Obama Re-acted Stupidly

>> Monday, July 27, 2009

"Pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall."--Proverbs 16:18

There really isn't much I can add to the latest Obama outrage, that of him calling the Cambridge Police Department stupid. Pretty much anything I can say has already been said by Conservative bloggers and columnists and talk show hosts.

One thing I haven't seen on any blogs is the actual police report submitted by the arresting officer, Sergeant James Crowley and Officer James Figueroa. (not that no blogs have published it)

I found the entire Police report here.

Keep in mind that filing a false police report is one of the most egregious offenses of Police Department policies. It is grounds for immediate dismissal and/or imprisonment. It is highly unlikely that a police officer would lie about what happened, especially in this case, considering the number of eyewitnesses, including both civilian and police personnel.

Plus, a police report has to be filed as soon after the incident as possible, which hardly gives Sergeant Crowley time to come up with some kind of credible fabrication.

No, Sergeant Crowley's version is undoubtedly accurate.

Now. There are a few things about this case that are glaringly obvious:

1. Henry Louis Gates is a racist bigot.

2. This is one more example of a black man shamelessly playing the proverbial race card in an effort to procure special favors or treatment.

3. Obama showed himself to be equally as despicably racist as Henry Gates.

On this last point, I would add, it's really pretty stupid to speak out in this knee-jerk fashion before all the facts are revealed. If Obama had simply said, "I have no comment at this time", he would have saved himself a lot of embarrassment.

Of course, that goes without saying.

But, instead, he stupidly assumed that a white police officer was racist because one of his racist friends said so.

That's right I said it! Obama reacted stupidly!

This is one of those cases when discretion on Obama's part would have been the wiser choice. It would have been more prudent for him to allow himself to be brought up to date on the particulars of the situation before making comment.

But that is not in Obama's nature. Obama is too arrogant.

Arrogance, as I once pointed out, is not necessarily a bad thing. Arrogance is an important trait in salesmen, for instance. It helps a salesman to believe he can close any sale regardless of the difficulty. That requires a certain amount of arrogance.

We've all seen this attitude in friends, co-workers, and enemies many times in our lifetimes, and we will continue to see it until the end of time.

But Obama's arrogance is an entirely different brand of arrogance.

This is evident in his absolute refusal to admit he was wrong to say the Cambridge Police Department acted stupidly in the arrest of Henry Gates. Pathological narcissists such as Obama would never admit fallibility in even the most innocuous matters.

What stubbornly arrogant people like Obama do when proven to be wrong about someone, is, rather than apologize, which normal people would do, simply make some kind of overture, in hopes that the offense will just go away.

And now, what do we see Obama doing?

He has offered to have a friendly little sit-down with Sergeant Crowley, Henry Gates, and himself, over a beer.

This is the typical attempt at apology exemplified by stubbornly arrogant people. It is his way of apologizing.

This offer of a meeting is simply wordplay utilized in an attempt to stem the tide of outrage over Obama's embarrassing remark. He doubtless has no intention of actually following through with his gesture.

But, assuming he would actually follow through with the invitation, which is doubtful, it will be too little, too late for Obama.

He has shown himself to be the small-minded racist bigot most of us believed him to be, and the gloss is beginning to wear off.

Read more...

The Upside To Obama's Policies

>> Friday, July 24, 2009

"Don't be discouraged by a failure. It can be a positive experience. Failure is, in a sense, the highway to success, inasmuch as every discovery of what is false leads us to seek earnestly after what is true, and every fresh experience points out some form of error which we shall afterwards carefully avoid." ~ John Keats

Barack Hussein Obama's feverish rush to get his health care legislation passed before the August recess could turn out to be his undoing.

If the bill passes both the House and Senate before the August recess, that means, I believe, that we could see the implementation of Government run health care as early as January first of 2010.

The next Presidential election will take place in November of 2012, almost two full years after Obamacare becomes the established law of the land.

If that's the way the scenario is played out, two years may be plenty enough time for even the most avid supporters of Obama to see the folly of his over ambitious plan.

Plenty of time for Obama's followers to watch their loved ones suffer and die, while waiting for procedures and surgeries that are too little, too late.

Plenty of time for them to experience first hand the interminable waiting lines and crowded waiting rooms.

Plenty of time for his worshipers to realize that medical professionals are hopelessly undermanned and underfunded.

