Saturday, October 31, 2009
Friday, October 30, 2009
Congressman LaTourette exposes liberal Democrats for the crybabies they are.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
CNN hit poll on whether Sarah Palin is qualified to be President.
CNN / Opinion Research Corporation
10/16-18/09; 1,038 adults, 3% margin of error
462 Republicans, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
Let's begin with the Favorable/Unfavorables
Favorable / Unfavorable
Sarah Palin: 42 / 51
Mitt Romney: 36 / 26
Mike Huckabee: 43 / 26
Tim Pawlenty: 15 / 13
Nobody who is a Republican or a Conservative would ever believe for a moment that Sarah Palin has a 51% unfavorable rating within the Republican Party. Three days after the election, Pollster Scott Rasmussen polled Republicans on Sarah Palin. 69% of GOP Voters said that Palin helped the McCain ticket. 91% of Republican voters said they had a favorable view of her with 65% saying they had a very favorable view of her. So what has changed that would make Sarah Palin's unfavorable numbers supposedly go over 51%? The answer is nothing. So these numbers smell pretty fishy.
32% Huckabee, 25% Palin, 21% Romney, 5% Pawlenty
Now it is time for me to have some fun with this. According the CNN/Opinion Dynamic poll, Sarah Palin would come in 2nd behind Mike Huckabee for the Republican nomination in 2012. If Sarah really has a 51% unfavorable rating among Republicans and Huckabee only has a 26% unfavorable rating, why would Huckabee merely have a 7% lead against Palin if his unfavorable is 26% and Palin's is 51%? Fuzzy math doesn't work here.
Thinking about the following characteristics and qualities, please say whether you think each one applies or doesn't apply to Sarah Palin.Not a typical politician: 65% Applies, 34% Does not apply
A good role model for women: 64 / 35
Care about the needs of people like you: 56 / 43
Is honest and trustworthy: 55 / 43
Shares your values: 49 / 49
Generally agrees with you on issues you care about: 48 / 50
Is a strong and decisive leader: 47 / 51
Qualified to be president: 29 / 71
I don't know how to approach these questions seriously, but I will give it a shot. The president of the United States is the elected "leader" of our country. He is also the "leader" of the free world. He is also the "leader" of the U.S Armed Forces. The question about whether Sarah Palin is a strong and decisive leader says that 47% applies and 51% doesn't apply to her. If that 47% believes she is a strong and deceive leader, how in the world can just 29% of so called Republicans says she isn't qualified to be president? See why this poll is such a joke? In order to lead a nation, a person must be a good leader right? It only sounds logical. So in a 18% point shift, these so called Republicans say she isn't qualified to be president according to CNN and Opinion Dynamics. I've notice that a certain follow up question is missing. The question of "why these polled Republicans don't believe she is qualified to be president" wasn't asked. This poll is what I use to call a "guider" poll. The poll is really meant for the Republican National Committee to see, so they can be fooled into trying stop any possible run by Sarah Palin in 2012. CNN isn't as slick as they think they are. This reminds me of when the New York Times endorsed John McCain in the primaries in a successful effort to fool Republicans into believing that he was the best candidate to reach out to moderates. As the days count down until the launch date of Sarah Palin's book, I expect more negative polls to appear as well as more so called journalist "hit pieces" about her. Let the CNN poll serve as an example to why polls should be taken with a grain of salt and then some, and why CNN is a discredited last place activist journalist organization.
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell got sacked by Congressman Steve King.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Obama's personal thoughts will playing basketball.
"Barack Obama": As usual this "typical white person" is trying to stop me. I bet he's a fan of Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and Fox News. I'm not going to get "We weed up" over it". I'm the president. People like me. I think they like me. I need them to like me. I'm a very insecure person, even though I look good playing basketball. I know I've never played real basketball on the basketball courts on the south side of Chicago, but I can pretend to look like I'm for real. I wish this basketball was Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck's head instead. This typical white person is holding my shirt. I bet he wouldn't do that to a white guy. This guy must be a racist. He is wearing the colors of Duke University and he is a white guy, so he is a racist by default. I'm sure Jeremiah and Sharpton would agree with me on that. I hope the media gets my good side while I'm beating this guy at basketball. As troops are being killed in record numbers in Afghanistan, I have to play some B ball to try and figure out what the hell I'm going to do next. I can't believe I actually have to make tough decisions, and I just can't vote present. Maybe if I fake an injure, I can get out of this mess. It isn't like the media is going to turn against me.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Newt Gingrich has become a "conservative in name only". Part 2
This is Lisa questioning Newt on his selling out conservatism and becoming a party hack.
This reminds me of the 2002 Gubernatorial race in California. Republicans had a chance to stand behind a true conservative by the name of Tom McClintok. He was talked down by the California Republican leadership and by other California Republicans, because liberal Republican Arnold Schwartnegger was famous and "had the best chance at winning". That was their excuse. Look at the shape of California almost eight years later. This is the same scenario playing out in the 23rd district race in New York. Shame on Newt, and shame on any other so called conservatives that puts party ahead of ideology.
Newt Gingrich has become a "conservative in name only". Part 1
If a person says that he or she is a conservative, it doesn't necessarily makes it so. The Republican Party is littered with conservative posers. These people are known as the "neo-conservative" crowd. George Bush was one of them. Senators Lindsey Graham, Trent Lott, John McLame, Chuck Hagel are just a few that comes to mind. The latest induction into the neocon hall of shame is Newt Gingrich. I never thought I would utter those words about good ol Newt. Looks like the guy has gotten tired and has lost his traditional conservative ways. When Newt was saying nice things about Hillary Clinton last year during the Democrat Primaries, I didn't think much of it. When Newt came out and claimed that man made global warming is real, my CINO alert went off. When Newt lead the Republicans back into power in 1994, the Republicans had a rock solid conservative leader then. Fifteen years later, Newt is merely a shell of that great leader. Some are saying that Newt is going to make a run for the Republican Nomination in 2012. Once conservatives find out who Newt has endorsed in the New York congressional race for the 23rd district, Newt can hang it up officially. Let me start from the beginning. In New York, the local Republican Party picked a liberal to moderate Assembly woman by the name of Dede Scozzafava as their choice for the November 3rd election for the 23rd congressional seat. This has forced conservatives in that district to back a third party candidate by the name of Doug Hoffman. This has become a three way race with the Democrat candidate Bill Owens. The race is being very closely watched nationally. Conservative talk show hosts nationwide have blasted the nomination of Ms. Scozzafava in the first place by the New York Republican Party. Everything that Dede Scozzafava stands for is the polar opposite of what conservatives stand for. She is merely another Republican Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. The other day Sarah Palin came out and endorsed Mr. Hoffman. His campaign received over $100,000 overnight just from her endorsement. This race represents the deep split in the GOP among liberal and neoconservatives on one side and paleoconservatives and libertarian conservatives on the other side. When the GOP lost control of congress in 2006, I said exactly why it happened. Bush, McCain and Graham attacked conservatives, because the grass root conservatives were furious over Bush and his neocon crowd wanting to give amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. 2005 marked the beginning of the exodus of Republicans changing their party affiliations to Independents. That action by conservatives could have also contributed to McCain being able to win the nomination in the first place, because Independents can't vote in the Republican Primaries. In Part Two, I'm finally going to get to my beef with Newt "The Gecko" Gingrich.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
What do Obama, Pelosi and Reid have to hide from the American people in regards to their health care bill?
