The Neosecularist

I Said That? Yeah, I Said That!

Archive for the tag “liberalism”

Unsympathetic Public School Burns Two Girls Alive, Pathetically Hides Behind Liberal-Based Law

There are an infinite number of reasons why, if you have children in public schools, you should immediately remove them from that destructive environment and place them either in a private school setting or home school them.  And even if you don’t have children in public schools, or don’t have children at all – you still need to fight the public school system’s tyrannical, imperial, bureaucratic and liberal hold it has on America’s youth.  Why?

Two young Washington State girls were forced to endure five hours of agonizing hell outside under the sun for their school field day.  The result?  Each came home very badly sunburned because they – by state law – were prohibited from applying sun screen without a doctor’s note giving them permission to do so.  Pure, liberal-based, hyperbolic overreaction which continues to infiltrate the public education system and take control over every single aspect of a child’s life during the hours they are in attendance at any given public school.

When will parents have the courage to stand up and challenge these heartless, thoughtless, unsympathetic thugs and rogues who have long ago usurped power, stolen it away from parents and community, and continue to wield that power to make incredibly devastating, irrational and permanently disfiguring decisions that only benefit them, but do absolutely nothing to educate and to prepare children for their future when they become adults?

More children will continue to suffer needlessly at the hands of public schools so long as they are run by government and not the parents and community at large.  It is entirely inappropriate and un-American for parents not to have more of a direct say, more of a direct control and influence with regards to their own children.  In other words – more government involvement is not the solution to a child’s well-rounded education, more government is the problem to a child’s well-rounded education.

Liberalism is also guilty of crimes against school children.  What conservative, or conservative idealism, provides for such nonsensical, and criminal, rules and stipulations as preventing a child from applying sunscreen to their skin to prevent being burned?  It is liberalism, and liberal ideology, that is the root of this ever-growing, and ever-growing out of control, problem.  Kids can’t play dodge-ball or tag, or anything of a competitive nature in public schools any longer for fear of hurting the feelings of other children who might lose.

Liberalism has outlawed the entire concept of winning altogether over the issue of “hurt feelings”.  And it is liberalism which – although it would seek to allow public schools to take your child to an abortion clinic to have an abortion against your will and without your knowledge; would seek to provide your children with condoms so they might engage is “safe sex” rather than abstain from sex; would teach your children that America  was founded by, and continues to be, a hateful, racist, bigoted, misogynist nation – that same liberalism would prevent your children from taking an aspirin to reduce or end pain; to apply sunscreen protection to their skin to prevent being burnt alive by the intense heat of the sun; or otherwise have a zero tolerance policy towards anything they deem to be a threat to their overall control and manipulation over the students, without exception, regardless of reason or consequence to the students affected.

Don’t misunderstand – public schools are noble and worthy institutions, and they ought to persevere.  However, so long as they are being run, and controlled by, outside influences with ignoble agendas; so long as parents have little or no say, or knowledge about what or how their children are being taught; so long as children are being intentionally inundated with harmful misinformation, that education – that purposeful lack of a quality education – will only prepare them for a life of indentured servitude, enslavement and complete dependence to government and government agencies.

The real reason why sunscreen is needlessly and heedlessly banned from public schools, like so much else, is not to protect your children from harm, but to protect the control public schools want, and need to have, over your children.  The sunscreen ban is a smokescreen.  In other words – public schools need to have complete dominance over your children without you influencing them.  The only way for schools to do that is to enact inane, head-scratching policies like the banning of aspirin and sunscreen, and the banning of tag and competitive sports, and enacting a zero-tolerance policy that makes absolutely no sense – and that also now includes, and extends to, the feeding of your children in public schools, all of which is engineered and designed to take more control over your children away from you and place that responsibility upon the public school system.  Public schools do not want you to have any say in how your children are educated, or what goes in public schools.  In increments, and over decades, the public school system has managed to become your children’s real parents, mostly due to our own apathy.