Plenty of time for Obama's devotees to see how Obama's grandiose plans for so-called free health care in America have withered and died.

It may not be enough time for Republicans to win enough seats in Congress to regain a majority in the 2010 elections, but the Congress will be undoubtedly already facing increased dissension over the economic recession, higher unemployment numbers, rampant inflation, little or no choice of health insurance, and inadequate health care.

Not to mention a near revolution against intrusive Government regulations regarding the first and second amendments.

In fact, Obama's big hurry to pass all sorts of legislative changes could well seal not only his fate, but the fate of the Democrat lawmakers who support him, as well. Obama's rambunctiousness may well insure no Democrats except Conservative Democrats will be elected to office for decades to come.

I met a young man a couple of days ago who confided in me that up until recently he had no interest in politics at all. But, he said, all that changed when Obama began taking over banks, auto makers, insurance companies, etc. He began to see how dangerous it would be to allow this man to grasp and hold that much power and control over Americans.

Gradually, he came to the realization that America, as he once knew it, had ceased to exist, and he fears now for the safety of his children and his children's children.

This is what he said to me:

"I guess I have to thank Obama for getting me involved in politics".
I wonder how many Conservatives Obama has created with his Marxist policies.

How many Democrats have become Republicans thanks to Obama?

How many Liberals are no longer Liberals?

I guess it's true:

Every cloud has a silver lining.

Read more...

It's Not My Problem...Or Is It?

>> Tuesday, July 21, 2009

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." ~ Thomas Jefferson

As much as I dislike insurance companies, I dislike what I am hearing about Obama's health care plan even more.

As a Conservative, it disturbs me deeply whenever I hear of any government plan that essentially denies anyone their Constitutional right to liberty.

Obama's health care plan will virtually outlaw insurance companies.

Additionally, it will force Americans into a Government run health care system whether they would personally choose such a system for themselves and their families or not.

This, as I say, is blatantly unconstitutional.

This is a perfect example of the classic Liberal notion that we American citizens are too stupid to know what's best for us, so the Government must make that decision for us.

I have mentioned my dislike for insurance companies before, but even I would not think of denying them the right to exist.

I don't even like the government requiring me to buy car insurance under penalty of law, so one can imagine how opposed I would be to any kind of national health insurance.

It's not that I don't think auto insurance is a necessity. I do, but mandating the purchase of it, in my opinion, violates basic human rights outlined in the Constitution of the United States.

I could do a whole blog post on the subject. In fact, I have. And here, also.

And so, I admit I have mixed feelings about this health care plan. On the one hand, I would personally like access to free health care. And, I'm not so sure Obama's plan wouldn't work, even though efforts to implement such plans have always failed when attempted elsewhere. Perhaps those who engineered the plan for him have managed to perfect the system, although, if Obama's history of choosing incompetent advisors and aides is any indication, they haven't.

Anyone who thinks I am wrong about his plan to outlaw private insurance, take notice. As early as page 16 of the health care bill now being debated, is this paragraph:

Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.

That's legislature speak for: Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.

The linked article goes on to say:

The nonpartisan Lewin Group estimated in April that 120 million or more Americans could lose their group coverage at work and end up in such a program. That would leave private carriers with 50 million or fewer customers. This could cause the market to, as Lewin Vice President John Sheils put it, "fizzle out altogether."

What wasn't known until now is that the bill itself will kill the market for private individual coverage by not letting any new policies be written after the public option becomes law.

Stepping away from my own self interest, I have to say:

No one, not even Government, has the right to take away any free market business' right to operate their business as they see fit.

Stepping back to my self interest, I don't want anyone, not even the government, telling me how I should choose to spend my health care dollar.

They don't even have the right to deny me my right to be stupid, if I want to be stupid. I reserve the right to refuse health care. If I want to suffer and die without ever seeing any medical professional, that is my Constitutional right.

This isn't about whether we have a right to health care or not, which, by the way, we don't.

It's about our inherent and constitutional right to choose how we want to live our individual lives.

Then, there is the point about the natural consequences of free health care for all, which I mentioned in a recent post:

Crowded waiting rooms and long waits for treatment, among other things. Not to mention the increased likelihood of misdiagnosis, due to rushing through examinations because of time constraints on the medical professionals.

More patients, less time to be thorough.

Personally, I am quite healthy, although I have some health issues with which I will eventually have to deal. Some day, I will need immediate health care.

