http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/09/06/AP-Reporter-Asks-If-Obama-Kerry-Of-Having-Group-Spin-Removal-Procedure
...and this is from the AP!!! Not exactly part of the "Right Wing Conspiracy"....
Friday, September 6, 2013
Funny, but......
Stewart, from time to time (like the Hillary "this is where boners go to die" clip) is absolutely hilarious!
He's done it again....this time, it's all about Wiener:
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/09/06/Jon-Stewarts-Epic-Annihilation-of-Anthony-Weiner
BUT....let's be VERY clear about something:
THIS IS ALL ABOUT "OPERATION PROTECT HILLARY". Huh?
Liberals are now bound and determined to make Wiener fail in his bid to be Mayor.
Why?
Imagine what would happen if he DOES become Mayor......and is mayor when Hillary runs in 2016.
Wiener.....Huma.....Hillary.....
Disaster.
So, here's what Liberals are doing (and going to do):
- Make sure Wiener's bid fails
- AGGRESSIVELY ignore Wiener from the moment he loses. He will be kept COMPLETELY out of the Liberal media from the moment he loses until the day after the 2016 election.
Hirota: out.
He's done it again....this time, it's all about Wiener:
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/09/06/Jon-Stewarts-Epic-Annihilation-of-Anthony-Weiner
BUT....let's be VERY clear about something:
THIS IS ALL ABOUT "OPERATION PROTECT HILLARY". Huh?
Liberals are now bound and determined to make Wiener fail in his bid to be Mayor.
Why?
Imagine what would happen if he DOES become Mayor......and is mayor when Hillary runs in 2016.
Wiener.....Huma.....Hillary.....
Disaster.
So, here's what Liberals are doing (and going to do):
- Make sure Wiener's bid fails
- AGGRESSIVELY ignore Wiener from the moment he loses. He will be kept COMPLETELY out of the Liberal media from the moment he loses until the day after the 2016 election.
Hirota: out.
I can't believe I'm saying...or even THINKING...this....
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/09/05/A-Visibly-Angry-Kerry-Makes-Pitch-for-Syria-Action-to-MSNBC-Host
"...loses cool..."
OMG... Kerry is an IDIOT! Imagine him as President! BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....
A 411, Johnny-boy: America, BECAUSE of Obama, you and Hillary, HAS NO CREDIBILITY.
You cannot lose what you do not have.
Geez.....(I can't believe I'm even THINKING this)....
I practically miss Hillary (who, let's not forget, GOT US INTO THIS MESS)....
Hirota: off to toss my cookies.....
"...loses cool..."
OMG... Kerry is an IDIOT! Imagine him as President! BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....
A 411, Johnny-boy: America, BECAUSE of Obama, you and Hillary, HAS NO CREDIBILITY.
You cannot lose what you do not have.
Geez.....(I can't believe I'm even THINKING this)....
I practically miss Hillary (who, let's not forget, GOT US INTO THIS MESS)....
Hirota: off to toss my cookies.....
Check it out, and, PLEASE....think about my comments about the electoral system.
Here's a little piece worth watching for a couple reasons....
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/08/noam-chomsky-shocker-sarah-palin-was-right-video/
I pretty much never agree with Chomsky. He's a garden variety Liberal, albeit with a bully pulpit.
However, when he's right, he's right.
And in this video, he's right about two things:
1. Palin, of course, WAS right about the "hopey-changey" thing. (Of course, Conservatives understood this ever since Obama first uttered "hope and change". It has taken, what, 6 years for a few of the Liberals to admit this. Now, that isn't to say we're going to see a change of heart, from Noam OR any other Liberal. Remember: they have a fundamental inability to learn.
2. Chomsky, in his characterization of the "Obama Model", is right; political campaigns are nothing more than marketing schemes. They are designed to prey on the weak (of mind), the deliberately, willfully ignorant....in short, they are fast food commercials. They depend on the complacency of people.
As for his comments on the electoral system, Chomsky is dead wrong. The Liberal REALLY comes out here.
For many years, there's been a push by Liberals (Socialists, Democrats) to abolish the electoral system and make a move to straight popular vote. One person, one vote.
Sounds fair, right? That way, EVERY vote counts, right?
Wrong. And the Liberals KNOW it.
With a popular-only voting system, population density matters. And Liberals KNOW this.
Think about it: where are the most densely populated areas of our country? New York City (and surrounding areas), California (Los Angeles, San Francisco), Illinois (Chicago), etc.....
