Why does President Downgrade expect you to believe that the violence of the last three days has been caused by a YouTube clip of some anti-Muslim agitprop? Because he has no fear of insulting your intelligence. He knows that you will vote for him no matter how incompetently his Administration (and that includes Hillary’s State Department) has acted.
I am embarrassed for those who call themselves liberals and progressives but who are making a sacrifice of our American birthright to offend with our speech and believe as our consciences dictate.
We must replace Obama with an American who has America’s best interests at heart.
In his acceptance speech before the RNC last Thursday, Mitt Romney quoted Barack Obama’s 2008 promise that his election would “slow the rise of the oceans” —at which point he paused a full twelve seconds before finishing the quotation. This was a brilliant rhetorical gesture: to let the absurdity of such unmerited self-regard sink into the audience’s mind anew. Romney was asking us to consider choosing a man of deeds over a man of words. That’s what I’m doing.
Hippies, don’t let your intellectual pride compel you to make the same mistake twice. But if you don’t have the integrity to admit you were wrong the first time, you could at least have the decency to not vote this time.
If you want a preview of the Left’s anti-Mormon bigotry from the upcoming general election season, be sure to read the execrable Frank Rich’s ad hominem attack on Mitt Romney in New York magazine:
The questions are not theological. Nor are they about polygamy, the scandalous credo that earlier Romneys practiced even after the church banned it in 1890. Rather, the questions are about the Mormon church’s political actions during Mitt Romney’s lifetime—and about what role Romney, as both a leader and major donor, might have played or is still playing in those actions. To ask these questions is not to be a religious bigot but to vet a candidate for the nation’s highest job.
See, the New York Jew only wants to examine Romney’s Mormon faith as much, I’m sure, as he wanted to take apart Barack Obama’s adherence to the black liberation theology of the Trinity United Church of Christ. Why should there be a religious test for Romney when there was none of any consequence for Obama? If the Evangelicals can make their peace with a Mormon, as they appear to be in growing numbers, then we can either enjoy this new age of Christian ecumenism —or revisit the explicit racism, socialism, and anti-Americanism of Obama’s Trinity UCC right along with the racism, sexism, and other sins of the LDS.
Won’t that pay your bills?
Inevitably, the Obamatons are taking their anti-Mormonism for a test drive to see how much they can get away with as the Election of 2012 draws near. But if they want to question and malign Mitt Romney’s faith, then they need to understand that Obama will be made to answer for the racism of black liberation theology. Not to answer just for Jeremiah Wright and the UCC, but the whole denomination. Sounds fair, right? And more than fair, but completely relevant. Because as our country implodes under the weight of mathematically unsustainable entitlements, collapsing home values, long-term un- and underemployment, rising fuel prices, and a thousand other huge problems what matters most is whether the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a real Christian church and to what extent Mitt Romney is in its clutches.
What argument can one make to someone who still supports Obama that can account for the emotional investment that such a person has in The One? It isn’t enough to list for him Obama’s many acts of cronyism, contempt, incompetence, and hypocrisy. It is too late for facts when defending Obama is defending one’s own political judgement and personal intelligence. Would an appeal to decency and love of country be enough to move an Obamaton to concede what ought to be conceded: that his statist ideology is destructive of the economic character of this country; that he is a law-breaking corporatist; that he is a campaign finance cheat and liar; that he is a hypocrite on civil liberties and warfare; that he is a vindictive narcissist?
No, the investment is too great. The racism inherent in the choice of voting for a man because of his race is too deeply held. The personal identification with this post-American agent of our dissolution is too complete. Democrats are prone to such personal idolatry (e.g., Obama, the Kennedys, FDR, Wilson, et al) and it reflects poorly on them.
But whatever it takes, the dominant narrative of a populist Obama who just wants what is fair and even and right for all must be resisted because it is false and it is dangerous. It is un-republican in the most literal sense.
I do not make idols of politicians. I do not understand those who do.
Last September, when the Koran-burner Terry Jones threatened to incinerate a copy of that very angry book, the Obama Administration and Big Media worked very hard together to give him as much notoriety and airtime as they could so as to demonstrate to the Muslim world their own tolerance by contrast. But now that this obscure gesture-maker and attention-getter in Florida has gone and finally burned a Koran (what, like, two weeks ago?), these very same exploiters want to scold him and hold him accountable for acts of murder committed in Afghanistan on Friday. Instead, they should hold themselves accountable for their appalling stupidity in using an American citizen with an unalienable claim on certain Constitutional rights to cynically try to improve their own image among nutbags who can’t even abide cartoons of the so-called Prophet. How do these dolts come by these mad props with such ham-handedness?
After all, Jones has as much right to burn a Koran as some fucking hippie does to burn an American flag. Or do his beliefs as a Christian —even the “extreme” ones— negate his First Amendment rights? Clever post-American degenerates need to think about that some. Are they letting their own bigotry against Christians militate against a proper regard for the First Amendment? Or are they so afraid of giving false offense to jihadist murderers who need no excuse to murder in the name of Allah that they would forget their own integrity as liberal Westerners? Whatever their rationale, the moral exhibitionism of Obama and his Administration and its tools in Big Media from before has now come back to embarrass them for the users they are. After all, they never had any control over this villain they made because they never should have had any control over him. If Jones is a proximate cause of those UN workers’ murders, how can these craphounds and politicians be any less culpable?!