Right now, I can wait for medical examinations. I don't have an immediate need for any prescriptions. I will not suddenly drop dead for lack of immediate health care. Knock wood.

Many people, notably senior citizens, don't have that option. They need care immediately.

Then, there's this, from Obama's own black heart:



Did you hear and understand what Obama said in this video? "Maybe this isn't going to help. Maybe, you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the pain killers."

He wants the government to decide who lives and dies.

Is this what you want for your grandparents? Is this what you want for yourself should you reach the point when Obama determines you have outlived your usefulness?

Obama has made it clear that he believes senior citizens, and those younger people with terminal diseases are, due to their advanced age and stages, past the point of saving. Therefore, he has suggested the government will save some money by simply not treating the aged and infirmed, except to dull the pain with pain killing drugs.

In other words, he believes saving the lives of some people isn't worth the cost and effort needed to do so.

Euthanasia is just around the corner. How could it not be?

He has yet to specify at what age we officially outlive our usefulness to society, but I'm sure eventually, once his plan is adopted into law, he will make his wishes known on that subject.

But, as I said, that doesn't specifically concern me personally. Yet. But, I'm not getting any younger.

And that leads me to ask, "What's next?" Eliminate the mentally challenged? How about those with Down's Syndrome? Is Sarah Palin's baby in danger?

Will Obama make "Welcome to the Monkey House", and "Soylent Green" a reality?

We already know he plans to grant late term abortion rights, on demand, to anyone who feels the least bit inconvenienced by an unexpected, and/or unwanted baby.

What were his words? Oh yes. "Punished with a baby".

Now, it seems simply being old or chronically sick will be justification enough for these Mengele-worthy "progressive" changes.

OK. Those are just a couple of thoughts I have about Obamacare.

But, what all this boils down to, whether the information we have about it so far is accurate or not, is this:

This is undoubtedly an unprecedented reach for power and control on the part of Obama.

It really isn't about a "failing health care system". It really isn't about "leveling the playing field". It isn't even about making sure all Americans have affordable health care.

Obama and his lackeys in Congress don't really care about Americans health or ability to pay for health care.

It is really all about a Marxist control of Government which will ultimately lead to the destruction of a free America.

Read more...

Health Care Warning

>> Saturday, July 18, 2009

I saw the video attached to the title above and thought I'd post it here. It is a semi-humorous look at the Canadian system (I say "semi-humorous" because it's really not funny at all) and says pretty much what has been said before about the gov't run system there.

What scares me the most is knowing what a bunch of buffoons the president and his majority lapdogs are (if they are the lapdogs---it could be that Barry's their lapdog). After having taken part in the destruction of the economy ("inherited" my ass), they now think they're capable of fixing it, and it seems obvious that they're only making it worse. Now, they want to push a system of health care that hasn't provided the medical utopia they promised it would be elsewhere. This of course doesn't even address the whole "how d'ya pay for it?" aspect of whole deal.

So watch and see how it works up north. The video kinda just stops at the end, but by then you should have gotten the point. As I've said, others have made the same complaints about Canada, most notably, Mark Steyn, and this vid just re-iterates the warning. Heed it. Call your reps and scream at them to block any such legislation that brings us anything similar. They just aren't smart enough to do it better than Canada and we will all suffer as a result.

Read more...

O.M.G!

>> Friday, July 17, 2009

"Lord, what fools these mortals be!" ~ William Shakespeare

What hath the Minnesota Supreme Court wrought?

How fate loves a jest!


Senator Al Franken.

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor?

Relevance?

God help us.



Be afraid. Be very afraid.

h/t: Lone Ranger, through Joe.

Read more...

That's Outrageous!

>> Tuesday, July 14, 2009

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

The last blog entry I posted at my blog, entitled "Congressman King Is Called A Racist" was perhaps the worst piece I ever wrote. I know what I was trying to say, but I was so angry. I just couldn't find the words.

I am still angry.

Why isn't everybody as enraged as I am? How long are we going to allow these race baiters and bigots to infect our culture with their hate and bigotry?

I am sick and tired of these jerks.

Do you understand what happened here? Let me remind you:

Congressman Pete King of New York posted a video wherein he exercised his first amendment right to free speech, and was mercilessly attacked for it.

He was apalled, as most of us sane citizens are, with all the fervor surrounding the death of Micheal Jackson, a man (and I use the term loosely) who's sole positive accomplishment in his 50 years was recording rhythmic, catchy, tunes for profit.