Until we become less apathetic, and more hostile (in a constructive manner) with regards to how our children are taught and educated in public schools, and what they are taught, more and more children will continue to be burned (pun intended) by those very public schools.  Either take back control of your public schools, or continue to watch the overall decline of your children’s education and, thus, their lives as they move into adulthood.  Which will it be?  And remember – your decision affects not only your children, but America at large, all of us.  Because children really are the future.

What future will America have, what future does America have, if its youth continues to be brainwashed and manipulated by a liberal-based agenda that ever seeks to dummy down their education rather than build them up and strengthen them, their perspectives, and prepare them for adulthood?  How can any child grow up to be independent when all they know is complete dependence and reliance on government to take care of them?

Meet The Anti “War On Women” Women

Foolish liberal feminists who wrongly and irrationally complain about a war on women ought to be prepared to meet their betters.  One group of conservatives is going to make it awful difficult for them to be taken as anything other than the joke that they are.  What makes this group of conservatives so special and unique?  They are all women.  Yes, that’s right.  Women!  Women standing up for conservative principles amidst the fog of war that is in actuality no war at all, but in the lurid, corrupt and feckle-encrusted minds of liberal feminists like Sandra Fluke, the National Organization of Women, Nancy Pelosi, Debbie Wasserman Shultz and the entire Democrat Party, all of whom are the real traitors to, and of, women.  Women will be represented in congress, and women will be a driving force in shaping policy.  But it will be conservative women, not mushy, emotional, nonsensical, wishy-washy feminists who demand the killing of unborn children be legally sanctioned by government and paid for by taxpayers.

Does that sound erratic and scatter-brained to you?  These conservative women are proof that the war on women is, and has been, a canard all along.  Nobody is being fooled by this charade but these feminists themselves who still think they have made any case at all against conservatism and so-called misogynists who oppose taxpayer-funded contraception and forcing religious institutions to pay for birth control, including that birth control used specifically in the act of sexual irresponsibility.

The National Organization of Women, which is the equivalent of an empty, discarded shell not even a crustacean would inhabit tried, and failed, to shut down Rush Limbaugh, has been telling American women for decades that men, and conservative men in particular, are anti-woman.  Yet, for all their pooh-poohing, there are more women (Rush Babes, as they are known) who support Limbaugh than support NOW.  If American women really felt there was a war on women, wouldn’t that be reversed?

The reality is, as it has always been, that women are far more pro-life and pro-family than liberal feminists give them credit for being.  But that doesn’t translate into the “barefoot and pregnant” definition liberal feminists have ascribed to being pro-life and pro-family.  It’s interesting to note that while conservative men are not at all fearful of a conservative women with an intelligent, independent mind of her own, liberal feminists are.  A woman’s mind that cannot be controlled, influenced and shaped by liberal feminist dogma is a mind that any liberal feminist fears.

Every other group in America is “coming out”.  Now it is time for conservative women to come out.  There are many millions of them, whose numbers are being underrepresented in the MSM.  Conservative men, who are secure in both their politics and their manhood, are looking for more conservative women to come out of the shadows and help them win back America from the grips of liberalism and to beat back those feminists who insist to be pro-life is to be a misogynist.

The values and morals held by conservative women are worth taking seriously.  The values and morals held by liberal women are worth taking out with the trash, seriously, including their biography of “Julia“.  But when you do take them out to the trash, don’t mix them in with the recycling.  Or – do you see anything in liberal feminism worth reusing?

Conservatism Is A Mental disorder?

According to one article, if you are a conservative you are the equivalent of being retarded.

One possible explanation is that some “conservatives” wear the label quite loosely. Another points to the long-established link between right-wing attitudes and a tendency to perceive the world as threatening. In an era where the latest scare is constantly being hyped on television and the Internet, it stands to reason that conservatism would dominate.

The article defines conservatism as the act of finding and labeling “threats” in the world.  Why does the author, Tom Jacobs, go to such extremes to paint conservatives as brain-dead?  Because, as he points out, 40% of Americans identify themselves as being conservative, and that scares the hell out of Jacobs and all liberals.  The same poll shows that only 21% of Americans identify themselves as liberals, which confuses and astounds someone as intellectually dishonest and deceiving, and brain-dead himself, as Jacobs.