Enjoy your new war on Muslim Country No. 4, Barry. I’m sure that your inevitable alienation and disappointment of democratic aspirations in Libya will be far less antagonistic to the Ummah than a symbolic gesture of contempt made by a media creation other than yourself.
I own a copy of the Koran and have no need to burn it.
I read a large chunk of my Koran when I first got it, but soon tired of it because it’s a tedious rant. The only pacificity I remember finding in the Holy Book of the Religion of Peace is that which is threatened to come with total submission to an angry Supreme Deity and his Sole Representative. I was not edified.
I don’t care whether Terry Jones burns his Koran tomorrow, but I do care that the so-called Fourth Estate in this country has found it appropriate to concoct this incident of moral exhibitionism and thereby elicit judgements upon it by everybody from the Secretary of Defense (!) to his boss. Why has this happened? Why does Big Media do this if not for the profit? What sequence of events elevated this one guy’s gesture of contempt to such great moment? Is Rupert Murdoch to blame? Maybe it was a blogger who’s mastered the chaos theory of information.
Whatever the motivation, it has spawned immense absurdities too pathetic to even pass for entertainment. The notion of the Secretary of State, for instance, speaking of Jones’ intentions as though he were threatening to kill a hostage is appalling. Why would she or any other member of this regime choose to invest Jones with such influence if not to make him into a conspicuous counterpoint to their own self-serving expressions of enlightenment? These are ridiculous choices that the leadership of our country is making to make a point which has no need of being made in the first place.
But keep on defending Muslims with a moist eye, Barack Hussein Obama. Keep taking the bait of defending their victory mosque and their holy book and their rights, in general. That’s a surefire way, as it were, of persuading people that you are a Christian gentleman after all.
Obama’s imitation of Stokely Carmichael on the mic is amazingly annoying. It’s almost like this cosmopolitan fop and fraud chose to use a particular tonality and oratorical style that he believed best conveyed the authentic voice of Black America. But all he has succeeded in creating, as I see it, is a phoney-baloney Southern accent (not a “Negro dialect” as the uneducated buffoon Harry Reid put it) that marks him for the calculated identity politician and race-user that he is.
Obama is unqualified to be President (despite the fact that he meets all the Constitutional requirements) because he has only a tin ear for what America is. He knows it as an alien latecomer, all studied and accounted for from afar and from within the context of Marxist ideology, which he was steeped in from childhood on. It is that part of his background that matters even more than his apostatic Muslimness.
The President is either enormously incompetent at being an American or he is deliberately giving his support to the enemies of Western Civilization.
I am shocked at the degree of Obama’s anti-Americanism. And to even THINK that about an American President? It’s like Obama is the embodiment of Marx’s elaboration on Hegel’s belief in the repitition of History; in the American context, Obama is the farce to Lincoln’s tragedy.
Democrats and other sorts of anti- and post-American garbage who now advocate for “religious tolerance” are morally repugnant liars. These anti-Christian bigots and anti-Semites on the Left have no idea what religious tolerance means. For them to speak on it as they though they do is an obscenity.
I will not defend Islam in any way, so let me be frank (or maybe a Frank) about that from the start. Religious tolerance is an illusion of interpersonal diplomacy assented to by most and realized —in fact— by few. Leftists perceive of themselves as superior to ”Christianists” by virtue of their supposedly scientific convictions (e.g., certitude in the truth of Evolution but, then again, of anthropogenic global warming, too) and by virtue of a sounder grasp of the separation of church and state. But Leftists do not believe in religious tolerance any more than I do. They believe that the Constitution grants them a right from religion when it actually grants them the right of religion. As an atheist in the conventional sense, observing that distinction is what allows me to live as I do. But, insofar as these Leftists and their pseudo-liberal followers are Marxist at all, they can certainly have no genuine respect for the magic shows of the religious Right or the Catholic church. After all, those are the refuges of racist gun-owners and Bible-readers, not of the right-thinking “reality-based community” (as they used to refer to themselves, now with extra irony).
Anyway, when fools like Michael Bloomberg stand and declaim upon the moral superiority of allowing a goddamned mosque complex to be built a mere stroll away from the site of the atrocities of 11 September 2001 as the highest order of religious tolerance, it makes me wonder whether such moral exhibitionism is easier with the tacit but certain knowledge that the godforsaken thing will never be built.
No, it isn’t religious tolerance to allow an insult and then to pretend that it was never inflicted. One thing that Westerners need to know about the Muslim mind is that it turns on the spit of the provocative gesture. As an old friend once remarked, the capital of capitalism had its two front teeth knocked out —right down the street from where this thing is supposed to be planted. The attacks of 11 September 2001 were, in themselves, a deeply humiliating and destructive gesture of contempt and provocation. What self-respecting people would permit a second such gesture at such proximity to the first? It isn’t defensible as religious tolerance but explicable only as the rankest sort of self-hatred. Bloomberg and the other useful idiots of the Ummah need to shut up and sit down.
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »