Posts Tagged ‘despicable’

Why This Conservative Criticizes Allen West Over Wasserman Schultz Comeback (Better Read This Before Drawing Conclusions)

July 21, 2011

Former Lieutenant Colonel and current Representative Allen West had the following response to a prolonged personal attack from Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (who had just attacked West on the House floor and who had previously staged a protest in his own district in front of his office):

Look, Debbie, I understand that after I departed the House floor you directed your floor speech comments directly towards me. Let me make myself perfectly clear, you want a personal fight, I am happy to oblige. You are the most vile, unprofessional ,and despicable member of the US House of Representatives. If you have something to say to me, stop being a coward and say it to my face, otherwise, shut the heck up. Focus on your own congressional district!

I am bringing your actions today to our Majority Leader and Majority Whip and from this time forward, understand that I shall defend myself forthright against your heinous characterless behavior……which dates back to the disgusting protest you ordered at my campaign hqs, October 2010 in Deerfield Beach.

You have proven repeatedly that you are not a Lady, therefore, shall not be afforded due respect from me!

Steadfast and Loyal

Congressman Allen B West (R-FL)

Interestingly, most of the mainstream media outlets omit the part about the fact that this feud “dates back to the disgusting protest [Wasserman Schultz] ordered at [West’s] campaign hqs, October 2010 in Deerfield Beach.”  Apparently that little bit of historical context makes West’s response seem more reasonable, so they left that part out.  West had had his fill of Wasserman Schultz.  And she deserved everything she got from West.

That said, West shouldn’t have said the part about her not being a “lady.”

Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a cockroach.  But she is a “lady” cockroach.

As for the rest (particularly the “vile” and ‘despicable” part), West accurately characterized Wasserman Schultz to a ‘T.’

For the record, Wasserman Schultz is a white “lady,” and Allen West is “black.”  By every liberal standard (except the standard that liberalism is quintessential hypocrisy and their own spewage never applies to themsleves), that makes Wasserman Schultz a racist for criticizing West.  Just thought I’d point that out.

The funny thing, of course, is that liberalism who love to play the race card so much it’s literally every card on every deck they play with, are steadfastly ignoring the racial angle now.  Rather, West is a “misogynist.”

Again, Wasserman Schultz IS a “lady.”  It would simply take an entomologist to prove it, is all.

By the way, that protest that Debbie Wasserman Schultz went to Allen West’s district to stage?  Here’s what happened there:

Wasserman Schultz held a small rally last year outside the office of Republican Allen West, denouncing the war hero who was running for the Florida congressional seat he eventually won.  Explaining the difference between the expression of her First Amendment rights and Tea Party rallies, she said, “I don’t see any swastikas or any pictures of the President in black face or burned in effigy here.  The difference between the way we express our First Amendment rights and the way I’ve seen Tea Party extremists—Republican Tea Party extremists—express their right is dramatically different.”

And, for the record, Wasserman Schultz has a documented history of comparing her political opponents to Nazis.

Well, other than the fact that the “swastikas” came primarily from the LEFT who were deliberately and deceitfully trying to falsely smear tea party people, and other than the fact that liberals have demonized Bush at rallies beyond the point of ad nauseum (see also here) – both of which make everything Wasserman Schultz said the “vile” and “despicable” ravings of a self-righteous hypocrite – what the hell business did she have organizing a protest in front of another congressman’s office in that congressman’s district?

Before I go on with my next point about Wasserman Schultz, allow me to first point out that “NAZI” stood for “National SOCIALIST German WORKERS Party.”  And Wasserman Schultz is FAR more of a “Nazi” than Allen West has ever been or ever will be.

That said, let me introduce this comment from Wasserman Schultz about another group of people she demonized; namely, all Republican women (that’s right, Wasserman Schultz hates blacks AND women):

Newly appointed  head of the Democratic National Committee and Democrat attack dog,  Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), the woman who has built a  reputation on the left for casting aspersions on behalf of female injustice,  recently made a blanket statement that all pro-life Republicans are “anti-women.”

