Hey liberals, remember during the 2008 campaign when you talked about how tough an Obama administration would be regarding terrorism?
The Hypocratic Party is showing its hypocrisy once more.
Anti-free speech liberals are at it once more by attacking Whole Foods Market CEO John Mackey, who dared to speak out against government-run health care.
Well it looks like our old liberal friends are at it again, shamelessly using somebody's personal tragedy to advance their own (socialist) political agenda, all the while imploring conservatives to "put politics aside".
Although Ted Kennedy was the political opposite of every conservative in America, he was a man who genuinely and sincerely believed in the causes for which he fought.
Nancy Pelosi thinks protesters are un-American.....BUT:
As a lifelong conservative, I am proud to say that I have switched positions and now fully support PETA—(P)eople (E)ating (T)asty (A)nimals!
In fact, I urge ALL conservatives to take a second look at this wonderful organization and show your support by eating a nice juicy steak for dinner (mmmm!).....or maybe a HoneyBaked ham (yum!)....or perhaps turkey with gravy (ohhh!).
Ah yes, I love animals..........WHEN THEY'RE ON MY PLATE.
Thank you for the wonderful work, PETA!
The Obama cultists believe that their main man can do no wrong, but how effective is he in the health care debate when he compares his government-run health care plan to the Post Office?
"I mean, if you think about it, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right?" he said at a recent town hall meeting. "It's the Post Office that's always having problems."
Exactly, Mr. President, which is why Americans recoil at having Post Office-like health care.
We've all heard the charge that conservatives are bigots because we disagree with gay marriage and that we personally attack our 'tolerant' opponents like Meghan McCain.
But there's only one problem—people like Ms. McCain are the real bigots. When asked about Joe the Plumber she said, "Joe the Plumber -- you can quote me -- is a dumbass. He should stick to plumbing."
Ms. Pot, please say hi to Ms. Kettle...
One thing's for certain: John & Meghan McCain are the Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels of the Republican Party.
You gotta love these feminists. They support model Liskula Cohen for suing a woman who called her a "skank", but where were they David Letterman called Sarah Palin a "slutty flight attendant"?
And for the record, Gov. Palin has been called much worse than a skank. Maybe the libs will support a lawsuit against Letterman and his ilk?
I doubt it.
Was Barack Obama born in the U.S.? Most likely, yes. In fact, I'd bet money on it.
But what's so amazing is the conduct of today's journalists, which reeks of liberalism. Guys like Chris Matthews become unhinged and turn a simple request (for the BC) into a supposedly racist attack on Obama.
Hey Chris, when you applied for your driver's license, did you show the DMV a copy of an announcement in your local paper, or did the DMV require the original BC? Thank you very much, Chris. (I just felt a thrill go up my leg)
And whenever someone brings up the (valid) point that it's theoretically possible that Obama's parents had notified the newspaper without any malicious intent about his supposed birth overseas, that's when hack journalists like David Shuster willingly mischaracterize this argument and falsely claim that critics are accusing Obama's parents of conspiring to help their son run for the presidency 47 years later. Please, Shuster.
There's only one person who can make this issue go away forever, but he'd rather stonewall...
Innocent human life should always have priority over guilty human life.
Remember when Carrie Prejean said she "believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman"? Gays and lesbians around the country went crazy and screamed for tolerance.
My, my, my...what short memories they have. Here's how "tolerant" they were towards Sarah Palin during the 2008 campaign:
And that's supposed to be John McCain sticking out of the chimney in flames. This scene took place at the home of a gay person in West Hollywood.
So the next time you hear gays talk about 'tolerance', ask them which of their mouths they're talking from.
AS PAINFUL as it is to admit, social conservatives are slowly losing the debate on gay marriage. Case in point: In this year's Miss USA pageant Miss CA, Carrie Prejean, answered a question by respectfully stating that she believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. Immediately after the contest she was vilified by the media, Hollywood celebrities, and even David Axelrod, President Obama's chief strategist. Nobody came to her defense.
At no other time in American history has it been a faux pas to support traditional marriage. Many have predicted a public backlash ever since Massachusetts legalized gay marriage in 2003, but subsequent polling shows the reverse, revealing that opposition to same-sex marriage has steadily eroded in recent years.
Is all hope lost for conservatives? Supporters of traditional marriage still have a slight majority with which to work, and although they are being pushed closer and closer to the precipice, they can still regain control of the national dialogue with a three-pronged strategy.
Stop Explaining Why Gay Marriage Is Bad
Social conservatives have been playing defense for a while now, stuck explaining why gay marriage is bad for society. The only problem is that fewer and fewer people are listening. Liberals have successfully drilled into the public consciousness the notion that same-sex nuptials should not only be tolerated but celebrated by society. They irresponsibly compare fair-minded opponents of gay marriage to the racist opponents of interracial marriage from years past.
Instead of responding to this baseless attack, conservatives must reframe the debate. Rather than answering "What is wrong with same-sex marriage?" and "How is opposing gay marriage different from opposing interracial marriage?" conservatives should counter by simply asking, "Should 3 gay men who love each other also be allowed to marry?" Gay rights supporters will be hard pressed to explain why they favor marriage rights for some relationships but not others.
In employing this strategy, social conservatives must be on their guard because one of the more effective tactics of the same-sex marriage crowd is to express feigned outrage at the slightest mention of polygamy, thus evading a critical debate of the logical consequences of the redefinition of marriage. They are wise to do so because polygamy continues to carry a stigma, even in our liberal culture, and the arguments used in favor of gay marriage can also be used to support multiple-partner marriage. Conservatives need to drive this point home.
Another tactic of gay rights advocates is to knock conservatives off balance by using the slogan "Marriage Equality". This shrewd maneuver comes with the implication that anyone opposing their agenda is also an opponent of equal rights. After all, Americans are a fair-minded people, and what decent person wants to support inequality? Those wishing to protect marriage need to officially adopt a slogan such as "Pro-marriage" (since marriage is still seen as a male/female institution in the eyes of many) which will resonate with the general public and, more importantly, persuade the fence-sitters who may very well jump to the other side, for fear of being called a bigot. Unless the focus shifts away from "Equality vs. Inequality" to "Pro-marriage vs. Anything Goes", supporters of traditional marriage will ultimately lose.
Reach Out To Black And Latino Churches
Conservatives have been unsuccessful at wooing minorities over the past 45 years, but clear majorities of Blacks and Latinos, in contrast to Whites, believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. This presents a rare opening for social conservatives to join forces with an influential voting bloc of the Democratic party, which would demonstrate that this issue is not a partisan affair and that it transcends race.
One of the dirty little secrets of this entire debate, which the media will never detail, is that the gay rights crowd is comprised of mostly middle to upper class, latte-drinking white men. You will find fewer colored faces at gay marriage rallies than Republican gatherings, yet reporters and pundits curiously never point this out.
The mere presence of prominent minorities on the Pro-marriage side will effectively neutralize the assertion that being gay is no different from being black, and it would come across as very awkward to see throngs of elitist white men lecturing their colored counterparts on civil rights. Although the race/gay analogy is rarely challenged, the undeniable truth is that gays have never been bound as slaves, barred from voting, counted as 3/5 of a person, or relegated to the back of the bus. In fact, many places today recognize civil unions which give gays the very rights that are supposedly unavailable to them.
Furthermore, conservatives must gently remind the public that a marriage license is no more a civil right, constitutional right, or human right than a drivers license or hunting license. None are mentioned in the Constitution, so each state gets to decide who is eligible to receive them. A person who supports traditional marriage is no more a bigot than someone who supports current CA law which bars 15-year-olds from obtaining drivers licenses.
Use Their Own Words Against Them
Supporters of traditional marriage have increasingly found themselves on the receiving end of vicious personal attacks. Those who happen to be Christian or Mormon have had to endure the additional burden of religious bigotry from the same group of people who, ironically, seek tolerance. Ms. Prejean, for instance, was mocked for her Christian faith, told she looked like a transvestite, called a "dumb bi----" by a pageant judge, and a politician in Britain even joked about murdering her.
Is this tolerance.....or hypocrisy? Social conservatives need to publicly ask this question and bring these crude comments to the voters' attention. In the same way that they are pressured to disavow intolerant remarks made against gays, conservatives must begin pressuring gay rights groups to denounce intolerant remarks of their own. Up to this point, the same-sex marriage crowd has paid little to no price for the incendiary words of their allies, which leaves them ripe for attack.
With the seemingly endless supply of tasteless remarks directed towards them, Pro-marriage supporters should produce more commercials reminiscent of the brilliant Yes-on-8 ad featuring San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome. The ad showed him uttering his now-famous quote that gay marriage is going to happen "Whether you like it or not." Even same-sex marriage proponents concede that the ad contributed to Prop 8's passage.
Presently, with even more material, provided by TV personalities such as Bill Maher and Keith Olbermann, Pro-marriage supporters would be wise to pick up where Yes-on-8 left off. It would be long overdue for voters to see a commercial entitled "Tolerance" showing Miss CA giving her perfectly reasonable definition of marriage during the Miss USA pageant, and then cutting to clips of her being called a "dumb bi----" by a pageant judge, followed by Bill Maher calling her a transvestite, followed by a 'joke' on Olbermann's Countdown that she used to be a man, followed by the quip about her being murdered. The American public needs to see that bigots come in all shapes, sizes, colors, and sexual orientations.
With legislators looking to legalize gay marriage in more states, it is imperative that Pro-marriage supporters seize the initiative rather than waiting for the other side to strike first. Traditional marriage has prevailed with voters in 30 states, but if its supporters--both in office and at home--allow themselves to be intimidated into silence, then gay marriage will soon become a reality nationwide.
