While perusing the media coverage of the devastating earthquake that hit Haiti, I had a flashback.
Does anyone remember a storm that hit New Orleans, Louisiana a couple of years ago?
In the aftermath of that storm, fingers were pointed. Blame was assigned. Remember?
It was George W. Bush's fault. It was FEMA's fault. I seem to remember Reverend (and I use the term loosely) Pat Robertson saying Hurricane Katrina was a judgment from God because of the hedonism and debauchery that runs rampant in the city. Well, he's at it again, isn't he? I wish he'd just shut up. He's giving real Christians a bad rep.
The storm changed the perspective of many people, including myself. Another blogger who I considered one of my best blogger buddies at the time was changed also.
I became less racist. He became more Liberal. Fanatically more Liberal. He is absolutely mad now.
He is married to a so-called intellectual. She is a doctor of some sort (he never enlightened his blog readers what she is a doctor of), who lectures all over the country, and also a raving Liberal.
She had her own blog. On her blog, she announced George Bush was at fault because a hospital ship was a day or two tardy getting to the port of New Orleans to aid in the rescue operations there.
Yes, I know, the connection between the two is tenuous at best, but I seem to recall her biased assessment of the situation made a sort of discombobulated sense in a Liberal, pseudo-intellectual kind of way. Somehow, it was the President's fault.
I wish I could explain her logic but it appears her blog is now non-existent, and frankly, I don't remember much of what she wrote, except that she blamed the President.
The media coverage I was referring to in the first paragraph was this. Here's a teaser for those who don't follow links:
The operating room is prepped with oxygen tanks, ventilators and a roster of blood donors. But while the USS Carl Vinson's medical facilities perhaps exceed those of any other triage center nearby, it had remained essentially unused since it arrived off the coast of Port-au-Prince early Friday
When did the Haitian earthquake strike? Wasn't it a few days before Friday?
Why is the hospital ship not helping? Is it political? Where are the incessant accusations from the left now? Why isn't anyone pointing fingers? Why is no one assigning blame? Who is at fault?
What is Obama doing?
Why aren't Liberal bloggers and the state run media blaming Obama?
Hurricane Katrina was all Bush's fault. Remember? At least that's what we were told.
The media says so. It must be true. Right?
I wonder how Rahm Emanuel and Obama and the rest of the gang can turn this latest crisis into a political advantage.
Listen: If Hurricane Katrina was George W. Bush's fault, then it stands to reason the blame for the Haitian earthquake lies squarely on Barack Hussein Obama's shoulders.
What are we going to do about that?
Wow. I haven't been by here in weeks to protect my sanity. My blogears were burnin' tho.
ReplyDeleteYou're right. President Obama should ask the leaders of Haiti, what's left of them, to call an election in a month, and send Jimmy Carter to supervise it, to see if the people of Haiti would accept an invitation to become the 51st state. if they do, then that should become one of his administration's top priority.
It might be a step toward the repentance this country should do to make amends for it's past and present abuse of power.
How's that suit ya? Radical enough.
If Jesus were president, that's what he'd do.
Adios.
--ER
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI'm surprised the Obama administration hasn't blamed the earthquake on Bush.
ReplyDeleteBush was supposed to stop hurricanes and the warming effect of the sun, why not earthquakes.
Cool, Drood! A comment as stoopid as this post! Bravo.
ReplyDeleteNo self-respecting liberal would ever criticize Obama... but then again using "self-respecting" and "liberal" in the same sentence is, at the very least, oxymoronic.
ReplyDeleteSince I have nothing good to say about liberalism in America, I'll simply say they are beneath me, and only worth note in as much as an ant is worth note when it decides to chew on my toe... best to squish it, then burn out the entire nest.
Nancy Pelosi? She should be shot for treason.
Mr. Reid? Shot.
Every single one of those monstrous democrat excuses for representatives and senators who vote the evil machinations of Barack Obama into law....? Taken out back and shot for traitors.
Perhaps one day, liberalism will be treated as the disease it is, and its adherents as the mental defects they are.