And also, for easier access to young boys for the purpose of sexual abuse.

OK. So maybe Jackson was a musical genius. If one wants to make that claim, I'll acquiesce to that. Perhaps he was extraordinarily brilliant at musical and video production. I'll grant you that as well.

But, as one commentator wrote, all those accomplishments are negated by his perversion.

Pete King was attacked and vilified for stating the truth.

I understand Michael Jackson's fans may have felt insulted by what Mr King said, and they have every right to voice objections to Kings portrayal of Jackson as a pedophile. After all, Jackson was acquitted of those charges. Some people accept that, and that's their perogative.

And, if Jackson's devotees had simply stopped at that, I wouldn't be writing this post.

But the racists and race baiters and bigots just had to stir the pot, and throw in charges of racism as well.

This is wholly unacceptable behavior.

Pete King said nothing about race, or color, or even any physical difference between blacks and whites during his rant. He made no reference whatsoever to stereotypical behavior of any race color or creed. He did not draw any similarities between race and pedophilia.

He did not say Jackson was a pedophile because he was a black man.

In short, nothing Pete King said had anything to do with race issues.

None. Zip. Nada.

When are we going to speak up and stop these people from disrupting and dividing our culture?

If not for these so-called black leaders and professional racists, there would be no racism anymore.

But they just have to keep the anger seething, don't they?

Ask yourself: What are they trying to accomplish? Racial equality?

Hardly. We have, for the most part, achieved that now. Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr won equality for blacks through his campaign of non-violence back in the 60's.

Yes, we are still a work in progress today, but really, how much further would we be toward that goal of true racial equality without certain people (on both sides admittedly) continually antagonizing the others?

The white supremacists and the Ku Klux Klan have been effectively neutralized. They have become insignificant.We pretty much ignore them and discount them as just a bunch of nuts, now. And nuts they are.

The only real racists and bigots that have any influence now are the black racists.

Are blacks still relegated to the back of the bus, banned from lunch counters, forced to drink from specially labeled drinking fountains?

Does our white culture still prevent blacks from attending all white schools, bar them from jobs they are qualified for, or otherwise "keep them in their place"?

No I say. No, no, and a thousand times no.

The fact is, blacks have more opportunity to all these things, and more today. Their leaders agitated for affirmative action and they got it.

Now, the pendulum has swung the other direction. Whites are now discriminated against regularly in schools, businesses, and everyday culture.

Do you think I'm overstating the problem?

Ask Frank Ricci.

Or, on your next visit to the Walmart, or the supermarket, or any place where the customer service people don't get paid on tips. Pay attention. Pay attention to the difference in how the black customers and white customers are treated by black customer service workers.

And still, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Jeremiah Wright, Lewis Farrakhan, Hazel Dukes, Charles Rangel, Barack Hussein Obama, and so many other so-called black leaders continue to agitate, antagonize, bully, accuse, vilify, and intimidate white people into keeping their mouths shut, and allowing black leaders to set public policies and agendas.

Believe it or not, these racist bigots actually get paid to incite division and hatred! They get paid to hate! Someone (and in many cases, it's the taxpayers), is paying these scumbags to spread hatred and division among the races.

This outrage has to be stopped. These so-called black leaders need to be fired. They are systematically destroying the fabric of our multi-racial culture.

We need to get angry. We need to stand up for true racial equality. We need to find our voices, and we need to use them to affect real change.

We need to treat everyone with respect and dignity, regardless of their race, color, or creed.

Everyone, that is, that deserve equal treatment. Not the scheming, cheating, lying race baiters and hate merchants.

We need to treat them as they would treat others.

That is what they deserve.

Read more...

Liberal Dishonesty -- So What Else Is New?

>> Wednesday, July 8, 2009


The Numbers Game

--Aaron Gee, AmericanThinker.com

All these supposed ethics complaints against Gov. Palin, reported over and over, ad nauseum, by the liberal media, but never do they tell you those complaints have been dismissed. Liberals also like to point to all the investigations against Republican lawmakers, but completely fail to tell you that there are MORE Democrat lawmakers under investigation than Republican.

What was the title of that Al Franken book? "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them" Yep, that would be Liberals and their butt-boys the in the MSM.


Read more...