According to Wasserman Schultz, Republicans who seek to save the lives of the  unborn, approximately half of whom are female, are indicative of an “extremely  radical social agenda” on par with waging “war on women.” For liberals, saving life is radical; ending  life is not.

That reminded me of the bumper sticker I have actually seen on liberals’ cars:

This is the equivlenet of being PRO-JEW, PRO-HOLOCAUST.  And Wasserman Schultz and every Democrat who has helped murder more than 53 MILLION innocent human beings in the abortion mills will one day be burning in hell for this incredibly stunning depravity.

“Pro-Jew” Adolf Hitler only murdered 6 million Jews.  So you can understand why Wasserman Schultz is NINE TIMES more “pro-child” than Hitler was “pro-Jew.”

And, yes, AGAIN, Wasserman Schultz and her fellow liberal baby murderers are both ANTI-BLACK and ANTI-WOMAN.

ANTI-BLACK:

And, again, let’s take a jaunt down memory lane and see that Margaret Sanger – a patron saint of liberalism – was a Nazi sympathizer and racist eugenicist who said things like “We don’t want the word   to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.”  And that Planned Parenthood located its abortion centers in black populated areas because “Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need … We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock.”  Let us not forget that three out of every five black babies conceived in America are murdered by abortion.  And by all means – given Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s love of using the term “Nazi” to demonize her opponents – let’s compare her Democrat Party/Planned Parenthood agenda with blacks to the Nazi Party one with Jews.

ANTI-WOMAN:

Western Governments Are Blamed for Asia’s Shortage of Women
Ujala Sehgal – Sat Jun 18, 4:41 pm ET

In her new book “Unnatural Selection,” Science writer Mara Hvistendahl examines how the trend toward choosing boys over girls through sex-selective abortions has spread through the developing world, particularly in Asia. Coining the term “Generation XY,” Hvistendahl provides the grim results of sex selection: while the natural sex ratio at birth is 105 boys born for every 100 girls, in India the figure has risen to 112 boys and in China, 121. The Chinese city of Lianyungang actually recorded 163 boys per 100 girls in 2007.

The shortage of women is already giving rise to deep societal problems. New markets have been created for women in Asia, including wedding agencies that arrange marriages between South Korean men and women often from poorer nearby countries like Vietnam, that now account for 11% of all marriages in South Korea. There is also a growing practice of child marriage in China, where wealthier families buy young girls to secure wives for their sons early. And with so many surplus men (e.g., up to a fifth of men will be single in northwestern India by 2020), she suggests that the excess testosterone could lead to raised levels of crime and violence.

But what distinguishes Hvistendahl’s book from other similar reports is that, as the Guardian notes in a profile today, she “lays the blame squarely on western governments and businesses that have exported technology and pro-abortion practices without considering the consequences,” unlike other accounts, that solely basing sex selection on cultural practices.

For the record, Asian and Indian immigrant families among others are bringing the practice of selectively killing female babies with them right here to the shores of these United States of America.

As for Debbie Wasserman Schultz being a cockroach, well, cockroaches eat THEIR own young, too.

Colonel West, sir, you once famously said, “If it’s about the lives of my soldiers at stake, I’d go through hell with a gasoline can.”  I believe you’ll find that you’ve got more than a few supporters (even in other states) who would do the same thing for you.

Hypocrite Sarah Palin-Denouncing Democrats Used ‘Targets’ On Their Maps

March 31, 2010

This is just too classic an example of the most blatant kind of Democrat hypocrisy and mainstream media propaganda.

From Vocal Minority:

Liberal Hypocrisy: Guess Who Used “Target” Imagery on Their Maps?

In addition slandering the Tea Party on a daily basis, the Democrat-media complex has had another target in their sights: Sarah Palin.