Far as I'm concerned, anyone who can point at Barack Obama and honestly say that he is the right man for the Oval Office; that he's a good and Godly man who is living up to his oath of office, is an idiot... irrespective of their degree of education. They are idiots, and as such should never be allowed to vote or reproduce.
If Jesus were president... this nation would be a theocracy, And every liberal would be crying for his crucifixion... 'let His blood be upon us and our children!' they'd all scream. What a steaming pile of dung eating hypocrites all you liberals are.
Where are the days of Kore when you need them? When the earth opened up and swallowed entire families for the sins of a single man?
Those days are coming again. Not for the sins of single man, but for the sin of all mankind.
What was so wrong about what Pat Robertson said? Haiti has been steeped in evil for centuries... corruption, violence, voodoo... Why is Haiti so poor, destitute, and now ravaged by earthquake when right next door the Dominican Republic is unscathed? Corruption is the reason Haiti is in the shape it's in. Not America.
But having said all this, Obama is doing the right thing in regard to Haiti. But they are quite fortunate they are NOT the 51st state. He's destroying the current configuration of the United States with his corrupted, horrid, and ungodly, policies. He'd only serve the people of Haiti the same.
For the people of Haiti that'd be a step up. But they'd be just as much slaves to governmental corruption as we here are now.
The constitution means nothing to people like Barack Obama.
Think about it.
Hope you feel better now, EL, but I know you don't. You're sick in your soul and in your head.
ReplyDeleteSick!?
ReplyDeleteThis from someone who is DEAD in soul and head!? That is truly rich ER.
Mmm-hmm. You don't know anything. I'd be careful calling for the execution of duly elected leaders. Or maybe, as a true believer, you'd find some twisted kind of "peace" from knowing the Secret Service is listenin' in. Because they are. And I think you just broke the law. Stooooopid!
ReplyDeleteAs if your ilk never uttered the same during the Bush years? Hypocrite.
ReplyDeleteYou think.... obviously not.
I never did. I never, ever, called for violence, and I never considered the government illigitimate. I did call for Bush's and Cheney's impeachment.
ReplyDeleteYou're so sick in your soul you're misremembering. As for my "ilk," my personal ilk is my family, my church, my workplace and to a lesser degree the liberal, but not anarchist or leven leftist, wing of the Democratic Party. And I do not know a one of them as sick in your soul as to call this government traitorous and to want to see people killed. You're sick, hoss, and, as one who hits his knees pretty regularly when he finally realizes he is sick in his soul, I suggest you do the same. Or your bitterness will kill you.
Peace, and adios.
You allowed all those poison pills at your place to do all the murdering for you.
ReplyDeleteChin Up Eric. You have nothing to be ashamed of, but there are some who have become so dead of soul that they know no shame. mom2
ReplyDeleteOh, I'm not discouraged Mom2, just tired of the godless sanctimony from the Left. Thanks for the support nonetheless. (Thanks for the holiday wishes by the way. I hope your holiday was a blessing for all)
ReplyDeleteIn reference to ER's ire, however, I will say this. I wouldn't have chosen a certain someone's wife, however much sarcasm I employed, to make a point. But it's a free country, so neither do I condemn it. That seems to be ER's MO-- he condemns us at American Descent for what he freely allows at the Erudite Redneck.
The problem with America today is it has forgotten what being American entails. And we can thank the Democrats for that as well. Much of what's gong on in Washington today IS unconstitutional. HAS BEEN unconstitutional for decades-- Republicans are semi-responsible for this decline as well. But I'm not going to sit back and just let the worst excuse for patriots, collectively known as Liberals or Democrats, continue to wreck this country simply because they think it's their God-given right to do so.
What's going on with this so-called healthcare "debate" is perhaps the greatest legislative travesty [beside ROE] in our history. This despite Pelosi's assertion that it's been the most "transparent" debate in legislative history. What's transparent is the unabashed deceit and hypocrisy of the Left... including Obama.
Barack Hussein Obama is the worst man this country could ever have elected in 2008. I would rather Hillary had won than Barack, simply because she would not have gotten this far this fast. On the downside, public sentiment against her would likely have never reached this fever pitch, this soon. Virginia and New Jersey would likely have not fallen to Republicans, and the race for the "People's Seat" in Massachusetts quite likely not have ever gotten this close. What happens to Obama's agenda should Brown win tomorrow? Even more despicable, even traitorous behavior from the democrat-led house and senate? All the more reason each and every one of them should be booted out as soon as possible. IF Brown wins tomorrow, what does that say about Republican chances of taking back the Senate and House in November?
Regardless of what happens tomorrow, Obama is single-handedly destroying the Democrat party (Hillary would never have done this)... And I see sunny skies ahead.
Should Republicans take back either house in November, we as Conservatives must hold their feet to the fire every bit as much as we're holding the Liberals.
Is it really possible that one party could so quickly rise to power only to fall in disgrace a mere two years later?
Time and tide will tell.
ER has now adopted the Obama way for answering critics, call names and throw tantrums. Good to see all the Obama-Zombies are on the same page.
ReplyDeleteI think there's a big difference between assassination fantasies on the left and charges of treason, for which the penalty is quite often death on the right. That Eric calls for particular Dems to be shot as traitors does not necessarily mean he wants anyone to take it upon themselves to be that hand of justice, but for those Dems to be tried, found guilty and the typical sentence carried out.
ReplyDeleteA far better reponse than questions of Eric's sould might be questions regarding his reasons for believing these people to be traitors or traitorous. It's easy to sit back, content with the direction of the country and suppose the rest of us who see clearly are the sick ones. Rarely do the wrong suppose themselves less than right.
So I will ask Eric to provide an example or two that supports his charge of treason against whatever Dems most piss him off. Then EL can debate those points if he chooses rather than suppose a guy at the end of his rope has truly lost his soul.
I am equally dismayed at the actions of this administration and my own emotions erupt with every job app that yeilds no response or a response of "no". But I have not come to a conclusion regarding the intentions of these people. I have not decided for myself if they are doing this on purpose, that is, willfully seeking to destroy our nation or if they're just really, really stupid. The results will be the same regardless, but at this point in time, as history continues to show them their ideas won't work, I can't help but think they are the largest collection of really, really stupid people that has ever been elected to public service. Consider how they blame Bush for our economic woes yet implement the same impotent strategies to combat them. They called Bush stupid and now do what he did and do it with greater gusto. That's pretty freakin' stupid.
Treason or stupidity? Let's just vote their sorry asses out of office and let them fade into the obscurity they so rightly deserve.
Jesus, God! EL's dragging Marshall right over the psychotic cliff.
ReplyDeleteIt's like Goehring and Edward VIII... Hitler and Pétain.
Marshall's an apologist for ELs irrational hatred.
Probably will be deleted, but . . .
ReplyDeleteMarshall, while I applaud your attempt to rationalize Eric's comment, the simple fact is - he meant exactly what he said, and desires the summary execution of senior Democratic politicians, including the Speaker of the House (third in line to the Presidency).
I take him at his word that he wants them not removed from office, but dead. By his hand? Perhaps not. But dead by someone's in any case.
Sic semper tyrannis, Geoffrey, sic semper tyrannis.
ReplyDeleteMy point was this: Democrats blamed Bush for everything remotely connected with the circumstances in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and although ER would have us believe they didn't, one merely has to do a search of ER's blog to find he and his amen corner repeated those unfounded and untrue accusations ad nauseum.
Now that there is similar natural disaster, no one is blaming Obama for anything. Not even Republicans.
(In fact, tonight on FOX news, Bill O'Reilly and Brit Hume both commended Obama for his quick response to this crisis.)
And there is no reason why anyone should. The fact is he is no more responsible for the earthquake and any resulting mistakes than Mother Teresa.
See? That's the difference between Conservatives and Liberals. One group has common sense, the other doesn't. Guess which is which.
And that was my point. Thank you.
Eric, I only mentioned his wife because it was from her he got most of his extreme Liberal ideas. Particularly the one about how the hospital ship was somehow inexplicably forbidden to participate in the rescue efforts after Katrina.
ReplyDeleteNow, since another hospital ship is floating, unused, in the Port-au-Prince harbor, why isn't the current President being blamed?
Seems to me what's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.
