Separation? Nah. Liberals Believe in Violation of Church by State

Townhall.com ^ | May 4, 2015 | Shawn Mitchell

[Kaslin]

I'm reconsidering the merits of the NSA. What if they droned the riots, face recognized every thug, and called their moms?

If Republicans and Tea Partiers are the racists, why are the riots always in Democrat and usually Black strongholds?

Leftists believe in separation of church and state, until the state can order pastors to conduct same sex weddings, and strip religious colleges of their tax exemption. Then they're all into violation of church by state.

This is all planned. The community organizers don't spawn riots in cities that would shut them down cold.

Urban thugs: Lets riot!
Conservative critics: These thugs are savages!
Liberal apologists: But they live in squalid, miserable conditions!
Rational observer: Yes, liberal, but is that the fault of your policies, or conservatives'? Who's been governing and schooling these places?

No, liberals, "thug" is not the N word. Just shut up.

The Narcissist in Chief insists massive public "investment" in his agenda would solve the ills of places like Baltimore. Hey, Boss, what did you do with the trillion dollar stimulus beyond enrich cronies and public unions?

Name one country--one--that has been saved by the national government committing eminent domain of the culture.

When George Bush nominated Gale Norton, my old boss in the Colorado Attorney General's Office, as Interior Secretary, the media hyped the theme she was "James Watt in a dress." For those too young to remember the 80s, James Watt was evil personified to the environmental Left.

I just remembered that episode. Have to say I'm shocked--shocked --the media didn't paint Loretta Lynch as Eric Holder in a dress.

Not really. To be liberal is to be loved by the presstitutes. To be conservative is to face their hostile skepticism. To be a conservative woman is to be subjected to their hostile, skeptical, vile, sexist double standard. You are fair game for any insult they can conjure.

Tough love Baltimore Mom is lucky her video went global. If it were seen only by Social Services, she'd be slow toast in the system's roaster oven right now.

There is a disconnect between the hearts and wisdom of the people and the grinding imperatives of the grim bureaucracy.

Uh oh. Time for a narrative shift. If the looters in Ferguson were reacting to the injustice of a white power structure, what are the looters in Baltimore reacting to? The injustice of a Democrat power structure?

I have no idea what the facts are in Baltimore. I don't know what happened between Freddie Gray and the police. I do know that we had days of riots and burnings in Ferguson, Missouri about a shooting that was lied about and misreported, and proved justified.

I also know this: Whether police acted responsibly, or killed a man in cold blood, that does not implicate random local drivers, homeowners, or business owners, many of whom are African American, and presumably all of whom would be horrified by police brutality.

What is going on is not a "protest for justice" but mindless savagery incited by self-selected leaders who have a purpose that has little to do with identifying facts and justice for Mr. Gray. It's a planned agenda, funded by the likes of Soros, and fueled by opportunistic thugs who know not what they do.

If the protesters had the courage of their convictions, they would be marching on the police station and on city hall and "occupying" those establishments, not trashing the lives and livelihoods of local residents.

If you decry the "rape culture on campus"--a place that is statistically safer for young women than the life of non-student women--but you champion Hillary, the enabler and defender of legendary abuse and exploits, the crusher and smearer of her husband's "bimbos," you might be a liberal.

Lefty logic:

A. Only right wing crazies believe the Second Amendment is so citizens can arm and guard against government that oppresses, abuses, and kills people.

B. Rioting, looting, burning, and destruction are a righteous, authentic response to government that oppresses, abuses, and kills people.

Wait, what?

Another liberal friend repeated the accusation that Bush lied America into war. Facts and truth and history matter. We can't let them turn this lie into truth. I have no idea why Bush and Rove clammed up and didn't rebut the accusers, but here's the rebuttal:

"Gaia that's a tired slander. Hillary Clinton and John Kerry saw the same intelligence and voted for the war. Every American including you and I believed Hussein had an active WMD program.
And where do you think Assad got all those gas toys he's dropping on his citizens? Bush not only didn't lie, he wasn't wrong."

Now, there are things to criticize and second guess about the Iraq War. There are important lessons to learn. Maybe it all was a mistake. Maybe the objective should only have been to take out Hussein. But saying that Bush lied is a lie.

Watching Washington Week. "Bans on gay marriage" is one of the most insidiously dishonest phrases of our age. A "ban" is when the state goes out there and tries to to stop and prosecute what people are doing in the street.

State policies not to recognize homosexual unions are not "bans". People can live however they want to live. Not awarding gay or multiple unions a government seal is not banning anything

News hour: Okay, tonight David Brooks kicked booty. "Ignoring poverty? We spend plenty on poverty. $14,000 per person. If we just handed that to poor people, we'd double the poverty line for every poor family. What is government doing with those dollars?" (From memory. I might have improved his delivery a little).

[Canedawg]

No, liberals, "thug" is not the N word. Just shut up.

+1

[Canedawg]

Those thugs in the photo may be whining about poverty, but it looks to me that none of them has missed any meals lately.

[Squat]

those tits are symbolic of being on taxpayer forced welfare, they’re having more babies to riot for more payoffs from the gubermint. Goverment never pays for anything!