Posted on 11/06/2008 4:37:57 AM PST by moneyrunner
There is an American habit of congratulating our opponents when we lose. And it’s appropriate when we have been bested in an equal contest. But when we have been cold cocked by our opponents and kicked to the curb by their friends, congratulations are the actions of a whipped cur.
For me, in this race, congratulations are bullshit. Moreover, I have no intention of being a good loser. Show me a good loser, and I’ll show you a loser.
Unless we didn’t mean what we said.
Obama and his friends told us that if we opposed him we were racists. And that was a big part of his appeal: he’s black. A large part the people who voted for him did so because he’s black and that’s no basis for congratulations. That’s not something we can be proud of.
Obama’s minister, friends and associated were racist, thugs and terrorists, but the MSM, the organs that were supposed to vet our candidates for us determined that these were not links that were worthy of inquiry. Instead, we were treated to the clothing bills of the Republican Vice Presidential candidate. That’s not something we can be proud of.
The Obama campaign promised 95% of the American people tax cuts. And impossibility when 95% of the American people don’t pay taxes. You can bet that this had an impact on the election, but the MSM did not send its truth squads out to report this lie. Instead we were treated to speculation that Sarah Palin’s child was really her daughter’s. That’s not something we can be proud of.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at moneyrunner.blogspot.com ...
bttt
Sounds like a good summation to me!
I am a good loser when, by all indications, the fight was fairly fought by a qualified opponent. I do not have those assurances so I decline to be a generous sport.
Was that the point of this election? To break down barriers or was it to elect the best person for the job? I think we now have our answer based on all of the post election coverage. I just wish that the color/gender barrier would have been broken at the same time the best person for the job was elected.
We need to start right now to develop a true conservative party, and start looking for conservative candidates to run in the elections that will come up in two years....and then keep going from there to the next presidential election.
And impossibility when 95% of the American people don’t pay taxes.Step 1: get back in touch with reality. Where did you get this statistic? Are you still drunk from Tuesday night?
Get a grip.
So, basically we have elected our first affirmative action president.
People are always so shocked when they sell their souls to the devil and he presents them with the bill.
You know, I asked that very question to family members across the aisle yesterday and was vilified. I still don’t have an answer from them as far as B. Hussein Obama’s qualifications to be POTUS.
Amen to that. It is funny that the conservatives say we can’t just try to be nice to terrorist in an attempt to get them to like us. They want us dead...period. Yet, the most of the “conservatives” inside the beltway are so damned scared of being conservative in an attempt to get the MSM and liberals to like them. We have seen this coming ever since ‘96. Personally, I think we need Newt back in the fold to a larger degree. Be conservative, talk conservative, vote conservative, and to hell with this “new tone” and “reaching across the isle” BS.
The Media won. Not only did they dictate the vote, they cleaned up in record campaign advertising.
The only thing historic about his win is that he is the first communist to steal the presidency of the US. We'll never know the full extent of the impact of ACORN and we'll never know where his campaign money came from. And he was never vetted by the MSM who gave him a free pass.
We don't need to congratulate him. We need to use the same tactics the left used. We need to denounce him as a liar.
He blew the syntax, that's all. He meant to write:
"An impossibility, since it is not true that 95% of the American people pay taxes."That is, "less than 95%". As to whether that's true or not, I have no comment. I'm just commenting on the sentence structure.
Not only did [the Media] dictate the voteWe had the same media in 2000 and 2004. Did they dictate the vote then? If they dictated the vote this time, who did they force you to vote for?
Good points. And that is the point I’ve made all along.
As the US military is no place for social experimentation such as allowing open homosexuality, so the Presidency of the US is no place for affirmative action.
He blew the syntax, that's all. He meant to write:OK, that makes sense. Honestly, I read it over several times because I was sure I read it wrong at first...
No, we did not, and I suspect you know it. In those elections there was a feeble pretense of objectivity, a thin veneer of pretended balance.
“We need to use the same tactics the left used”
NO, we do NOT grovel on that same level.
Amen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.