Posted on 06/10/2009 9:44:55 AM PDT by SonOfDarkSkies
Meanwhile the headlines are trying to tie conservatives like me to the Holocaust Museum shooter. :(
Yep, zero really listens to the Jews..... That’s why he’s bowing to Saudi royals and calling terrorists “domestic” whatevers.
Sorry Rev... Even Obama’s socialist democrats think you’re radioactive. And coming from guys who tell him to bow to Saudi Royals, that’s saying something.
Guess your chickens are coming home to roost, Reverrrrend.
LoL...
The only problem is that she might be too dark for Wright who's last mistress was a fat white girl!
Type in Jihadist Crashes Memorial in the youtube search bar and you'll see who I'm talking about!
Both Obamas are identical copies of this Wright. There’s a sleeper cell in the White House.
I am slightly surprised...
I thought he would have said Craker Whitey won’t let him near the Bama....
A lot of Wright defenders say that he gave lots of sermons that were positive, not hate-filled, etc. so why should we just concentrate of the bad ones?
Well, Hitler gave a lot of speeches and not all of them were hate-filled. He even painted pictures of flowers.
Okay. There is a lot more to Rev. Wright than meets the eye. His connections to the Black Muslims, to Qadafi’ Libya, to the Saudis, to the Black Radical Congress (a marxist group), N’COBRA (a radical, leftist coalition of black extremists who want reparations for slavery), and to Cuba.
Some of this can be found in the column “Black Reparations” at www.newzeal.blogspot.com. Also see Obama File about #38 for a shorter version of this column/subject.
Rev. Wright. We hardly know you, but Obama did, and learned well at your knees for 20 years.
Obama is either incredibly ingnorant, dumb or a plain liar. I’ve never known anyone that long without knowing them throroughly.
ignorant....shame on me for spelling that wrong.
yet Olberman and matthews can complain that guys like Beck and Rush are starting trouble and creating problems.
MSM doesn’t want to talk much about stuff like this though do they?
Oh how I wish there was tension in that camp.
All it would take is one top guy to roll over and Obama would be up the creek without a paddle.
*them Jews* eh?
It’s a good thing people of color can’t be racist or someone might think that he made a racist statement there....
Part of the ongoing hatred of the Jews by the Muslims and their left-wing allies.
Sounds like Bonnie Erbe wants to sacrifice Wright so she can crack down on the other "hate promoters." Fits right in with Napolitano's approach.
She sees no problem with shredding the 1st amendment alnong the way: "....ridding the Internet and the public dialogue of hate speech."
CBS: Round Up Hate-Promoters Now, Before Any More Holocaust Museum Attacks
Where was Bonnie Erbe in 1992? Where was she in 1994? Where was she in 1996, or 1998? Perhaps a better question, is where was she in the 1980s?
Was there any talk of eliminating hate speech under GHWB, RR, or GWB?
The ‘hate’ this woman focuses on today, has always existed. It’s called political discourse. It can be mild or it can be polarized to extremist levels, but that doesn’t happen in a vacuum. There is a cause and effect to this.
In the mid to late 1960s, the Democrat party was infiltrated and taken over by devout socialist leftists. Senator McGovern was the most visible evidence of that. In that atmosphere a guy like John Kerry could make audacious comments about our military, and get away with it. The most outlandish charges were scooped up by our nation’s media and published as fact. Over the years, it didn’t get better.
Ronald Reagan came along, and he was demagogued constantly. It didn’t matter if he made this nation safer, caused the Iron Curtain to become insolvent, or initiated economic policies that saw our nation experience the longest period of economic growth in it’s history. The left just hated the guy, and that was all anyone needed to know. And of course, open oppostion to him, demonization of him, hey, just the thing our nation needed according to some.
Where was the call to silence the hate focused on Reagan, after he was shot? Crickets...
What was the cause of the leftist mindset in those days? I submit the cause was a leftist movement infiltrated by communist infiltrators. It’s a known fact that Soviet Russia had infiltrated the leftist movement in Europe. It was a known fact that players in Europe were heavily influencing the leftists in the United States. The Vietnam war was unpopular, and the Communists capitalized on that to blossom the anti-war movement, which was also an anti-Conservative anti-government movement.
Thus the cause of this was dissatisfaction with the Vietnam war, and the Communist insurgency into leftist U.S. anti-government organizations.
The people involved in the hay day of this back in the 60s and 70s on university campuses, rose to run those institutions, the major media outlets, and many other orgs. including the government.