Conservatism is on the rise in America, despite all the attacks that have been waged against it by the liberal MSM for decades.  Liberalism is dying a slow and painful death.  Is it more ironic that the death can be felt and noticed to such extremes more so by the liberal MSM than it can by your average liberals?

If we don’t have the time or energy to give a matter sufficient thought, we tend to accept the conservative argument.

Conservatives have given “time and energy sufficient thought” when it comes to abortion, for example.  That is why conservatives, by in large are pro-life.  The only “sufficient thought” liberals give to abortion is that having a child may inconvenience the woman, therefore, whether abortion is moral or not, whether the unborn child is a living human being or not, the mere fact that the woman is inconvenienced is “sufficient” enough a reason to kill the child.  But that position, to liberals, is retarded and unintellectual, unenlightening and “threatening”.

Eidelman and his colleagues’ paper will surely outrage many on the left (who will resist the notion of conservatism as somehow natural) and the right (who will take offense to the idea that their ideology is linked to low brainpower). The researchers do their best to preemptively answer such criticism.

“We do not assert that conservatives fail to engage in effortful, deliberate thought,” they insist. “We find that when effortful thought is disengaged, the first step people take tends to be in a conservative direction.”

Conservatives will not be as outraged as liberals hope us to be.  We see the humor in this because we can see liberalism’s death knell in progress.  Conservatives beat liberals in the area of morals and ethics, hands down, every time.  Liberalism is based purely on emotions.  Conservatism is based on rationality.  This proof is clearly illustrated and demonstrated every day in every single article and broadcast throughout the liberal media establishment.  As conservatism strengthens, as its number steadily rise, the MSM will kick and scream louder and louder, engaging itself in yellow journalism, smear attacks, misleading propaganda and out and out lies and prevarications against conservatives.  Likewise, as conservative media outlets continue to grow, as the market for conservative news grows, we will be there to show and document the complete meltdown and breakdown of liberalism.

It’s morning again in America.  Conservatives are waking up.  Liberals will also have to wake up to conservatism, or forever live in what can only be perceived, by their standards, as a hellish, nightmarish world where conservatism and conservative ideas and ideals, values , moral and ethics are mainstream and liberalism is passe’.

American Liberalism Is Dying, Though Its Last Gasps Are Louder Than Its Voice Ever Was

While it’s sad, but true, that the MSM (Main Stream Media), which is, and has always been, very liberal, is still the predominate vehicle through which most Americans receive their news, this phenomenon is slowly but steadily crumbling.  Unless you are a conservative, and looking from the outside in, it will be hard to tell, and certainly harder to tell if you are a liberal, and one who is already entrenched the in Leftist camp.  Nonetheless, as the latest gallop Poll shows, more American consider themselves conservatives than liberal or independent.  That is not a new trend, by the way.  Conservatives have always outnumbered liberals, and conservatives, by the percentages, have been rising throughout the decades.  So – how long before conservatives reach fifty percent?

That may be sooner than anyone ever thought, and thanks, large in part, to that group of Americans who nobody thought might help push conservative numbers and percentages higher and higher, into that coveted majority standing.  That group?  Liberals, naturally.  And it is through their lack of any real insight, intellectual capability, provocative debating skills, and the fact that they argue more through substantive emotions, rather than through rationality, that is, and will continue to be, their undoing.  Obviously, they won’t see it.  They will, of course dent it.  And all of that is just fine with conservatives.

We clearly see the Left’s infantile, its child-like and most juvenile nature everyday, in every liberal media outlet – CNN, MSNBC, NPR, CBS, NBC, ABC.  All these markets are declining in viewership.  Where are all the former viewers going to get their news?  Newspapers have been on the decline for years, and because most people can get their news online, conveniently, and for the most part, free, newspapers will continue to decline as more and more opt to use the internet to market their brand rather than the old-fashioned paper.  Good for us, but probably bad for the paperboy.

