• Meta

  • Click on the calendar for summaries of posts by day, week, or month.

    October 2018
    M T W T F S S
    « Sep    
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728
    293031  
  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

    wearenegroes on Will Hillary Clinton Run Again…
    Al Dajjal (@AlDajjal… on Where are the “Moderate…
    esgort on Religion of Peace Update: Musl…
    IB on Why Gun Ownership is Biblical…
    NEW White House Insi… on Hitler and the muslim bro…
  • Archives

  • Advertisements

Harry Reid personally attacks CNN reporter for daring to ask him a question that exposes his hypocrisy

Harry Reid asked by CNN’s Dana Bash,

“You all talked about children with cancer unable to go to clinical trials. The House is presumably going to pass a bill that funds at least the NIH. Given what you’ve said, will you at least pass that? And if not, aren’t you playing the same political games that Republicans are?”

Why, yes, Dana. He is indeed guilty of what he is accusing his opposition of doing. Hypocritically so. Remember the whole post-Sandy Hook push to implement sweeping gun control legislation? “If it will save just one child…” (Biden) Well, now you have that chance, and you WON’T do it.

Then Harry begins equivocating and changing the subject.

“Why would we want to do that? I have 1,100 people at Nellis Air Force base that are sitting home. They have a few problems of their own.”

Then he goes further and actually PERSONALLY ATTACKS Bash for simply asking the question.

“This is — to have someone of your intelligence to suggest such a thing maybe means you’re irresponsible and reckless,”

Harry Reid also asked…

“What right did they have to pick and choose what part of government is going to be funded?”

Well, Harry. If you actually READ the Constitution you swore an oath to uphold, you would know the answer to that.

Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution (The Legislative Branch, Limits on Congress): No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

They have EVERY right.

Advertisements

Biden has NO IDEA what the ‘Christian thing to do’ would be

Gaffe-a-Minute Biden dares to call ANYONE a hypocrite?  Having people like Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and yes, Barack Obama DARE to lecture ANYONE on what’s the “Christian” thing to do is absolutely laughable and ridiculous.

Is it the “Christian” thing to do to support the slaughter of MILLIONS of children?

Biden, Pelosi, and Obama seem to think so.  Biden and Pelosi, please go talk to the bishops of the Catholic Church you claim to be a part of.

Is it the “Christian” thing to do to reward millions of people for illegal behavior by punishing those who have NOT broken the law?

Biden, Pelosi, and Obama seem to think so.

Is it the “Christian” thing to do to FORCIBLY take from one person to give to another?

Biden, Pelosi, and Obama seem to think so.

For these colossal hypocrites to open their mouths to address ANYONE with ANY words other than “I’m sorry” is at best infuriating.

(Updated to include link to article)


Biden: Immigration Reform ‘The Christian Thing to Do’

by Debra Heine 20 Jun 2013

Speaking at the National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast Thursday, Vice President and self styled theologian Joe Biden suggested that Republicans who profess to be Christians are hypocrites because they oppose comprehensive immigration reform that does not secure the border.

Biden (a pro-abortion Catholic) said, “Many of these same [GOP] representatives talk about their Christianity and their fidelity to the Bible, but they forget Matthew Chapter 25, Verse 34, where scripture teaches us: ‘I was hungry and you gave me food; I was thirsty — you gave me drink. I was a stranger, and you welcomed me.’”

Biden later added, “It’s the right thing to do; it’s the Christian thing to do. But it’s also an incredibly practical thing to do.”