In these VERY-densely-populated areas, where welfare payouts are highest, where food stamp handouts are highest, where ALL entitlement handouts are highest, HOW DO YOU THINK THESE POPULATIONS VOTE?
Answer: LIBERAL DEMOCRAT. The harder Left a candidate is, the more votes that candidate gets.
AND THE LIBERALS KNOW THIS...
....WHICH IS WHY THEY WANT TO DO AWAY WITH THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM.
Now, what they ABSOLUTELY DON'T want is this:
ELECTORAL REFORM.
Imagine a system, oh...say....in California, with it's 55 electoral votes...where those votes, instead of its current "winner-take-all" structure (which disenfranchises around 40% of the state's population), were split along the percentage of popular vote.
In the 2012 Presidential election, Obama captured 59% of the popular vote. Romney captured 38%; the balance going to other candidates.
Under current California (and most other states) law, Obama took ALL the state's 55 electoral votes.
Now, while this is a wonderful thing to Liberals, it is, in truth, a gross violation of what Liberals CLAIM to stand for: fair representation. 38% of California's population went unrepresented; they were disenfranchised; their votes did not matter. THAT is the law; and it is a law AGGRESSIVELY defended by Democrats, in the state as well as nationwide.
Want TRUE "fairness"? Split the electoral votes along popular vote count.
In 2012, under THIS reform, Obama would have taken 32 electoral votes and Romney would have taken 20 electoral votes (the other 3 votes going to other candidates).
The results: Obama would STILL have taken the national election (with a total of 309 electoral votes), but, in California, Romney-voters would have actually had a voice in the election, giving Romney 20 electoral votes.
Liberals, isn't this what this is SUPPOSED to be about: Fair representation?
Folks: ELECTORAL REFORM in California.
FIGHT FOR IT.
Hirota: out.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/08/noam-chomsky-shocker-sarah-palin-was-right-video/
I pretty much never agree with Chomsky. He's a garden variety Liberal, albeit with a bully pulpit.
However, when he's right, he's right.
And in this video, he's right about two things:
1. Palin, of course, WAS right about the "hopey-changey" thing. (Of course, Conservatives understood this ever since Obama first uttered "hope and change". It has taken, what, 6 years for a few of the Liberals to admit this. Now, that isn't to say we're going to see a change of heart, from Noam OR any other Liberal. Remember: they have a fundamental inability to learn.
2. Chomsky, in his characterization of the "Obama Model", is right; political campaigns are nothing more than marketing schemes. They are designed to prey on the weak (of mind), the deliberately, willfully ignorant....in short, they are fast food commercials. They depend on the complacency of people.
As for his comments on the electoral system, Chomsky is dead wrong. The Liberal REALLY comes out here.
For many years, there's been a push by Liberals (Socialists, Democrats) to abolish the electoral system and make a move to straight popular vote. One person, one vote.
Sounds fair, right? That way, EVERY vote counts, right?
Wrong. And the Liberals KNOW it.
With a popular-only voting system, population density matters. And Liberals KNOW this.
Think about it: where are the most densely populated areas of our country? New York City (and surrounding areas), California (Los Angeles, San Francisco), Illinois (Chicago), etc.....
In these VERY-densely-populated areas, where welfare payouts are highest, where food stamp handouts are highest, where ALL entitlement handouts are highest, HOW DO YOU THINK THESE POPULATIONS VOTE?
Answer: LIBERAL DEMOCRAT. The harder Left a candidate is, the more votes that candidate gets.
AND THE LIBERALS KNOW THIS...
....WHICH IS WHY THEY WANT TO DO AWAY WITH THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM.
Now, what they ABSOLUTELY DON'T want is this:
ELECTORAL REFORM.
Imagine a system, oh...say....in California, with it's 55 electoral votes...where those votes, instead of its current "winner-take-all" structure (which disenfranchises around 40% of the state's population), were split along the percentage of popular vote.
In the 2012 Presidential election, Obama captured 59% of the popular vote. Romney captured 38%; the balance going to other candidates.
Under current California (and most other states) law, Obama took ALL the state's 55 electoral votes.
Now, while this is a wonderful thing to Liberals, it is, in truth, a gross violation of what Liberals CLAIM to stand for: fair representation. 38% of California's population went unrepresented; they were disenfranchised; their votes did not matter. THAT is the law; and it is a law AGGRESSIVELY defended by Democrats, in the state as well as nationwide.
Want TRUE "fairness"? Split the electoral votes along popular vote count.
In 2012, under THIS reform, Obama would have taken 32 electoral votes and Romney would have taken 20 electoral votes (the other 3 votes going to other candidates).
The results: Obama would STILL have taken the national election (with a total of 309 electoral votes), but, in California, Romney-voters would have actually had a voice in the election, giving Romney 20 electoral votes.
Liberals, isn't this what this is SUPPOSED to be about: Fair representation?
Folks: ELECTORAL REFORM in California.
FIGHT FOR IT.
Hirota: out.
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
Doubling.....tripling......oh, and throw in revisionism
Democrats, this week, are in full wagon-circling mode, fearing that this Syria disaster might make Obama (and them) look REALLY stupid.
411 to Dems: too late. WAYYYYYYYY too late.
Since yesterday, they've reverted to their usual revisionism: tell everyone....and keep repeating it....that Obama never drew a "red line".
Here's his statement:
"First of all, I didn't set a red line," said Obama. "The world set a red line. The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons are [inaudble] and passed a treaty forbidding their use, even when countries are engaged in war. Congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. Congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation entitled the Syria Accountability Act that some of the horrendous things happening on the ground there need to be answered for. So, when I said in a press conference that my calculus about what's happening in Syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons, which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, that wasn't something I just kind of made up. I didn't pluck it out of thin air. There's a reason for it."
Nancy Pelosi had this to offer:
“President Obama didn’t draw a red line; humanity drew a red line decades ago."
Remarkable statements for at least two reasons:
First, not even Jimmy Carter demonstrated this level of cowardice. These people....these Liberals, these Democrats....are gutless, spineless cowards.
It would seem that the only time they will take an unwavering, brave, courageous stand is when there's a chance to butcher the unborn.
But now; now that they are in full view of the world, it's like turning on the bathroom lights and finding cockroaches...
Dumb ol' Chris Matthews even admitted this week that Congress needs to pass a war resolution in order to "save the President's hide".
Second, it's a lie. Obama lied (about "not drawing a red line"). Pelosi lied.
They didn't mislead, they didn't make a mistake; this wasn't a nuanced statement.
It was a lie.
Liberals (Democrats) are in full revisionist mode; lying about this red line.
Here's what Obama ACTUALLY said (about WMD in Syria):
“We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is [if] we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus.”
So, on August 19th, Obama CLEARLY draws a red line. Yesterday, he says he never did.
So, why does he lie? Why does Pelosi lie? Why do ANY of these idiots lie (Republican idiots, too...)?
Because they can. Because Americans are stupid and complacent to call them on it.
Shameful. Obama is an embarrassment. But WE Americans are as embarrassing, because we allow it.
Hirota: out.
411 to Dems: too late. WAYYYYYYYY too late.
Since yesterday, they've reverted to their usual revisionism: tell everyone....and keep repeating it....that Obama never drew a "red line".
Here's his statement:
"First of all, I didn't set a red line," said Obama. "The world set a red line. The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons are [inaudble] and passed a treaty forbidding their use, even when countries are engaged in war. Congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. Congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation entitled the Syria Accountability Act that some of the horrendous things happening on the ground there need to be answered for. So, when I said in a press conference that my calculus about what's happening in Syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons, which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, that wasn't something I just kind of made up. I didn't pluck it out of thin air. There's a reason for it."
Nancy Pelosi had this to offer:
“President Obama didn’t draw a red line; humanity drew a red line decades ago."
Remarkable statements for at least two reasons:
First, not even Jimmy Carter demonstrated this level of cowardice. These people....these Liberals, these Democrats....are gutless, spineless cowards.
It would seem that the only time they will take an unwavering, brave, courageous stand is when there's a chance to butcher the unborn.
But now; now that they are in full view of the world, it's like turning on the bathroom lights and finding cockroaches...
Dumb ol' Chris Matthews even admitted this week that Congress needs to pass a war resolution in order to "save the President's hide".
Second, it's a lie. Obama lied (about "not drawing a red line"). Pelosi lied.
They didn't mislead, they didn't make a mistake; this wasn't a nuanced statement.
It was a lie.
Liberals (Democrats) are in full revisionist mode; lying about this red line.
Here's what Obama ACTUALLY said (about WMD in Syria):
“We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is [if] we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus.”
So, on August 19th, Obama CLEARLY draws a red line. Yesterday, he says he never did.
So, why does he lie? Why does Pelosi lie? Why do ANY of these idiots lie (Republican idiots, too...)?
Because they can. Because Americans are stupid and complacent to call them on it.