Again, if all we ever read or listen to is the Arianna Nation, The Daily Kos, The View, Rachel Maddow, Ed Shultz, John Stewart, Steve Colbert, etc., then it will be very difficult to grasp just was is actually happening out in the real world.  And too many, in fact an uncomfortable and disturbing level of young adults, college aged, are still either listening to or reading liberal-based media or not interested in news at all, having consumed and wrapped themselves up in their own little fantasy worlds.  Luckily, most of them will grow out of it by the time they reach their mid thirties, which is exactly why conservatives outnumber liberals, and why that trend will continue, and why the percentages will long remain in conservatism’s favor – and why, by 2020, conservatives will be somewhere around the 45% mark, whereas liberals will be below 20%.  The reason?  Moderates/Independents, who make up 35% of Americans will, for the most part remain unchanged.  But any shift will see this group move to the conservative side rather than the liberal.

America is returning to its conservative roots and heritage.  Again, it’s near impossible to see this living in a liberal state, city or part of America that is a stronghold for liberalism and liberal values.  And we recognize that it will take much longer to break the grips of leftist propaganda in these areas, which are tightening and bearing down on the communities where they still have a hold.  That also is fine.  Conservatism is on the march, and we have yet to be stopped.  Portraying conservatives as the bullies and aggressors has done nothing to thwart our resolve, slow or progress or shut us up.

What happens to liberalism when Obamacare is overturned?  What happens to liberalism when Obama loses his reelection bid to, it is presumed, Mitt Romney?  What happens to liberalism when a republican controlled congress begins to repeal some of the Democrat legislation that has crippled our nation, incurred trillions of dollars of debt and kept us in a perpetual recession?  What happens to liberalism when taxes are substantially cut?  When the Keystone XL pipeline is passed and when more and more drilling permits are accepted?  What happens to liberalism when all of this comes to pass, and the nation finally realizes that smaller government, lower taxes and more personal freedom is not the “evil” liberals paint it to be?

Liberalism flounders and chokes on its own acidic vomit.  Not convinced?  That isn’t really important to us – right now.

Fighting Liberalism – Our Resolve Has Never Been Greater!

With the passing of Andrew Breitbart comes much sorrow within the conservative community, perhaps as much sorrow as devilish glee and enraptured satisfaction and content within the liberal community.  Andrew never minced words, never backed away from a fight, never squirmed out of a challenge.  Although he has passed, his voice still resonates, and his spirit still carries on.  While liberalism yet plagues America and the world; while its corrupt ideologies, its convoluted way of solving social and economic problems, its irrational and overly emotional outlook on life, liberty and happiness continue to infiltrate young minds, twist and warp reality into fantasy, fact into fiction – and fiction into fact; while liberalism is yet a prevalent and strong adversary in this world, while we mourn a true conservative voice, we must continue to be emboldened, to be inspired, to be courageous and resolved.  This fight has lost an ally, but millions more soldiers will rise to defend all that is common sense, rationality, conservatism!

Andrew was as blunt as he was provocative.  His style of journalism, because of its no holds barred strategy, ticked off the Left.  And every time the Left tried to take apart Andrew’s words and attack his writings, his character, him personally, all the Left could show was how inept it really was, and remains, in its debating format.  Liberalism, because it deals more in emotions than in rationality, always becomes bogged down and mired in its own arrogance, condescension, corruption and contemptuous and flagrant arguments; weighed down by its own lies, its own misrepresentations, its own misinformation and sinks down into its own inescapable quicksand-like cesspool.

The Left is resolved to fight for its goals, its ambitions, which include abortion on demand (and as much of the expense of those abortions paid for by taxpayers); free contraception, birth control and healthcare (also paid for by the taxpayers); bigger and more expansive government, more government programs and services (as well paid for by the taxpayers); and raising taxes, and the rate of taxation, as high as they can get away with (the result of which will be felt by all Americans whether they pay taxes or not).