It just doesn't pay to be a "victicrat" and it never will.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Liberal intellect on display: Case study Nancy Pelosi
My thoughts on Obama's 4 hour lay over in New Orleans on his way to San Francisco.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
So Fox News isn't really news according to Obama and the left. Part 2
Maybe journalist blood is thicker then ideological water? I have to give Jake Tapper some major credit for standing up for the last few grains of journalist integrity in America. I don't think Jake should be expecting an invite to the White House Christmas Party this year. Jake exposed how absolutely ignorant and foolish Gibbs, David Axelrod and Barack Obama are. Sean Hannity and Glen Beck aren't reporters nor are they news anchors. That is where the left gets tripped up in their mental breakdown on how they perceive Fox News as being to the right. The news content of Fox News is straight down the middle. Fox also does the stories that the other media outlets refuse to do. That is why Fox News has the ratings it does. Nothing is preventing the other media outlets both network and cable from following Fox's lead. They simply don't want to do the stories that would be damaging to Democrats, Obama and liberal causes in general. It is extremely hypocritical of Obama, Gibbs and Axelrod to cry about how Beck and Hannityactually hold their administration accountable and take them to task for their radical agenda. When Obama invited Keith Olberman and Rachael Maddow to the White House yesterday for an off the record get together, Obama showed that he loves those who will kiss his rear end and are loyal to his agenda. Obama doesn't have a problem with News Commentators on the left. He has a problem with those on the right. Chris Mathews has a male crush on Barack Obama. This is the man who said that he gets a "tingle up his leg" when he hears Obama speak. I'm not even going to go there. Chris also said "it was his job to make sure Obama's presidency succeed". Mathews, Olberman and Maddow all work for MSNBC, but I'm sure Obama wouldn't think of waging a war against them.
Obama has three ultra liberal flunkies licking his knee caps, but what good does it do him? Olberman, Maddow and Mathews can't attract viewers if their lives depended on it. If these three are suppose to represent Obama's foot troops in his war against Fox News, he might as well give up while he's already behind.
So Fox News isn't really news according to Obama and the left. Part 1
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Rush Limbaugh, fake quotes and thug journalism in America.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Juan Williams strikes back against black race baiter Warren Ballentine. Part 2
I want you all to listen to the portion of the interview when Pastor Ken Hutcherson speaks about Rush Limbaugh. Ken is a very close friend of Rush. The people that talk ignorant about Rush have no idea about Rush Limbaugh "the person".
Juan Williams strikes back against black race baiter Warren Balentine Part 1
Friday, October 16, 2009
Everybody should get a piece of the Nobel Peace Prize.
The rats that screwed over Limbaugh are fearing his next move.
Now for the other rat turd that is tucking his head between legs. This is David Shuster on his show today on MSNBC
Shuster "MSNBC attributed that quote to a football player who was opposed to Limbaugh’s NFL bid. However, we have been unable to verify that quote independently".
I know all the parties involved in this smear job on Limbaugh are sweating it out right now. Most of Limbuagh's vast audience wants him to sue everyone involved. Rush has been very coy in his response over the last two days to what his next steps will be. If I was Limbaugh, I would make their lives a living hell and sue all of them right down to their last nickel, but I'm not Rush. Only he knows what he's going to do. Funny how CNN could fact check a SNL comedy skit, but they didn't even bother to fact check comments before using them. Attack and smear journalism on display.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
The crucifixation of Rush Limbaugh by the race hustling prostitutes.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Do you really believe that the NAACP is a "non partisan" organization?
That basically means that an organization can't align themselves with a political party. They must be "neutral". It looks like the NAACP has tipped it's hand and exposed itself as being a partisan organization. I commented earlier on the stupidity and racism of Marvin L. Cheatham who is the President of the Baltimore Chapter of the NAACP. I left out another ignorant comment Cheatham made. Apparently Mr. Cheatham has a problem with a Republican being appointed Mayor of Baltimore if a Republican wins the Governorship next year and Mayor Dixon is found guilty when she goes on trial in November.
Marvin Chetham "he worried that a future Republican governor could appoint someone from his party to lead a city were Democrats outnumber Republicans 9 to 1. "Would not the Republican governor have the ability to pick a Republican mayor?" he asked.
"We just think there are some unanswered questions about the process,".
With Chetham representing a so called non partisan organization, why should he cares what party affiliation controls the mayor ship of Baltimore? That is the twenty one thousand dollar question. This is the first paragraph from the Baltimore Sun.
Baltimore Sun "Leaders of the Maryland NAACP, worried that a Baltimore mayor's criminal conviction could result in the appointment of a white or Republican leader who may not fully represent the majority black and Democratic city, are asking state lawmakers to strip the governor of authority to permanently fill the office."
