Friday, November 29, 2013

Liberalism: The Religion of Hate

The following video took place back in 1976, and it begins with the television announcer saying "...and, wait a minute, there's an animal loose..."

The animals in question were a couple of liberals who wanted some attention; they jumped into the field at Dodger Stadium, planted their sorry behinds in center field, and made an attempt to set fire to an American flag, which they probably stole from someone else, but who knows.  It was their "religious rite" so to speak.  Too bad for them the hero of the day was Rick Monday of the Chicago Cubs, who made what was arguably the greatest play in baseball.

We remember Rick Monday's name with relative ease.  We don't remember the names of the animals in center field.  Why even bother? 

Cut the scene to several weeks ago in Conservapedia.  An animal - this one hailed from Australia, but he's not as cuddly as a koala - has to leave a harassment note of sorts for one of our staff.  It read:


Hi Ken.

I would have left a message for you on your talk page but, as usual, it was locked.

It makes me sad that you are so afraid to engage with anyone.  What makes you so scared?  Is your faith in God and the Bible so weak that you can't even discuss them with others?

I recommend that you open up a bit to those with different views.  Maybe you'll learn something!

Anyway, must run.

Much love

Horace

I'm drawing a comparison here.  The actions of the animal calling himself Horace are directly related to the actions of the two animals on that ball field back in '76.  What happened that day was a pair of liberals engaged in the destruction of an American symbol (the flag of the United States); they attempted to do this destruction within the confines of another American symbol (a baseball park) during a traditional American pastime (a baseball game), and they were determined to do it in the faces of those who objected to it, which were ordinary Americans who believe in traditional American values.  Needless to say, these liberal animals didn't get it through their heads that they were being booed, neither did they get it through their heads that the audience stood up and cheered the moment Rick Monday saved the flag from their behavior.

So we return to the above letter.  What we have here is another liberal animal who for years tried to force his opinions on our site, and was repeatedly booted out for the troll that he is.  He claims that we should be more open to those with different views, which means his views, and those whose views who are similar to his.  We have seen his views, unfortunately.  They are views thoroughly anti-American and anti-Christian; they are in-line with Marx, Engels, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, Saul Alinsky; these views support the killing of unborn children in abortion clinics, and demand the censoring of prayer in schools and the removal of God from the public sphere.

This is what liberalism is about, folks.  It is not "liberty" for everyone, as it may have been in the past.  It is the religion of hate.  Whether it's done in a ball park, or by the occupiers of Wall Street, or by some clown who demands we pay for her "Obamaphone", or when some nut gets in your face about what you drive, what church you go to, who you voted for, well, that's today's liberalism for you.

As for Horace, well, he hails from down-under, Australia to be exact, and he still tries to force his way onto Conservapedia.  We discovered his kind of force also includes DDoS attacks and spam.

So much for liberal tolerance and love!

Sunday, November 10, 2013

If the Jackboot Fits, Wear It!

One of the things that liberals don't like is to be hit with facts.  They like to lie a lot; their lies serve to push an agenda which is alien to everything this country stands for, and for them to be confronted with the facts which contradicts their agenda causes them to behave in a hostile manner.
Kathleen Sibelious' brooch

And one of their agendas now is to push the Nazi "pin" accusation against us.

Here's the background:

An individual alerted the author of this blog that Kathleen Sibelious was wearing a certain pin - the word is "brooch" - on her clothing when testifying before the Senate recently, and during an AP interview in 2009.  This particular brooch is an eagle clutching a pearl.  Obviously, the eagle is an American symbol, and the brooch itself is merely a decorative piece of jewelry.  No problem, right?

The individual in question alerted the blog author to the similarity of the Sibelious brooch to the Nazi eagle; both the brooch and the Nazi emblem are, at their very basic forms, an eagle clutching a circular object, which on the brooch is a pearl, and on the Nazi emblem it's a swastika encircled by a wreath.  The implication here is that Sibelious is a Nazi.
The Nazi emblem

Now, it would take a long stretch of the imagination to accuse Sibelious of slipping into a pair of jackboots so she could do the goosestep down Pennsylvania Avenue, raising the ol'right arm in a "seig heil" salute, would it?  But that's what these liberals would have the public believe, in that we at Conservapedia are accusing Kathleen Sibelious, the Heath and Human Services Secretary, of being a closet Nazi, and they are basing this accusation on nothing more than the similarity of a piece of jewelry to the Nazi emblem.

But when they harp on the brooch, they hope the reader will miss the important point that was raised.  Sibelious' actions speak louder than any piece of jewelry.

Our point is the following:

Ever since Barrack Obama came into office, this country was forced into a radical change to the left, and he first warned us about it when he answered a question given by Joe the Plumber: he was going to take people's hard-earned money and spread it to anyone he wanted.  That's called socialism.  He's on record as wanting a civilian agency more powerful than the Army.  That's called intimidation of the citizenry.  He has purged from the Armed Forces more than 200 general and flag officers for spurious reasons.  That weakens the country's war-fighting capabilities.

And he created Obamacare.  Obamacare was passed without anyone in Congress - much less the general public - being allowed to read it, and when it was read we all discovered just what it would cost to the average citizen, liberal as well as conservative.  Private insurance plans would end, and thousands upon thousands have just discovered it the hard way.  Costs for new insurance policies tripled or quadrupled vs. the old policies.  The uninsured - of who Obamacare was meant for in the first place - have discovered they are now forced to pay, either a minimum of $500 dollars per month for the basic policy or a heavy fine in the thousands of dollars if they don't.  No one can opt out of it.  It seems Obama will get his money one way or the other.

And to make sure Obama get's his money, Obamacare calls for the hiring of some 16,000 new agents for the IRS.  You know those people; they'll shake down a kid in a lemonade stand for a dime in taxes with the same ferocity that they'll use against a citizen who owes $200, and Obama wants 16,000 more of these people...because he's given over the money-collecting apparatus for Obamacare to the IRS.  You would think that since Obamacare is about healthcare the bill would hire 16,000 doctors and nurses, but again, Obama wants his money.

And then there is that little part of the bill that liberals really want to ridicule, which is the death panel part.  It's a determination by the government as to who gets care and who doesn't; you're doctor just isn't included in the dialogue.  Set your time machine to earlier this year, May to be exact.  A little 10-year-old girl named Sarah Murnaghan from Newtown Square, Pennsylvania, suffered from cystic fibrosis, and she needed lung transplants desperately.  Who acted like the bureaucrat, and not the doctor?  Who tried dismissing this case with the curt "someone lives, and someone dies"?  Who confirmed immediately that there was a death panel in Obamacare?  HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sibelious:


Now, does that mean Sibelious is a Nazi?  No.  But try comparing what she did in Murnaghan case, try comparing the overall government control that is contained in Obamacare with the videos below:


At their basic forms, Obamacare and Nazi eugenics both are entwined in a government bureaucracy as to who lives and who dies.  Sibelious was exactly the kind of uncaring bureaucrat that would be comfortable in Germany in the 1930's as she is today.  That is part and parcel to what socialism is all about, and that includes national socialism, which are your infamous Nazis.  But, of course, we're going to have our liberals whine about a pin on someone's blouse rather than the idiotic and despicable ideas they themselves create, which have affected all of us at the stroke of a pen.  These liberals are going to deny any connection they have to Hitler and his goose-stepping minions at all costs, even if the evidence against them is starring them in the face.

But if the jackboot fits...