Geoffrey,
ReplyDeleteUntil he says otherwise, I'll defend Eric because his comments were pretty specific. If he simply said they should be shot, I'd still want to know why he thinks it would be justified to do so. But he was specific about having them shot for treason, for being traitors to our country, a punishment that is traditional for those found guilty of treason. So again, the question is: in what way have they shown themselves to be treasonous? If they are guilty of treason, then being shot is a typical punishment, is it not? Eric feels they are guilty, so let him explain why. I say again that it is a far cry from assassination fantasies of the left during Bush's time in office. If Bush was guilty of treason, he'd be deserving of the same punishment as any other traitor.
Again, I think the Dems are just downright stupid and prove it routinely. Being stupid isn't a capital crime. Otherwise Feodor would be counting the days.
Subtlety is lost on the left. I mean, they can read the obvious hatred in my own rants toward those who have sworn to protect and defend the Constitution yet deliberately work to subvert it. But they can't see the hatred these evil men and women in congress project toward the Constitution and the very people it was crafted to protect.
ReplyDeleteIs there any greater evil than ignorance? Cause the Left is wholly ignorant of what their handlers are doing to them. Kinda reminds me of the closing scene in Animal Farm.
Obama, for anyone keeping score, doesn't care about the Constitution. To him, and in his own words, it is "a charter of negative rights." The Constitution limits the rights of Government, and defends the rights of the individual and the state. Obama would swap those positions if he could and, by all appearances, is trying to do just that.
He is an utter disgrace. I for one will be quite glad to see him go the way of Carter.
Nancy and Harry? I believe they're traitors. They should be arrested, and given fair trials. If found innocent... fine. But if found guilty? What does any nation do with traitors? The foremost penalty for treason in this country is death. Look what happened to Nicolai Ceausescu. At what point does government imperil their own fates by pushing an angry populace too far? Is that what congress is doing right now? Whose to say. But the populace IS angry.
At the very least neither Harry nor Nancy should ever be allowed to hold public office again. It is clear they haven't the honesty or integrity needed in a public servant.
Now, seeing how some have reacted to what I've written here so far, I realize I spoke too freely. Do I really want to see Harry Reid set in front of a firing squad? Obviously not. And so I apologize for speaking in both haste and anger. But this doesn't change my belief that Obama, Reid, and Pelosi are, quite frankly, evil at heart. The fact that ER, Geoffrey, Feodor, and whomever else wishes to chime in, can't see the danger these elected "servants" pose to the Constitution of the United States and individual freedom, only shows they are either perilously tainted by the very same evil that infects the likes of Washington's current spate of leaders, or they are themselves intellectual invalids. In either case, they are just as dangerous to this country as the political asses into which they have crammed their collective diminished mental capacities.
You disgust me. Every one of you who can't see the truth of what these evil men are doing, because you obviously hate America. You wish instead for America to be something wholly different from what our Founders intended.
I am here to declare that, referring back to the very first comment, if ER thinks this is something Jesus would do, then ER doesn't know Jesus. "Abuse of Power"!? How fucking stupid must you be to not recognize the abuse of power OBAMA! REID! and PELOSI! are currently engaging in?
Now, ask me if I think Obama is currently doing the right thing in regard to Haiti. He damn sure is. Ask me if George Bush was slow on the uptake during Katrina. He damn sure was. If I can recognize truth when it stares me in the face, why the fuck can't any of you?
Because it's dark where your eyes are.
Mark is right. There is a gross injustice being perpetrated in this country, and it is the double standard by which media filters events. Things are bad enough now as it is but thank God America isn't anywhere near becoming another Cambodian-style killing field, cause folks in the media would all end up with bullets in their brain pans. As would a good many politicians, and probably each and everyone one of us.
And, perhaps, rightly so.
ReplyDeleteto Mark: There are a few substantiative differences between the Hurricane Katrina disaster and the earthquake in Haiti.
ReplyDelete1. New Orleans and the Gulf Coast are parts of the sovereignty of the United States while Haiti is a separate country. That makes disaster preparedness and response to events in America the responsibility of the President and his administration. While disaster preparedness and response that happen in other countries are not the responsibility of the President of the United States.