I found that paragraph to be, drop down ,laughing on the floor hilarious. As a citizen of Baltimore, I can say with much dripping sarcasm, "I love what Democrats have done with the place". The city of Baltimore has been run and controlled by Democrats for over forty years. Forty years ago, Baltimore City had a population of little over 950,000 people. Today it has a population of around 635,000. The city has lost in population the equivalent of a medium sized city. I wonder could the NAACP leadership in Baltimore claim that Democrats done a great job for blacks in cities like Detroit, Chicago, New Jersey City, Atlantic City, Richmond. New Orleans, Washington DC. I'm clueless to how the NAACP feels that Democrats have "represented the black majority" in Baltimore. They've done an awesome job contributing to a shrinking tax base. Democrats represented Baltimore well in it's accomplishment of being the number one most violent city in America for the last twenty years or so. If Democrats represent the black majority of cities like Baltimore, why do these cities have so many serious social and economic problems and continue to have them? It can't be said that Democrats haven't had enough time to change these cities around. These cities have been Democrat ruled for decades. The only city with a mostly black population that isn't in the sad state of affairs and Democrat run is Atlanta. The population of Atlanta is also highly educated, so crime isn't a problem like it is in other cities with black majorities with disastrous and dangerous public school systems. The NAACP is clearly a hack group for the Democratic Party. They don't represent the interest of blacks. Their role is to control blacks and deliver their votes come election time. They represent their own interest of power and self preservation, hence the National Association of the Advancement of "SOME" colored people.
Is the NAACP any different the Klu Klux Klan?
Marvin Cheatham " Our concern is who would the governor appoint?""Here you have a predominantly African-American city. What if the governor appointed somebody white? ... Would he appoint someone Irish to be the mayor?"
Martin O'Malley is the Governor of Maryland, and he is of Irish descent. Marvin Cheatham is an ignorant horses ass. His comments representing the NAACP in Baltimore is no different then a white member of the Klu Klux Klan making a similar statement. Liberals spewed and continue to spew on about how whites in this country didn't want a black man as president. If people feel that race is a dis-qualifier for why a person shouldn't be elected to political office, then people who feel that way are racists. So my question is this, what make people like Marvin Cheatham any different? According to him, the mayor ship of Baltimore should be reserved for "blacks only". Of course Cheatham would never admit to his so called rationality being racist in nature. Marvin would say that he isn't a racist, because "he's black and a Democrat". What would be the results if Marvin Cheathman's thinking was applied by whites? David Paterson shouldn't be the Governor of New York and Deveal Patrick should be the Governor of Massachusetts. Both men are black Governors of two states with mostly white populations. Also, Barack Obama wouldn't' be the President of the United States being that the population of the U.S is mostly white and blacks make up only 13% of the population. This is why I have no respect for the NAACP. If the organization went bankrupt tomorrow, I would go out and buy a bottle of Champagne to celebrate the occasion. Let Marvin Cheatham's comments prove that racism is alive in America and that whites don't hold the patent to it.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Obama and the gay agenda.
Even though Obama is a Marxist by nature, he isn't stupid. I doubt he'll lift the "don't ask, don't tell" provision that was enacted by Bill Clinton. I got into a debate with a gay marriage advocate today. Me and him went back and forth. His arguments were typical absurd. This person told me that gay marriage is going to happen as well as the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell". I told him that he was dreaming, then I brilliantly laid out the case to support why that was. The speech that Obama gave to gays and gay advocates was merely lip service as with all his speeches. The Saturday Night Live skit proves it. Obama has given speech after speech after speech, yet he has done nothing on top of nothing. If Obama was truly serious about lifting the "don't ask" rule, he would have done it as soon as he was sworn into office as a top priority. Gays haven't figured out that they are a second hand priority at best. The top four agendas of Obama this year were "government health care", " the porkilus bill", "cap & tax" and "card check". Anybody who follows politics know that Obama wouldn't dare bring up the issue of repealing "don't ask, don't tell" during the midterm elections next year. It would be political suicide for the Democratic Party if he did. The whole gay marriage movement has been extremely deceptive. First gays made the claim that they wanted the rights to make medical decisions for their partners. Then they said that they were ok with having Civil Unions as long as they had the equivalents "rights" as heterosexuals have. Now that Obama is in the White House and Democrats control both houses, the "true" agenda has been presented by gays and gay advocates. So will Obama risk alienating moderate to conservative Independent voters as well as risking creating a demoralized military by lifting don't ask don't tell? Obama really hasn't been known for making the tough decisions. Maybe he'll just vote present instead.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
And the Nobel Peace prize goes to?
Somebody definitely not deserving of it. The Nobel Peace Prize Committee managed to make their precious prize less legitimate and more irrelevant then in years past. When Al Gore won the prize a few years ago for his "work" in promoting the hoax that is "Global Warming", the Nobel Prize's reputation started going down hill for obvious reasons. Today, the Nobel Committee has to be considered a laughing stock around the world. Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize today for his accomplishments in "nothing". Barack Obama has only been President for nine months,yet he was nominated for the prize on February the 1st. That means that Barack Hussein Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize just 11 days after being sworn into office!
Now do you all see how much of a joke this is? Besides the money, the awarding of Obama the peace prize is pretty much as meaningless as the Honorary degree Obama received from Notre Dame earlier this year. Even Obama's supporters are scratching their heads in bewilderment over this one. Obama did tell the truth for once. He admitted that he didn't do anything to deserve the award. Michael Steele came out and made a very honest statement about one of the reasons Barack won the award. It was Obama's star power that did it for him. Obama to liberals is like what the Beatles were to teenage girls when they first debuted in America. I believe the Nobel Committee's decision was also based on politics. Ronald Wilson Reagan ended the Cold War without a single shot being fired, yet he never received the Nobel Prize. The last two presidents to receive the prize prior to Obama were Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. What do all three presidents have in common? They all have a deep rooted problem with American exceptionalism. They are American apologists on top of being pacifists. Obama basically got the nod from the socialist euro trash crowd to keep up the good work of tearing down America and it's superpower status. George Bush's foreign policy was refereed to constantly by liberals as "cowboy diplomacy". Liberals used the word cowboy as an insult. In American folklore, the cowboy represented the good guy. The cowboy was seen as a morally upstanding person that took on the villains, saved the day, got the girl and rode off into the sunset. Liberals of course got it all backwards. Liberals embrace the bad guys and trash the good guys. I've heard some say that the Nobel Committee gave Obama the award as a way to handcuff him into continuing to go along with chopping America down at the knees. It wouldn't come as a surprise. Obama's head is so far in the clouds, he wouldn't know one way or the other when he is being played for a sap by the world stage.
Thursday, October 08, 2009
Tim Pawlenty to headline Iowa GOP event.
It's not hard to figure out how Obama became president.
The lady who thanked Barack Obama and most in the line are text book Obama supporters. In their mind, Obama is somehow helping them. "Thank You Barack Obama, We love you"? Any educated person would actually be saying "Thank you American taxpayersr". Contrary to the popular belief of the population in Detroit, Barack Obama didn't create the money for them. The $15 million dollars have to be paid for by someone, and that somebody is "us". I have a strong feeling it won't be the people in Detroit ever repaying any of that money they believe was given to them. This is why I want to bang my head against the wall in frustration. Ignorant people make my head hurt. I need a bottle Tylenol listening to these intellects.
These young ladies along with most of the population of Detroit will never grasp this. It is because of the ideology of Obama and people like him that they support is why "they are in the financial and social mess that find themselves in"! Liberalism has destroyed Detroit like most U.S cities with mostly black populations. The income per capita in Detroit is lower then the national average. Detroit is no different then Baltimore, Memphis, Los Angeles, New Orleans, Gary Indiana, New Jersey City, Atlantic City etc. It's pure concentrated black poverty overseen by liberal democrat politicians. I said something similar to this the second day I started this blog four years ago. I said the Democrat plan for blacks and non whites in America is to
1. keep them down
2. keep them dependent
3. keep them loyal
4. keep them ignorant
5. keep them voting democrat
If any of you think that I'm wrong or off based, answer these questions to see how "wrong" I truly am.
Are the people that were standing in lines seeking handouts in Detroit from the stimulus funds
2. dependent on the stimulus money?
3. loyal to Obama and democrats?
4. ignorant to where the money is truly coming frm?
5. are all registered loyal democrat voters?