Our resolve as conservatives must not be diminished, must not falter, must not waver, must not flinch.  Our resolve as conservatives must remain strong; we must meet liberals on the battlefield of ideas and crush them and their emotional outbursts with our intellectuality, our rationality, our intelligence and intellect and out ability to reason.

Conservatives must be willing to be as blunt and as provocative as was Andrew.  We must be willing to take on any criticism, any hate, any callous, scathing, slander, any BS the Left will throw at us and show how incredibly inept, juvenile and nonsensical the Left is at conveying its message – which is always wrapped up, and warped, in emotions.  Conservatives must be willing to feel the intense heat of the Left, and liberals, who will defend their emotional tantrums, and who will hide, cowardly, behind yellow journalism, the MSM and the Democrat Party when we attack their ideas.  Conservatives must be resolved not to give up, give in, give an inch of ground.  We have the high ground, the moral ground – and as for the bottom land with which liberals occupy? – we can re-till that land with their carcasses once we have won this war.

Conservatives – this is a call to stand and fight.  Remember Andrew as the conservative stalwart that he was.  We too must be stalwart.  We must carry on this fight.  Let it be resolved that we will not back away so long as life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, our Constitution, our country remains under siege by liberals and liberalism.

We can stay holed up in our “cave of the dead”, or we can grow up, grow some courage and fight to defend the morals and values that made, and makes, America the greatest nation on Earth.

How do we fight liberals?  With the same bluntness, the same provocative in their face style and resolve as Andrew.

Will we fight?

How Can Islam Be The Religion Of Peace It Claims To Be? (And How Can We Respect It With A Straight Face?)

In Saudi Arabia, a Colombian soccer player, Juan Pablo Pino was detained by “moral” police, after he was seen with an exposed tattoo of Jesus on his arm.  The country maintains its law under Sharia, which does not allow for religious tattoos, among other things, to be exposed in public.  Upon his release, Pino is said to have apologized for the mishap.  If he hadn’t, would he have been released?

And, in an on going story which has the world gripped, Iran is set to execute by hanging a Muslim turned Christian pastor. And if it had not been from all the pressure, all the condemnation, worldwide, the execution would have already taken place.

Two current stories, among the countless millions which illustrate the destructive, anti-human worldview that is Islam.

A man cannot wear a religious tattoo without being accosted by “moral” police.  Any Muslim that dares convert to Christianity, and is found out, is executed.  Arab Muslims from Hamas to the PLO, in Egypt, Iran, Syria and all over the Middle east routinely, religiously, call for the destruction of Israel and the killing of every last Jew.  And Muslim women can’t do anything for fear of being lashed or stoned to death in so called “honor” killings.  And that includes reporting being raped, because if she does that, her father and brothers will kill her for having “dishonored” the family, and that is protected under Sharia law.  And Muslims are just arrogant enough to have the audacity not to understand why we criticize them and their religion.

Ladies and gentlemen, Islam is not a respecter of peace.  Islam is not about peace.  Islam is not defined as peace.  Islam is not defined by peace.  If you are a Muslim today, you are either the blood thirsty Muslim terrorist who uses Islam and the name of Allah in vane to justify your madness, or you are the cowardly Muslim who will not stand up for your religion and defend it (that part of Islam that once was peaceful and enlightened) and take it back from the blood thirsty Muslim terrorists that have hijacked it.  Which one are you?

And before you take offense, which you don’t deserve, and start talking about all of Christianity’s faults throughout the centuries just remember – Christianity ironed out most of those faults through all its many schisms, religious wars, etc., where millions of people, mostly innocent, died during this period of struggle.  Today, Christianity is vastly different than it was even three hundred years ago.  It is less blood thirsty and less hell bent on damnation and more focused on saving souls, whereas Islam is more focused on killing souls.

Nothing coming out of Islam today remotely suggests there is any intent by Muslims to be more caring, more giving, more tolerant people.   By their law non Muslims are the infidel and it is justified to kill them.  That’s Sharia law.  The only law they know.