2. A hurricane is a large visible object with days of advance notice, while an earthquake is only minorly predictable, and has not visible outward signs.
3. Coordinating a humanitarian disaster response in another country must be done with the cooperation and permission of the host country. As I understand it the government in Haiti has become fragmented after the earthquake, which makes such coordination difficult at best.
4. The previous disaster responses from FEMA had been considered exemplary. Then under the Bush administration the agency became infective. This suggests that some fault may have lain with policy and staffing decisions made by the new administration.
It's quite possible FEMA was a bloated and ineffective agency long before Bush. Katrina was it's only real test. Also, to be fair, logistics are a nightmare right now in Haiti.
ReplyDeleteLastly, Katrina was a failure FIRST of New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin for NOT being all he could be as mayor. For that, he is at least partly responsible for the death toll in New Orleans. FEMA could have moved more quickly and efficiently, but mayor Nagin dropped the ball in a very big way... and yet he gets little blame by what passes for journalism today. Bush made a very bad decision to wait a few days to "fly over" New Orleans. He didn't make that mistake after 9.11 so I have to wonder what he was thinking and who was advising him.
On the flip side. Obama waited a few days to address the FruitaKaboom bomber... staying on vacation... just like Bush stayed on the ranch.
Bent, as usual your rationalization doesn't address the point.
ReplyDeleteI was only asking questions about why there seems to be a double standard. We have one natural disaster that the Libs and the media blamed on Bush, and we have one natural disaster which the Libs and the media are calling...gasp!...a natural disaster!
You don't recognize hypocrisy when you see it?
You don't need to answer that. I'll answer it for you:
Only if the hypocrisy is from the Republicans.
Howdy, y'all. I've been keeping up at arm's length.
ReplyDeleteRe, from Mark: "I only mentioned his wife because it was from her he got most of his extreme Liberal ideas."
Well, no, on two counts. 1., I get my extreme liberal ideas from Jesus of Nazareth. 2. You mentioned my wife, Mark, because you're a classless jerk and a cad. I mean, really. How low? How the fuck* low can you go?
*"Fuck" -- I got that from Eric L. Ashley, the poser, p.o.s. fake. But really, EL, glad to see you grow a pair finally.
Toodles, y'all.
Nice language from a seminary student. I wonder why I believe ER is a phony. Huh?
ReplyDeleteIn fact, I mentioned a wife of a blogger without naming names because she was the one who suggested the supposed tardy arrival of a hospital ship was somehow George W. Bush's fault. And you, ER, published that myth on your blog.
ReplyDeleteI wonder, ER, does she blame Obama because the hospital ship USS Carl Vinson is sitting anchored in the Port au Prince harbor unused? Do you?
Or is that George W Bush's fault, too?
You are a liar and a fraud and a hypocrite.
And...your hatred belies your claim of being a Christian.
But I was quoting the prophet Eric. And yeah, that lets me off the "fuck" hook. (Besides: wth does *that* have to do with seminary? Nada.)
ReplyDeleteAs for yer other drivel: Your ability to type belies the fact that you're barely sentient. So what?
Oh, further: Ask her. I don't speak for She Who Is My Wife.
What? I'm a prophet AND a POS?
ReplyDeleteYou're not much into forgiveness even when a guy admits he was wrong to spout off? Can you really see the color of my heart? Is it still black?
"But I was quoting the prophet Eric. And yeah, that lets me off the "fuck" hook. (Besides: wth does *that* have to do with seminary? Nada.)"
ReplyDeleteJust quoting Eric? Jeez. That's lame, Dickel-man. And no, it DOESN'T let you off the hook. If you were 10 yrs old that might be a nice try. And no, if it's not appropriate language for anyone, how much less so for a seminarian, unless you're attending for show.
Eric, your offense was not mine to forgive. But if it will make you feel better, no harm, no foul on the F-bomb. Your rage, however, will get the better of you, again, probably. So, be careful with it. I have my own that I deal with regularly, so i do know.
ReplyDeleteHey, MA: I really, honestly don't see where use of a crude word nopw and then has, jack shit, so to speak, with faith, Christianity, seminary, God, the Universe and Everything or anything. Sorry. Like just about every other social more, "bad language" is a cudgel that you and yours just love to beat people with when they don't fit into your own notions of "acceptable."
