Obama’s Benghazi Cover-Up Scandal Far, FAR Worse Than Nixon’s Watergate Cover-Up EVER Was.

First of all, do you know what the Watergate cover-up was about?

You probably don’t.

Most people – misinformed as they are by a mainstream media propaganda operation that is second only to the Nazi’s Ministry of Propaganda – believe that Nixon’s infamous “Plumbers” Unit was sent into the Watergate Hotel to look for information that would help his re-election campaign.  That is simply false.

So what were Nixon’s “Plumbers” looking for?

Late June-July 1971: Nixon Authorizes ‘Plumbers,’ Orders Media Leaks to Smear Ellsberg

 

President Nixon authorizes the creation of a “special investigations unit,” later nicknamed the “Plumbers,” to root out and seal media leaks. The first target is Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers to the press (see June 13, 1971); the team will burglarize the office of Ellsberg’s psychiatrist, Dr. Lewis Fielding, in hopes of securing information that the White House can use to smear Ellsberg’s character and undermine his credibility (see September 9, 1971). Nixon aide John Ehrlichman, who supervises the “Plumbers,” will later say that the Ellsberg burglary is “the seminal Watergate episode.” Author Barry Werth will later write, “[L]ike all original sins, it held the complete DNA of subsequent misdeeds.” During the upcoming court battle over the documents, Nixon tells his aide Charles Colson: “We’ve got a countergovernment here and we’ve got to fight it. I don’t give a damn how it’s done. Do whatever has to be done to stop those leaks.… I don’t want to be told why it can’t be done.” Whatever damaging information the “Plumbers” can find on Ellsberg will be itself leaked to the press, Nixon says. “Don’t worry about his trial [referring to Ellsberg’s arrest on conspiracy and espionage charges (see June 28, 1971) ]. Just get everything out. Try him in the press… leak it out.” [Werth, 2006, pp. 84-87]

The Plumbers were looking for dirt to smear Daniel Ellsberg, who had leaked the Pentagon Papers.

Here’s the thing: what did the Pentagon Papers reveal?  Who – or perhaps it is more appropriate to ask, which administration – did the Pentagon Papers indict?  The boldfaced type provides the answer:

Daniel Ellsberg is a former U.S. Marine and military analyst who precipitated a constitutional crisis in 1971 when he released the “Pentagon Papers.” The papers comprised the U.S. military’s account of theater activities during the Vietnam War. Ellsberg released top secret documents to The New York Times. His release of the Pentagon Papers succeeded in substantially eroding public support for the Vietnam War. A succession of related events, including Watergate, eventually led to President Richard M. Nixon’s resignation.

The Pentagon Papers were mostly an indictment of the Democratic administration of Lyndon B. Johnson, but they fed the Nixon administration’s preoccupation with finding information and document leakers. They eventually led to the secret White House “Plumbers” group and then to Watergate. In its turn, Watergate led to the first resignation of an American president, Richard M. Nixon. The Pentagon Papers contained plans to invade Vietnam, even though President Johnson had told the public that he had no intention to stage an invasion.

The simple fact of history – despite all the lies that the liberal ideologues have told masquerading as “journalists” – is that Richard Nixon was watching a liberal media campaign based on anonymous leaks erode and undermine U.S. foreign policy that had been approved by successive DEMOCRAT administrations (i.e., both the Kennedy and the Johnson administrations).  Barack Obama notwithstanding, American presidents have the duty to GOVERN and LEAD based on actual REALITY.  Both Republican and DEMOCRAT presidents who had sat in the Oval Office had made the tough calls based on the best intelligence ANY American will ever have access to.  And Nixon was watching the mainstream media communist fascists undermine that policy with a campaign of illegal leaks to selectively embarrass and ultimately undermine and cause the military defeat of the United States of America.

The Pentagon Papers documented that the DEMOCRAT LBJ administration had done some despicable things in their conduct of carrying out the Vietnam War.  They did NOT indict the Nixon administration:

The Pentagon Papers, officially titled United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967: A Study Prepared by the Department of Defense, is a United States Department of Defense history of the United States‘ political-military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. The papers were first brought to the attention of the public on the front page of The New York Times in 1971

The Nixon presidency did not begin until 1969.

It’s amazing how history damns Democrats again and again and again.  The Civil War was waged against the United States by DEMOCRATS.  The Klu Klux Klan was the terrorist arm of the DEMOCRAT Party.  Prior to the Vietnam War – which had “DEMOCRAT” written all over it – Harry Truman’s incompetence and stupidity literally caused the Korean War in which nearly 60,000 Americans miserably perished.  History reveals that Harry Truman first refused to give weapons to the South Korean government, which emboldened the communist North which was armed to the teeth with the most sophisticated Soviet and Chinese weaponry:

Both Rhee and Kim Il Sung wanted to unite the Korean peninsula under their respective governments, but the United States refused to give South Korea any heavy weapons in order to ensure that its military could only be used for preserving internal order and self-defense. By contrast, Pyongyang was well-equipped with Soviet aircraft and tanks.

History reveals that Harry Truman then proceeded to massively screw up by failing to list South Korea in their zone of protection which gave North Korea, the USSR and China the green light to attack the South:

But just because he did not include South Korea as part of his “defensive perimeter,” it was said later on that such omission had served to give the communists “the green light” to try to overrun Korea.

Emboldened by the exclusion of South Korea from the American defense line in the Pacific zone in the so-called Acheson Declaration, Kim Il-sung decided to launch an outright invasion of the South

Just as history also reveals that Harry Truman – in a pattern that has characterized Democrat administrations for decade after decade – disarmed and weakened America so that we were in no shape to fight anybody anywhere which further emboldened our enemies.

All that the Democrat fiasco in Vietnam was was a longstanding continuation of Democrat fiascos that ultimately included Bill Clinton disarming America and inviting the 9/11 attacks before Bush prior to Obama baring America’s throat to terrorist attacks after Bush.

As much as you want to dump your hate on Richard Nixon, his crime was that he was trying to protect a Democrat administration in order to protect American foreign policy.  And he was trying to expose a dishonest and corrupt media propaganda operation.  And he himself used corrupt and dishonest tactics to accomplish those goals.  And he got busted.  By the very liberal communist fascist rat bastard pseudo-”journalists” who were selectively illegally leaking classified government documents in order to bring about America’s defeat in the Vietnam War.

We now know that Barack Obama is the kind of Chicago thug who criminally used the IRS to target his political opponents.  The word “Nixonian” doesn’t begin to do Obama’s thug tactics justice.  You have to call it “Obamian.”  And if the crap that Obama is pulling doesn’t qualify as “enemies list” garbage, then NOTHING does.

We also know that Obama has his lapdog Kathleen Sabelius ILLEGALLY shaking down businesses to coerce them to give money for ObamaCare (see also here).  It is specifically illegal for someone in such an official capacity to strongarm businesses that you are regulating and asking them for money.  Democrats were besides themselves with frothing rage when Reagan did something like this to get around specific Congressional refusal to fund a program during Iran-Contra.  And they passed a law to criminalize it.  Just as they passed laws criminalizing the Watergate crap that Obama just pulled.  Again, this is Obamaian – because it goes beyond “Nixonian.”

This thug Obama is a demon-possessed criminal who has contaminated the White House beyond repair.  He is the epitome of what his cockroach pastor for 23 years railed when he said, “No, no, no!  NOT God bless America.  God DAMN America!”

But let’s get back to Benghazi.  We now know that the Obama administration engaged in a cover-up.  We know that they tried to cover-up their abysmal, incompetent failure before the 9/11 (2012) attack against the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.  We know that they tried to cover-up their abysmal, cowardly failure during the attack to bring any U.S. assets to bear to help the Americans – including the first U.S. Ambassador to be killed in the line of duty since the failed Carter years – who ultimately perished during the attack.  And we most certainly know that they tried to cover-up the crystal-clear connection to terrorists and al Qaeda.

Obama claims that he called the Benghazi attack an “act of terror” the next day.  Bullcrap.

Obama supporters (read, “dishonest lying weasels”) claim that Obama called the Benghazi attack an “act of terror” the day after the attack. Right. And I called Obama an honest man and a good leader. Obama had just referred to the 9/11/2001 attacks – which even Obama would call “acts of terror” – immediately prior to his statement that “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation.” There is absolutely NO reason – grammatical or logical – to believe that Obama was referring to the attack against the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi with that reference. And Obama went on to PROVE that he wasn’t referring to the Benghazi attack as an “act of terror” by going out and repeatedly claiming that it was NOT an act of terror, but a mob protest gone bad over a Youtube video. Which it was NOT.

Here’s the thing: the very same NIGHT that Obama gave that speech above – at an event memorializing the 9/11/2001 attacks – he gave an interview to 60 minutes.  Let’s look at a snippet from that interview:

KROFT: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya Attack, do you believe that this was a terrorism attack?

OBAMA: Well it’s too early to tell exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.

KROFT: It’s been described as a mob action, but there are reports that they were very heavily armed with grenades, that doesn’t sound like your normal demonstration.

OBAMA: As I said, we’re still investigating exactly what happened, I don’t want to jump the gun on this. But your right that this is not a situation that was exactly the same as what happened in Egypt. And my suspicion is there are folks involved in this. Who were looking to target Americans from the start. So we’re gonna make sure that our first priority is to get our folks out safe, make sure our embassies are secured around the world and then we are going to go after those folks who carried this out.

So CBS stated as a FACT that Obama “went out of his way to avoid the use of the word terrorism” and Obama clearly continued to avoid using the word “terrorism.”  And if “it was still too early to tell” if it was an act of terror” the night AFTER he gave the speech in which he now claims that he claimed that it WAS an act of terror, well, you see the pretzel Obama twisted the truth in.  Which pretty much proves that when Obama later said he DID call it “terrorism” was a lie.  A lie from a serial liar.  And what we have had was a cover-up by the Obama administration from the very start. 

And why did Obama attempt this cover-up?  Was it for the sake of the previous Republican administration the way Nixon tried to protect the previous Democrat administration?  Nope.  Obama has demonstrated that he is a vicious partisan ideologue who would NEVER lift a finger to ever do anything but demonize and slander the Bush administration.  Was it to protect U.S. foreign policy?  Nope.  Obama was two months from an election and the only thing he was trying to protect was his own scrawny political neck.

Republicans pointed out the TRUTH from the outset. They said the very DAY that Susan Rice went out on all five major Sunday morning political programs and repeatedly lied to the American people that “Most people don’t bring rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons to a demonstration.”  Which was obvious to anyone who wasn’t a demon-possessed Obama ideologue.

But as a whole, we know that the Chicago thug Obama administration and the mainstream media thug propaganda were on the same damn page.

The funny thing is that the Chicago thug Obama administration, the Democrat Party propaganda machine and the mainstream media cockroaches are all frantically claiming that there’s nothing to see in any Benghazi investigation because the Republicans are trying to politicize it.  Here’s the thing: these Democrat roaches have just been caught RED-HANDED “politicizing” Benghazi from the very first moments:

WASHINGTON — Political considerations influenced the talking points that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice used five days after the deadly Sept. 11 assault in Benghazi, Libya, with State Department and other senior administration officials asking that references to terror groups and prior warnings be deleted, according to department emails.

The latest disclosures Friday raised new questions about whether the Obama administration tried to play down any terrorist factor in the attack on a diplomatic compound just weeks before the November presidential election. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed when insurgents struck the U.S. mission in two nighttime attacks.

The White House has insisted that it made only a “stylistic” change to the intelligence agency talking points from which Rice suggested on five Sunday talk shows that demonstrations over an anti-Islamic video devolved into the Benghazi attack.

Numerous agencies had engaged in an email discussion about the talking points that would be provided to members of Congress and to Rice for their public comments. In one email, then-State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland worried about the effect of openly discussing earlier warnings about the dangers of Islamic extremists in Benghazi.

Nuland’s email said such revelations “could be abused by members of Congress to beat the State Department for not paying attention to (central intelligence) agency warnings,” according to a congressional official who reviewed the 100 pages of emails.

Which is to say that the Obama State Department falsified the truth and engaged in the very FIRST act of “politicizing.”  They literally admit here to altering the facts so their opponents won’t be able to point out that they were incompetent fools.  Which the facts now prove that they very clearly were.

Obama had a completely bogus narrative that, because he had been the president when we got Osama bin Laden, that somehow he had decimated al Qaeda and the War on Terror was over.  Obama stated that as a fact again and again and again prior to the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi planned and carried out to correspond with the anniversary of the 9/11 attack against America in 2001.

The official liar of the Obama Administration, Press Secretary Jay Carney, had told the American people this:

“The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two, of these two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility,’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate,” Mr. Carney said on Nov. 28.

We now know that like everything ELSE the most dishonest administration in American history has claimed, that this was a pure lie.  We now know that the talking points went through a DOZEN revisions in order to falsely scrub any connection to al Qaeda or terrorism in order to “support” the Obama lie that the attack was a protest over a video gone bad.  We now know that CIA director (and war hero) David Petraeus was “frustrated” and “surprised” by Obama’s whitewash and distortion of the Benghazi talking points.  Just as the number two man in Libya who clearly KNEW what had actually happened said “my jaw hit the floor” when he heard Susan Rice repeatedly report the Obama lie again and again and again and again and again five days after the attack.

We now know that – contrary to the Barack Obama White House and the Hillary Clinton State Department official lies – that the intelligence IMMEDIATELY claimed that the Benghazi attack was a planned, coordinated terrorist attack by an al Qaeda-linked terrorist group.  And we now know that Obama and Clinton deliberately falsified the intelligence and lied to the American people to cover their own incompetence and their own political aspirations.

Obama lied, Americans died.  Clinton lied, Americans died.  Unlike anything that happened during Watergate. Pat Smith, whose son Sean was murdered, is furious because Hillary Clinton looked her right in the eye and lied to her.  She now says, “She has her child.  I don’t have mine because of her.”  Americans died for Obama’s and Clinton’s sins.

But let’s forget all about Pat Smith’s pain.  After all, as Jay Carney claimed, “It happened a long time ago” (after eight months of delay and cover-ups).  And of course Hillary Clinton exlaimed, “What difference at this point does it make?” 

Susan Rice and Jay Carney need to go to prison – along with these IRS thugs - for their official lies and participation in an obvious cover-up.  Barack Obama needs to be impeached for his high crimes.  And Hillary Clinton needs to never show her face in public again.

Why I’m Done Watching Professional Sports. Period.

I’m through.

Back in 2009 I said I was through with the NFL after it basically said that forcing dogs to fight each other in bloody matches and then viciously killing the ones that weren’t vicious enough was fine.  And the only unpardonable sin in their eyes was being a political conservative.  And I’ve made good on my word; the only football I’ve watched since has been college.

And, of course, I still had my basketball and my hockey, right?

Well, wrong as of recently.

First the NHL all but bent over so the first openly gay hockey player could sodomize the whole league.  And then we had our first male openly homosexual player celebrated for issuing a statement that he likes it in the rear.

Me, I just wanted to watch sports.  I didn’t want to get lectured about accepting, embracing and celebrating homosexuality.

I looked in vain through the rule books of all the major sports.  There was NOTHING about that garbage in any of them.

But boy – as in “gay boys in bondage” – have professional sports ever changed since I was a kid.

My first thought when Jason Collins “came out” was that at least he didn’t play for any of the teams I root for (I couldn’t care less about the Washington Wizards and I utterly despise the Boston Celtics).  But Kobe Bryant blew that up.  The man who most represents the heart and the soul of the Los Angeles Lakers – my favorite team since Jerry West was a guard rather than the NBA logo – tweeted the following:

Proud of @jasoncollins34. Don’t suffocate who u r because of the ignorance of others #courage #support #mambaarmystandup #BYOU

“The ignorance of others”??? 

Does God know He’s “ignorant”???

I suppose I’m supposed to forget that Bryant was once accused of rape.  I suppose that I’m supposed to forget that he cheated on his wife and that he revealed his own latent homosexuality by sodomizing the woman he cheated on his wife with.  And having forgotten all that I’m supposed to regard Kobe Bryant as a moral authority.

I mean, if the perp says I’m ignorant, then I’m clearly ignorant.

I wonder if Tiger Woods – whose behavior was recently endorsed by President Obama – has offered his own support of Collins’ homosexuality?  You KNOW if he hasn’t the only reason is because his publicist advised him to stay on the down-low on this one.

Professional sports is now like Nazi Germany – the first culture to warp sports into depraved political statements celebrating warped ideologies – you just can’t get away from the crap they’re pimping.

It’s kind of funny, if by “funny” you mean “twisted and warped”; a couple of years ago sports writers were questioning Tim Tebow and asking the question for our consideration:  “Should Tebow be so flamboyant about his faith? Should Americans keep their religious beliefs to themselves?”

CHRISTIANS are “flamboyant”???  Seriously?  I mean, dang, if you even like to SAY the word “flamboyant” there’s a pretty good chance you’re a homosexual.

And in today’s culture, it is a no-no to talk about your Christian faith.  You should keep embarrasing junk like that to yourself.  But if you want to come out and tell the world you love to be sodomized by another man after sucking his weenie for him first, well, expect a call from the president of the United States congratulating you.  And expect to be praised and celebrated by pretty much anybody who is anybody in today’s depraved culture.

I’m done with sports.

I saw an article in the Los Angeles Times that like most Los Angeles Times articles was so full of crap the paper ought to just be printed on dung.  The print version title was “2 views of gay NBA player.”

Make it ONE view that homosexuality is just neat and one utter mischaracterization of the despised view that it’s even possible there could be anything wrong with it.

Anyway, the two quotes from this piece of propaganda gibberish representing the “two views” are as follows:

“We have a lot less tolerance for people who make reactionary statements like Mr. Broussard,” Hilliard said, referring to ESPN television commentator Chris Broussard, who said Monday that, because of his religious beliefs, he did not condone homosexuality.

And let’s not omit the “Christian” view (at least “Christian” according to the Los Angeles Times:

All but one player agreed. “I’m a Christian,” said 17-year-old Jordan Bryant. “But I also feel that God created you to be what you can be. If He created you with an intent to like another male, then that is what you were created to be.”

Well, let’s first think about what Hilliard said.  If you have religious beliefs that in any way prevent you from celebrating sodomy, you are making “reactionary statements.”

Since when?  You know, given the fact that there was not ONE SINGLE CIVILIZATION IN ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY that embraced homosexuality.  You know, given the entirety of Western Civilization, upon which our own culture comes from, which specifically CONDEMNS homosexuality.  And, you know, given the thousands of years of Judeo-Christian tradition that our society is similarly based upon.

When did it become cool to describe Moses and St. Paul as “reactionary”???

How did the militant homosexual agenda that has been gaining ground for something like the last twenty years suddenly erase all previous human history???

And how did the militant homosexual agenda somehow sneak past even the Darwinian evolutionary view that homosexuality represents a complete dead-end for any species which embraces it???

It is frankly amazing.

And now let me turn to the words of this idiot named Jordan Bryant who has the moral idiocy to say “I’m a Christian” followed by a sentiment that comes right out of the place that God famously vaporized for wickedness.

When did what the Bible clearly and emphatically states become irrelevant to “Christianity”???

Leviticus 18:22 – “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.”

Leviticus 20:13 – “If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”

Romans 1:26-27 – “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.”

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 – “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

Famed pastor John MacArthur has publicly declared that Romans chapter one is the official platform of the Democratic Party.  But just to make sure there is no place one can go to get away from it, it is also the official platform of most newspapers, most TV stations, Hollywood, and now all the professional sports leagues.

I’m going to be – in Kobe Bryant’s words – “ignorant” on this subject.  I’m going to side with God and let the rest of culture be damned.

What is the saddest thing of all is that most people who call themselves “Christians” are nearly as ignorant – and they truly ARE “ignorant” – as that 17-year-old Jordan Bryant idiot.  The Bible tells us NOT to participate in the world, the flesh and the devil.  But we’ve dived in and immersed ourselves in it.

We ought to be BOYCOTTING it.

Instead, the only ones who do any actual boycotting are the left who boycott anything that DOESN’T represent the world, the flesh and the devil.

As for me, I am done watching professional sports. ALL of them.

This is the culture just before the coming of the beast.  Soon, the world will be worshiping him and accepting his mark on their right hands or on their foreheads.

And I’ll be in heaven with my “ignorant” Savior watching the world descend into literal hell on earth before the REAL hell comes upon them.

Yet Another Vile Liberal (And Is There Any Other Kind?) Busted For Faking Hate Crimes Against Conservatives

I have detailed several examples of this crap on my blog.  There was the case of the liberal who vandalized a Democrat headquarters in Colorado in a deliberate effort to blame Republicans.  I recounted the case of a liberal woman who literally carved swastikas on her own body in an attempt to frame innocent people for a bogus “hate crime.”  There was the case of a liberal public school employee who started a movement to brand Tea Party protestors as racist bigots by encourging liberals to infiltrate the movement with hateful signs.  I have also pointed out that the media is now INFAMOUS for screeching hate against the Tea Party when they have done NOTHING wrong even as they have continually covered up the liberal and Democrat-praised Occupy Movement whose members have been arrested going on eight-thousand times for crimes including rape and actual terrorism.  I’ve documented that we can go back to Saul Alinsky encouraging liberal demonstrators to show up at Republican events wearing KKK outfits to falsely insinuate that racists are pro-Republican.

It doesn’t even matter to Democrats that they steal their targets from the Nazis.  These people are THAT wicked.

The leftist-owned mainstream media is all over this: they falsely accuse conservatives all the damn time at the very highest levels.  And of course they are joined by uber-Democrat Nancy Pelosi.

I’ve pointed out that this is so damn typical of the left it is beyond unreal.  And documented cases of where liberals tried to pull their crap off on me.

This crap happens all the time on the part of the left because they are bad people with no morals and no decency and no integrity and no honor whatsoever.

At least this one got busted (Note that this psychotic fraud is an “award-winning” blogger from a known liberal and pro-Democrat Party organizaton):

Lib Blogger Meg Lanker Allegedly Faked Rape Threat from Conservative
By Howard Portnoy | May 02, 2013 | 14:55

If you can’t beat ‘em, frame ‘em. That in a nutshell would appear to be the motivation behind Think Progress award-winning blogger Meg Lanker-Simons’s false claim that she had been threatened with a hate crime via social media. On Wednesday, she was charged by University of Wyoming Police with faking her own threat.

Trib.com reports that Lanker-Simons was charged with interfering in a police investigation, which is a misdemeanor. University police say that Lanker-Simons admitted to authoring an anonymous threat of sexual violence targeted at her on Facebook last week.

---

Lanker-Simons accused an anonymous source of posting a threat of rape on the Facebook page ‘UW Crushes’ on April 24. But the citation issued Monday claims Lanker-Simons admitted to making the post, then lying about it….

The post, purported to be the work of an out-of-control conservative detractor, read:

I want to hatef**k Meg Lanker — so hard. That chick that runs her liberal mouth all the time and doesn’t care who knows it. I think its [sic] hot and it makes me angry. One night with me and she’s gonna be a good Republican b**ch.

Trib.com notes that Lanker-Simons has been in similar situations in the past. She reported receiving a death threat via email in March 2011 just before syndicated columnist Ann Coulter was to visit the University of Wyoming.

The message, which was emailed to the Star-Tribune, read, “If I see her I will send her to Hell with one shot and you can bet I wont [sic] miss.”

Cross-posted from Liberty Unyielding.

And by “busted” I mean “arrested” by the police:

Liberal Blogger Cited For Allegedly Faking Facebook Rape Threat And Blaming It On Conservative
May 1, 2013 by Ben Bullard

A liberal University of Wyoming student who routinely berates conservatives on her blog and college radio show has been charged for allegedly staging an anonymous rape threat against herself and attributing it to a fictitious conservative Facebook poster.

Meg Lanker-Simons, whose cognitive dissonance blog last year even garnered her an honor from liberal spigots Mother Jones and Think Progress, was cited by University of Wyoming police for interference with an investigation and making false statements to the police department, following this rape threat she allegedly made against herself on the “UW Crushes” Facebook page, posing as a close-minded conservative creep:

I want to hate f**k Meg Lanker-Simons so hard. That chick that runs her liberal mouth all the time and doesn’t care who knows it. I think its hot and it makes me angry. One night with me and shes gonna be a good Republican bit*h.

The threat gave Lanker-Simons, pictured, the opportunity to scold the allegedly phony, would-be “hate f**ker” on her award-winning blog, where she called the threat “disgusting, misogynistic, and apparently something the admins of this page think is a perfectly acceptable sentiment.”

In 2011, Lanker-Simons reported she’d received an emailed death threat, which was allegedly timed to coincide with a campus visit from conservative columnist Ann Coulter.

“The message, which listed Lanker-Simon’s address and included a description of her car, was emailed to the Star-Tribune,” reported the Casper Star Tribune of the 2011 incident.

H/T: campusreform.org

These liberals are demon-possessed people.  There is no other way around it.

Liberals are people who live in a world of lies.  They are people who prefer lies and hate the truth.  Falsely slandering conservatives is merely the next logical step to actualizing the world of  lies that they live in.

And the demon-possessed mainstream media propagandists are on their side.

Don’t Mention The Name Of Jesus Christ In Obama’s Fascist Military. God Damn America!!!

I have been predicting (see here and here and here and here and here) that the United States military was going to hell for years now. 

Well, it is virtually official now:

Pentagon: Religious Proselytizing is Not Permitted
By Todd Starnes
April 30, 2013

Religious liberty groups have grave concerns after they learned the Pentagon is vetting its guide on religious tolerance with a group that compared Christian evangelism to “rape” and advocated that military personnel who proselytize should be court martialed.

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation is calling on the Air Force to enforce a regulation that they believe calls for the court martial of any service member caught proselytizing.

President Mikey Weinstein and others from his organization met privately with Pentagon officials on April 23. He said U.S. troops who proselytize are guilty of sedition and treason and should be punished – by the hundreds if necessary – to stave off what he called a “tidal wave of fundamentalists.”

“Someone needs to be punished for this,” Weinstein told Fox News. “Until the Air Force or Army or Navy or Marine Corps punishes a member of the military for unconstitutional religious proselytizing and oppression, we will never have the ability to stop this horrible, horrendous, dehumanizing behavior.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, told Fox News he was stunned that the Pentagon would be taking counsel and advice from the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.

“Why would military leadership be meeting with one of the most rabid atheists in America to discuss religious freedom in the military,” Perkins said. “That’s like consulting with China on how to improve human rights.”

The FRC has launched a petition drive urging Defense Sec. Chuck Hagel to protect the religious freedom of troops “and not to proceed with the purge of religion within the ranks called for by anti-Christian activists.”

Pentagon officials met with Weinstein and his group were to discuss a policy called “Air Force Culture, Air Force Standards,” published on Aug. 7, 2012.

Section 2.11 requires “government neutrality regarding religion.”

“Leaders at all levels must balance constitutional protections for an individual’s free exercise of religion or other personal beliefs and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion,” the regulation states.

Military leaders were admonished not to use their position to “promote their personal religious beliefs to their subordinates or to extend preferential treatment for any religion.”

Weinstein said it’s time for the Air Force to enforce the regulation – with zeal.

“If a member of the military is proselytizing in a manner that violates the law, well then of course they can be prosecuted,” he said. “We would love to see hundreds of prosecutions to stop this outrage of fundamentalist religious persecution.”

He compared the act of proselytizing to rape.

“It is a version of being spiritually raped and you are being spiritually raped by fundamentalist Christian religious predators,” he told Fox News.

He said there is a time and a place for those in uniform to share their faith – but he took issues with fundamentalism that he says is causing widespread problems in the military.

“When those people are in uniform and they believe there is no time, place or manner in which they can be restricted from proselytizing, they are creating tyranny, oppression, degradation, humiliation and horrible, horrible pain upon members of the military,” he said.

Perkins said the military regulations have “Weinstein’s fingerprints all over it.”

“It threatens to treat service members caught witnessing as enemies of the state,” he said, referring to a Washington Post article highlighting Weinstein’s meeting with Pentagon officials. “Non-compliance, the Pentagon suggests, even from ordained chaplains could result in court-martialing on a case-by-case basis.”

The Pentagon confirmed to Fox News that Christian evangelism is against regulations.

“Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense, LCDR Nate Christensen said in a written statement. He declined to say if any chaplains or service members had been prosecuted for such an offense.

“Court martials and non-judicial punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis and it would be inappropriate to speculate on the outcome in specific cases,” he said.

Ron Crews, the executive director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, warns that the Air Force policy would “significantly impact the religious liberties of Air Force personnel.”

“Saying that a service member cannot speak of his faith is like telling a service member he cannot talk about his spouse or children,” Crews said. “I do not think the Air Force wants to ban personnel from protected religious speech, and I certainly hope that it is willing to listen to the numerous individuals and groups who protect military religious liberty without demonizing service members.”

In an interview with the Washington Post, Weinstein called proselytizing a “national security threat.”

“And what the Pentagon needs to understand is that it is sedition and treason,” he told the newspaper. “It should be punished.”

Perkins said it was troubling the Obama Administration would place so much trust in someone like Weinstein.

“Unfortunately, it appears our military is on a forced march away from the very freedoms they are sworn to protect,” he said. “This language from Weinstein that Christians who share their faith or offer comfort to others from their faith in Jesus Christ is “sedition and treason” is a treasonous statement in and of itself.”

But Weinstein said they count thousands of Protestants among their ranks – and said they are simply going after fundamentalists.

“As soon as we find a fundamentalist Muslim, atheist, Jewish person or anybody else, we will be happy to fight them – but so far they have been few and far between,” he said.

Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Jerry Boykin, an executive vice president with the Family Research Council, told Fox News that he’s deeply concerned by what he call a pattern of attacks on Christianity within the military.

“Mickey Weinstein has a very visceral hated of Christianity and those who are Christians,” he said. “He’d like to see it eliminated from the military entirely.”

If the Air Force policy is implemented, Boykin said Christians who speak of their faith “could now be prosecuted as enemies of the state.”

“This has the potential to destroy military recruiting across the services as Americans realize that their faith will be suppressed by joining the military,” Boykin said.

In the meantime, Weinstein and his group said they will continue to push for the Pentagon to fully implement its ban on proselytizing.

“There is a time, place and manner in which proselytizing is not only allowed, but it’s something we support among our Christian clients,” Weinstein said. “However, you can’t scream fire in a crowded theater and you can’t scream Jesus in a crowded theater at certain times, places, and in certain manners.”

As we speak, a Christian was just sentenced to death in Iran.  His crime?  Being a Christian.  Which of course makes rabid atheists like Weinstein happy.  He wants Iran to come to America and do unto the Christians as Iran is doing unto them.  Apparently Obama agrees.

Just today, we’ve got a Christian in North Korea being sentenced to fifteen years of hard labor.  What was his crime?  Being a Christian.  And the vicious communist monsters in North Korea view being a Christian exactly the same way that Weinstein views them: as seditious traitors.

There is a 100% correlation between “state atheism” and the most inhuman and murderous form of communism.  I have repeatedly documented that fact:

Obama And His Liberal Fascists Want To Ban Guns. Why Don’t We Ban Anti-Christian Worldviews Instead?

How Secular Humanists And Progressive Liberals Have Always Exempted Themselves From The Darwinian Evolution They Inflict On Everybody Else

Secular Humanist Left So ‘Tolerant’ They Want To Purge Anyone Who Isn’t Just Like Them

Where Economic Marxism – And LIBERALISM – Truly Comes From: Hostility Toward God And Religion

In yet another article, I document:

We’ve seen the kinds of places that Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and numerous other atheists yearn for: they’re called “re-education camps,” and they come only from officially state atheist societies:

State atheism has been defined as the official “promotion of atheism” by a government, typically by active suppression of religious freedom and practice.^[1]

State promotion of atheism as a public norm was first practised during a brief period in Revolutionary France. Only communist states and socialist states have done so since.

And it is no coincidence that these communist officially state atheist societies have murdered more human beings during peacetime than have been killed in all the wars in history.

Or take the Nazis. Please, as they say.

So now it is an official crime against the state to say the name of Jesus?

State atheists like Weinstein are guilty of murdering more than 100 million of their own people.  During peacetime.  I’d call THAT “horrible, horrendous, dehumanizing behavior.”  But atheists like Mikey Weinstein would just call it another day at the office.

Atheist Mao murdered 45 million people in just four years - again during PEACETIME.  Atheist Joseph Stalin signed mass death warrants late into the night and murdered tens of millions - during peacetime.

Let’s consider these TRUE monsters words.  Let’s consider the worldview of state atheism:

Joseph Stalin said:

“One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.”

Chairman Mao said:

LEE EDWARDS, CHAIRMAN, VICTIMS OF COMMUNISM MEMORIAL FOUNDATION: In 1959 to 1961 was the so-called “great leap forward” which was actually a gigantic leap backwards in which he tried to collectivize and communize agriculture.

And they came to him after the first year and they said, “Chairman, five million people have died of famine.” He said, “No matter, keep going.” In the second year, they came back and they said, “Ten million Chinese have died.” He said, “No matter, continue.” The third year, 20 million Chinese have died. And he said finally, “Well, perhaps this is not the best idea that I’ve ever had.”

CHANG: When he was told that, you know, his people were dying of starvation, Mao said, “Educate the peasants to eat less. Thus they can benefit – they can fertilize the land.”

Versus Abraham Lincoln, who said:

… that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

But America has made its choice.

This is Obama’s God damn America, just as I have been saying over and over.  One day every Democrat baby-murdering queer sodomy-lover will one day burn in hell.

And the beast is coming.   Obama is his Useful Idiot in Chief.  And Americans will worship him and take his mark on their right hands or on their foreheads.

Democrat Hero FDR Was In Fact A Wicked Man Who Is Burning In Hell With The Blood Of Hundreds Of Thousands Of Innocent Holocaust Jews On His Hands

I had my view of Franklin Delano Roosevelt radically changed by my reading of the Burton Folsom Jr. book, New Deal Or Raw Deal? How FDR’s Economic Legacy Has Damaged America.  I challenge anyone who adores FDR to read that thoroughly documented work.  Another book to read is Amity Schlaes’ The Forgotten Man.  You end up being incredibly angry and deeply saddened at the same time as a foolish American people wickedly kept returning to the policies of a wicked man who trapped America into the misery of a terrible depression that lasted fully seven years longer than it should have.

We also find that he may have – at least if you believe in a just and righteous God – kept America trapped in a bloody world war that resulted in the deaths of over 400,000 Americans.

If you believe in God – as I do – I think it is a valid assertion that God would have given America swift victory had we tried to help God’s people the Jews instead of what we did under a despicable and callous FDR.

We know that FDR was a racist bigot who detested black people and allowed labor unions to exclude blacks from work that they desperately needed to survive the darkest days of America.

The question as to why black people have in recent years chosen to celebrate and support the party that put their ancestors in the chains of slavery, fought a vicious Civil War to keep them in those chains, invented the Ku Klux Klan as the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party to keep blacks who had been freed by Republicans in subjugation, resegregated blacks under the tyranny of “the father of the modern progressive movement” also known as the racist white supremacist Woodrow Wilson, was still so racist in 1924 that the Democratic National Convention of that year was called “Klanbake,” allowed black men to go untreated with syphilis so researchers could study the progression of the disease (the Tuskegee Experiment) throughout the entire FDR presidency, was largely THE party of racist discrimination through the 1950s, and then only passed the Civil Rights laws with the overwhelming supporting votes of Republicans, is a mystery that I will not attempt to explain.  I have no idea why black people as a culture allowed Democrats who had subjected them to one form of plantation allowed Democrats to bait and switch them into a different form of plantation (the welfare plantation of institutional generational dependency).

I will only point out that after reading about the incredible harm a wicked and cynical president did to the American economy out of bitter partisan ideology, I believed that FDR is burning in hell today.

Now, having read this piece by an expert on the Holocaust, I am certain of it (this piece was originally filed under the LA Times title, “FDR’s troubling view of Jews”):

What FDR said about Jews in private
His personal sentiments about Jews may help explain America’s tepid response to the Holocaust.
By Rafael Medoff
April 7, 2013

In May 1943, President Franklin Roosevelt met with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill at the White House. It was 17 months after Pearl Harbor and a little more than a year before D-Day. The two Allied leaders reviewed the war effort to date and exchanged thoughts on their plans for the postwar era. At one point in the discussion, FDR offered what he called “the best way to settle the Jewish question.”

Vice President Henry Wallace, who noted the conversation in his diary, said Roosevelt spoke approvingly of a plan (recommended by geographer and Johns Hopkins University President Isaiah Bowman) “to spread the Jews thin all over the world.” The diary entry adds: “The president said he had tried this out in [Meriwether] County, Georgia [where Roosevelt lived in the 1920s] and at Hyde Park on the basis of adding four or five Jewish families at each place. He claimed that the local population would have no objection if there were no more than that.”

Roosevelt’s “best way” remark is condescending and distasteful, and coming from anyone else it would probably be regarded as anti-Semitism. But more than that, FDR’s support for “spreading the Jews thin” may hold the key to understanding a subject that has been at the center of controversy for decades: the American government’s tepid response to the Holocaust.

Here’s the paradox. The U.S. immigration system severely limited the number of German Jews admitted during the Nazi years to about 26,000 annually — but even that quota was less than 25% filled during most of the Hitler era, because the Roosevelt administration piled on so many extra requirements for would-be immigrants. For example, starting in 1941, merely leaving behind a close relative in Europe would be enough to disqualify an applicant — on the absurd assumption that the Nazis could threaten the relative and thereby force the immigrant into spying for Hitler.

Why did the administration actively seek to discourage and disqualify Jewish refugees from coming to the United States? Why didn’t the president quietly tell his State Department (which administered the immigration system) to fill the quotas for Germany and Axis-occupied countries to the legal limit? That alone could have saved 190,000 lives. It would not have required a fight with Congress or the anti-immigration forces; it would have involved minimal political risk to the president.

Every president’s policy decisions are shaped by a variety of factors, some political, some personal. In Roosevelt’s case, a pattern of private remarks about Jews, some of which I recently discovered at the Central Zionist Archives in Jerusalem and from other sources, may be significant.

In 1923, as a member of the Harvard board of directors, Roosevelt decided there were too many Jewish students at the college and helped institute a quota to limit the number admitted. In 1938, he privately suggested that Jews in Poland were dominating the economy and were therefore to blame for provoking anti-Semitism there. In 1941, he remarked at a Cabinet meeting that there were too many Jews among federal employees in Oregon. In 1943, he told government officials in Allied-liberated North Africa that the number of local Jews in various professions “should be definitely limited” so as to “eliminate the specific and understandable complaints which the Germans bore towards the Jews in Germany.”

There is evidence of other troubling private remarks by FDR too, including dismissing pleas for Jewish refugees as “Jewish wailing” and “sob stuff”; expressing (to a senator ) his pride that “there is no Jewish blood in our veins”; and characterizing a tax maneuver by a Jewish newspaper publisher as “a dirty Jewish trick.” But the most common theme in Roosevelt’s private statements about Jews has to do with his perception that they were “overcrowding” many professions and exercising undue influence.

This attitude dovetails with what is known about FDR’s views regarding immigrants in general and Asian immigrants in particular.

In one 1920 interview, he complained about immigrants “crowding” into the cities and said “the remedy for this should be the distribution of aliens in various parts of the country.” In a series of articles for the Macon (Ga.) Daily Telegraph and for Asia magazine in the 1920s, he warned against granting citizenship to “non-assimilable immigrants” and opposed Japanese immigration on the grounds that “mingling Asiatic blood with European or American blood produces, in nine cases out of ten, the most unfortunate results.” He recommended that future immigration should be limited to those who had “blood of the right sort.”

FDR’s decision to imprison thousands of Japanese Americans in internment camps during World War II was consistent with his perception of Asians as having innate racial characteristics that made them untrustworthy. Likewise, he apparently viewed with disdain what he seemed to regard as the innate characteristics of Jews. Admitting significant numbers of Jewish or Asian immigrants did not fit comfortably in FDR’s vision of America.

Other U.S. presidents have made their share of unfriendly remarks about Jews. A diary kept by Harry Truman included statements such as “The Jews, I find, are very, very selfish.” Richard Nixon’s denunciations of Jews as “very aggressive and obnoxious” were belatedly revealed in tapes of Oval Office conversations.

But the revelation of Franklin Roosevelt’s sentiments will probably shock many people. After all, he led America in the war against Hitler. Moreover, Roosevelt’s public persona is anchored in his image as a liberal humanitarian, his claim to care about “the forgotten man,” the downtrodden, the mistreated. But none of that can change the record of his response to the Holocaust.

The observance of Holocaust Memorial Day begins Sunday night. It is the annual occasion to reflect on the Nazi genocide and the world’s response to it. In the case of the United States, it is sobering to consider that partly because of Roosevelt’s private prejudices, innocent people who could have been saved were instead abandoned.

Rafael Medoff is the founding director of the David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies in Washington. His latest book is “FDR and the Holocaust: A Breach of Faith.”Medoff will speak Sunday at the Holocaust Memorial Day service at the Alpert Jewish Community Center in Long Beach.

I’m sorry.  Franklin Delano Roosevelt was different from Adolf Hitler HOW, exactly?  Certainly not in their vile racism or their contempt for Jews.

FDR has the documented blood of an ABSOLUTE MINIMUM of 190,000 Jews on his hands.  And given that he should have done far, far more than the “absolute minimum” to help desperate people who were condemned to miserable deaths because he wouldn’t lift a finger to help them, that number of Jews whose blood FDR has on his hands soars much the way Obama’s debt has soared.

FDR wanted to “eliminate the specific and understandable complaints which the Germans bore towards the Jews in Germany.”  The rat bastard son of a bitch actually AGREED WITH HITLER!!!

That’s one of the reasons every single American should be nauseated by this image that celebrated both the wicked Obama and his wicked predecessor in massive socialism and rabid anti-Semitism:

At the heart of the Democrat Party is a profound hatred for God, for the Judeo-Christian worldview and for the people – both Jew and Christian alike – who follow the Word of God.

At last year’s Democrat Party National Convention, they removed “God” AND Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.  The Democrat Party then illegally put them back in not because they didn’t despise God and a Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, but because of the political embarrassment they had caused themselves by being too honest with their hatred of the God of the Bible.

This is God damn America.  And we’re going to reap the same godless disaster this time around that we faced the last time.  Only this time – given the fact that this nation is more depraved than ever before – we are going to lose and lose big and lose everything.

And then Democrats will lead America into the worship of the Antichrist and the acceptance of the mark of the beast.  Because that is the hellish abyss they have been pushing America toward for decades.

Margaret Thatcher, God Rest Her Soul, NAILED The Essence Of American Liberalism: They’d Rather The Poor Be Poorer Provided The Rich Are Less Rich

Margaret Thatcher, speaking before the House of Commons on November 22, 1990:

Transcript (from the video):

Prime Minister Thatcher: If the hon. Gentleman will just listen, he might hear something that he did not know. The average pensioner now has twice as much to hand on to his children as he did 11 years ago. They are thinking about the future. This massive rise in our living standards reflects the extraordinary transformation of the private sector.

Mr. Hughes: There is no doubt that the Prime Minister, in many ways, has achieved substantial success. There is one statistic, however, that I understand is not however challenged, and that is that, over her 11 years as Prime Minister, the gap between the richest 10 per cent. and the poorest 10 per cent, has widened substantially. At the end of her chapter of British politics, how can she say that she can justify the fact that many people in a constituency such as mine are relatively much poorer, much less well housed and much less well provided for than they were in 1979? Surely she accepts that that is not a record that she or any Prime Minister can be proud of.

Prime Minister Thatcher: Mr Speaker, ALL levels of income are better off than they were in 1979.  But what the honorable member is saying is that he would rather the poor were poorer provided the rich were less rich.  That’s why you will NEVER create the wealth for better social services as we have.  And what a policy!  Yes, he would rather have the poor poorer, provided the rich were less rich.  That is the liberal policy.

Mr. Hughes: No.

Prime Minister Thatcher: Yes, it came out!  He didn’t intend it to, but it did.

[Different liberal socialist Mr. Sillars]: The prime minister is aware that I detest every single one of her domestic policies and I have never hidden that fact.

Prime Minister Thatcher: And I think that the honorable gentleman knows that I have the same contempt for his socialist policies as the people of East Europe who have experienced it.  I think I must have hit the right nail on the head when I pointed out the logic of those policies are they’d rather have the poor poorer.  Once they start to talk about the gap, they’d rather the gap were that [indicating] - down here – not that [indicating], but that [indicating].  So long as the gap is smaller, so long as the gap is smaller, they’d rather have the poor poorer.  You do not create wealth and opportunity that way.  You do not create a property-owning democracy that way.

Margaret Thatcher was EVERY BIT as correct about the liberal American socialists like Obama who are running this country into its grave as she was about the liberal British socialists of her era.

The median wage has PLUMMETED under Obama’s failed presidency.  And as the last jobs report just proved (yet again), the poor have no chance of even being able to FIND a damn job as they are driven out of Obama’s failed economy in despair.  Under Obama, the labor participation rate – the percentage of working age Americans with jobs – there are fewer working Americans today than there have been since 1979.  And it’s actually far, FAR worse than it was in 1979 – because back in 1979, not NEARLY as many women wanted a to have a job as today.

Obama has created a jobs HOLOCAUST for the “poor.”  There is no question Obama has made the poor poorer.

And the fact that his welfare state has absolutely exploded – with food stamp dependency up by 100 percent since Obama took office - is proof of that vile pudding.

She said:

“I came to office with one deliberate intent: to change Britain from a dependent to a self-reliant society — from a give-it-to-me, to a do-it-yourself nation. A get-up-and-go, instead of a sit-back-and-wait-for-it Britain.”

What kind of nation has Obama “fundamentally transformed America” into?  The very kind that Margaret Thatcher sought to deliver her nation FROM.

She nailed Obama right on the head when she summed up the results of his attempt to socialize the American economy by describing the failed results of the British Labour Party:

I was speaking of the Labour party wanting to renationalise privatised industry. Four of the industries that we have privatised are in the top 10 British businesses, but at the very bottom of the list of 1,000 British businesses lie four nationalised industries. Labour’s industries consume the wealth that others create and give nothing back.

That’s exactly what Obama has given us: the nationalized industries of his crony capitalist fascism where only HE and his bureaucrat thugs get to decide who wins and who loses, who gets to keep their money and who gets their money taxed, who succeeds and who fails.

Today Fisker – another of the failed liberal boondoggles that Obama gave half a billion taxpayer dollars to - is beginning the process of filing for bankruptcy after laying of 3/4 of its workforce.

In 2009, when Joe Biden trumpted the Obama half-billion boondoggle loan to Fisker, Joe Biden trumpeted:

“The doubters were wrong about our ability to manufacture.”

No we weren’t, you failed turd.  YOU were wrong.  You were catastrophically wrong and WE WERE COMPLETELY RIGHT JUST AS I PREDICTED WE’D BE COMPLETELY RIGHT.  Just as you were wrong about all of Obama’s other failed boondoggles:

Barack Obama is the Solyndra President.  Well, make that the Solyndra-EverGreen-SpectraWatt-First Solar-Solar Trust-Abound Solar-BrightSource-LSP Energy-Ener1-SunPower-Beacon Power-ECOtality-A123-Uni Solar-Azure Dynamics President.  Not to mention all the other now-bankrupt green energy crony-capitalist businesses that have stolen more than $2 billion dollars of the American people’s money.

And that sum of massive Obama failure has grown massively since I wrote that a year ago – as Fisker alone proves.

Reality simply doesn’t matter to dishonest hypocrite liberals or to their dishonest and hypocritical ideology of liberalism.  There is simply no contact with the real world.  The Word of God enables humans to – at least in part – be able to see the world accurately, as God sees it.  Liberals hate the Word of God and the Judeo-Christian worldview which is based on the Word of God.  Instead, liberals view the world through demonic secular humanist theories such as existentialism, postmodernism and yes, Marxism and its socialist cousin fascism.  They are blind fools leading a blind and foolish world into the heart of darkness.  And they are about to get their way.

It’s not that conservatives have no convincing arguments; it is rather that, between the facts that a) mainstream media propaganda deceitfully distorts the conservative message; and b) we are entering the last days before the Antichrist and the mark of the beast as God has decreed that it is time that the world receive the judgment for its wickedness that it deserves – which is why we have the terrible choice between a Mormon Mitt Romney who believes Jesus Christ is the spirit brother of Lucifer and an Obama who actually IS the spirit brother of Lucifer; c) which results in RINO turds like John McCain, Lindsey Grahem and Mitt Romney being the inarticulate voices of the Republican Party who can’t argue their way out of a wet paper bag on a rainy day.

Todays’ leaders have no courage, no backbone and no clue.  Because they are men and women manufactured by politics rather than men and women shaped by virtue.

Now we are cursed with Barack Hussein Obama, a fool who believes the disease is the cure.  And if his “cure” doesn’t work to plague America with more of his disease.  And then more disease, and still more.

When God damned Europe for its wickedness in the wake of the rise of Stalin and Hitler, there WERE no intelligent voices of opposition who were allowed to rise up and confront the evil and stupidity that were swallowing up the world.  In nation after nation in Europe, you had the dismal choice between an evil, terrible choice and a slightly less evil, terrible choice.  And again and again the most evil and terrible choice was the one that prevailed.

We won’t see your like again, Mrs. Thatcher.  But God bless you for your good work on this earth.  The world desperately needs leaders like you, but they will not rise.  Because the beast is coming – and fools must reign to welcome him and his coming mark.

Enjoy your rest with God in heaven, Iron Lady.  You truly earned it.

Would that we had your like now instead of the God damn America that we have under this failed presidency of a man who is every bit as foolish as the fools you exposed.

Obama’s Economy Has Yet ANOTHER ‘Arab Spring’ As Employment Collapses To Less Than HALF What We Were Told To Expect. And The Beast Is Coming.

Why do I compare Obama’s economy to the so-called “Arab Spring”?  Think back: when the Arab world first began rioting, the liberal-dominated mainstream media coined it “the Arab Spring.”  It was a wonderful thing, they claimed.  It was the Arab world blossoming under Obama and claiming “democracy.”

We now know in hindsight that that was all a giant wave of lies coming from both the Obama White House and his Joseph Goebbels’-style media propaganda machine (see also here and then see here).  We’ve seen close historic U.S. allies topple to the Muslim Brotherhood; we’ve seen an embrace of sharia law from these “democrats”; we’ve seen blood baths of vicious war.

And of course we saw an Obama who claimed credit for that “Arab Spring” (see also here) only to blame everything else instead when it went to hell.

And that’s the way it has been with Obama’s economy.  Over and over again, he took credit for it – only to proceed to demonize the very thing he had taken credit for as he blamed Republicans for the failure of what he had promised would be a success.

Remember that term “green shoots”?  Obama promised that a turnaround was just around the corner, hyped the “green shoots” of his stimulus and promised that happy days were returning?

His false promises are now an annual event.  Let me go back to one year ago to May 2012:

As Economy Sputters, Obama Tries Distraction
Posted 05/02/2012 06:56 PM ET

Economy: It’s no wonder President Obama wants to direct everyone’s attention to far-off Afghanistan these days. The economic news here at home is looking increasingly grim.

Just 28 days after Time magazine ran an April 2 cover story boasting that “in the past few weeks, signs of economic expansion have been everywhere” it warned that “the economy might be stalling.”

The article pointed to “disappointing” news that Q1 GDP had climbed just 2.2% — below expectations — and job growth in March was 120,000, also a miss.

Now, two more troubling signs have emerged. The government reported on Wednesday that new factory orders fell 1.5% in March, the steepest drop since March 2009, when the country was still in recession.

Then ADP reported that private employment climbed just 119,000 in April — the smallest gain in seven months and also far below expectations. The April employment report comes out Friday, which economists think will show an unimpressive 160,000 job gain.

Seems that, once again, all the talk about “green shoots” and “turning the corner” and reaching “escape velocity” are just more false hopes.

Instead, we’re starting to get another round of economic reports that contain “unexpectedly” bad news.

I wrote about Obama’s bogus “green shoots” a year before that in June 2011.  And cited articles from 2010 and 2009 where Obama had made the same bull crap promises with the same economic tank coming after he made those promises.  Oh, after the mockery of his “green shoots,” he came up with a different term that meant the same thing, such as “recovery summer.”  But it’s been the same promise that Lucy keeps making to Charlie Brown.  And unfortunately the American people were as naive and as stupid as Charlie Brown in believing that Obama really would hold the economic football so we could kick it into the air.  Again.  And again.

Was sequestration to blame for the economic plunge last May?

Now we’re at a job creation level that made last year’s miserable job creation level look wonderful in comparison.  But it’s too late to do anything about it, American fools: you voted for it.  And you deserve it and a lot worse just as you’ll eventually be getting the eternity in hell that you deserve.

The liberal-owned financial world that contributed to much to Obama’s reelection (Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, JP Morgan) predicted we’d have 190,000 new jobs.  Surprise!  We got the “unexpected” dismal level of 88,000.  Which aint even HALF what they said it would be.

That 88,000 falls WELL BELOW what we needed just to keep up with population growth.  We need at least 125,000 jobs a month just to keep up with the growth in population.  We are LOSING ground under this failed presidency.

And Obama has given us a labor participation rate that is so completely godawful that if we used the same labor participation rate as that which Bush handed over to Obama, unemployment would be measured at about 14% right now.

The labor participation rate measures the percentage of working-age Americans who are employed.  And there is no question when one considers it that Obama has destroyed the American job engine (that existed in the private sector until he killed it) with his socialism, his big government crony capitalist fascist state, his war on business.

Again, I talked about that when I pleaded with the American people to NOT choose stupidity and suicide in the 2012 election:

In 2010 – and this was AFTER we supposedly were out of the recession in Obama’s “wreckovery” –  the labor participation rate was 64.5%, which was at a 25-year low (i.e., lower than it had EVER been under Bush).

In 2011, the labor participation rate dropped to 63.9%, the lowest level in 27 years.

Last year in 2012 under Obama’s failed policies it fell to the lowest level in 30 years.

And here we are today.  You’ve got to go back to the dismal failure of the Carter era in the late 1970s to get such an awful participation rate.  It’s now the worst its been in 34 years.

Stupid people can’t see it, I know, but THERE’S A REALLY BAD TREND going on under this demonic administration.

What is our actual unemployment rate if Obama didn’t get rewarded for crushing the spirits of Americans who desperately want jobs and driving them out of the job market?  It would be 14 percent.  Instead, Obama can keep taking credit for the unemployment rate going down and down even as the American people give up ever having a job.  It’s like I derisively pointed out a year ago when I wrote an article with the title: “Unemployment Rate: At ‘Rate’ We’re Going, We’ll Have 0% Unemployment But No One Will Have An Actual Job.”  And when Bush left office, people stayed unemployed less than HALF as long as they are staying unemployed today as Obama has gutted any incentive for any employer to hire anybody.

Year after year Obama has failed to deliver.  Year after year he had something else to blame,something else to demagogue, to explain away his abject failure to create the jobs he promised with his crony capitalist policies in which he appointed himself and his giant government the sole right to appoint who wins and who loses, who succeeds and who fails.

Like I said, America.  You voted for this.  You deserve it.  And the people who voted for Obama in the highest numbers: young people, black people, Hispanics and women – have the worst employment figures of all.  They are getting what they deserved.  And they deserve far worse, so Obama will give them far worse.

Now Obama is blaming the sequester for his current “green shoots/recovery summer” failure.  In spite of the fact that the damn sequester was HIS idea, which HE signed into law, and which HE swore to use his veto pen to protect when Republicans wanted to overturn it (see also here).  Oh, and the fact also is that Republicans offered Obama a way to manage the sequestration cuts so that the American people would not feel so much pain, but Obama, WANTING the people to suffer so he could falsely demonize Republicans for that suffering, refused the authority.

Let’s also not forget that Democrats wanted this sequester and they got what they wanted.

Was sequestration to blame for 2009?  2010?  2011?  I mean, the sequestration thing Obama is now demagoguing as being the cause for all the economic calamity didn’t even exist.  Right?

Obama is a cynical liar without shame,  without integrity and without honor.  His political brilliance is in the fact that he never underestimates the sheer stupidity of the American sheep who used to be the American people.

If you are a pathologically morally stupid human being – which based on the polls you likely are – you will decide that Obama is not to blame yet again.

I remind the world that when George W. Bush was president, he had to contend with not just a Democrat House that hated him and plotted his destruction under the rule of Nancy Pelosi, but a Democrat Senate that hated him and plotted his destruction under the rule of Harry Reid, as well.  Just in case you want to blame Obama’s failed economy on the Republican House.

Democrats are abject hypocrites year after year.  The only thing you can trust about them is that they will demagogue and slander and blame and lie.

If you want to blame the tanking economy on the sequester, at least have the integrity to demand that Obama – who again thought it up in the first place, signed it into law and then threatened to veto anything that prevented it – resign from office.  But the fact of the matter is that in spite of two months of pathologically insane Obama lies, the sequester has had so little economic impact that it has had nothing to do with anything (all the sequester did was cut the projected rate of growth – and many of the projected rate cuts don’t occur until years in the future).

If you want to know why the economy is now officially crippled again, blame Obama, blame Democrats and blame their tax hikes.

Unlike Obama, Republicans have been incredibly consistent in pointing out the historic fact that tax cuts increase economic activity and tax revenue, and that tax hikes do the exact opposite by undermining economic activity as job creators and investors have all of their incentives to grow and invest seized from them.

ObamaCare – which is an absolute catastrophic failure – was the largest tax hike on the middle class in American history (and see here).  And now even the überliberal Los Angeles Times now acknowledges that is true:

The threat of higher costs could alienate many of the policyholders the state needs to keep in the fold in order to offset the increased costs of covering sicker, poorer people who have been shut out of the system for years.

According to the state, about 1.3 million people who are middle-income or higher and already have coverage not through an employer will bear the brunt of the higher costs. These are individuals making more than $46,000 and families earning more than $94,000 annually. People below those income levels qualify for federal subsidies.

Look at some of my article titles which pointed out this fact:

Even ObamaCare Backers Now Finally Admit To Seeing Shocking Premium Hikes Coming Due To The Evil Mark-Of-The-Beast ObamaCare Law

This Is Amazing.  30% Of Doctors Leaving Medicine Under ObamaCare.  Just As We Said.  Left Is Handling It Dishonestly.  Just Like They Always Do.

Get This: The CHEAPEST ObamaCare Plan Will Cost $20,000 A Year Per Family, Says The IRS

Somebody Had To Pay For All That ‘Free’ Stuff Obama Stuck Into ObamaCare; Turns Out It’s Companies And Their Workers

Lying Democrats Demonize Romney-Ryan For Gutting Medicare; Meanwhile, ONE-THIRD Of Funding For ObamaCare Comes Out Of Medicare

ObamaCare Killing Economic Growth And Job Expansion – And We Aint Seen NOTHING Yet!

What the hell did thinking people think would be the effect on jobs?  We’re seeing what conservatives said would happen: businesses culling their workforce to remain under that magic “fifty” number so they could escape ObamaCare hell; businesses cutting people to less than full-time so they could escape ObamaCare hell.  And NOBODY expanding their payrolls.

We TOLD you this would happen.  And it is amazing that the American people now prefer socialist and frankly Marxist LIES to the truth and to reality.  And to then reward a liar without shame to slant that truth and reality again and again as the consequences of his immoral policies rain down like the black rain in the aftermath of the nuclear bombs the fascist Japanese demanded fall on them before they would surrender.

Remember the  tax hikes Obama got in January?  Obama demanded – and got – $620 billion in new tax hikes in exchange for only $15 billion in spending cuts.  For a ratio of 41:1 in tax hikes to spending cuts.  Obama called that” balanced.”

Mind you, Obama initially demanded over $1.5 TRILLION in new tax hikes.  So you know where his heart is: punishing job creators and investors in America.

Add to that the payroll taxes that nailed the middle class.  That was another $115 billion in tax hikes just for 2013 alone.

Add to that the $800 billion in NEW tax hikes Obama is now demanding.

And explain to me why a rich person, an investor, a business, should do anything other than protect themselves against this seizure of what they worked so hard to build.  How does taxing productivity generate productivity?  How does punishing wealth production generate more wealth production?  If I beat you with a bat every time you produce, how long will you keep trying to produce?

You are getting what you voted for.  You are getting a foretaste of the hell you will one day spend the rest of your eternity in for your role in the participation in the murder of 56 million innocent babies since 1973.  You will get what you deserve for voting for the Democrat Party Platform of Romans Chapter One.

I put it crystal clear in November after the election fiasco: Congratulations, America, You Got What You Voted For: Soaring Unemployment, A Crashing DOW.  Next Comes The Beast (You’ll Be Worshiping Him Soon).  And: Obama Gives America One Of Worst Post-Presidential Market Plunges In History As Businesses And Investors Say Sayonara To Economic Growth, Jobs.

Do I look like I’ll be right or wrong???  And, again, unlike Obama – who was for the sequestration before he was against it – I’ve been consistent in explaining why America would end up in misery under this most wicked president in American history.

We are watching the world melt down.  We are watching Iran get nuclear weapons – after Democrats mocked Bush for warning of that fact - and will one day soon reap hell as Iran seeks Armageddon.  We are watching North Korea pursue a level of brinksmanship unlike anything we have ever seen.  We are watching China and Russia rise up against us and block us at every turn – while they rob us blind with no response from Obama.  Thugs know they can push us around now because of our weak and failed leadership.  And we are watching our own America become weaker and weaker as Obama has gutted American jobs – with tens of millions of jobs now vaporized as measured by the dwindling labor participation rate – even as he keeps claiming success for his nonexistent economic turnaround.  Before Obama, we could fight two wars simultaneously; now it’s a real question whether we can even fight one.

The beast is coming.  The Bible describes him as a man who will criminalize the God of the Bible while imposing the most gargantuan fascist government stranglehold on the private economy ever witnessed in human history.  In other words, he will be a Democrat.  That’s the Party that is working overtime to criminalize God even as they advance a giant welfare state to replace God.

We’ve just seen two appalling sings of the coming financial ruin: in the theft of private bank account holdings in Cyprus and in the confiscation of bondholders’ investments in the bankruptcy of Stockton, California.  The first has been compared to being a “Sarajevo moment” in which an event in a tiny country triggered catastrophic global consequences.  The cat is out of the bag; the European Union has described the confiscation of privately held bank assets as a “new template” to follow in other bailed-out nations’ financial crises.  Countries who cannot pay for all of their socialism will be encouraged to seize the assets of banking account holders.  And what spillover effect will that have in terms of confidence in the banking system?  How many people will start withdrawing their holdings fearing their savings will be targeted next?  The second has been in Stockton, California, where bondholders are going to get screwed while union pensions remain sacrosanct.  How does that do anything but discourage holding bonds in cities that could fall next?  What impact will that have on the interest rate of such future bonds?  Would you like to lose YOUR money so completely out of control union pensions can remain untouched???  How can bondholders not flee from this idiocy???  How can that not trigger more and more cities – starved of funds – from declaring bankruptcies in a domino effect???

We’re facing the collapse of the entire global financial system, folks.  And the night before it all just melts down and implodes, I promise you this: the “experts” that will be trotted out by the mainstream media will assure everybody that everything will be fine the night before the collapse occurs.  This is a house of cards that is going to catastrophically fall; and when it falls you will deserve it and your children will deserve it.  Because the Bible makes it plain that a nation suffers for the wickedness of its king.

Abject hypocrite liberals tell me I’m angry and hateful.  Only to hate me with a hate that I NEVER had for my opponents even as they self-righteously lecture me about hate.  And I AM angry: I have watched America go from walking toward the beast and ultimate collapse to running to fall at the feet of the beast and worship him.  Our real debt is not the $16.7 trillion you hear about; it is HUNDREDS of trillions.  This nation is doomed.  In the four miserable years of Obama, this nation has crossed the threshold and there is no way to avoid complete collapse and the ensuing mark of the beast.

The same people who voted so eagerly for Obama will vote for the Antichrist.  And they will get the hell they deserve both on earth and in eternity.

I Predicted Obama Democrats Would Turn On The Elderly. And I Was Right. You Just Watch How Obama Will Turn On You, Old People.

Earlier this year, I wrote a post bearing this title:

What I See Coming As ObamaCare Unfolds: The Holocaust Of The Elderly As Democrats Abandon Elderly And ‘Pivot’ To Young Voters

I stand here today as one whose opinions stand confirmed as fact.

Barack Obama is beginning to turn on the elderly as he “pivots” to the young.  That fact is demonstrated in his budget, in which he breaks (because Obama is a liar without shame, without integrity and without honor just as I have kept stating) his promise from 2008 and now says he will cut Social Security benefits.

Obama’s promise back then:

Obama is now putting cuts in Social Security and Medicare on the table in complete abandonment of his promises:

WASHINGTON — Seeking an elusive middle ground, President Barack Obama is proposing a 2014 budget that embraces tax increases abhorred by Republicans as well as reductions, loathed by liberals, in the growth of Social Security and other benefit programs.

The plan, if ever enacted, could touch almost all Americans. The rich would see tax increases, the poor and the elderly would get smaller annual increases in their benefits, and middle income taxpayers would slip into higher tax brackets despite Obama’s repeated vows not to add to the tax burden of the middle class. His proposed changes, once phased in, would mean a cut in Social Security benefits of nearly $1,000 a year for an average 85-year-old, smaller cuts for younger retirees.

Obama proposed much the same without success to House Speaker John Boehner in December. The response Friday was dismissive from Republicans and hostile from liberals, labor and advocates for the elderly.

As usual, Obama is as politically brilliant as he is completely morally depraved.

He recognizes that the elderly now overwhelmingly vote Republican – because as stupid as our elderly are today, they are smarter than the young punks whom Obama owns.

It is a fact that the elderly are THE most Republican-leaning group:

Obama realizes what many Democrats in their districts don’t: that the elderly aren’t Obama worshippers.

And that therefore the elderly are blasphemers who deserve to die.

What group DOES vote for Obama?  The ignorant young punks.

And what do the ignorant young punks want?

They want socialism.  They want Obama to take care of them.

What is getting in the way of the godless socialist State that the young want?  Old people – and the benefits being consumed by old people.

How can young people get free health care when the old are getting most of the government bennies?  How can young people ever hope to have a viable Social Security system when the system promised to the elderly is bankrupting America?

The answer is that if you kill off all the elderly, you can make the same false promises to the young that the FDR generation of Democrats once made to the elderly of today.

I’ve been pointing this fact out in previous articles:

ObamaCare Will Bring Abortion Mindset To Treatment Of Elderly

Democrats Vote To Let Elderly Die In Name Of ‘Stimulus’

Remember How Leftist Media And Democrats Mocked Sarah Palin Over ‘Death Panels’?  Now Überliberal Paul Krugman Is Demanding More Death Panels

Paul Ryan Versus Barack Obama On Medicare (It Aint Paul Ryan Who Already Stole $716 Billion From Medicare, People)

You can find these quotes along with many others in the articles above, but let me start with the words of lifelong Democrat and Obama supporter Robert Reich:

“Thank you so much for coming this afternoon. I’m so glad to see you and I would like to be president. Let me tell you a few things on health care. Look, we have the only health care system in the world that is designed to avoid sick people. And that’s true and what I’m going to do is that I am going try to reorganize it to be more amenable to treating sick people but that means you,  particularly you young people, particularly you young healthy people…you’re going to have to pay more.

“Thank you.  And by the way, we’re going to have to, if you’re very old, we’re not going to give you all that technology and all those drugs for the last couple of years of your life to keep you maybe going for another couple of months. It’s too expensive…so we’re going to let you die.”

And here’s now-former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s brother, Ezekiel Emanuel, whom Obama appointed as OMB health policy adviser in addition to being picked to serve on the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research:

“When implemented, the Complete Lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated… The Complete Lives system justifies preference to younger people because of priority to the worst-off rather than instrumental value.”

“Attenuated” means, “to make thin; to weaken or reduce in force, intensity, effect, quantity, or value.”  Attenuated care would be reduced or lessened care.  Dare I say it, in this context it clearly means, “rationed care.”

And “rationed care” means death panels.  Which again for the record überliberal Paul Krugman says are an essential part of ObamaCare - all previous Democrat lies to the contrary.

I’ve been saying it all along.

I couldn’t understand why Democrats refused to take ANY of the corrective actions necessary to save Medicare – which will go bankrupt and collapse by 2016.  And now Social Security – which is now in debt to the tune of tens of billions of dollars a year.  A few minor changes could have saved these programs – but Democrats are in lock-fascist step determined NOT to allow those changes.

Understand: my PARENTS are on these programs.  As terrible and as godawful as these programs are given the private-sector alternatives that Democrats refused to allow or even consider, they were the only path for my parents’ – and millions and millions of other people’s parents’ – retirement.  Republicans proposed to gradually phase in reduced benefits beginning for those who had at least ten working years remaining to prepare alternative strategies (which would also give the country time to prepare those alternatives).  Current retirees would have been untouched.

Democrats refused to make any changes and falsely and frankly demonically demagogued the lie that Republicans were trying to kill old people (again, their changes wouldn’t have affected ANY “old people.”  I couldn’t understand why Democrats would allow the systems that THEY created to simply implode.

If we just made a few minor changes, we could keep these programs going.  It is insane that Democrats refuse to make those changes.  The reason that Europe is going through all the “austerity” crap is because they did what the Democrats are doing now in America; they refused to make minor changes and then they went bankrupt and now there is no way out of their crisis.

I now DO understand the reason Democrats won’t make the changes we need when there’s still time to make those changes: Democrats plan to turn on the elderly whom they promised they would take care of through these programs.  When they collapse – and they surely will – Democrats will “pivot” to the young voters and leave the elderly to die.

Democrats seized power by lying to the people who are now “the elderly.”  They can now leave those elderly to perish and sell their lies to a whole new generation of truly stupid young people.

Barack Obama realizes that he will profit politically if he wages his style of fearmongering and divisive campaigning and pits the young against the old (just as he pitted minorities against white people and women against men and the poor against the rich).  He realizes that he doesn’t need the elderly any more than he needs white people or the rich.

By increasingly pointing out that the elderly have an obligation to die so that the young can inherit the earth (and the socialism), Obama knows he can seize the young vote for the Democrat Party.  He will promise them the benefits that used to belong to the elderly.  Which means the elderly have got to go.

I’ve pointed this out again and again: D. James Kennedy prophetically warned:

“Watch out, grandpa!  Because the generation that survived abortion will one day come after you!”

You’re about to pay for your wickedness and selfishness in allowing the holocaust of 56 million murdered babies since Roe v. Wade in 1973, old people.  The day is coming when you are going to be told to shove off and die with dignity so that young Obama voters can take your place.

And you are going to deserve it, even as God begins to stockpile His wrath against the final and most wicked generation of Americans who will vote for your deaths by the millions the same way you voted for babies’ deaths by the millions.

You watch with growing horror, elderly Americans: Obama is going to use his mastery of political rhetoric – based entirely on his never EVER underestimating the stupidity and wickedness of the America people – to slowly begin to turn on you.  It will be just like homosexual marriage – or as great American pastor John MacArthur called it, “the Party platform of Romans Chapter One - in which Obama begins by unequivocally stating that he is opposed to it (see here and here), and then saying he’s ”evolving”in spite of what he’d promised, and finally claiming that he is completely for what he had previously said that he was completely against.  And then he’ll claim that anybody who used to hold the very position that he himself used to hold is evil.  He’s going to frame turning on the elderly in “moral” terms, as an obligation to young people who are being deprived of benefits.  And when he’s got the young behind him, he will demand that you perish in miserable deaths due to medical neglect and the confiscation of benefits that you banked your retirements upon.

Because this is God damn America, and you helped set it up.

Now you get to find out what it’s like to be “aborted.”  Because it’s coming for YOU.  You’re going to be the next group of death camp Jews.  You’re going to be the next group of non-humans to perish.

God damn America.  God damn the Greatest Generation.  That’s where Obama is heading.

The beast is coming.  And you aint seen NOTHING yet as to the liberal holocaust that is going to overtake this wicked land.

Blame Barack Obama And Failed Democrat Policies For North Korea

Let’s see.  Under the Obama presidency and under his regime, North Korea has had two nuclear tests, repeatedly tested ballistic missiles, threatened America more times than in ANY previous administration, and just moved missiles to threaten South Korea.  Right after re-starting a nuclear plant that they had shut down under Bush.

Generals and foreign policy experts are saying that North Korea – under the Obama regime’s handling, mind you – is a greater threat than it has EVER been.

Meanwhile, under Obama’s failed presidency, we had the meltdown that the mainstream media liberals so idiotically called “the Arab Spring.”  We had violent revolutions across the Arab world as the governments of vital U.S. allies were toppled by terrorist organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.  With Egypt now instituting sharia law to complete the insult.  We have incredible bloodbaths under Obama with Syria’s death toll now numbering over 70,000.   We have Iran on the verge of getting their nukes and their ballistic missiles and their Armageddon.  And where are the hypocrite Democrats now who teed off so viciously on George W. Bush???  Where are they in decrying Obama for a far, far worse and more unstable world?

Let’s get in our memory trains and take a little ride, when Obama’s future Secretary of State was demagoguing Bush in the most savage way imaginable:

Democrats blew it on North Korea
Now they should join Republicans to force changes in the country’s behavior
October 15, 2006 12:00 am
By Jack Kelly / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

If Democrats went after America’s enemies with the ruthlessness with which  they attack Republicans, the Axis of Evil would be toast.

No sooner had North Korea completed its (botched or faked) nuclear bomb test  last weekend than Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Hillary Clinton,  D-N.Y., were blaming it on “the failed policies of the Bush administration.”

That annoyed Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.:

“I would remind Sen. Clinton . . . that the framework agreement her husband’s  administration negotiated was a failure,” he said. “Every single time the  Clinton administration warned the Koreans not to do something — not to kick out  the IAEA inspectors, not to remove the fuel rods from their reactor — they did  it. And they were rewarded every single time by the Clinton administration with  further talks.”

Media commentators spun Mr. McCain’s remarks as jockeying with Ms. Clinton  for the presidency in 2008, but in fact Mr. McCain had been speaking out against  her husband’s Agreed Framework deal with North Korea since May of 1994.

Here is the history Democrats would like you to forget: The CIA began  worrying in the late 1980s that North Korea was trying to build an atomic bomb.  President Clinton attempted to head them off by offering a massive bribe. If the  North Koreans would forgo their nuke plans, the United States would provide them  with 500,000 tons of free fuel oil each year, massive food aid and build for  them two $2 billion nuclear power plants. The deal made North Korea the largest  recipient of U.S. foreign aid in Asia.

Mr. McCain was against the deal from the get-go, because it was all carrots  and no sticks, and there were no safeguards against North Korean cheating.

North Korea took the bribes President Clinton offered, and kept working on  its bomb.

Two experts told a House committee in April of 2000 that North Korea was  producing enough highly radioactive material then to build a dozen bombs a year,  but it is unclear when the North actually built a bomb (if yet) because our  intelligence on the reclusive regime there is so poor.

Most experts think North Korea restarted its nuclear weapons program between  1997 and 1999, said Paul Kerr of the Arms Control Association. But the  Congressional Research Service thinks the North began cheating in 1995.

Signs of cheating were abundant by 2000. Secretary of State Madeleine  Albright flew to Pyongyang that October to put lipstick on the pig. She offered  dictator Kim Jong Il a relaxation of economic sanctions if he’d limit North  Korea’s missile development. Kim took those carrots too, but kept building  missiles.

The Bush administration called North Korea on its cheating and suspended fuel  aid pending an improvement in its behavior. North Korea declared (in 2002) it  had the bomb, and the United States organized the six-party talks to try to  persuade it to give up its nuclear ambitions.

Like Mr. McCain, I thought the Agreed Framework was a bad idea from the  get-go. But I don’t blame the Clinton administration (very much) for trying.  Massive bribery hadn’t been tried before, and if it had worked, it certainly  would have been preferable to war. And, since as far as we know, serious  cheating didn’t begin until 1997 or 1998, it can be argued the deal did buy us a  little time.

But even though the ultimate failure of the Clinton policy of appeasement is  excusable, the refusal of Democrats to acknowledge that failure is not.

Democrats tend to view foreign policy crises through the narrow prism of  their impact on domestic politics. But the villain here isn’t Bill Clinton or  George Bush. It’s Kim Jong Il. And what’s important here is not which party  controls the House of Representatives. It’s whether we can prevent a second  Korean War.

Democrats ordinarily make a fetish of “multilateralism,” which is what  President Bush has been pursuing through the six-party talks, the only format  that offers hope of reining in North Korea short of war, because only China is  in a position to force North Korea to behave.

Kim wants direct negotiations with the United States, both to undermine the  six-party talks, and because he wants to return to the good old days when the  Clinton administration was providing him with aid in exchange for, in effect,  nothing. Democrats, astoundingly, want to give him exactly what he wants,  without first insisting upon a change in his behavior. They would rather restore  a failed policy than admit a mistake.

If tragedy is to be avoided, Democrats must stop putting their partisan  ambitions ahead of the security of the United States.