There has been talk of allowing Sharia Law here in America, to accommodate the many Muslims who have immigrated here.  Why they came here, to what is essentially a Christian nation, would be baffling except for the fact that it is here in America where a Muslim, where anyone of any religion, can most freely practice their faith (within reason).  It’s ironic.  In fact, Muslims can practice their faith here in America more freely, and without being harassed, than they could back in their own country.  We don’t have a “moral” police that can arrest anyone for the slightest of religious infractions.  It would be unconstitutional.

Allowing Sharia law here in America would be a bad idea, not just because it violates the constitution, which is does.  But by its very nature, Sharia law would allow for Muslims to be tried and sentenced under separate laws and a different due process than the rest of Americans.  That’s not what our founding fathers intended.  Sharia law, just as it does in the rest of the Muslim world, would also allow for the lashing, stoning and killing of women and girls in their so called “honor” killings.  Sharia law, just as in the rest of the Muslim world, would allow for the executions of Muslims turned Christians.  Right here in America.  And the same damned liberals who despise and decry our own death penalty would support the death penalty under Sharia law, because these same damned liberals who so despise Christianity welcome anything that is counter to Christianity, i.e., Islam.

And what of women’s rights groups like the National Organization of Women?  They are silent right now on everything going on in the Muslim world concerning the violence against Muslim women and girls.  Why?  Out of some fear they would be disrespecting the religion?  No.  Because NOW so hates Christianity, it is willing to bite its tongue when Islam, which also despises Christianity as much as liberals, behaves badly towards its women and girls.  Bring Sharia law here to America, install it, use it in place of American law, to subvert American law, to intimidate and spread fear, to counter Christianity – liberals will look the other way, regardless of the inhumanity it commits against Muslim Americans in the name of Islam and of Allah.  One has to wonder what Sharia law has to say about abortion, and how that would play into NOW’s attitude toward Sharia law.

With all the violence being committed in the name of Islam, and it is true that the vast majority of today’s terrorists are Muslim, is it even possible Islam itself can be saved?  And if so, where are the so called “peaceful” Muslims?  What is the point of retaining ones religion if that religion no longer reflects or behaves in the manner in which it was founded?  What is the point of staying in a religion that has evolved itself more into a satanic cult, than a religion of peace?  Why not just convert to Christianity?  Is there anything within Islam even worth redeeming at this point?

In Arabic, Islam means submission, not peace.  And it is submission for which one part of its followers, (about 300 million out of nearly 1.3 billion Muslims) Islam is concerned.  But if Islam is ever going to be that religion of peace that the other part (the one billion Muslims) claims it really is, than the one billion need to stand up and be counted; they need to take a stand for the Islam that is of peace, (if that “peace” still exists, or ever existed) and remove that Islam which is of death and destruction.  If they (the one billion Muslims) don’t find the courage to do that, then it will happen progressively, and more violently, by western powers in their/our on going War On Terror.  And the longer the “peaceful” Muslims” continue to sit and be silent, the harder it will be for anyone to look at Islam with a straight face and seriously consider anything remotely peaceful about it.

And by the time the West is through waging its War On Terror, which will continue for years to come – will there even be anything left of Islam, within Islam, to salvage?  Anything worth remembering?  Or will Islam be remembered mostly for its violence and its murderous rage and tendencies; its “honor” killings and beheadings; its terrorism and homicide bombers?  And will that be how the history of Islam is taught to subsequent generations?

Is that really what Muslims want for their religion?

Roseanne Barr Loses Her Head, Becomes More Unhinged

Yes, it’s a sobering truth, Roseanne Barr is still alive and kicking, and still screaming for attention, as is evidenced by her latest unhinged rant against bankers and the rich.  She is calling for them all to be beheaded for having the audacity to be wealthy and for not sharing any of it with those “less fortunate”.  As of yet, Roseanne has not said what she is doing with all her wealth, or whether she will “voluntarily” give it up to those people she claims are less fortunate.  It is presumed that she would, and that is all the more reason for all of us who are “less fortunate” to beat a path to her doorstep.  Where does she live again?