About a week ago, the leftocracy, was all atwitter due to Sarah Palin having this map on her Facebook page:

Palins-Facebook-map

The icons placed on strategic Congressional districts throughout the U.S. were interpreted as cross hairs or gun sights. Devonia Smith at the Examiner says they’re neither; they’re surveyor’s symbols:Surveryorsymbol

So what exactly sent libs into a tizzy? Well, take out your fully functioning brain for a minute, and replace it with a liberal brain. Now do the calculation:Cross hairs = Guns = Violence
= Sarah Palin is threatening violence against Democrats!

Google “Sarah Palin” and “cross hairs” and you will see libs from politicians to the network shows to the mainstream editorial pages castigate Sarah Palin’s “despicable” ad. I even got into an argument with more than one liberal Facebook friend over the inoffensive (to most sentient human beings) ad. One of them even insisted Palin should be arrested. Amused, I responded: Arrested for what? Because of liberal politicians you support, we can’t even profile at the airport or engage in “warrantless wiretapping” or engage in any other preventative measure to capture radical Islamic terrorists. We need to wait until they’ve actually blown up an airplane or building before we do anything. But this liberal Palin-hater wants her immediately arrested for allegedly “inciting violence” by using crosshairs on strategic Congressional districts on a U.S. map. (Again, the liberal brain.)

The targets, obviously (to most sentient human beings), were symbolic. Hell, I’ve put politicians’ faces inside gun sights on my own blog as symbolic political targets. (Alas, neither Paul Krugman, Howard Kurtz, Anthony Weiner, nor Chris Matthews have discovered my blog!)

When Palin’s ad came out, the leftocracy went on and on about how she “crossed the line!” By the way, isn’t it funny how the right is always “crossing the line”? But for some reason calling Bush a Nazi and a war criminal; denouncing our troops as stupid, uneducated, hick dupes and cold-blooded murderers; calling the Iraq War “lost” while our troops were in harm’s way; publishing a full-page NYT ad reading “General Betray-Us;” the NYT adorning its front pages with classified information that hampered our war effort; and giving an endless forum for anti-American opportunists like Cindy Sheehan were never considered “crossing the line”? ‘M just sayin’.

Anyway, the British-health-(s)care-loving Paul Krugman wrote:

All of this goes far beyond politics as usual … you’ll search in vain for anything comparably menacing, anything that even hinted at an appeal to violence, from members of Congress, let alone senior party officials … to find anything like what we’re seeing now you have to go back to the last time a Democrat was president.

John at Verum Serum gladly accepted that challenge:

Really, Paul? I’ll search in vain?

DLC-Targeting-map

The map appears on this page of the Democratic Leadership Committee website (dated 2004 during the Bush years). I guess we could argue over whether the DLC counts as “senior party officials” but they’re certainly as much a part of the party as Palin who, after all, currently holds no elected office. …

But wait, there’s more!

When Palin’s map became an issue, Rep. Chris Van Hollen, leader of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), rushed on MSNBC to denounce it, telling Chris Matthews:

I really think that that is crossing a line…In this particular environment I think it’s really dangerous to try and make your point in that particular way because there are people who are taking that kind of thing seriously.

Really, Chris? So what do you think about this map?

DCCC-target-map

Each one of those red targets represents a “Targeted Republican.”You’ll never guess where I found this map. That’s right, it’s on the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) website. They launched the site and the map on February 23rd of this year, making it just over a month old. And yet Van Hollen was quoted by Politico just today denouncing Republicans for “pouring more and more gasoline on the flames.” Right back at you, pal. …

You have to be kidding me! The leader of the DCCC is condemning Sarah Palin for “crossing the line” with this supposed violent imagery when his own committee did the same thing only a month ago!?The knee-jerk “OMG, Sarah Palin scares me!” mentality of the leftocracy is so old and tired. But with regard to this latest outrage there’s only one way to describe them:

Hypocrites.