And, of course, to this day, if Obama were to attack North Korea with as much vile as he has repeatedly attacked Republicans, the Axis of Evil “toast” would be a pile of burnt ash.

I contemplate Kim Jong-Un’s fearmongering rhetoric and have a hard time telling the difference from Obama’s rhetoric on issues such as the sequester.  Both men seem to very much have in common a complete lack of grasp on reality when they are dealing with their political foes.  Just as both men’s national press corps’ seem to have the same determination to present whatever the hell their “dear leaders” are saying with as much deceit.

Democrats, who were of course nearly completely responsible for North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, attacked, backbit, undermined, slandered and demonized George Bush at every turn in his attempt to hold talks that would include China as the ONLY country that could reign in North Korea.

Let’s go back and remind ourselves of that, as well:

The radioactive glow had barely worn off Kim Jong Il’s face when liberals began to lay the blame for North Korea’s detonation of a small nuclear device (maybe) at George W. Bush’s feet. But their criticisms have left many of us downright confused.

On North Korea, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid complained, “the Bush administration … [has] made America less secure.” His remedy? “Speak directly with the North Koreans so they understand we will not continue to stand on the sidelines.” Sen. Joe Biden (D.-Del.), the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, concurred that “the strategy must include direct engagement with the North [Koreans].”

Potential Democratic presidential aspirants also want the U.S. to assume the lead role in this unfolding drama. Sen. Russ Feingold (D.-Wisc.) demanded that the Bush administration jettison its “hands-off approach to North Korea,” because “the stakes are too high to rely on others.” And Sen. John Kerry (D.-Mass.) noted that “for five years, I have been calling for the United States to engage in direct talks with North Korea” and “for five years this administration has ignored them.”

But, rather than ignore the metastasizing cancer in North Korea, the United States has expended considerable diplomatic capital on the so-called six-party talks — the long-running effort by the U.S., China, Russia, South Korea and Japan to convince Kim Jong Il to abandon his nuclear program. This multilateral process, moreover, grew out of the failed Clinton-era effort to engage the North Koreans directly. Sen. John McCain (R.-Ariz.) recently described that process in scathing terms: “Every single time the Clinton administration warned the Koreans not to do something –not to kick out the IAEA inspectors, not to remove the fuel rods from the reactor — they did it. And they were rewarded every single time by the Clinton administration with further talks.”

President Bush abandoned the one-on-one approach when he learned that the North Koreans violated their agreement not to enrich uranium (in exchange for a cool $350 million in fuel), opting instead to invite China and the other regional powers into the process. Thus began three years and five frustrating rounds of six-party talks. At first North Korea participated. Then in February 2005 it withdrew in a huff, only to re-engage a few months later for two more grueling rounds. Finally, Kim Jong Il sent a clear message about these talks when he launched two short-range missiles into the Sea of Japan in March of this year, then seven more over the 4th of July weekend.
Kerry and his allies dismiss this aggressive form of multilateral diplomacy as nothing more than “cover for the administration to avoid direct discussions.”

Hence the confusion. We thought that one of the major foreign policy fault lines separating liberals from conservatives has been whether the United States should reserve the right to act unilaterally to protect its national interests (the conservative position favored by Bush) or whether we should act only after securing the support of our allies (the liberal position embraced by Kerry and virtually all Democrats).

As a presidential candidate, John Kerry summed up the multilateral approach: “Alliances matter. We can’t simply go it alone.” We must exhaust all avenues of diplomacy, persuade rather than bully, and “assemble a team.” The Bush administration’s “blustering unilateralism,” he concluded, is “wrong, and even dangerous, for our country.” And nowhere, Kerry said, is the need for multilateral action more “clear or urgent” than when it comes to preventing the proliferation of nuclear materials and weapons of mass destruction.

And that leads us to North Korea. It appears Kerry favored the multilateral approach before he opposed it. In a major foreign policy address at Georgetown University in 2003, he actually praised Bush’s engagement in the six-party talks: “Finally, the administration is rightly working with allies in the region — acting multilaterally – to put pressure on Pyongyang.” And, he added, “the question is why you’d ever want to be so committed to unilateralist dogma that you’d get on [that merry go round] in the first place.”

So what gives? Isn’t it time for lawmakers to transcend the finger-pointing and focus on the real issue?

Let’s give Sen, Mitch McConnell (R.-Ky.) the last word: “The president’s political opponents attack him for a ‘unilateral’ approach to Iraq. Now they attack him over a multilateral approach to North Korea. Listening to some Democrats, you’d think the enemy was George Bush, not Kim Jong Il.”

Mike Franc, who has held a number of positions on Capitol Hill, is vice president of Government Relations at The Heritage Foundation.

North Korea is now a more psychotic threat than ever before.  But where’s all the denunciations of Obama from the ideologues who used to reign blame down on George Bush???

Remember how the president of the United States was responsible for absolutely everything that went wrong when Bush was that president?  Now we have a president who absolves himself as being responsible for ANYTHING while we’ve got a media that has actively covered up for his failures.  And where are we now?

Our greatest statesman today seems to be Dennis Rodman.

We are watching rogue nation after rogue nation rearing its ugly head and rising to threaten the world because they know that a weakling and a coward is the pathetic failed leader of once-great America.

We are also watching the United States of America degenerate into a banana republic under this failed presidency.  Our welfare roles are rising even faster than the nuclear-armed dictators who shake their fists at us.

Here’s one for you: if Republicans were even a FRACTION as treasonous and willing to undermine America’s national security for cynical political advantage as Democrats have been, they would be demanding that Obama hold one-to-one talks with Kim Jong-Un the way Democrats did when Bush was president.

You probably wouldn’t want me as president: what I would have done – whether in 2006 or today – would be to arm Taiwan with nuclear weapons (to the frothing and rabid outrage of China, which claims that Taiwan is part of China).  And I would simply tell China: “North Korea’s nuclear weapons are every bit as unacceptable to the United States as Taiwan’s having nuclear weapons is to you.  Disarm North Korea’s nukes and we’ll disarm Taiwan’s nukes.”

Hypocrite Liberalism, Where Leftist Sean Penn’s Racist Son Calls A Black Reporter The N-Word While MLK-Marching Charleton Heston Gets Demonized

According to the tenants of liberalism, this is fine:

Say What? Sean Penn’s Son Calls Black Photographer ‘N**er’ and ‘Fa**ot’
Mar 27, 2013
By Ruth Manuel-Logan

Hollywood A-Lister Sean Penn was once notorious for his explosive temper but now his son, Hopper (pictured right), has apparently followed suit.

Well, somewhat.

The younger Penn is accused of resorting to vicious and racist name-calling after he got into an altercation with a random Black photographer who confronted the pair as they entered a medical building, reports TMZ.

The nasty encounter between the photographer (pictured) and the 19-year-old was captured on video.  Hopper is seen pushing the unidentified man and this is followed by a face-to-face confrontation where the hot-headed teen is heard spewing the words, “F**k you,  you’re a f**king fa**ot…shut up you fu**ing ni**er.”

During the raucous, police just happened to be in the vicinity and overheard what had transpired between Hopper and the photographer. When officers questioned the shutterbug about what had happened, he just sloughed off the argument and refused to press charges.

Yes, he did say that.  On camera, no less.  With his words being recorded.  For the record, without the asterisks, Sean Penn’s apple that didn’t fall very far from the tree shouted, “You’re a fucking faggot.  Shut up you fucking nigger!”

Now, of course, if it had been Sarah Palin’s kid, imagine the rabid-cockroach feeding frenzy the press would have had.  You would have thought Sarah herself had been caught on tape mouthing those obscenities if it had been her kid who had said that.  She would have been persona non grata.  You know, the way the left already treats her.

Instead, it’s yawnsville.  You know, much the same way that famous liberal actor and loud-mouthed punk Alex Baldwin “a rude little pig.”  Which you’d think would be, you know, a WAR ON WOMEN.

Hell, you can even slaughter dogs after you’ve mangled them by forcing them to fight with other dogs as long as you belong to the “permanent ward of the liberal State” class.  As Michael Vick did.  Rush Limbaugh can’t become a part owner of an NFL team because he’s a Republican and Republicans are evil, but people who force dogs to fight to their deaths and then viciously slaughter the ones who aren’t vicious enough are peachy dandy as long as they’re black.  The media falsifies stories to demonize the former while ignoring the truth to celebrate the latter.  You can get caught red-handed committing adultery with whores in the scores, like Tiger Woods did.  And Obama will still play golf with you during one of his countless vacations.  Why not?  Obama is pissing on marriage by replacing it with sodomy; so why not further piss on it by endorsing the crown prince of all adulterers???

No one is ever to be punished for their words or their behavior except Republicans, you see.  Because Democrats despise actual morality and view the world through a rabid political prism that Stalin would have admired.

It’s Charleton Heston – the first famous actor to put his stand with the civil rights movement and march with Martin Luther King when people were getting beaten BY DEMOCRATS – who should be tormented in the “fundamentally transformed” world of liberalism.  Even from beyond the grave by worthless punks like Jim Carrey who is upset that anybody else should be allowed to have guns to protect themselves with the way his ARMED SECURITY has guns to protect him with.  But, what the hell – he’s a conservative so his sacrifical service out of his love for his fellow man should be mocked by a worthless liberal turd.

When I first saw Jim Carrey, I thought he was hilarious.  But by the time I saw his third movie, I realized that he was purely one-dimensional.  And if you’ve seen one of his films, you’ve pretty much seen his entire repertoire.  Unlike, say, Charleton Heston – an actual ACTOR.

Greg Gutfeld of Fox News’ “The Five” has destroyed Carrey.  He pointed out that Carrey attacked Heston because he didn’t think he could lose an argument with a dead man.  But the funny thing is THAT HE DID LOSE AN ARGUMENT WITH A DEAD MAN.  Because a dead Charleton Heston is worth a 16.7 trillion Jim Carreys (or however many trillions Obama’s national dead is at now).

The quintessential essence of the left is abject moral hypocrisy.  If you are a Democrat, you are a hypocrite; if you are a liberal Democrat, you are a tyrannosaurus hypocrite on megasteroids.  Whether it’s about racism or guns or taxes or any other damn thing under the sun of their fascism.

This is an amazing time when the truth is urinated upon while liars and their lies are beloved.

The day is coming when liberals are going to stand before a just and holy God and find out the hard way that morality is a real thing and that God will judge them according to His Word that they mock rather than their self-serving standard of political correctness.

That day will be so beautiful that it’s worth wading through all the liberal ugliness and filth to get to.

Update, 3/29/13: I wrote this piece to highlight the galling and appalling constant piss of liberal hypocrisy.  I have Jim Carrey to thank for providing more documentation to prove my thesis.  The whiny little turd just released a letter bitching about “vicious slander” from Fox News because this pathetic little turd believes that only HE should have the right to viciously slander people.  He alludes to a lawsuit because this little creep knows that the man whose grave he literally danced on is dead and can’t sue him right back.  Most amazing of all is his assertion that the clear majority of Americans that he mocks and slanders – as proven by the fact that even the majority of DEMOCRATS refuse to embrace his fascist position on guns as evidenced by Harry Reid’s tabling the so-called “assault weapons” ban – are “intolerant” even as this intolerant little creep demonizes them.  What a pygmy little loser.