But wait!  Suppose she doesn’t give up her wealth.  Suppose Roseanne were to slam the door in their face and call out her hounds.  Suppose Roseanne were to be as much a selfish prude and snob as she proclaims rich bankers are.  Is that possible?

Said Roseanne:

“Part of my platform is, of course, the guilty must be punished and that we no longer let our children see their guilty leaders getting away with murder. Because it teaches children, you know, that they don’t have to have any morals as long as they have guns and are bullies and I don’t think that’s a good message,”

Roseanne is fortunate that she is a lunatic.  Of course, that is also our misfortune.  Actually our real misfortune is that so many of us paid attention to her back in the 1980’s and 90’s.  If only we had seen then, it was not just her myriad hair styles that were crazy.  She is also fortunate that she is a liberal, because every time a conservative calls for the death of someone, or applauds their death, i.e., an Islamic terrorist, we are branded as bigots and xenophobes.

With all this talk of  “the guilty must be punished”, one must wonder whether there isn’t just a hint of conservatism flowing through Roseanne.  But then again, that “guilty must be punished” rhetoric is probably just a hold over for her strong pro-abortion, kill your child in the womb, beliefs.  After all, if a banker can be “guilty” of accumulating wealth and for not “sharing” any of it with the poor, certainly an unborn child can be “guilty” of being conceived and becoming a burden on its mother.

And when it comes to murder and killing, and revenge, the only murder, killing and revenge liberals like Roseanne Barr supports are the murder of rich conservatives and unborn children.  They were appalled by the execution of Troy Davis, as they are with most other criminals on death row.  Executing white supremacists, however, is still cool with them.  To liberals like Roseanne, both the evil, rich banker and the unborn, burdensome child are as leaches to them.  Rich liberals, however, get a pass because at least they “say” they want to help the poor, and at least they “say” that want their taxes raised so that money will go towards ending poverty.

We conservatives could learn much from the liberal, if only we would just “say” more.  After all, isn’t that how Obama got elected?

According to Roseanne’s “intellectual” musings, punishing these guilty bankers will help us better teach “morals” to our children.  Also, according to Roseanne, and liberals, it is “moral” to “teach” our children that America is an inherently evil and racist county founded by evil, rich racists.  And yes, that it is “moral” for a woman to kill her child in the womb.  (We can’t forget that)

And conservatives never give liberals enough credit for being “moral”.  That’s all liberals talk about is “morals”.

 - It’s “moral” to kill rich people (rich Democrats, liberals being exempt)

 - It’s “moral” to “teach” children who the “real” racists are.

 - It’s “moral” to be against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan because America “deserved” to be attacked

 - It’s “moral” to verbally attack and slander our elected leaders so long as they are conservatives, as in the case of George W. Bush. (But do that to a liberal, as in the case of Barack Obama, and that would be racist and immoral)

 – It’s “moral” to support open borders and illegal immigration because America was stolen, and isn’t really our land anyway.

Conservatives are obviously in a lot of trouble when it comes to “morals” and “morality”.  Liberals like Roseanne Barr clearly have that market all sewn up.

Until we can be “taught” by liberals like Roseanne to be more open minded, we will have to be content with being “immoral”, with:

promoting “immoral” values such as life, liberty and the American way

promoting “evil” and “immoral” economics like capitalism, free markets, free trade

promoting “evil” lifestyle choice like abstinence until married

promoting an “evil” Constitution that guarantees us the right to bear arms and to defend ourselves from those who would kill us or our family

promoting values that instill the concept of individualism and of independence

And for promoting the worst “evil” of them all – from the liberal point of view:

That the United States of America is the greatest nation on Earth, founded by some of the greatest, most influential, incorruptible minds ever to walk this Earth, despite the fact that among them some were slave holders.

And if we conservatives can’t learn just how “immoral” we are and have been all this time, or refuse to listen to “liberal reason”, well don’t worry.  Roseanne will have us thinking “clearly” in no time after a stay in one of her “reeducation camps”, or conservative retreats.