History Of Independence day

>> Saturday, July 4, 2009

Independence Day is the national holiday of the United States of America commemorating the signing of the Declaration of Independence by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

At the time of the signing the US consisted of 13 colonies under the rule of England's King George III. Leading up to the signing, there had been growing unrest in the colonies surrounding the taxes that colonists were required to pay to England. The major objection was "Taxation without Representation" -- the colonists had no say in the decisions of English Parliament.

Rather than negotiating, King George sent extra troops to the colonies to help control any rebellion that might be arising. The following timeline will give you a crash course in the history that lead to the signing of the Declaration of Independence and America's break from British rule.

1774 - The 13 colonies send delegates to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to form the First Continental Congress. While unrest was brewing, the colonies were far from ready to declare war.

April 1775 -- King George's troops advance on Concord, Massachusetts, prompting Paul Revere's midnight ride that sounded the alarm "The British are coming, the British are coming."

The subsequent battle of Concord, famous for being the "shot heard round the world," would mark the unofficial beginning of the American Revolution.

May 1776 -- After nearly a year of trying to work our their differences with England, the colonies again send delegates to the Second Continental Congress.

June 1776 -- Admitting that their efforts were hopeless, a committee was formed to compose the formal Declaration of Iindependence. Headed by Thomas Jefferson, the committee also included John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Philip Livingston and Roger Sherman.

June 28, 1776 -- Jefferson presents the first draft of the declaration to congress.

July 4, 1776 -- After various changes to Jefferson's original draft, a vote was taken late in the afternoon of July 4th. Of the 13 colonies, 9 voted in favor of the Declaration; 2, Pennsylvania and South Carolina voted No; Delaware was undecided and New York abstained.

John Hancock, President of the Continental Congress, was the first to sign the Declaration of Independence. It is said that he signed his name "with a great flourish" so "King George can read that without spectacles!"

July 6, 1776 -- The Pennsylvania Evening Post is the first newspaper to print the Declaration of Independence.

July 8, 1776 -- The first public reading of the declaration takes place in Philadelphia's Independence Square. The bell in Independence Hall, then known as the "Province Bell" would later be renamed the "Liberty Bell" after its inscription - "Proclaim Liberty Throughout All the Land Unto All the Inhabitants Thereof."

August 1776 - The task begun on July 4, the signing of the Declaration of Independence, was not actually completed until August. Nonetheless, the 4th of July has been accepted as the official anniversary of United States independence from Britain.

July 4, 1777 -- The first Independence Day celebration takes place. It's interesting to speculate what those first 4th festivities were like. By the early 1800s the traditions of parades, picnics, and fireworks were firmly established as part of American Independence Day culture

Read more...

Who'd She Coup?

>> Thursday, July 2, 2009

Did you hear about the coup in Honduras? I bet you did. Media's been talking this up, along with Michael Jackson's untimely demise, as typical central and south American "rule by mob" politics (the coup, not Jackson's U.D.)... even Fox calls this the military coup of a democratically elected leader. And aside from a few of the pundits, Fox's news department paints the whole affair in a negative light. Not particularly surprising.

Well how about some perspective?

From the Wall Street Journal:

The Wages of Chavismo


"As military "coups" go, the one this weekend in Honduras was strangely, well, democratic. The military didn't oust President Manuel Zelaya on its own but instead followed an order of the Supreme Court. It also quickly turned power over to the president of the Honduran Congress, a man from the same party as Mr. Zelaya. The legislature and legal authorities all remain intact.

We mention these not so small details because they are being overlooked as the world, including the U.S. President, denounces tiny Honduras in a way that it never has, say, Iran."


President Zelaya, with the aid of Hugo Chavez was attempting to set himself up as a tin-horn dictator. But the world [i.e., the U.N., Obama, Chavez, Castro, etc.] is outraged that any populace would seek to prevent a leader from voiding his country's rule of law to become, well, another tin-horn dictator.

Enter a bit of dangerous Obama hypocrisy:

"...As for the Obama Administration, it seems eager to "meddle" in Honduras in a way Mr. Obama claimed was counterproductive in Iran. Yet the stolen election in Iran was a far clearer subversion of democracy than the coup in Honduras. As a candidate, Mr. Obama often scored George W. Bush's foreign policy by saying democracy requires more than an election -- a free press, for example, civil society and the rule of law rather than rule by the mob. It's a point worth recalling before Mr. Obama hands a political victory to the forces of chavismo in Latin America."


Not only is Obama inexperienced, but it's on display for anyone in the world with eyes to see, and ears to hear.

From the National Review:
The Honduran Counter-Coup

"...While it is always unnerving to see gun-toting officers arrest a president, the move against Zelaya was not a conventional "military coup." It was an affirmation of democracy and the rule of law, both of which the president had flouted. If anything, it was a counter-coup, the real coup having been attempted by Zelaya."


Did you catch that? 'it was a COUNTER-COUP.'

Isn't that what democrats in Washington are doing to the United States? Staging a coup? Isn't this what they've been trying to do for decades now?

As a side note, allow me to suggest that the reason everything Obama and the Left are attempting to do to America appears so overwhelming is because America has reached a tipping point where, after years of bad policies on top of bad policies, the pot is now tipping over from the weight of all that built-up momentum. it looked pretty when the fall appeared ages away, but now that we're in the gravity well of a gargantuan socialistic black hole we are all understandably fearful. Would that we had wakened to the danger decades ago; but this is where we are, and this is from where we must begin to fight back.

It's time now to stage our own counter-coup. Not with guns, knives, or pipe-bombs. Not with men like Bill Ayers, but with the ballot. The ballot is mightier than the sword [except in Minnesota]. It is time to take a side and stand firm-- no wishy-washy Charlie Brown's allowed.

Those who wish to see America return to her roots must refuse to give any more ground to the Left, and that includes supporting democratic bills because they have the pretension of offering a few items of piecemeal goodness, while loaded throughout with poison.

If you want to prevent Obama from further destroying this country you have to stand up. Now. Today. Tomorrow will be too late.

Press your senators to vote against Cap & Tax. Press your congressmen and senators both to vote against government run healthcare. These two measures alone will wreak havoc on American business, American jobs, and more importantly, American lives.



I've said my peace, now it's your turn.


Read more...

Barry Obama : The Young Turk


Young Turk:
Date: 1908
Function: noun
Etymology: Young Turks, a 20th century revolutionary party in Turkey
:an insurgent or a member of an insurgent group especially in a political party : radical; broadly
:one advocating changes within a usually established group.





Photos: 1980 Taken by, Lisa Jack / M+B Gallery

Labels

"House Negro" "No One Messes with Joe" "O" "The One" 08-Election 1984 2009 Inaugural 2012 Election 9/11 abortion abortionists Air Obama Al Franken Al Gore Al-Qaeda American Youth Americarcare Assassination Scenario Atheism Barry O Bi-Partisanship Biden Billary Birth Certificate Border Security Bush Bush Legacy Change Change-NOT child-killers Christians Christmas Civilian Defense Force Clinton Code Pink Congress Conservatism Constitution Creation Darwin Del McCoury Democrat Hypocrisy Democrats Dick Morris Dr. Tiller Dubya Earth Day Elian Gonzalez Ends Justify Means Evil Evolution Evolution-Devolution Failure in Chief Fairness Doctrine Feodork Foreign Relations Free Speech Frogs Fuck America - Obama Has Gates George Orwell Gestapo Global Cooling Global Idiots Global Warmong God GOP Descent Graphic Design Great American Tea Party Gun-Control Guns hackers Harry Reid hate haters Heath Care Heretic Hillary Howard Dean Hussein ident in History identity theft Illegal Immigration Iraq Jackboots Jesus Jihadist-Lover Jimmy Carter Joe Biden Jon Stewart Kanye West Karl Rove Katrina Las Vegas Left-Wing Media Leftists Liar Liberal Media liberal tactics Liberals Liberty Lying Media Marriage Penalty Martyr Marxism McCain Media MSNBC/Obama Administration murderers Norm Coleman Obama Obama 2012 Obama Administration Obama Dicatorship Obama Lies Obama Wars Obama's Army Obamacare Obamists Olympia Snowe Partisanship perversion Piracy Police State Political Hell Political Left Populist Rage Pragmatist Prayer Proof of Citizenship Proposition 8 Racism Regime Change Revolution Ronald Reagan Rush Limbaugh Second Amendment Separation of Powers Slavery Socialist Government Tea-Bagging Tea-Parties terrorists The Raw Deal Thuggery Tom Tancredo Traitors War Criminal War on Weather War-Crimes Worst President in History

  © Blogger template Werd by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP