Republicans threw the election
In the video linked below, hear the Democrats deny in their own words that there was a mortgage lending problem at Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. One even cussed out the Republicans who dared to suggest there might be a problem.
Why didn’t McCain mention this?
I think the obvious answer is: McCain didn’t want to offend any of his buds on the other side of the aisle, where he was busy reaching most the time instead of being a Republican.
McCain sort of wanted to maybe possibly be president under certain conditions (to be set by the Democrats).
This is why this swell idea of getting along with everyone wrecked the Republican brand just as it wrecked the financial institutions.
No Republican would defend the free market.
Now there’s no one left to defend the Republican Party. And rich people everywhere, including the rich guys who supported Obama and his socialist worldview, are losing – reportedly the founders of TomTom have lost a million so far.
“Gays” reject democracy
More on making leftists squirm
I have found that one very effective way to deal with leftists is to ask a question they can’t answer or will inevitably answer incorrectly based on a popular misconception, and then to suggest the answer in a cryptic way that he can’t quite comprehend. That makes you the master. Like the lefty I met at the polling place. I asked him what caused the banks to crash.
He said “lack of regulation of the market.” [All lefties say that because they hate the free market].
I said “what about the CRA?” knowing that he had never heard of it.
Then when he drew a blank, I taunted him by saying: “You know [of course he didn’t], the Community Reinvestment Act.”
At this point I had defeated him psychologically because he knew I knew more than he did and my matter-of-factness suggested this was common knowledge — which in fact, it should be and would have changed the election results had it been.
But you note that I didn’t explain what the CRA was. I didn’t want him to be able to think up some half-baked argument showing that the bank crash was still the free market’s fault. And I also wanted him to be keenly aware that the media and the Dems were keeping him in the dark
I told him it was up to him to look it up and walked away the clear winner — even in his own eyes.
But not only that, I gave him ammunition to use in a conversation with someone else that will make him look good, and on top of that, because he looked it up himself, this has the psychological effect of making him think of himself as “self-taught,” a source of pride that will stimulate him to further study in the future and may eventually moderate his leftist views.
My ears are burning…
A pro-Obama, anti-Hillary Democrat blog cites “Laigle’s Forum:
“23 October – the ultra-far-right-wing blog “Laigle’s Forum” shows Berg the meaning of the saying “lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas”. [Quoting Laigle’s Forum:]
Remember that Berg claims to be a Sen. Clinton supporter. Yet these are the people supporting his suit.
“Note that Berg is a Hillary supporter and suddenly the Hillary camp is sounding like they want the Constitution restored. Can you see anything wrong with this picture of the Clinton camp complaining about injustice and lawlessness? The lady who made off with the White House silverware? The president who made a brothel of the White House and then perjured himself? The couple who rudely fired the kitchen help on trumped up charges as soon as they entered the White House, and whom Judicial Watch has been trying for years to indict for a wide assortment of suspected felonies?”
“(Is it just me, or do the tired old smears against the Clintons sound a LOT like the smears that Berg, “TexasDarlin”, and their supporters use against Sen. Obama. Hmmmmm……)”
This citation of Laigle’s is ironic for various reasons, for one thing, because a pro-Hillary blog had also cited an article by me in WorldNetDaily criticizing Obama.
About that “ultra-far-right-wing” epithet, why do Dems cite us if we are nothing but ultra-far rightwingers with whom they supposedly don’t agree with? When we criticize Obama, suddenly the Hillary camp cites us as authorities. When we criticize Hillary, the Obama supporters (in the present case) cite us as authorities but simultaneously undermine our authority with the “ultra-far-rightwing” epithet.
So, how to sort this out? first, thanks for the compliment, I think.
Second, Laigle’s does not bill itself as ultra-right, so where does this come from?
Our site has published articles from writers of different countries around the world who promote the free market and traditional values, particularly Christian traditions.
But wait: during their campaigns, both of the major Democratic candidates (Hill and Obama) have made a big issue out of being Christians themselves. So on this issue, whey don’t they qualify as ultra-far-rightwing”?
Laigle’s Forum has also tended to favor the free market, in keeping with Adam Smith’s book The Wealth of Nations. Smith is regarded as one of the first liberals.
Wouldn’t that make us liberals? Don’t they claim to be liberals?
Strong defense is another rightwing issue. Doesn’t Hillary support that, as she herself said repeatedly in her campaign?
Thus far, we are shaping up as very much like our Democrat counterparts.
The real difference is that we actually support the free market, strong defense and traditional religion, whereas the Left pretends to support them when it suits them for political purposes.
Now that Obama has mesmerized much of our youth into supporting communism, the Left is showing its true colors.
So the main difference is honesty and integrity.
If being honest makes us ultra-far-right, then I say guilty as charged, Your Honor!
BTW, they used to call people like us far right. Now they have added the “ultra.” But this tells us more about them than about us.
America is drifting to the far left, and the names the Left calls us change to match their leftward drift, not our rightward drift. We haven’t drifted.
Spreading Islam through public and Christian schools:
By Berit Kjos
Our friend Tom* enrolled his seventh grade son in a local Christian school this year. But he felt a bit uneasy when he saw the new history text. And as he leafed through the pages of World History: Medieval and Early Modern Times (a standard nationwide textbook), his concern grew.
The dramatic images, evocative suggestions and interesting group assignments would probably prevent boredom, but what would his son actually learn? How accurate were the lessons? And most important: What kinds of values would they instill?
Page 4 (in the section on “Strategies”) told students to “Try to visualize the people, places, and events you read about.” With all the inspiring stories and pictures, that should be easy! Group dialogue and peer consensus would help seal those biased impressions! This was not what Tom expected from a Christian school!
Read more here.
U.S. may soon accept Sharia Law
Incredibly, in recent days, the U.S. Treasury Department has begun embracing Shariah-Compliant Finance. Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Robert Kimmitt has professed an interest in “studying the salient features of Islamic banking to ascertain how far it could be useful in fighting the ongoing world economic crisis.” According to a press report out of Saudi Arabia, he has declared that “experts in the Treasury Department are currently learning the important features of Islamic banking.”
Read more here.
William Lobdell article:
William Lobdell says he lost his faith and is cashing in on his faithlessness to sell his book. Fair enough. Christians and Jews cash in on what they believe too.
I emailed William and told him our stories are reversed: I lost my faith in Marx after worshipping the Left for 40 years.
But before that I had lost my faith in God when I saw some of the same things he saw that caused Lobdell to doubt. My swing back to faith is partly the product of free will, and the willingness to submit and obey – not to religion but to God. That is a subtlety than I think many atheists haven’t understood.
Lobdell and I agree on one thing: religion in itself is not the way. Jesus Christ agrees with both of us on that. I think Lobdell is confusing religion with God, as I once naively did.
I am negotiating with Lobdell to submit an article to Laigle’s Forum so that we can respond.
Joran wanted to traffic in Thai women?
There is evidence that Joran van der Sloot wants, or wanted, to traffic in Thai prostitutes.
Read about it here.
Obama required by SCOTUS to present a birth certificate:
“At this point, Supreme Court Justice David Souter’s Clerk informed Philip J. Berg, the lawyer who brought the case against Obama, that his petition for an injunction to stay the November 4th election was denied, but the Clerk also required the defendants to respond to the Writ of Certiorari (which requires the concurrence of four Justices) by December 1. At that time, Mr. Obama must present to the Court an authentic birth certificate, after which Mr. Berg will respond.”
“If Obama fails to do that, it is sure to inspire the skepticism of the Justices, who are unaccustomed to being defied. They will have to decide what to do about a president-elect who refuses to prove his natural-born citizenship.”
Read more here.