…in the U.S. Congress aren’t all that different from their counterparts that infest the British Parliament. They’re certainly right behind the Brits in engineering this state of affairs.

“We supposedly live in a truly democratic society where freedom of speech is a fundamental right enjoyed by everyone,” friction.tv Chief Marketing Officer Andy West said in a press release. “However these survey results have shown rather powerfully that most adults in the U.K. feel that this is not the case.”

West added, “We live in such a politically correct society that people don’t know what they can and can’t say anymore and there is a constant fear that if you go against the grain, you’ll be vilified by your peers.”

Sally McNamara, a senior policy analyst in European Affairs for the Heritage Foundation’s Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, blamed recent British policy.

“The government’s role in any free society is to ensure the safety of its citizenry and pursue policies that guarantee basic rights for all law-abiding people,” she told Cybercast News Service on Monday. “This has been taken to the extreme; legislating against language, behavior, etc.”

Perhaps we should learn from the Brits’ mistakes before it’s too late — if it isn’t already…

…so short-changed by the mainstream media in almost every area that can be equated with politics, but none so much as our involvement in Iraq.

They deny that we’re fighting an enemy there, peddling a story of pure civil war in which U.S. servicemen are dropping like flies, the Iraqis want us out of there, Iraqi civilian deaths at the hands of terrorists are 100% our fault, etc, etc.

They ignore every positive event that occurs over there.

They make an instant buffet of the slightest allegation that any U.S. troops have committed a wrongdoing, slandering the troops in the most extreme ways before any investigation has even begun.

Since the majority of Americans count on the MSM to deliver them accurate and complete news, the propaganda they actually receive gives them leftward slanted and highly inaccurate reports of the state of affairs in Iraq, and this is the information upon which they rely when it comes time to vote.

The latest example?

Water boarding, keeping interrogation subjects in uncomfortable positions, other techniques that do no physical damage to said subjects, the “plight” of captured terrorists at GITMO, which the left has compared with gulags, concentration camps and the killing fields of the Pol Pot regime, and the embarrassment to which still other jihadi murderers were subjected at Abu Graibh commanded a lengthy and aggressive crusade by the mainstream media, yet graphic pictures of fiendish tortures from a captured al-Qaeda interrogation manual and of the tools of the trade don’t even warrant honorable mention from the MSM. Whose side are they on, again?

Since the left would have the American people believe that there is no al-Qaeda activity in Iraq (that would indicate that we actually have an enemy to fight in Iraq), they ignore other stories that place al-Qaeda in the country.

The mainstream media is doing an outstanding job as a propaganda tool for the left. They are also a discerning lot — the only rank and file soldiers and Marines we ever hear from on that quarter seem to be the scarce few they can find who are against the war. Otherwise, most so-called liberal intellectuals will tell you that the folks who are over there fighting have been duped by Bush & Cheney and don’t know what they’re talking about when they support their mission in Iraq. They ignore the large numbers of volunteers who stick around for a second tour, they ignore our troops’ contributions to the betterment of education, lifestyles and infrastructure in Iraq, and the progress they’ve made in training Iraqi police and military personnel to eventually take over all law enforcement and national security duties. They ignore the courage and spirit of the Iraqi people who turned out twelve million strong to vote in a democratic government. They ignore the success of the post Saddam stock market, the copious publications of the burgeoning free press…

…yet when an American soldier is killed, they crow gleefully and shout about it from the rooftops, adding the casualty to their one-sided scorecard. If a U.S. military unit waxes thirty five terrorists, it is: 35 Dead in U.S. Firefight rather than Marines Kill 35 Terrorists.

Over at And Rightly So, Civil Truth has posted a lengthy but well worth the read compilation of beliefs on the war and U.S. politics by a man who not only survived the destruction of 9/11, but a full tour as a Marine in Iraq as well.

Although I haven’t been what one would term “pro-draft”, the writer makes some convincing points in favor of a draft that have me reevaluating my point of view on that score, and other than his choices for President in 2008, I largely agree with most of what he has to say.