Since Biden considers himself somewhat of an arbiter of what Christians should and shouldn’t do, I wonder what he would say about Nancy Pelosi’s comments characterizing late-term abortions as “sacred ground”, which has  has drawn fire from a national organization of Catholic priests active in pro-life work. Continue reading

Mark Kelly’s ‘AR-15 Stunt’ Provokes Giffords Photo Leak

I’ve previously related my misgivings about Mr. Kelly based on personal experience. I stand by those statements. I’ve also said that I believe Ms. Giffords may not have the mental capacity after being shot in the head to take the kind of positions she is being made the poster child for without Mark Kelly manipulating her and pulling her strings like a puppet. You never see her speaking publicly without Kelly right there. Now Kelly’s hypocrisy is even further exposed after getting caught buying both an AR-15 and a Colt 1911. Did he seriously expect us to believe that crap about buying it to “get it off the street?” Seriously?

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Mark Kelly’s ‘AR-15 Stunt’ Provokes Giffords Photo Leak

by Awe Hawkins

Mark Kelly’s campaign against “assault weapons” such as the AR-15 rifle has sparked a local backlash. On March 13, a Tucson, Arizona radio host published a photograph of former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords holding an AR-15 rifle at a gun range. Giffords has since confirmed that the photograph is authentic. Continue reading

Nancy Pelosi and the failed Jedi Mind (Word) Trick

Nancy Pelosi is without a doubt the most patronizing, bumbling, vacuous, hypocritical bimbo that I have ever seen. Does she think that the 80% of Americans that claim to be Christian are dumb enough to fall for her bumbling use of a few Christian buzz phrases and empty platitudes? She must. Not only that, but the bimbo can’t count.

If she actually knew ANYTHING about “the Word” and actually believed it as she claims, she would be an entirely different person. She COULD NOT support abortion as she does. She would love homosexuals, but hate homosexuality. She wouldn’t believe that taking from others against their will is acceptable.

San Francisco got what they deserved in electing this ninny, but sadly they have inflicted her cancerous hemorrhoid on the rest of us. Anyone know a good oncologist/proctologist?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSko2ixEB8U
+


The First President Since Richard Nixon to Personally Launch Verbal Assaults on His Enemies

More of the liberal/socialist/progressive, or in this case just egotistical and hypocritical behavior of one Barry Obama.


http://www.impeachobamacampaign.com/?p=316

Obama: Civility for Thee but Not for Me

Posted by admin on May 7, 2010 · Comments (20)

Floyd and Mary Beth Brown, Impeach Obama Campaign

Our Lecturer-in-Chief demands we do as he says, not as he does. During his University of Michigan commencement address, Barack Obama assumed the professorial role and began lecturing Americans on how to behave: “Now, the second way to keep our democracy healthy is to maintain a basic level of civility in our public debate. … But we can’t expect to solve our problems if all we do is tear each other down. You can disagree with a certain policy without demonizing the person who espouses it.”

While the idea of a civil debate is certainly appealing, Barack Obama has done more to damage civility in public discourse than any presidency in 40 years. Obama is the first president since Richard Nixon to personally launch verbal assaults on his enemies. His administration is willing to attack anyone who dares to stand up against them. They employ the shockingly un-presidential strategy of going after their critics by name. Robert Gibbs, the president’s acid tongue spokesman, attacked CNBC reporter Rick Santelli after less than a month in office.

Obama then joins Gibbs by personally lashing out at critics. Obama is even willing to go after his allies that don’t fall in line. “Don’t think we’re not keeping score, brother,” Obama famously told Rep. Peter DeFazio, a Democrat from Oregon.

Obama has issued scores of scathing personal attacks. He attacked Mitch McConnell as being in bed with Wall Street. He claimed John Boehner was a healthcare Chicken Little. He said Sarah Palin is “not exactly an expert on nuclear issues,” and called Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh a “troublesome” twosome spreading “vitriol.”

Obama’s comedy also has a political bite to it. Rather than employing the strategy of most recent presidents of engaging in self-deprecating humor, Obama makes fun of others. He tells jokes mocking Sarah Palin, Scott Brown, John Boehner, Charlie Crist and Mitt Romney.