And, OMG, I assure you that I am not further into debt, running up miles on my car, wearing myself out and making my wife crazy going to seminary for "show." I am going to seminry because of two distinct calls, as clear as anything like that can be. The first one was: "Start seminary," and the second one was: "Keep going." And I'm almost certain that the underlying purpose is to provide an alternative voice to the likes of yours and EL's. Mark's "voice" I don't find to be relevant to anything to do with church.
ER,
ReplyDeletePerhaps whilst attending, you might ask one of your instructors about the use of foul language and how that might honor/dishonor God. While I don't pretend to struggle with such words leaping from my own lips, seemingly by themselves, I don't see that such temptations are harder to control when speaking through a keyboard. I do allow for the possibility that you've consciously chosen a seminary steeped in "progressive" thought and therefor might come away having been taught that it no longer matters how we speak to each other. I allow for the possibility that such a school might hold accountability as a "cudgel" and might eschew propriety viewing it as an unnecessary burden.
You already are an alternative voice. My prayer is that you either learn yours has been mistaken or that you can show us how ours has been. Good luck either way.
MA, ah, no. You do more damage to people with whom you disagree, with perfectly "acceptable" words, than one, or three, or a dozen f-bombs could possibly do. So, really, naah.
ReplyDeleteHow you can keep yer balance on that high horse amazes me, BTW. Does yer nose ever bleed?
Also, yours does not have to be "wrong," and mine does not have to be "right" for each of our voices to have value (I'm talking here of faith; your politics, cruel, selfish, destructive ss it is, is another thing entirely.) Neither of us is "right," on faith. I do think that each of us is close enough, EL included. Mark, again, I must say, not so much (not meant ro reflect on his position under grace, but his actual involvement with matters of church, which seems to be nil.)
"yours does not have to be "wrong," and mine does not have to be "right" for each of our voices to have value"
ReplyDeleteA very rational statement. And true, btw. Even though our interpretations on matters of faith differ somewhat.
"You do more damage to people with whom you disagree, with perfectly "acceptable" words, than one, or three, or a dozen f-bombs could possibly do..."
ReplyDeletePerhaps true if you could possibly support this notion. And certainly to those for whom foul language is routine, then yes, that could certainly be true, but only by default. But assuming all are equal as regards f-bombs, what you say could only be true in the sense that the truth can hurt.
"How you can keep yer balance on that high horse amazes me, BTW"
I don't have a horse, but when I do ride, a higher horse is preferred as I am somewhat tall. :)
As to your last paragraph, I agree the initial statement is rational on it's face, but I disagree with Eric that it is distinctly true, even on matters of faith. What value can there be in a belief that isn't true or doesn't reflect a sound understanding of the faith? To say that "Neither of us is "right," on faith" serves only to allow for that which is wrong, to widen the narrow path. I think that one assumes far too much to believe that God holds all opinions equally regarding what His will is for us. Christ certainly more narrowly defined understanding when he said not murdering isn't enough, that we shouldn't hate either, or that lusting is equal to adultery. And I would hate to settle for "close enough" when my salvation is on the line. It's hard enough walking the narrow path as it is and to step off on the shoulder now and then won't condemn us. That's what Christ's sacrifice has done for us since we can't be perfect. But to constantly call the shoulder part of the path and then step regularly outside of even that is another thing all together. There comes a point where we're not worshipping the same god anymore.
..."your politics, cruel, selfish, destructive ss it is, is another thing entirely..."
This accusation is often heaped upon conservatives by the left, but never substantiated. Perhaps someday you'll give it a try.
Hmm. That top part just makes no sense at all. Rambling.
ReplyDeleteAs for the path: It has virtually nothing to do with any set of "beliefs" -- I mean beyond 1., There is God., 2., Jesus Christ enables me to Commune with God -- and everything to do with trust, and a whole heck of a lot to do with living it out.
As for the different gods thing: There is one God, correct? Then it is impossible for you and I, or you and anyone else who aims, faithfully, to trust that one God, to worship different Gods.