Democrats and liberal journalists are as dishonest as the sun is hot.

Liberals also fainted in panic over the “hate” Sarah Palin expressed when she said “Don’t Retreat, Instead – RELOAD!

And we all know how Democrats denounced Obama for his “FIRED UP, READY TO GO!!!” remarks, as we all recognized he was very clearly inciting his followers to violent acts of arson.

Oh, wait.  I’m sorry.  That was me assuming that Democrats and the mainstream media had enough brains or enough fairness to treat both sides the same way.  When they don’t have any of either.

Update, January 9, 2011: Given that this article is receiving more attention due to the shooting of  Rep. Gabrielle Gifford (among 18 other victims), I ought to throw a bone to a more current article on that subject: “Gabrielle Giffords Shooting: Don’t Blame Sarah Palin, Blame Jerod Loughner (Who If Anything Is A Leftist)”

For those who continue to want to blame Sarah Palin for using surveyor symbols to identify vulnerable Democrat-held districts, or for her “rhetoric,” I leave you with this:

The website Daily Kos has also deleted a diary about Rep. Gabrielle Giffords entitled “My Congresswoman Voted Against Pelosi, Now She’s Dead To Me,” but so far has not deleted a post by founder Markos Moulitsas that lists Giffords’ district among those on their “target list,” and noted that “Not all of these people will get or even deserve primaries, but this vote certainly puts a bulls eye on their district.” (emphasis ours).

Given the clear and abundant record of Democrats and liberals doing not merely the same as Sarah Palin, but in fact worse, what is your beef with Sarah, again???

Bill Maher vs. Pope Benedict: and the Winner is…

April 16, 2008

The too-often unfunny comedian Bill Maher’s comments about the pope deserve all the outrage and contempt that the self-righteous media could possibly dump on the man.  But it is very unlikly that he will receive more than the most mild criticism.

You think of Don Imus getting dumped over his “nappy headed hoes” comment; you think of the media universe literally coming unglued over Senator George Allen’s use of a single word – “macaca” which I still have never actually heard defined.  (Media narrative: “We don’t know what it means, but it just sounds racist to us, coming as it did from a Republican and all.”).  Actor Isaiah Washington was fired from his role on Grey’s Anatomy over an anti-gay slur.  But when Bill Maher viciously rips the pope and a billion-plus Catholics again and again, the media doesn’t seem to see any problems.  It’s a matter of one of their own targeting one of their targets.

Christians – and Catholics, especially – are fair game.  I guess when every other group has special protections, somebody has to remain on the “fair game” list.  Every propaganda machine needs a villian, after all. 

I’d like to say a few things about Bill Maher.  But first let’s let the man speak for himself:

According to Newsmax:

“The comments were made on HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” on Friday, Apr. 11. Maher went into a long monologue on his program comparing the Catholic church to a polygamous cult — the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints — which was raided on Apr. 3 and whose founder, Warren Jeffs, was convicted last year for being an accessory to the rape of a teenage girl. Bill Maher compared the Texas scandal and its latest alleged abuse with the sexual abuse scandal that rocked the Catholic Church in the United States in 2002. http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Pope_bill_maher_/2008/04/15/88028.html

These are a few of Maher’s remarks:

“I’d like to tip off law enforcement to an even larger child-abusing religious cult,” Maher told his audience. “Its leader also has a compound, and this guy not only operates outside the bounds of the law, but he used to be a Nazi and he wears funny hats. That’s right, the Pope is coming to America this week and, ladies, he’s single.”

And again:

“If you have a few hundred followers, and you let some of them molest children, they call you a cult leader. If you have a billion, they call you ‘Pope.’ It’s like, if you can’t pay your mortgage, you’re a deadbeat. But if you can’t pay a million mortgages, you’re Bear Stearns and we bail you out. And that is who the Catholic Church is: the Bear Stearns of organized pedophilia — too big, too fat.”

First of all the man is a documented liar.  Pope Benedict XVI – like ALL German youth of the time – was conscripted against his will into a German youth organization, from which he fled as soon as he could.  He was not a Nazi.  He was never a Nazi.  If anyone is a Nazi, it is Bill Maher for using Joseph Goebbels-like propaganda tactics to maliciously brand an innocent man with the most despicable charge.

Bill Maher clearly doesn’t mind telling vicious, hateful lies.  So it isn’t surprising that he would also talk about the Catholic Church in this manner.  I did a little reading on the subject, and discovered that one of the most reliable sources available – the February 2004 research study conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice – found that 81% of the so-called abuse cases involved teen-age boys and up.  Stephen Rubino, a lawyer who has represented over 300 alleged victims of priest abuse, estimated 85 percent of the victims have been teen-age boys. And Catholic psychiatrist Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, who has treated many victims and offending priests, agrees with that figure, noting that 90 percent of his patients are either abused teen-age males or their priest abusers.  These were cases of evil abuse against young men who were taken advantage of by certain priests in the worst way, but they were NOT cases of “child molestation” and/or pedophilia.  Rather, these cases were the result of a massive homosexual sub-culture within the Catholic Church taking advantage of their positions and the unequal-power-relationships they initiated to have homosexual intercourse with teens and young men.

It turns out that genuine cases of pedophila are MUCH more likely to occur in the public schools than in the Catholic Church.  And that the culture of cover-ups, transfers, and

other protective schemes to conceal abusive teachers are likewise FAR more likely to occur in the public school system than in the Catholic Church – especially today.  Public school abuses – including both the cases of sexual abuse by teachers and the covering up of such abuses by the administrators and unions – ought to be far more shocking and disturbing, because parents are forced to send their children to public schools whereas they are not so required to send their children to priests.  Why doesn’t Bill Maher charicterize public school teachers as pedophiles?  If you hate religion, don’t let facts get in the way of a good propaganda campaign.  The Catholic League has documented the points I made at:  http://www.catholicleague.org/research/abuse_in_social_context.htm

Second, Bill Maher is a bigot.

That’s what he’d call him if he singled out ANY other group of people for such hateful remarks.  If I go on a comedic rant about blacks, or Muslims, or gays, or most anyone else, and I’m sure going to hear that label applied to me.  And from no less a personage than Bill Maher, to boot.

As a counterexample to Maher, I, along with the overwhelming majority of genuine Christians, would never use rhetoric like Maher’s to describe or ridicule homosexuals in spite of our beliefs about the nature of their lifestyles.  We recognize that they are human beings who deserve compassion.  So are the one billion Catholics that Maher calls deranged cultists.

Third, Bill Maher is a coward.

I’m sure in his little “yuk-it-up” elitist social gatherings, Maher is routinely praised for his “courage” in “taking on” the Catholic Church, Christianity, and organized religion.  But this atheist wouldn’t dare attack and insult and lie about Islam the way he so cavalierly does about Catholicism and Christianity.  why not?  Because they will go after him and kill him, that’s why.  And he won’t go after Jews or Judaism (or rabbis, who have about the same rate of sex-abuse as Catholic priests, by the way) the way he goes after Catholics and Christians, because that really would be “politically incorrect” (the title of his former show), and organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League would rightly make him pay.

Fourth, Bill Mayer is a bully.

Instead of taking on people and organizations that would go after him or undermine his popularity, Maher takes advantage of the fact that Christians believe in turning the other cheek.  He takes advantage of their goodness, graciousness, and self-restraint to attack them and hurt them.  He takes advantage of the fact that his core audience – which is as vile, as bitter, and as mean as he is – are the type of people who wouldn’t at all mind seeing Christians killed by the tens of thousands in the Coliseum just as they were in the Roman days.  He’s no different than the ringleader of a group of thugs in a school yard who single out a particular kid for torment.

Fifth, Bill Maher is a hypocrite.