Landon Parvin, an author and speechwriter for Democrats and Republicans, and a joke writer for three Republican presidents (Reagan and both Bushes) says, “With these dinners you want the audience to like you more when you sit down than when you stood up. … Something in [Obama’s] humor didn’t do that.”

Even Nancy Pelosi has told Obama to cool his critiques of Washington, D.C. Pelosi and other Democrats in the House are concerned that he is throwing them under the bus to save his own reputation. Obama is more concerned about preserving his own image and re-election prospects than he is about supporting his party in 2010.

Even Obama’s most reliable allies, the formerly dominant mainstream media, are beginning to take notice. Josh Gerstein and Patrick Gavin of Politico report: “Reporters say the White House is thin-skinned, controlling, eager to go over their heads and stingy with even basic information.” When the friendly press takes notice, there must really be a big problem.

It’s easy for the president to lecture about the lack of civility in politics, but when his administration is one of the most vicious voices in modern history those lectures are hypocritical. If Obama really wants to raise the public discourse he ought to start the cleaning in his own White House.


Al Gore’s $8.875 Million House of Carbon

Remember all that noise Al Gore made about oceans rising and cities being flooded because of “man-caused global warming?” Well, Mr. Hypocricy, Al Gore doesn’t seem to be too worried about that anymore. He bought a nearly $9 million house RIGHT NEXT TO THE OCEAN. Where did all that money come from? Follow the money,… and you’ll see that global warming really is just a hoax.


http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/nswift/al-gores-8875-million-house-of-carbon

Al Gore’s $8.875 Million House of Carbon

By Nan Swift on Apr 30, 2010

Two days ago the LA Times reported that Al Gore has picked up a pricey new Italian-style villa with “ocean view, fountains, six fireplaces, five bedrooms and nine bathrooms” all for a mere $8,875,000.

It always seems a little surprising that this self-styled eco-warrior isn’t living in a tree with the rest of his disciples, but it shouldn’t be all that shocking because he can definitely spare the change he shelled out for the Montecito-area cottage.

Of course the most famous public figure with deep financial ties to the climate change money machine is Al Gore. During the last ten years, he has increased his personal fortune a hundredfold, from “between $1 million and $2 milion” (from his 2000 Presidential candidacy disclosures) to over $100 million in 2007. Gore and former Goldman Sachs executive David Blood founded Generation Investment Management (GIM), a venture capital firm that invests in “green” businesses. GIM is a member of the Chicago Carbon Exchange (CCX) which is the commodity trading market created to facilitate the sale of carbon credits.

Money machine? The blog quoted above points to a good introduction:

If you accept that CO2 is the problem, then steps need to be taken to reduce CO2 emissions, which many developed countries have attempted using “cap and trade” schemes. In cap and trade, you use the law to require companies in developed countries to reduce their CO2 emissions, or to buy carbon offsets if they can’t.

Where do carbon offsets come from? Simply enough, some authority must certify that someone else has either reduced their CO2 output, or has agreed not to do something that would increase CO2 output they would otherwise have done. For every ton of CO2 you don’t emit, you get a certificate that you can sell on the carbon market to someone who needs permission — an indulgence — allowing them to emit a ton of CO2.

But what about the details? Who has the authority to certify? And how do you measure CO2 not emitted? The opportunities for graft are vast. There isn’t much that is easier than not building a facility that therefore doesn’t emit CO2. Convince an inspector that you really would have built that facility, or simply that you built a modern efficient plant where you might otherwise have built a dirty inefficient one, and you’re entitled to a credit.

Once you have the carbon credit you need to sell it, which means there must be a market — a role filled in part by the Chicago Carbon Exchange (CCX).

Glenn Beck does an excellent job of trying to unpack the growing carbon credit market/jungle below:

It’s difficult to dismiss this as a lot of tinfoil hat ranting – people have been picking up on this in bits and pieces over a long time period now, even Rolling Stone did a piece on this last July!  The Washington Examiner also has more information on the Fannie Mae cap and trade connection here.