I mentioned the 1992 to 1998 time frame, because I think it exemplifies a dynamic that has caused the political discourse in the United States to continue to melt down since.
When the left and the right communicate, and both attempt to be reasoned, the political discourse is moderated. When one side or the other digs in their heels and refuses to be reasoned, the divide is accentuated.
During the Clinton decade, citizens in this nation were exposed to the truth about him. The reasoned members of both sides (right/left) were appalled by his actions, but the majority of the left made a fateful choice. They decided it was imperative to back him no matter what he did.
The observation of this by the right, convinced them that the left would sell this nation out rather than see it’s leaders or objectives thwarted.
Thus the decision by the left to back criminality at all cost, polarized the nation to dangerous levels.
Clinton was a severely flawed human being. I don’t know anyone who can deny this. Still, the left praises him to this day, even though the leftist media continues to make jokes about his infidelities. He is the quintessential high school class clown that some of the students wish to emulate, even if it leads to their own destruction. The problem is, this isn’t high school, and the destruction isn’t going to be limited to the leftists. Our nation is at risk.
Enter Obama, the consummate leftist socialist fascist. Here’s a man that thinks terrorist entities should be respected, and our allies taken to task. Oh but he’s the anointed one. Once again the left is entrenched in a protect ‘the One’ at all cost mode. To hell with the nation, they have been taught to hate. Is there anyone who can get their ‘stuff’ printed in the leftist media, who takes that hate to task?
If Obama alienates our allies, no problem. If he trashes the United States while abroad, no problem. If he releases some of the worst terrorists the world has ever known into our midst, or the midst of other peaceful nations to be destablized, no problem. If he takes charge of our domestic corporations, Wall Street, banks, lending institutions... no problem. They must defend him at all cost. The nation be damned, the important thing is that Obama is in power.
The most dangerous part of all this, is the complicity of the leftist media in the United States. Convinced that Obama can do no wrong, they fail to see what every other fascist before him has done. They fail to see the ramifications of him being able to consolidate all power unto himself.
I guess I should acknowledge the the only entity that could be confused to be of more danger than the nations media, but then I’d have to ignore it’s manipulation by the media to do it. The leftist public, is being defrauded by our nation’s media. Obama is not a reasoned leader. You can’t take the past into consideration, and see Obama as a great leader, no possible threat to the United States.
So why is there ‘so called’ hate speech today? By and large, it’s because the right refuses to buy into Obama’s plans, the media’s door mat stance, and the crafted vision (by the leftist media players) of the leftists in the United States.
There’s your hate speech. It’s ugly, because it isn’t the mirror image of Obama. It dares to challenge, to explain what the naked emperor is wearing. And so the left has no other option but to declare it hate speech.
Once again the left has polarized a political climate to the max, because all reason was cast to the wind, by them.
If hate speech is to be eliminated, then we damn well better be sure who is setting the definition of ‘hate speech’ is. If my perception is right, then the definition won’t just be left, it will be alarmingly beyond the pale, something the left in the United States has exceeded more and more to get us to where we are today.
If the left can cancel an open debate, not only is this nation is over, the civilized world is over.
Senator McGovern was the most visible evidence of that.
You know, in some ways I think McGovern is a better man than the Obama crowd. McGovern opposes "card check."
The problem with a guy like McGovern, is that they live on long enough so most people have forgotten who they were/are, and then they do one good thing and folks think they may have moderated, at least on one point.
He may be right on this issue. I will take your word for it. I still wouldn’t trust that guy with any slice of governance. I’m sure you wouldn’t either.
Jerry Brown, ex-governor of California is a another one who makes a good call once in a while, yet I wouldn’t trust that guy in a position of leadership on a dare.
For sure - Soros - the voice of TOTUS.
Agree. Sometimes I wonder if Jimmy Carter would have ended up a better person if he had never been elected POTUS. Dem POTUSes certainly don't have any shortage of evil "helpers" whispering in their ears.
McGovern would have been a horrible POTUS, but he had a few principles. I just don't see those principles in Obama.
Carter’s damage would have been avoided by him not being POTUS. He still would have been an idiot, but his influence would have been severely limited. We have the left to thank for that not being the case.
In this, I think is the key to McGovern’s impact. If he had been president, his influence would not have been limited as it was. Even as a Senator, he wasn’t able to impact the nation as negatively as he would have been able to as POTUS.
As for Obama, I think we all make a mistake when we think he has no principles. He is being very loyal to ‘his’ set of principles. It’s just that his loyalties are focused outside our system of governance, outside our nation, outside our set of principles.
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.