I mentioned that the overwhelming majority of Catholic priests’ sexual abuse cases were homosexual in nature rather than cases of pedophilia.  Let me take a moment to document the homosexual subculture within the Catholic Church before I relate this to Bill Maher. I quote one paragraph from the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance (source: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_rcc1.htm).  I am including the footnotes in order to better document the following statements, and maintain the numbering of the footnotes as they are found in the article:

* Father Donald Cozzens wrote that several studies have concluded that about 50% of priests and seminarians are gay. 5
* David France of Newsweek, referring to St. John’s Seminary in Camarillo, CA, wrote:
“Depending on whom you ask, gay and bisexual men make up anywhere from 30 percent to 70 percent of the student body at the college and graduate levels.” 3
* Rt. Rev. Helmut Hefner, rector of St. Johns Seminary “accepts that his gay enrollment may be as high as 50 percent.” 3
* Gay journalist Rex Wockner commented: “When I was in the Catholic seminary in my early 20s (St. Meinrad College, St. Meinrad, Ind., 1982-1983; University of St. Mary of the Lake, Mundelein, Ill., 1983-1984), at least 50 percent of the students were gay….At St. Mary of the Lake, the straight students felt like a minority and felt excluded from some aspects of campus life to such an extent that the administration staged a seminar at which we discussed the problem of the straight students feeling left out of things…” 6
* Author and sociologist James G. Wolfe estimated that 55.1% of seminarians were gay. 7

3   David France, “Gays and the Seminary,” MSNBC, 2002-MAY-20, at: http://www.msnbc.com/
5   “Vatican threatens gay purge of priesthood,” The Data Lounge, 2002-MAR-6, at: http://www.datalounge.com/
6   Rex Wockner, “The end of Catholicism in America,” PlanetOut, at: http://www.planetout.com/
7   James G. Wolf, “Gay Priests,” Harper and Row, 1989, Pages 59-60. Cited in Father Donald Cozzens, “The Changing Face of the Priesthood: A reflection on the priest’s crisis of soul,” Liturgical Press, (2000), Page 99.

One of many supporting articles would be http://www.actupny.org/YELL/catholicpriests.html which begins, “Roman Catholic priests in the United States are dying from AIDS-related illnesses at a rate four times higher than the general population and the cause is often concealed on their death certificates, The Kansas City Star reported in a series of stories that started Sunday.”  The article goes on to describe the homosexual subculture within the Catholic Church.

I don’t point out that the maliciously characterized “pedophile priests” have actually been homosexuals in order to attack homosexuals or homosexuality in this context.  Most of these homosexual priests – in the overwhelming majority of casaes – have practiced their vows of abstinence.  The statistics demonstrate that a tiny minority of priests perpetuated all the abuses.  Rather, I bring this up in order to reveal what a hypocrite Bill Maher is.  This man, who has made so much of these abuse cases within the Catholic Church, is a hard-core liberal activist.  Homosexuals are very much one of the groups of people that he and people like him have shielded.  One of the main reasons people like Bill Maher have so vindictively attacked Christianity and Catholicism has been because Christians and Catholics have condemned homosexuality.  And for Maher to lay at the feet of Catholicism what more deservedly lays at the feet of people whose rights he defends is the basest form of hypocrite.

The Catholic Church could have done a much better job of dealing with the abuse cases by aggressively purging homosexuals from its priesthood – which would have brought the ire of liberals like Bill Maher.  Instead, they tolerated this massive homosexual presence within their midst for decades – and Bill Maher attacks the Catholic church for tolerating a group of people that he demand they tolerate!

Thus I conclude my case that Bill Maher – and quite frankly every one who agrees with him – is a lying, bigoted, hypocritical, bullying coward.

The Catholic Church is a flawed organization, without a doubt.  But when I look at all the good that Catholics have done in the world, and then look at the fruits of people like Bill Maher, it is not the Catholic Church that looks bad.