- Hey! Have you heard the joke about the illegal immigrant who was deported?
- Re: Wisconsin GOP 'welcomes' Bernie Sanders with billboards
- Hillary Clinton's Video On Homosexual Marriage
- 'The gay marriage debate is not about gay marriage any more than the Confederate flag debate is about racism'
- Quote of the day from Moonbattery
- True colors of the rainbow
- "You can either stay and be quiet or we will have to take you out!" Hussein Obama
- Read of the Day on the Redefinition of Marriage
- Question of the Day: 'If John Boehner Was a Democratic Plant, What Would He Be Doing Differently?'
- As of June 26, 2015 ... True Marriage No Longer Has Real Meaning
- Walmart Selling Iranian and Cuban Flags ... But Refuses to Sell Confederate Flags
- Muslim Reformist Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser: New York Times 'Indistinguishable From Islamist Media'
July 3, 2015
Hey! Have you heard the joke about the illegal immigrant who was deported?
Until he/she wasn't!
Now ain't that the funniest thing you ever heard of America?
A few of the "little" details:
Nearly 1 million illegal immigrants in the US have been ordered to leave the country - but remain.
That includes 170,000 criminals, ordered deported "in absentia,"
Huge numbers of the poor wittle unaccompanied minors ordered deported didn't show up for deportation hearings so "were shown the door in absentia."
And, and, wait for it ..... "said since most of the removal orders are never carried out, the result is a "kangaroo court."
How's that for a joke America? Ain't our government just the funniest?
Could someone please help here - this sign needs to be updated to -
OH! And I just about forgot this other illegal immigration "joke" - we all know it is commonly expected/accepted that rape is "the price" women coming across the border into America can expect to pay. Sorry thing is, I can't find a punchline.....
July 2, 2015
Re: Wisconsin GOP 'welcomes' Bernie Sanders with billboards
So very appropriate!
The only change I'd make would be to label them 'Far' Left and 'Way Far' Lefter ... with the backward 'R" for Bernie.
June 29, 2015
Hillary Clinton's Video On Homosexual Marriage
Video from June 24 ... Hillary celebrates 'Gay' marriage (BARF ALERT)
Wikipedia: (Gay) primarily refers to a homosexual person or the trait of being homosexual. The term was originally used to refer to feelings of being "carefree", "happy", or "bright and showy".
Related: Hillary Clinton on Gay Marriage 2004:
"I believe marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman. I have had occasion in my life to defend marriage, to stand up for marriage, to believe in the hard work and challenge of marriage. So I take umbrage at anyone who might suggest that those of us who worry about amending."
Must be another case of depending on what 'is' is ...
On the other hand ... 'what difference does it make (to Hillary ) since truth, facts, and reality are, to her, simply whatever she wants it to be in order to suit her own political purposes!
'The gay marriage debate is not about gay marriage any more than the Confederate flag debate is about racism'
Image below, Barack Obama orders the American People's house to be disrespected by ordering it to be decorated in LGBT colors in celebration of SCOTUS's creation of a right for same-sex marriage by redefining marriage and finding a right in the Constitution that didn't exist.. Do you ever recall Obama bathing the White House in the Stars & Stripes?
First, a little trivia to ponder: As a candidate for president, Obama told Rick Warren's Saddleback Church that marriage could only extend to heterosexual couples ... "I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman," "Now, for me as a Christian -- for me -- for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God's in the mix."
Well, so much for Barack Hussein's Christianity and marriage being a sacred union with 'God in the mix.'
Which sets the stage for making the point that the gay marriage debate is not about gay marriage any more than the Confederate flag is about racism. It's about free speech ... or rather the Left not wanting you to have the right to express it, especially if it conflicts with what Barack Obama and his fellow Leftists want you to think and say..