Thanks to the elaborate “cash web” Gore and his cohorts have put together, he can not only afford his new digs, he can afford the carbon offsets from such an elaborate, energy sucking abode.  Unless, of course, he can just give them to himself?  Perhaps for an early birthday present.

On the other hand, even if he did buy the offsets to counter the earth abuse the Montecito pad is committing, it probably wouldn’t do much good.  The Christian Science Monitor has an indepth investigative report on the extreme no good at all and, in fact, extreme fraud some carbon offset outfits are accomplishing.

An investigation by The Christian Science Monitor and the New England Center for Investigative Reporting has found that individuals and businesses who are feeding a $700 million global market in offsets are often buying vague promises instead of the reductions in greenhouse gases they expect.

They are buying into projects that are never completed, or paying for ones that would have been done anyhow, the investigation found. Their purchases are feeding middlemen and promoters seeking profits from green schemes that range from selling protection for existing trees to the promise of planting new ones that never thrive. In some cases, the offsets have consequences that their purchasers never foresaw, such as erecting windmills that force poor people off their farms.

Carbon offsets are the environmental equivalent of financial derivatives: complex, unregulated, unchecked and – in many cases – not worth their price.

And often, those who get the “green credits” thinking their own carbon emissions have been offset, are fooled.

As we’ve pointed out in the newly revamped Cap and Trade online war room, government wants us to have a lot of economic pain for what is clearly no ecological pay off. The entire system is barely afloat under the weight of fraud, back room deals, and the type of cronyism that would make Boss Tweed proud.  And for some reason we’re supposed to believe that the government is some how more pure and will pull this off better?

That’s a big pill to swallow.

It’s good that the cap and trade gambit is being exposed, but the dots are purposefully hard to connect and the kind of serious attention that is required to bring this kind of information to the forefront of the public conscience is seriously lacking.  That’s why it is easy for Kerrry, Graham, and Lieberman to get away with saying their new bill isn’t cap and trade, but caps and all this other junk that people accept without questioning.  It’s all very complex and shady – it would take serious unpacking to discern what is really going on and who is getting rich off the taxpayers – because someone always is.

For all those reasons and more, it’s essential that we take action now before the bill that was dead, then wasn’t, comes back for more.

It’s also essential that citizens stand up for themselves, do some serious investigating, and demand answers.  That’s what the Tennesse Center for Policy Research did when they exposed that Al Gore’s electricity bill was 20X the national average in 2007.  But don’t worry, he can afford it.


In the Dictionary Under “Ninny” it Says “See Maxine Waters”

nin·ny [nin-ee]

–noun, plural-nies.

a fool or simpleton.
See also: Maxine Waters
Maxine Waters is a simple minded, loud mouth, racist, useful idiot to the progressives who are trying to destroy America.  I would accuse her of being in on the plot, but she obviously isn’t smart enough for that.

This hypocrisy is sickening.  “Oh, the liberals don’t call names and shout obscenities.”  Yet they are the only ones you see doing it.  “Oh, democrats would never encourage anyone to be disruptive.”  Yet we have the video of Mzzzzzz. Waters her royal self inciting a crowd to be just that.

The state-run media won’t report one bit of this.  Do you think the Microsoft-No-Black-Commentators network will report on this?  Not on your life.  This is why it is imperative that America resist the efforts to censor all other forms of media and dissent.  Through their laws with disingenuous names like the so called “Fairness Doctrine,” the progressive Marxists led by Obama himself hope to silence all opposition in much the same way Hugo Chavez has done.  They will first do it “legally” until they have grabbed enough power, then they will just shut down or jail anyone who voices dissent.

YouTube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dg29GWk2nMc

Alternate link: http://www.breitbart.tv/off-the-hook-hypocrisy-rep-waters-used-to-love-vulgar-outlandish-protest-rallies/

+


%d bloggers like this: