I started to NOTICE the shift when Bill Clinton got hammered with MonicaGate. When everything really hit the fan in that incident I realized why my innate instinct about the man as being a number one sleazebag piece of pond scum was more than an innate instinct but in fact true.
I further noticed that the left did not give a fig about the fact that the leader of our country stood in front of the public and claimed “I NEVER HAD SEX WITH THAT WOMAN” … had the “little black dress” never surfaced we would no doubt be arguing the point to this day. An Monica would have been trashed by Clinton and the media just like Flower had already been.
Personally I did not care if Clinton had sex with the goat down the road but what I did care about was the man felt it was okay to blatantly lie to the mass. What I further cared about was the pass given for those who loved his political agenda. “Oh whatever he does is okay as long as we get our way.” The next thing I noticed was the liberals that I was fighting side by side with … for stopping the crosscutting of old growth forest sported this same hypocrisy. Then when Bush began his run for office what was good for Clinton was not okay for Bush who they hated before his running shoes actually hit the ground.
Since my tolerance level for hypocrites and inequality is less than zero … I pulled my organization out of the fight and let their group die a fast death. It did.
During the past 8 years I began to notice how the media which was clearly left viciously attacked anyone they thought sneezed wrong. When the weapons of mass destruction “lies” started to be bandied … my reaction was HEY WHAT’S THE PROBLEM? what’s good for the goose is good for the gander right?
HYPOCRISY FRONT AND CENTER!
With this ever increasing bad behavior being directed at Republicans while Democrats were being given a pass I found myself wondering … hey wait a gosh darn minute here. Are you going to let them get away with this without defending yourselves?
Well they did and now we see the result of that failure.
Fast forward to now … today.
Where did MSNBC dredge up this piece of S*** David Shuster?
If those targeted will not stand up for themselves … let me help.
I have no qualms about calling a spade a spade on the exact same level as anyone throwing the first stone.
No wonder MSNBC has hit the rating skids as anyone with an ounce of common sense is scampering to ANY OTHER network like cockroaches when someone flicks on a light.
So Shuster thinks Carrie Prejean is not free to speak her mind because it is contrary to his opinion?
Tit for Tat … I don’t think he should have the freedom to counter her opinion on national TV.
So applying the what is good for the goose is good for the gander technique how is the situation remedied?
We the people do not write MSNBC about this jerkwater. You pay attention to those who sponsor his show and write them. Amazing how far a simple “I will no longer purchase your product as long as you sponsor the David Shuster show” will go. Sponsors are quickly yanked back into line when their bottom line profits are threatened.
So in truth “we the people” actually have more power if we choose to use it.
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo | Posted on 5/13/2009 12:00:00 AM
The purpose of government is for those who run it to plunder those who do not. Throughout history, governments have used violence, intimidation, coercion, and mass murder to enforce this system. But governments’ first line of “defense” is always a blizzard of lies — about its own alleged benevolence, altruism, heroism, and greatness, along with equally big lies about the “evils” of the civil society, especially the free market.
The current economic crisis, which was instigated by the government’s central bank and its boom-and-bust monetary policies, among other interventions, has once again been blamed on “too little regulation” and too much freedom.
Will Americans ever catch on to this biggest of all of government’s Big Lies?
The rest of the story …
When Coulter takes aim she ALWAYS hits her target right between the eyes.
Anyone who reads this blog much is probably getting the message.
I love Ann Coulter. She ALWAYS makes me laugh out loud.
Her opposition hates her for one reason.
SHE IS DEADLY RIGHT!
Worse she makes them laughing stocks. They have one defense … foam at the mouth and call her names.
Personally as you all know I think what is good for the goose is good for the gander. They can dish (and do viciously) it out? Well they better be willing to take it back in kind.
We the middle ground are tired of the unchecked stupidity being foisted our way by mostly ignorant ranting liberals. I learned long ago that these people are on the ropes when their assessment of a situation consists of denigration and name calling only.
The tactic is simple “let me TRY and drag them down to my level”.
Here is what Ann has to say on the subject of strong sexy women who can actually think on their own:
Not even Dick Cheney can incite the blood-curdling rage of liberals at the sight of a sexy evangelical Christian. Paula Jones, Katherine Harris, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin and, most recently, Miss California, Carrie Prejean, have all come under a frenzy of attacks from liberals.
Christians are supposed to be fat, balding sweaty little men with bad complexions. It’s liberals who are supposed to be the sexy ones. (I know that from watching “The West Wing” and all movies starring Julia Roberts.)
But sadly for liberals, in real life, the fat, balding sweaty little guy with the bad complexion is Perez Hilton and the smoking-hot babe is Carrie Prejean.
This apparent contradiction incites violent anger in liberals, triggering their famous “flight or flight” response. So liberals are, once again, launching furious attacks on a beautiful Christian in a fit of pique similar to the one directed at Joan of Arc.
First, the Miss USA contest held a press conference to announce that Prejean had breast implants. Take a Christian position in public and Satan’s handmaidens will turn all your secrets into front-page news.
Next, a photographer released a single cheesecake photo of Prejean. This prompted liberal reporters who have never met a Christian to proclaim that Christians were outraged by the photo. Liberals believe abortion is a sacrament, but smoking, wearing short skirts and modeling lingerie are mortal sins. (And if wearing women’s underwear is a basis for being disqualified from the pageant, that’s the end of Perez Hilton’s judging career.)
While I was bouncing around the internet I happened onto an interesting article posted by an author who had written a book on the matter. (Book linked below.)
Since Barack Obama likes to pattern himself after FDR and the New Deal … it caught my attention. I could never understand why people would be happy with a 19% unemployment rate … at least happy enough to re-elect a president over and over.
Were they fed skewed facts?
I have often wondered if women (who were not usually bread winners back then) were counted into these statistics. If we took the % of woman out of that statistic does the percent then rise to 38%? Is that really what we can look forward to under the HOPE PRESIDENT?
Oh wait I know now HOPE means I HOPE none of this drops on my front door.
Hope then was suppose to be just past the horizon or around the next corner?
Sound anything like what passes the lips of Barack Obama almost daily?
Why am I getting the feeling Obama WILL SAY ANYTHING to keep the lid on this powder keg?
Notice this tactic at hand today?
Let’s use an analogy to make the point: Imagine that in the last days of his presidency, George W. Bush declared a new policy. His spokespeople explained, “It is rather misleading to say that the unemployment rate in October 2008 was 6.6 percent, because that implies millions of Americans are destitute. But in fact they are all receiving generous assistance from the government in various forms. If we say that their ‘job’ is filling out the paperwork for unemployment claims, then the true unemployment rate is more like 0.4 percent. Those are the people who truly have no source of income, and need to be helped.”
Would any left-liberal sign on to that rationale? Of course not. Now, there is no objectively hard and fast line between a “real” government-provided job versus a “phony” job such as “filling out unemployment forms.” In fact, a purist could note that all government jobs are artificial and not indicative of true productive value for consumers, since their compensation is derived through involuntary taxation.
This book by Robert P. Murphy can be purchased for around $13 at Amazon.
This young woman has it together and I hope she is willing to run for an office some time. We need more like her.