I know how the Democrat game is played. The is the primary reason why liberals hate my guts so much. The con is so transparent, it isn't hard to see. Entitlement programs create dependents, and dependent people hooked on entitlement programs create loyal VOTERS!!Empowered people aren't dependent people. Liberals talk so much about LBJ and the Great Society and how much it had done for black people. I'll rather put my money on the belief in Santa Clause or buy some Lehman Brother stock. If liberalism was so great for blacks in America, people by the thousands wouldn't' have to be standing in line in the liberal's Mecca of Detroit begging for some financial scraps from the grand liberal overseer Barack Obama.
Tuesday, October 06, 2009
CNN "fact checked" SNL's Obama skit.
Monday, October 05, 2009
The man whore David Letterman and the liberals who love him.
Conservatives Don't Care If ‘Half the Country Dies’ in Order to ‘Take Down Obama?
When 15 minutes of "fame" is extended for no good reason.
Levi got a gig doing a commercial for the "get crackin" pistachio nut company. The bodyguard in the commercial is suppose to be his "protection". I can understand the "protection" angle in regards to Levi. I'm one of the biggest champions of capitalism there is, but the marketing of a person just because he impregnated a young woman is just cheap!
Sunday, October 04, 2009
Another world figure not happy that Chicago wasn't awarded the 2016 Olympic Games.
Capitalism failed to show Michael Moore's movie any love.
Even liberals on Saturday Night Live are turning on Obama.
Friday, October 02, 2009
The Chicago Dream Team to star in a new reality show entitled: Sleepless in Copenhagen.
Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm.
Obama went to Copenhagen and his ego was checked
The Olympic Committee showed him no love and gave his city no respect.
Barack Hussien Obama, mmm, mm m.
This has been a great day. I can't say the same for the people in Chicago nor the "Chicago Dream Team" of Barack and Michelle Obama and Oprah Winfrey.
The Obama faithful thought that it was in the bag for Chicago to host the 2016 Olympic games. Jesse Jackasson called Barack, Michelle and Oprah the "Dream Team". I guess that greatly hyped team was day dreaming, when they gave their self absorbed reasons for why Chicago should host the 2016 games. Normally I don't' take comfort in other people's disappointment, but how can I not in this case? I don't feel bad that Barack Obama embarrassed himself on the world stage. He brought it on himself in the first place. The role of promoting Chicago's bid was suppose to have been the job of the Governor of Illinois and the Mayor of Chicago. Barack set himself up for failure, and the rest is history. The immediate reaction by the media was priceless, when they heard Chicago was eliminated in the first round. Note to CNN's Tony Harris, Chicago is still out!! um, um um.
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Multimillionaire Michael Moore claims "Capitalism has done nothing for him".
Normally I could care less about any of Michael Moore's propaganda flicks. The major element that is usually missing from a typical Moore film is a thing called "the truth". I will give credit where credit is due though. Michael Moore is the king of self promotion and "splice and paste" editing. The only moderately successful movie Michael Moore has ever created is Fahrenheit 911. It's too bad that Moore had to steal the Fahrenheit title from author Ray Bradbury who wrote the novel decades ago entitled "Fahrenheit 451. Liberals swore up and down that Moore's movie was going to help defeat George Bush back in the 2004 election. That didn't work out so well for them. Fahrenheit 911 was full of lies and half truths.Pundits had a field day exposing every inaccuracy in Moore's so called "documentary". Fast forward to today. Michael Moore's new film "Capitalism: A love story" is gong to open tomorrow. The movie is basically a Wall Street suck and capitalism is bad themed movie. This is a brief interview that CNS News conducted with Michael Moore a few days ago. Michael claimed that "Capitalism had done nothing for him". Heres the words that came out of the front end of the human jackass.
What path does a hypocritical liar follows? Before Michael made his current movie that bashes capitalism, Moore said the following several years ago.
Michael Moore ""I'm a millionaire, I'm a multi-millionaire. I'm filthy rich. You know why I'm a multi-millionaire? 'Cause multi-millions like what I do. That's pretty good, isn't it?"
I got more quotes from the great anti capitalist crusader.
This quote is from Michael Moore in his book "Stupid White Men" page 51 . I doubt Moore was describing himself in the title of his book, but that title suits him to a tee.
Michael Moore "I walk among them. I live on the island of Manhattan, a three-mile-wide strip of land that is luxury home and corporate suite to America's elite..... Those who run your life live in my neighborhood. I walk in the streets with them each day" .
For vacations, Michael has another million-dollar beachfront house in Michigan. I'm starting to see the pattern here. Michael Moore is so right about capitalism. Capitalism has done absolutely nothing for Michael, EXCEPT made him a multimillionaire with a net worth of over $50 million dollars. Michael hates capitalism so much that he uses his evil, dirty wealth to send his children to "private school". Funny how the liberal elites talk up public schools so much for the masses, yet they send their precious children to private schools. Moore is just a typical double talking, elitist, liberal hypocrite fraud. Michael desperately hopes that he can keep up his deceptive fraud for as long as possible. The day the dazed over, brainwashed liberal drones realize they have been played for suckers by liberals like Moore will be the day the gig is up for elitist liberals in general. Michael Moore made this movie for one purpose, and it wasn't to expose the greed on Wall Street. He made this film to play off the anti capitalist mindset of his targeted liberal audience. He's not a champion of the common man. He's just a con man that is playing his marks and getting paid for it.
Meet the media's new GOP useful idiot for 2012. Part 2
This is a paragraph from Katie Connolly comparing Romney with Pawlenty" Both men are socially conservative, but neither is likely to make that the centerpiece of their campaign. And both will fashion themselves Washington outsiders, as will most of the potential field.
Does that sound familiar? The only time McCain acted like a social conservative was when he was at the "Saddle Back Church" forum hosted by Rick Warren. Here's another paragraph of interest from Katie on Pawlenty. This paragraph tips Katie's hand.
Katie Connoly "He's considered a solid player, a reasonable man with good conservative credentials who is reportedly easy to get along with. "No diva-ish behavior there"
No "diva-ish" behavior there? I don't recall ever hearing of a guy being referred to as acting like "diva-ish". Maybe Perez Hilton might know something about that I guess. Clearly the "diva-ish" jab was aimed at Sarah Palin. When Palin created Sarah Pac back in February, the media went out of it's way to act like the creation of Sarah PAC had nothing to do with a possible Palin run in 2012. With Pawlenty and Romney it is the complete opposite. The media has been using 2012 in connection with these two in every story they've written about them. Here's a google search I did just using the name of Tim Pawlenty and 2012. I told you I know how the media operates. The media has found their Republican pawn I meant guy for 2012.
Meet the media's new useful GOP idiot for 2012. Part 1
If you understand the media, you can easily understand how they operate politically. During the Republican primaries last year, the media promoted John McCain up and down and left and right. The liberal New York Times came out and endorsed John McCain. Anyone who follows politics knew why the media endorsed and talked up McCain during the primaries. John was the most reliable Republican to undermine the GOP agenda. That is how he got the name the "maverick". The media loved him, because he was their GOP "useful idiot". Democrats loved him for the same reason.
The only reason the media spoke kindly of McCain during the primaries was, because they wanted to make sure that a conservative candidate didn't win the Republican nomination. Liberals in the media knew that John McCain wouldn't be able to rally conservatives around him. True to form, that is exactly what happened. I said before that John picked Sarah Palin out of necessity. The media knows that Sarah Palin isn't a John McCain clone. Now lets focus on the media's new 2012 Republican useful idiot. A few months after last year's election, the media started throwing out the names of possible 2012 Republican candidates. The one name that kept getting positive press was Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota. Tim Pawlenty immediately went on my radar screen back in February. The media doesn't give positive press to "true conservatives". That treatment is only reserved for Republicans In Name Only "RINO". So when the media started writing glowing reviews about Governor Pawlenty as a possible 2012 candidate, I knew the media was up to something. I came across a story today from the Politico. The story is in reference to Governor Pawlenty setting the ground work for a possible 2012 run. The story of course was absolutely positive. I couldn't find any negative jabs at him. I might be ahead of the curve in my thoughts about Pawlenty and the media's coverage of him. I have a strong feeling that the media is gong to hitch their support behind Tim Pawlenty in which to try and take out Sarah Palin in the Republican Primaries and to have the same scenario as last year play out in the General Election against Obama.