John Daniel Davidson writes in The Federalist's must-read roundup of reactions to the Supreme Court's same-sex marriage legalization in Friday's Obergefell v. Hodges decision:
"It is not hard to see where this is going. The gay marriage debate is not about gay marriage any more than the Confederate flag debate is about racism. It is about free speech. The court's ruling on gay marriage announces that in due course the First Amendment is to be sacrificed on the altar of the Fourteenth Amendment. Prior to this ruling, bakers and wedding photographers had already suffered fines and the threat of imprisonment for refusing to serve gay customers. Brendan Eich was among the first high-profile CEOs fired for his views on gay marriage, but he will not be the last. Eventually, churches and religious nonprofits will have their tax status threatened if they do not accommodate the new consensus on gay marriage.Read the complete must-read roundup here ...
It is not enough for the Left to live and let live. You must change your mind. You must not hold disfavored views. You must be the right sort of person. If you're not, you will be muzzled. ...
Reactions include those from Newt Gingrich, Mike Lee, Ilya Shapiro, Heather Wilhelm, Hunter Baker, Eric Teetsel, Robby Soave, John Davidson, Rachel Lu, D.C. McAllister, Leslie Loftis, Amy Otto, Daniel Payne, and Benjamin Domenech.
Meanwhile, in the same spirit of redefining one's convictions as Barack Hussein Obama ... professor William Jacobson reminds us (via Mark Hemingway at The Weekly Standard) of this answer Elena Kagan gave to Senator John Cornyn in her confirmation hearings to be Solicitor General in 2009: "There Is No Federal Constitutional Right to Same-Sex Marriage."
Needless to say, as Hemingway reminds us, there was no right to constitutional right to same-sex marriage right up until last week when Kagan joined four other justices on the court in creating one. Appropriately enough, your opinion of whether or not Kagan lied to Congress in her confirmation hearings depends on what the meaning of 'is' is.
Obviously, redefining the definition of 'is' remains a habit of the Left.
Quote of the day from Moonbattery
All people are equal before the law -- or at least they should be. In contrast, all behavior is not equal. Some behavior is wholesome and constructive. Other behavior is pernicious and depraved. A society that loses sight of the difference is doomed.
True colors of the rainbow
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Health Statistics - 2013 - "Sexual orientation - Among all U.S. adults aged 18 and over, 96.6% identified as straight"
What percentage of those 96.6% believe in gay marriage? Percent of Americans who Oppose/Strongly oppose Gay Marriage = 47%. Those who strongly favor/favor = 41%. Source here.
I would be curious to know how those stats have changed since 2009 but am not curious enough to research. America's values seem to have changed. We are more - progressive?
"When we get ready to take the United States we will not take it under the label of communism; we will not take it under the label of socialism. These labels are unpleasant to the American people and have been speared too much. We will take the United States under labels made very lovable; we will take it under liberalism, under progressivism, under democracy. But take it we will." Alexander Trachetenberg, (1885-1966), longtime activist in the Socialist Party of America and later in the Communist Party USA. From a speech in Madison Square Garden in 1944.
1963 - "Communist Goals For America" - #26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
A little reminder - as if we needed it:
The above pictures were posted by Blue's Blog on 6/27 - "I wonder how they all knew? Coincidence? Maybe they all had the same idea at the same time and were able to put all of this in place within hours of the Supreme's legislation ruling on homosexual marriage?
No way was it planned ahead of time. It couldn't have been. Right?"
"You can either stay and be quiet or we will have to take you out!" Hussein Obama
So. Obama was being heckled at a LGBT event by one Jennicet Gutirrez, founding member of Familia TQLM, and an undocumented LGBTQ trans activist from Mexico.
HO - "Hey, listen, you're in the White House, it's not respectful when you get invited....."
Damn, fingers did the talking instead of the brain - what he actually said was - "Hey, listen, you're in my house." And later - "You can either stay and be quiet or we will have to take you out!"
As Keith Koffler notes the Secret Service dutifully removed her albeit rather slowly for some reason or another. All I can say is that Jennicet should be grateful HO does not dispatch drones within "his" house.
To the incident -
To the issue -
Gutirrez - What I was trying to say was for Mr. Obama to release all the LGBTQ detainees in detention centers in addition to stop the abuse and torture the trans woman are facing in detention.
Moderator - Were you concerned that you yourself would be in jeopardy as an undocumented trans activist from Mexico?
Gutirrez - I knew there was a big risk to take but to me, I've always been a risk taker and the message and giving the voice to my community that don't have the voice was more important than facing any consequences.
At this point I will clarify my position on marriage - that it is between one man and one woman. On illegal immigration - I believe it will be the downfall of this country.
On inhumane treatment while being detained awaiting deportation - it is wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong! May the abusers and those who allow this particular atrocity rot in hell for all of eternity.
A FUSION INVESTIGATION - Why did the U.S. lock up these women with men? Read here.
June 26, 2015
Read of the Day on the Redefinition of Marriage
In today's Hyscience pick for the read of the day, C. C. Pecknold, associate professor of theological, social, and political thought at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. wrote two days before today's SCOTUS decision that the redefinition of marriage serves the government leviathan:
"We urgently need to advance a debate about marriage and the limits of government. Our current judicial regime seeks not to recognize marriage but to redefine it on a political basis. In doing so, our government is claiming for itself a power that our Founders explicitly sought to limit. That's the debate we are not having. And not having that debate will eventually mean a loss of freedom for everyone."As Professor Pecknold points out in his piece, when the state recognizes the nature of marriage as something prior to itself, it secures its own limits. Our government no longer is tempted to define the whole of reality.
Professor Pecknold notes in his piece that the most serious and, to his mind, persuasive philosophical and moral arguments against same-sex marriage have been mounted by Robert P. George, Ryan Anderson, and Sherif Girgis in What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense:.
Such arguments are essential to ongoing debate about marriage in this country, not only for those of us who believe that the union of man and woman simply is the definition of marriage but also for those who think that the judicial redefinition of marriage represents a usurpation of politics.Read his entire piece HERE.
Take home point ... via Breitbart ... today's SCOTUS decision (essentially declaring itself God) on the day after declaring Obamacare magically rewritten and that the lawsuits against discrimination in housing require no proof of actual discrimination, the Supreme Court found a unicorn in the 14th Amendment:
[...] in the idolatry of the left, we do not have the freedom to govern ourselves, nor even to rely the old God for our values and truths. Our betters will lead us. And they will grant any right they see fit, and reject any liberty they see fit, and redefine any term they see fit. Democracy in America did not die with jackboots; it died with the boredom and stupidity of an American people complicit in its demise, celebrating the circuses and the games provided by its new rulers, fat and happy in their submission. Let the parades be held; let the call go forth. By the power vested in them by, well, them, the Supreme Court and the left declare Americans husbands and husbands, wives and wives -- and all of them slaves.I get the distinct feeling that all this ever-growing encroachment of government in our lives is not going to end well ... and that we are witnessing an acceleration of our government and our society's slide into ever greater decline, and that reality, tradition, and our cultural values nave no meaning.
I do hope and pray that I'm wrong ...
Question of the Day: 'If John Boehner Was a Democratic Plant, What Would He Be Doing Differently?'
As Jim Hoft points out at Gateway Pundit ... not a damn thing:
[...] John Boehner wouldn't stop funding for Obmaacare.More here ...
John Boehner did nothing about Obama's illegal amnesty.
John Boehner did not slow down spending.
John Boehner does nothing to reach out to conservatives in the House.
John Boehner failed to pass Obamatrade so he brought it back up again.
John Boehner could not care less what conservatives think.
John Boehner has sided with Pelosi and Democrats to push through his unpopular agenda.
... Speaker John Boehner refused to allow conservative Republican amendments to the Obamatrade deal -- But he allowed Democrats to amend the legislation.
There's a reason why 65% of Republican voters think Republicans aren't doing what they promised today.
Because they aren't.
It is, indeed, time for Obama's BFF to step down. Working with Obama to accompany objectives that are also of interest to conservatives is one thing ... however, to consistently outright collaborate against conservative interests is yet quite another!
Related: John Boehner's Coward Complex
As of June 26, 2015 ... True Marriage No Longer Has Real Meaning
Today, June 26, 2015 marks the day that SCOTUS killed marriage as we've known it. Common sense and traditional marriage no longer exists in America. While there will those that celebrate this day, there will also be those that mourn it ... myself among them.
As Justice Anthony Scalia aptly wrote today in his dissent:
"Today's decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact -- and the furthest extension one can even imagine -- of the Court's claimed power to create "liberties" that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.Liberalism's next target ... churches. Is criminalizing Christianity in it's entirity or fobidding churches to decline marrying homosexuals next?
Scalia began his dissent saying that he writes separately to call attention to this Court's threat to American democracy.
(Update) Suggested read: Here's What Supreme Court Says about Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Freedom - Christians can 'continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction' against same-sex marriage, rules Kennedy. [Wonder just how long this claim lasts!]
Alito and Thomas Dissent: 'Constitution Does Not Guarantee Right to Enter into Same-Sex Marriage'
Robed Houdinis: How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America
Brands Join the Gay-Marriage Celebration in Social Media
The Roberts Court renders all laws meaningless as written
June 25, 2015
Walmart Selling Iranian and Cuban Flags ... But Refuses to Sell Confederate Flags
Speaking of political correctness run amuck in collusion with loony leftism ... there's this:
Meanwhile, Walmart has removed "all items" promoting the Confederate flag for sale from its stores and its website.
Muslim Reformist Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser: New York Times 'Indistinguishable From Islamist Media'
When the New York Times becomes indistinguishable from Qatari government Islamist media at Al Jazeera:More on the story at PJ Tatler.
"Right-wing extremists more deadly than Muslim radicals in U.S."
(All the Islamism that's fit to print)
The idiocy of this story and its data will be verified by its reproduction in every Islamist venue around the planet... all the while ISIS and the global jihad spread at home and abroad exponentially.
The NYT speaks volumes as to the lunacy of the Left and their apologist positions for radical Islam and their embrace of Islamism.
Ever wonder why such an affinity for Islam?
Perhaps, as noted at RedState a few months ago, it's because people on the far Left of the political spectrum want to fundamentally transform society, basically doing away with capitalism, restricting speech, and forcing people to obey a strong, central authority (dictator, party, etc.). And as for most Muslims, they want to fundamentally transform society, basically doing away with capitalism, restricting speech, and forcing people to obey a strong, central authority (Allah, the Koran, imams, mullahs, sharia law, etc.).
June 24, 2015
Speaking of Flag Controversies, What About the U.S. Embassy in London Flying the 'LGBT' Rainbow Flag
And they outnumber 'Old Glory' Flags!
Hat tip to Gay Rights folks. Flag out numbering 'Old Glory' at the front of a U.S. Embassy may be unprecedented. pic.twitter.com/u3zJCMgERI— Declan Ganley (@declanganley) June 24, 2015
As Fausta Rodriguez Wertz so aptly points out at Da Tech Guy, the unalienable rights, endowed by our Creator, of all the people of the United States are protected and guaranteed by the Constitution. Whether it's the rainbow flag, the Burmese flag or the Hello Kitty flag, the U.S. Embassy should display the American flag prominently and above any other.
Read of the Day: Thomas Sowell on 'Hillary and History'
So Hillary Rodham 'What Difference Does It Make' Clinton is running for president.
As Thomas Sowell aptly points out, in the most important job she has ever held -- Secretary of State -- American foreign policy has had one setback after another, punctuated by disasters ... and he warns of catastrophic consequences if she is elected president:
There are no offsetting foreign policy triumphs under Secretary of State Clinton. Syria, China and North Korea are other scenes of similar setbacks.Read the whole thing ...
The fact that many people are still prepared to vote for Hillary Clinton to be President of the United States, in times made incredibly dangerous by the foreign policy disasters on her watch as Secretary of State, raises painful questions about this country.
A President of the United States -- any president -- has the lives of more than 300 million Americans in his or her hands, and the future of Western civilization. If the debacles and disasters of the Obama administration have still not demonstrated the irresponsibility of choosing a president on the basis of demographic characteristics, it is hard to imagine what could.
With our enemies around the world arming while we are disarming, such self-indulgent choices for president can leave our children and grandchildren a future that will be grim, if not catastrophic.
Meanwhile I say to myself, surely the American people can't really be so uniformed and stupid as to elect Hillary Clinton as president. Then, almost in the same thought I recall ... they elected the far-Left, radically racist (Michelle Obama as well), racially divisive,anti-Christian, pro-Muslim and pro=Iranian, idealogue Barack Obama not just once - but twice.
Hysteria Over Confederate Battle Flag Causing Sales To Rise Through The Roof (Updated)
According to Business Insider, prior to Amazon.com stopping the selling of the Conferate battle flag at 2:30 PM Eastern time today, sales of the Confederate battle flag had shot up 4,000% over the previous 24 hours.
Rick Moran notes at PJ Media that he's still trying to find the logic of using the tragedy in Charleston to set off this hysteria against an icon that barely has a tangential relationship to the killings:
[...] About the only thing I can come up with is that the reason the campaign to bury the Confederate battle flag is happening is because it can. The people pushing it have the power so why not exercise it? I would like to see a campaign to ban the image of Che Guevara. I mean, if we're going to go around banning symbols of hate and murder, you can't do better than banning the image of a man who is personally responsible for thousands of deaths due to his unreasoning hatred and bloodlust.Lots of luck Rick on finding the logic of the liberal's hysteria. As Daniel Greenfield aptly points out, political correctness is what happens when reason dies:
Che's image may not grace the capitol grounds of a state, but its iconic presence in liberal politics is undeniable. If flying the Confederate battle flag is an indication of racism, then wearing the image of the mass-murdering Che indicates support for violence and hate, right?
[...] There isn't a conflict between liberals and leftists over political correctness. Instead there's a conflict between older white establishment leftists and younger minority social justice activists over their relative power and positions within the left. This conflict is being fought using the rules of identity politics which are deliberately structured to delegitimize and silence white men.Let there be no doubt that liberal-progressivism has brought our nation to point in whichl logic and reason no longer play a part in our political discourse and especially our politician's thoughts and decision making.
This is yet another evolution of the term 'political correctness' whose history both Voegeli and Chait trace. It's not the political correctness experienced by an employee fired after a social justice warrior lynch mob pounces on him on social media and, if the 51 percent of Democrats and liberals had their way, tried, sentenced and sent to jail. It's an internecine leftist power struggle. ...
[...] Obama uses the language of the liberal, referencing civil rights, FDR and American history, while governing like a radical. And as Voegeli also points out, that's not a new phenomenon, when FDR made "your typical hashtag campaign fanatic" resemble "a bashful centrist".Americans don't like radicals. More Americans would refuse to vote for a Socialist than for a Muslim or gay political candidate. But the Socialist can still win as long as he pretends to be a liberal moderate rather than a radical leftist.
The hybrid leftist-liberal works within the system when it comes to rhetoric, but not in reality. Obama tours the country giving speeches in which he implores Congress to do something or work with him while he ignores Congress and rules unilaterally. But Obama wouldn't be getting away with this if his attitude didn't reflect the hypocrisy of how self-defined liberals actually think and act.
A handful of liberals like Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz have been willing to call out Obama's abuses of power. They are notable mainly for raising topics of process that the rest mostly ignore.
As for racism and hate crimes, Bill O'Reilly, puts both in perspective, and nails it:
Meanwhile, during the time it takes to remove the Confederate flag from public places, you can bet your life that the liberal-progressive race hustlers will find something else to be offended at. Next thing you know liberals will be wanting military bases named after Confederate generals to be renamed.
Oops ... that's already happening.
Suggested read: History books, the media, the school systems, etc abound in falsehoods and inaccuracies of Confederate and Southern history. This fact sheet will help to clarify and dispell some of these rampant inaccuracies.
Related: From Charleston to Fort Hood