Shameful. Obama is an embarrassment. But WE Americans are as embarrassing, because we allow it.
Hirota: out.
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
Unbelieveable....
Perhaps, by now, you've heard about McCain's idiotic statement, equating shouts of "Allahu Akhbar!" to Christians saying "Thank God"....
If you haven't, stop watching the Liberal media.
Here's what he said in response to a FoxNews host saying, "I have a problem helping those people screaming that after a hit..."
McCain: “Would you have a problem with an American or Christians saying ‘thank God? Thank God? That’s what they’re saying. Come on! Of course they’re Muslims, but they’re moderates and I guarantee you they are moderates.”
Yes, John, that IS, in fact, what Christians cry after they bomb a school bus.
It's what they cry as they chop the heads off of infidels.
It's what they cry as they detonate their roadside bombs.
It's what they cry as they open fire on children.
(And, BTW, my guess is that, YES, this host WOULD have a problem with a Christian shouting "Thank God" after he committed and act of terrorism)
McCain: one of the best hopes for the Democratic Party....
Hirota: out.
If you haven't, stop watching the Liberal media.
Here's what he said in response to a FoxNews host saying, "I have a problem helping those people screaming that after a hit..."
McCain: “Would you have a problem with an American or Christians saying ‘thank God? Thank God? That’s what they’re saying. Come on! Of course they’re Muslims, but they’re moderates and I guarantee you they are moderates.”
Yes, John, that IS, in fact, what Christians cry after they bomb a school bus.
It's what they cry as they chop the heads off of infidels.
It's what they cry as they detonate their roadside bombs.
It's what they cry as they open fire on children.
(And, BTW, my guess is that, YES, this host WOULD have a problem with a Christian shouting "Thank God" after he committed and act of terrorism)
McCain: one of the best hopes for the Democratic Party....
Hirota: out.
Awesome!!
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_JUDGE_IDIOT_SIGN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-09-03-08-52-57
Come to think of it......this is what everyone who votes "Democrat" should be made to do...
Hirota: out.
Come to think of it......this is what everyone who votes "Democrat" should be made to do...
Hirota: out.
Monday, September 2, 2013
Conservative revisionist history......no question about it!
Check THIS out.....
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/29/iowa-democrat-prayer-thank-god-for-abortionists/
Thank God for abortionists?
Here's a great lesson, for young Liberals, about Conservative revisionist history.
Those nasty Conservatives, in order to make you THINK that Jesus was one of them, often bring up this quote:
"But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven." (From the book of Matthew)
But, kids, the REAL Bible quote is this:
"But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: bid them to be butchered, bathed in salt or partially-delivered while having their spinal cords severed; for of such is the freedoms accorded to women in the Kingdom of Heaven."
See? Doesn't that sound MUCH more like something Jesus would have said?
Hirota: out.
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/29/iowa-democrat-prayer-thank-god-for-abortionists/
Thank God for abortionists?
Here's a great lesson, for young Liberals, about Conservative revisionist history.
Those nasty Conservatives, in order to make you THINK that Jesus was one of them, often bring up this quote:
"But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven." (From the book of Matthew)
But, kids, the REAL Bible quote is this:
"But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: bid them to be butchered, bathed in salt or partially-delivered while having their spinal cords severed; for of such is the freedoms accorded to women in the Kingdom of Heaven."
See? Doesn't that sound MUCH more like something Jesus would have said?
Hirota: out.
Almost forgot........
Remember when, immediately after 9/11, EVEN Gore's own people were thanking God that he wasn't the President?
I'm VERY sure Hillary's people are saying exactly that right now!! (Even though she is as responsible for this crisis as Obama)...
Unfortunately, while America DID have Bush instead of Gore in 2001, today we are stuck with something even worse than Hillary; we have Kerry, who is as incompetent as it gets.
I read this media piece the other day, characterizing the Syria crisis as "Kerry's defining moment"...
Without question, that definition will be:
Useless.
Bungling.
Incompetent.
Gutless.
Escalating.
Democrat.
Hirota: out.
I'm VERY sure Hillary's people are saying exactly that right now!! (Even though she is as responsible for this crisis as Obama)...
Unfortunately, while America DID have Bush instead of Gore in 2001, today we are stuck with something even worse than Hillary; we have Kerry, who is as incompetent as it gets.
I read this media piece the other day, characterizing the Syria crisis as "Kerry's defining moment"...
Without question, that definition will be:
Useless.
Bungling.
Incompetent.
Gutless.
Escalating.
Democrat.
Hirota: out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)