President Bush’s veto of the pork-ridden, cut & run, head for the tall timber, tails between our legs, whimpering surrender redeployment deadlined Congressional rendering evidently backed the Democrats far enough into a corner that they were forced to submit a much more sane and acceptable bill.

Of course, this is only a brief respite from the sabotage tactics crowd over on the port side and their mainstream media hacks, those tenaciously anti-American scumbags progressive souls, to borrow a line from a governor I once successfully voted for, “will be bock!”

…tedious in their efforts to “interest” society in their menu of micromanagement.

Of whom do I speak?

The portside media, researchers who are probably compensated, in large part, by grants financed by our tax dollars and assorted blank-minded, modern flower children who need a cause, any cause will do as long as it isn’t in any way conservative.

The people who feel it is their mandate from On-High to tell the rest of us what we can and can’t eat, the more enterprising among whom will probably soon be selling Trans-fat Credits.

The usual suspects, liberals from the Land Of The Lotus Eaters (The Odyssey) whose ambitions include snatching meat from the jaws of human carnivores and spooning yogurt into our mouths in its place.

The folks who now deem attending a good, old fashioned backyard barbecue a dangerous risk.

While my own inclination is to tell such critters to mind their own business, that what I choose to eat is my affair, I’ve had liberals tell me that the reason these people are so aggressive about their beliefs is that they are concerned that “unhealthy eaters” will one day cost taxpayers a lot of money on health care.

“Since when,” goes my stock reply, “did liberals give a flying f–k about spending the taxpayers’ money on social services related issues? You guys even endorse spending our money on illegal aliens!”

The truth is, American liberals are quite sure, and with good reason, that their efforts to trump our present form of government with socialism are succeeding. Thinking liberals are actually looking past their initial political victories at the practicalities to follow: Their social programs will cost the U.S. taxpayer dearly, and they need to find ways to cut costs, one being to put the proletariat on a diet of tofu and rice, unsweetened green tea and spring water to keep them healthy.

This program would never work for me, I was born by Occident and could never Orient myself to such a diet.

Of course, during an exchange of ideas with the flower kids who have long enjoyed desirable sustenance therein, I understand: There are benefits to be had from consuming a lot of tofu.

Indeed.

I recall an afternoon about three years ago, at an IHOP in rural Illinois, when the waitress informed me that they could not, by law, serve me a rare cheeseburger. I always order/cook my steaks and burgers rare (except prime rib, which I do medium), and requested a visit from the manager. After some debate, I explained, “It’s not how long you cook something that kills bacteria, it’s how hot you cook it.” He finally agreed on condition that “no matter what happens”, I would tell nobody that I’d been served a rare burger under his auspices. He was from India, somewhat recently to judge by his accent, and if he ever returns to the old country he’ll be a superb candidate for Bangalorian telephone Tech Support. He’d undoubtedly make a great Fred, or a passable Bill (Beel?). I only mention this because our conversation would have made an outstanding comedy skit based largely on his accent.

Relax, there’s no bigotry here, just a paucity of political correctness. I grew up in a Jewish family wherein one of our favorite holiday dinner table (or Passover seder) customs was sharing the most irreverant-but-funny Jewish jokes we’d run across. Even my grandmother, who played a puritanical role in the family, shared jokes gleefully, and hers were some of the most risque, go figure. The way I grew up, PC has never stood a chance with me and never will.

Back on track, these “healthy choice” advocates seem to assume that everybody will leap onto a government program at the first sign of illness. No one, they presume, has an HMO as back-up or sufficient wealth to obtain timely and quality medical care rather than substandard and often demeaning, government bureaucracy administered Socialized Medicine offerings.

Wrong! At least as long as the government doesn’t make it legally mandatory that all citizens participate in the program (Senior Ministers Pelosovitch and Reidakov would have no trouble with that, nor would any other mega-wealthy, double standard liberal)…

Right, while you and I are comparing tofu and rice recipes, Pelosi and Murtha would be sitting down to a chateaubriand dinner. Perhaps a platter of canard a’la orange, which the public, or non elite, can’t be allowed because of the fat content in a duck. Quack!

Michael Moore will be doing humongous pig on a spit for one.

Rosie O’Donnell will be chowing down on camel tripe and the fatty parts of a whole uncooked lamb using her bare and greasy hands, clamoring for ten pounds of pork chops as liquified provender drips down the front of her blouse.

For the rest of us, well, please pass the rice….

In the Republican/conservative vs Democrat/liberal debate on illegal immigration, there will never be a bipartisan consensus. The issue could be hammered out by honest, sincere thinkers on both sides and never come anywhere near any kind of mutual agreement.
The right believes that immigration should occur according to law, that all aliens entering the United States should be properly documented and should obtain the proper permits from the government in order to work in the U.S. They should be issued Social Security numbers and should both be adequately compensated for their work and pay taxes.
The left believes, for some reason, that anyone who sneaks into the country illegally has automatically earned the right not only to stay, but to avail himself of every tax financed social service in existence. It’s amazing that such supposedly learned individuals as our Democrat members of Congress (and lately, in the pork department, the Republicans as well) have forgotten that the Treasury belongs to all Americans, not just to our politicians to spend at will.
The Democrats are all for issuing drivers’ licenses to people whose existences aren’t even documented with the federal government, for taking care of their housing, medical, family and food expenses and doing so on the taxpayers’ dime. They defend these lawbreakers’ “right” to destroy the quality of life in American neighborhoods by renting one-family houses and moving in three or four families plus a few cousins, a dozen cars and then letting the properties decay while making noise 24/7. They could care less about the street crime, store robberies and gang activity that commence once these neighborhoods are overrun or about the decline in the value of area properties that force fleeing long term residents to sell their homes at prices far below market value.
The liberal mainstream media avoids discussion of the above tragic byproducts of illegal immigration, preferring instead to focus on the occasional sob story of one family being separated from a child during deportation proceedings or to perpetuate the myth that these trespassers do the work Americans won’t do. By this, they must include construction, house painting and other jobs Americans are being forced out of to the detriment of themselves, their families and every taxpaying citizen who has to pick up the slack for the lost tax revenues.
Democrats create “sanctuary cities”, where local authorities are prohibited from reporting illegals whom they encounter professionally to the federal government.
Meanwhile, these same Democrats do whatever needs doing to ensure that illegals don’t descend on their neighborhoods or otherwise have any effect on their lives.
The creation of slums has long been a strategy of the Democrats, who use their squalid, embattled, gang riddled creations as breeding grounds for Democrat voters. Falsely blame the Republicans for these folks’ poverty and make knowingly unfulfillable promises. Get the votes, and then forget all about those constituents until it’s time to campaign to them again. This more than explains the push, from the liberal front, to get criminal aliens into the polls to cast illegal votes.
Meanwhile, the hordes of illegals the policies of the left enable to enter the country have included, and continue to include the odd member of that satanic cult known as Islam, here to plot and execute terrorist operations against the American people. The only consolation there is that President Bush, whom the Democrats continuously describe as dumb, has put together a highly competent organization within his administration that repeatedly prevents such Muslim-made-mayhem from succeeding, but even in that regard any security professional will agree that the terrorists have a distinct advantage here, as does any offense when confronting a purely defensive target – as long as they keep trying, the odds are in their favor that eventually some of their “colleagues” will penetrate our homeland security venues and murder large numbers of innocent people.
The Democrats’ championing of “rights” to “undocumented” immigration will be, in many ways, responsible for the consummation of these Islamofascists’ plans, including, eventually, the smuggling in and detonation of nuclear weapons in one or more U.S. cities.
While numerous officials and other “experts” communicate their belief that such nuclear attacks will target New York and Washington D.C., one can only hope they actually realize that terrorists don’t strategize via the same priorities that legitimate armies do – while desirable, it is not vital to them to attack government centers, they are in business to demoralize the civil population. Exploding a nuke in L.A., Chicago or even Casper, Wyoming would more than suffice.
But I digress (who, me?).
Mark Steyn’s latest and as usual great column, which covers ground on Islamofascism in the Balkans and greater Europe (a figure of speech) to the potential price of the U.S. immigration fiasco, touches on both the subject of my above digression and the ease which the Democrats, as well as a few spineless, therefore Democrat-enabling Republicans, bestow upon criminal aliens to remain in this country.

The three Duka brothers were (if you’ll forgive the expression) illegal immigrants. They’re not meant to be here. Yet they graduated from a New Jersey high school and they operated two roofing companies and a pizzeria. Think of how often you have to produce your driver’s license or Social Security number. But, five years after 9/11, this is still one of the easiest countries in the world in which to establish a functioning but fraudulent identity.

Consider, for example, the post-9/11 ritual of airline security. You have to produce government-issued picture ID to the TSA official. Does that make you feel safer? On that Tuesday morning in September, four of the killers got on board by using picture ID they’d acquired through the “undocumented worker” network in Falls Church, Va. Half the jurisdictions in the United States issue picture ID to people who shouldn’t even be in the country, and they issue it as a matter of policy. The Fort Dix boys were pulled over for 19 traffic violations, but because they were in “sanctuary cities,” any cop who suspected they were illegals was unable to report them to immigration authorities. Again, as a matter of policy.

On one hand, America creates a vast federal security bureaucracy to prevent another 9/11. On the other hand, American politicians and bureaucrats create a parallel system of education and welfare and health care entitlements, maintaining and expanding a vast network of fraudulent identity that corrupts the integrity of almost all state databases. And though it played a part in the killing of 3,000 Americans, leaders of both parties insist nothing can be done to stop it. All we can do is give the Duka brothers “a fast track to citizenship.”

Democrats: What an un-star spangled web they weave….

Sorry about that, I couldn’t help myself. What a pun! What a — oh… well, the title of this post certainly applies; if one considers what the mainstream media has been focusing on of late. First there’s the 100% political firing of a small quantity of U.S. attorneys, which happens to be a mid-term event that is practiced by nearly all administrations — as we know, Clinton’s Justice department terminated all of theirs. There was no MSM uproar when the latter occurred under Clinton, but since there is a Republican administration ensconced at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue led by George W. Bush, the former has been blown up to Armageddonal proportions by the liberal media as the Democrats raise the roof with blaring accusations and utterly moronic, blatantly politics-based innuedo….

It is eroding the Anna Nicole moment, which was just starting to wan, anyway, for all except those who are truly without lives of their own to live, and as it gathers momentum, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announces that she is going to Syria on a “fact finding” tour. The White House requests that she not go, but she announces that she’s going, anyway.

She does, and not only does she perform the Kiss of Shame on Bashir Assad, she delivers a false diplomatic message from Tel Aviv to Damascus that not only isn’t she asked to deliver, but there has been no message sent. Then she reports false peace policies of Assad’s government regarding Israel to the local media. There is no “fact finding” involved in her tour, only hints and not so subtle hints that indicate that the United States has two completely different sets of official policies on the execution of the War on Terror, and that the Democrats’ policies are equally as official as the President’s. What she is doing is in total violation of the concerned articles of the U.S. Constitution, dangerous to both our diplomatic relations and Bush’s message to the world on America’s resolve to defeat terrorism and a serious threat to U.S. troops in Iran and Afghanistan.

Some of the same liberal media that supports her editorializes her activities in a negative light while most of the same liberals that disagree with every point made at conservative blogs they frequent of course present laughably thin, generally downright stupid defenses of Pelosi’s harebrained, purely political exploits.

Don Imus comes into the picture, making a joke that has the race baiting team of Sharpton & Jackson crawling out from beneath their respective stones — did I employ the word “picayune” at the top of this post? Um, sure did! Back in the 1970s when I lived in New York, Imus had the morning show on an A.M. station while Howard Stern worked mid afternoon to early evening on the same station. Both of them were shock jocks, and both made a living out of boldly offending whatever or whomever came to mind. Nothing has changed with either, particularly Imus. Now he makes a “nappy haired ho” remark about players on a female college basketball team, which is not, by far, the most offensive thing he’s ever said into the mic, and it’s suddenly treated as the most important, dynamic story on the planet by the MSM and Democrats (as well as a few soulless Republican politicians whose lives revolve around pandering for votes wherever they can find them), conveniently drowning out much of the Pelosi-in-Syria affair. Now, Nancy’s talking about taking a trip to Iran to nasalize some butt for Ahmadmanjihad.

Liberal politicians are doing their best to take a bite out of our First Amendment rights by enacting “hate crime” laws that aren’t crimes.

The Democrats have absolutely no issues of a positive nature on the table, everything they do attacks the President, the Constitution and the American way of life, and most of their purely political assaults are based upon trivialities that they themselves have blown up into maelstroms of misinterpreted laws and ridiculous innuendo, from Scooter Libby, who did nothing wrong, to the federal judge firings, the liberal media conducting disinformation campaigns to bring things to a boil.

The media we are confronted with today is a joke, I mean why waste money on a newspaper today when one can enjoy the same awareness of what’s going on in the world by reading The Onion?

…(which portsiders aren’t misguided?) get their due herein, one, a punk (I truly cannot locate, after much thought, a more accurate descriptive) whose celebre eminates from among the columns of the New York Times, from his fellow Democrat and undoubtedly the best former mayor New York has seen in my lifetime despite his political career having been spent on that side of the aisle, the other, a braying, disgusting, megablubbery, smelly looking, treasonous pig comedienne cum TV personality, from one of the more aggressive right thinking political commentators of today.

First, there is Koch on Kristof.

The hostile views that Nicholas Kristof expresses in his March 18, 2007 column correspond with those held by former president Jimmy Carter.

Kristof is distressed that the Democratic Party leadership is too supportive of the State of Israel. He says that he prefers the view of U.S. Senator and presidential candidate Barak Obama who recently stated, “Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people,” for which he says Obama was “scolded.”

Kristof does not mention that Palestinian suffering has in large part been brought on by the Palestinians’ own actions. Their leaders rejected the United Nations vote in 1947 dividing historic Palestine into two states: one Arab and one Jewish. They supported or actively participated in at least seven wars against Israel: the 1948 War of Independence, the 1967 Six-Day War, the 1968 War of Attrition, the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the 1982 Lebanon War [1] and the 2006 Lebanon War [2]. Their leadership declared two intifadas (insurrections) in 1987 and in 2002, which still goes on.

Imagine that! Another liberal who is comfortable with ignoring the facts in order to press a political agenda. Of course, he and his fellow members of the anti-Israel persuation have no choice but to employ the communistic technique of sweeping the truth under the rug in order to replace it with propaganda for consumption by the masses. If you simply gloss over the realities, you don’t have to work all that hard at revising history, modern or otherwise — sort of like lefty teachers do in schools these days, but let’s not digress, for once (that means you, Seth).

Kristof denounces Israel’s building “a better fence” or seeking “more weaponry.” What does he mean? That in his opinion Israel may not erect a fence to help keep the terrorists out? Does he suggest that the U.S. should deny the sale of new weapons to Israel unless it also makes them available to the Palestinians? Kristof’s tortured reasoning led to the fall of the Spanish Republic to which we would not sell arms to defend itself from Franco’s fascist armies which were supported by Hitler and Mussolini.

Liberals, who yearn desperately for the implementation of that provenly oppressive failure called socialism to “come to our rescue”, never miss an opportunity to opine that any and all democracies should bend over backwards to sabotage themselves in the face of the enemy. Thus the leeches over at the ACLU, for example, are forever using the courts in an attempt to erode the security measures the United States Government takes to repel terrorism from our shores, and the liberal anti-Israel crowd demands that the Jewish state tie their own hands and that the U.S. turn our backs on them in order to allow the forces of their terrorist enemy to destroy them.

Kristof clearly wants the U.S. and the Democrats seeking the presidency to end what every president since John F. Kennedy has called “a special relationship” with Israel — that of an ally — and create a new climate of neutrality. Even the Arabs have accepted that special U.S. relationship with Israel; nevertheless, they have asked the U.S. to take the role of mediator/broker, knowing that only the U.S. would be able to get Israel to make concessions based on hopes and promises rather than concrete confidence-building measures by the Palestinians and their supporters.

Emphasis mine.

************

The second subject of conservative OpEd attention is a truly twisted soul who is the epitome of ugliness inside and out, and who embodies treason in a most abrasive and wingnutty way, from a forum that used to be (prior to her arrival) a light hearted, acceptable-to-all political groups, womens’ talk show.

Here is O’Reilly on O’Donnell.

Armed with propaganda and dangerous with passion, Rosie O’Donnell has turned a morning coffee klatch TV program into Al Jazeera West. Where once “The View” dealt with menopause and shopping tips, the program now routinely assassinates the characters of anyone Ms. O’Donnell finds objectionable….

Read the entire column here.

All I can say about O’Donnell is that I find her to be one of the most offensive, disgusting TV personalities in existence and one who truly doesn’t merit citizenship in our great nation. I really don’t like to say derogatory things about women (no chauvenism intended, just a conservative Jewish upbringing and a profound appreciation and respect for the female of our species) but that horrible creature is a real toilet cake.

To that end, Thespis also has a thing or two to say regarding O’Donnell that aren’t exactly rosie (pun intended)…

…. proves that this is not the free country intended by our founding fathers, interfering, and not for the first time, with the competitive structure of the marketplace.

Of course, scum sucking, piece of shit, treasonous, commie liberal politicians are at the source of this particular infringement, but what’s new? They always are!

In this case, the victim is a dairy farmer who chose to charge less money for his milk.

I can see no reason why liberals should even want to live in America, except to destroy this great country. There is no other conceivable purpose they could have for remaining here.

They should go to countries whose governments are structured more to their liking and leave this one alone.

Sure, they claim to respect our form of government, yet prove time and time again that they do no such thing – if they did, they would permit it to work as it’s supposed to.

For example, if a given decision is solely the responsibility of Congress and the President to reach agreement on, like the decision or not, that is the final word. Next time elect senators, representatives and/or a President who are more in tune with your own political agendas. If you fail to do this, well, guess what? This means that the majority of the citizens with whom you share this democracy disagree with your choice. Sorry, try again next election.

What do liberals do when they don’t get their way? They weasel around Congress and take their case where it just flat out, plainly does not belong: To the courts. To leftist judges like those treasonous commie toilet cakes on the bench at the 9th Circus in San Francisco, or, if that doesn’t work, to the Supreme Court.

The courts have no mandate to legislate, yet these self important, sleazy southpaw judges are permitted to get away with it both blatantly and regularly.

One such issue is the global warming farce. You know, the one that caused recent snow in Florida and seems to be adding density to Algore’s “melting” Arctic ice mass (It’s pretty easy to B.S. a few hundred million people when you know they’re not very likely to climb into a boat and go up there to check for themselves).

The Supreme Court this week will begin hearing perhaps the most significant environmental case ever to reach its marbled halls — a dispute that could shape the future of U.S. policy on global warming.

This is not SCOTUS’ mandate. It is not their job. It is not a Constitutional issue. It is purely a Congressional issue.

The Court’s rightful response here, simply put, should be “Ees na’ my yob, man!”

In 1999, when environmental groups originally petitioned the EPA, they argued that the Clean Air Act required EPA to regulate “any air pollutant” that could “reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.”

EPA denied the petition in 2003, saying even if the agency had the authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, it would be inappropriate because there’s no conclusive proof the gas hurts to the environment.
The agency cited a 2001 study by the National Research Council that concluded, “A causal linkage between the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the observed climate changes during the 20th century cannot be unequivocally established”

Some climate scientists say that view contradicts the best evidence now available.
“The EPA position is untenable,” said Andrew Dessler, an associate professor of climate science at Texas A&M University. “At the present time it is virtually certain that human emissions are warming the planet. The real question is how much warming we can attribute to emissions, and it’s likely that most of the recent warming is due to human activity.”

There they go again! ….it is virtually certain that human emissions are warming the planet.

Yoda: Virtually certain, they are!

….the best evidence now available.

And what the {pick an expletive} does that mean? They couldn’t convict OJ with “the best evidence available”!

Excuse me, Andrew, but last time I looked, no one had proven anything of the kind! The only science that supports your theories is political science. Get any new research grants lately?

If SCOTUS does its job, it will simply opt not to rule on the issue and cite it as a matter for Congress, but after some of their more recent offerings of note, I wouldn’t hold my breath.

And here we have a sterling, totally blatant example of liberal hypocrisy in its finest hour, courtesy of none other than John Edwards, our former Vice Presidential candidate.

I was perusing the comment section at another blog yesterday and read a liberal’s comment that made me thankful he and I were not in the same room — had we been, I probably would have strangled the son of a bitch out of sheer frustration. My own comment, in reply to his, was as restrained as possible, I believe it remained within, though pushing the envelope, the boundaries of respect due the owners of that most excellent site.

I mean, these people (not the owners of said most excellent site, but liberals) are such — such varmints!

Look.

They claim to be champions of human rights, for example. Here in America, human rights are honored more than they are anyplace else on earth. Freedom of speech? C’mon. Here, you can shout obscene jokes about the President from the rooftops if you feel like it.

In the Soviet Union, you’d have been hauled off to the Lubyanka, or perhaps Lefortovo Prison, in a heart beat, and not seen again for quite some time, if at all.

If they needed information they thought you might possess, there was none of this patty cakes BS like water boarding or playing loud music at you, they were somewhat more practical — maybe running some electricity through your genitals, or shooting you up with interesting chemicals like lysergic acid mixed with amatol that might get you to babbling, but might also scramble your brains permanently. Then again, permanently might have only meant a couple of hours, anyway.

So what did American liberals do? They extolled the virtues of communism in all its grand superiority over capitalism, even as they enjoyed instant gratification at the local mall while Soviet citizens were standing in bitter cold, in four and five hour lines, to buy a potato.

North Vietnam, an oppressive communist regime, invades the south, and our country defends the South Vietnamese against the north and its VietCong terrorist apparat. Liberals at home fight tooth and nail against the conflict. They influence politicians, who influence the war effort itself, prolonging it by several years. They eventually succeed in getting our troops pulled out. They rejoice. Ho Chi Minh’s communists sweep into South Vietnam and butcher hundreds of thousands of innocent people, then they enslave the country under said oppressive government.

Meanwhile, here in America, the liberals are celebrating their “victory”. They could care less about the fates of those poor souls thousands of miles away, human beings they’ve helped murder as surely as if they’d been there, splattering brains across the ground.

In the 1990s, there was brutal conflict in the Balkans. Muslims were slaughtering Christian Serbs, and Milosevic’s people were killing Muslims.

The EU, led by Germany, exploited the violence in order to get a foot in the door for influence in the Balkans. They altered intelligence reports and manipulated the media to paint a gruesome picture of Muslims being victimized via
“ethnic cleansing” by Milosevic’s people. Peaceful, nonviolent Muslims, victimized!

Then-boss liberal Bill Clinton bought into it and got us into it, and we helped eliminate a lot of obstacles al-Qaeda and fellow travellers faced in the day-to-day ethnic cleansing operations they were engaged in over there.

Milosevic was arrested and tried for his “crimes” — and died in custody five years later without ever being convicted of anything.

Muslims in the Balkans continue murdering Christian Serbs to this day.

Onward to Iraq, and to the global war we are waging to defend ourselves against the abolition of liberty under Islamic rule.

There we are again — which side are liberals on?

The other side, of course, as usual!

America’s enemies, any enemies, have never had a better friend than a liberal.

You want some liberal friends? Just declare war on the United States and they’ll be coming out in droves to shake your hand or, if requested, stick their noses wherever you wish.

Liberals….

Certainly not on our side, ever, yet when you state this obvious truth, they will actually argue the opposite, as often as not with that smug smirk that brings out the strangler in many of us….