comfortable with the killing of innocents; Clinton for all his other problems at least claimed to want to keep abortion “rare”.



But when Joe Biden says that he believes that abortion is the killing of an innocent human being and that he, Biden, still believes that abortion should be legal--through all nine months of pregnancy for any reason-- he is declaring that he believes it is reasonable to allow the murder of innocent human beings.



What sort of monster can believe that abortion is the killing of an innocent human being and still say it should be legal?

Saturday, October 6, 2012

Obama loves high gas prices

I just paid $4.76 a gallon for gas. I guess Obama is more than half way to his objective of getting US gas prices to be comparable to European gas prices, about $8/gal.

Some will say that the Presidents opposition to drilling for oil--in the US he sent $2,000,000,000 to Brazil to fund oil drilling there--and building new refineries has no impact on the price of gas.

But back in 2008, when gas was nearing $3/gal, Obama and other Democrats blamed Bush. So if Bush can be held responsible for gas prices so can Obama.

Friday, October 5, 2012

The Killing Exception

If we let people avoid combat because they have a moral objection to war why can't we let Christians who oppose abortion be conscientious objectors to the HHS mandate that requires them to directly pay for and offer abortifacient "medicines" to their employees?

Due to an editorial confusion this article shouldn't have been published here.  I submitted it to American Thinker and I thought they weren't interested in it but in reality there was some confusion on their part, they have multiple editors, and they forgot to let me know they were going to publish it.

Since I promised to only send them unique material I've removed the content of this really amazing--note my incredibly humble attitude-- post but you can read it in all of its amazingly humble wonderfulness here