Sounds kind of peaceful and relaxing, doesn’t it?  Especially if it includes that full frontal lobotomy.  And if it does, then we conservatives will really be considered as “among the walking liberals”.

Herman Cain is Right – Blacks Have Been “Brainwashed” By Liberals And Liberalism

When Presidential candidate Herman Cain, a black conservative, said that black Americans had been “brainwashed by liberals, Democratic strategist Cornell Belcher countered with his own slant, calling Cain’s remark “racist and bigoted.  There are a number of striking qualities to all of this, the most striking, perhaps, is that for decades we have been told that black Americans cannot be racists themselves.  (That was only reserved for whites because of slavery and segregation)  Now comes clear evidence that indeed black Americans can be racists, and often speak with racist undertones.  But it is not Herman Cain who is the racist.

Belcher, who is black, by the way, and a liberal, said about Cain’s remark that it was Cain who was the bigot and racist; that it was Cain who was attacking the intelligence of blacks by saying they had been brainwashed by liberals.  And what did Herman Cain say that so riled Belcher?  Said Cain:

African Americans have been brainwashed into not being open minded, not even considering a conservative point of view.  I have received some of that same vitriol simply because I am running for the Republican nomination as a conservative. So it’s just brainwashing and people not being open minded, pure and simple.”

So according to Belcher, Cain, although he is a black American, is a racist because he would have the audacity to even suggest other blacks look into the “conservative point of view”.  Because, as Belcher, a black liberal, knows, should more and more blacks begin to see that it is liberalism, and the Democrat Party, that is inherently racist; when more and more blacks begin to understand that it is conservatism and those values associated with conservatism that can free one’s mind and remove the stigma, the liberal imprint and the brainwashing mechanism that has caused millions of blacks into believing only government can care for them and provide for their every need, Democratic strategists and black liberal sellouts like Belcher will be out of a job.

And this is the “real teachable moment”, contrary to Belcher.

And it is Belcher who is the bigot and racist.  As are all liberals who keep on insisting that blacks are little children lost; that blacks must be taken by the hand by liberals and guided to the open arms of government (federal, state and local) where they can be looked after – clothed, fed and housed.  It is Belcher and all liberals who are being condescending toward black Americans, certainly not white conservatives and certainly not Herman Cain.

Belcher continues with his own racist and twisted remarks saying:

Well — well, liberals didn’t have a history of Jim Crowe or slavery so it’s different.

So Belcher, who seems to have a real problem with Jews in the article cited, has just admitted the liberal belief that because of slavery and Jim Crow, liberals, including blacks, cannot be racists – although he calls Cain “racist”, and he himself appears to have hostility to Jews.   But Cain is a conservative, so in Belcher’s warped, his own, racist mind, Cain is the sell out for suggesting that blacks ought to open up their minds more to other points of view, in this case conservative views.  And because, in Belcher’s view, Cain has sold out black America, and because Cain is a conservative, there is nothing hypocritical with referring to Cain as a racist.

The question then that needs to be asked to all liberals, and to Belcher himself is – why do liberals oppose blacks having an open mind, and why do blacks themselves continue to support a party (Democrat) and a destructive ideology (liberalism) that ever seeks to keep their minds shut?

For generations blacks have believed. and have been brainwashed by liberalism into believing, they could only find salvation, real hope,  in liberalism and government.  Herman Cain is doing all he can to dispel this lie and wake black America up, open their eyes and expand their minds with the truth.  For that, Cain is labeled the racist.

All Cornell Belcher has shown in his interview is that even blacks like himself can be vile, despicable racists.  Herman Cain is both showing up people like Belcher and shutting them up.  White Americans have been pointing out the racism within liberalism for decades.  Mostly this has been ignored.  Now, Herman Cain, a black man and a conservative is doing much the same.  His comments are not being ignored; cannot be ignored; will not be ignored.

Herman Cain is forcing liberals to show their true racist colors  – and that those colors come in both white and black.

Post Navigation

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 61 other followers

%d bloggers like this: