This article from the Britain Sunday Times …
[Tennis-star, Martina] Navratilova defended the “right” of sheep to be gay.
*cough*
Do gay sheep bleat with a lisp?
Truly, there are a lot of idiots in the world. The conviction, and subsequent execution, of Saddam Hussein — by his own citizens — is certainly proving it.
A perfect example of people losing their damn minds comes from India, where, in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, Samajwadi Party general secretary Beni Prasad Verma (a lefty Islamist, no less) claimed that George Bush is “the biggest terrorist in the world.” Seems he’s all about getting those around him riled up with anti-American sentiment despite the fact that Saddam was convicted and executed by the very people he used to rule.
All in all, it seems a very nasty place for an Indian politician to be sticking his nose, but then I guess his sort are pretty common these days. It’s little wonder that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was mentioning, just the other day, that that state specifically is “in need of modern leadership.”
Why, I’ll bet right there in Uttar Pradesh, just a hop-skip-and-a-jump from the Kashmir, there’re even a few Islamic fundamentalists who were inspired by the snippet and are declaring jihad at this very moment! Let’s hope they’re at least as stupid as the British attempted-shoe-bomber Richard Reid…
It’s a little funny, since you certainly don’t hear any anti-American sentiment in the execution video. Seems like most people who lived under the thumb of that maniac in Iraq are overwhelmingly happy the man is dead.
And while I’ve wrestled with the thought that perhaps I shouldn’t post this video, stolen from a camera phone, I finally thought… why not?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av1JpCbY884
People amaze me these days.
You say “liberal,” people can’t get it out of their heads that you’re slamming Democrats. You link to Michelle Malkin because you met her and her husband a couple of times, and supported her in her fight against YouTube for removing her video for no good reason, then, oh, you must be a RepubliCon!
Here’s another video, dedicated to our troops in Iraq, but has been lambasted with votes on YouTube that the content is Objectionable and Obscene.
The word “liberal” shouldn’t piss anyone off, but I think people search for it these days so they can show their disdain, and become ever pedantic about things that were commonly broadcast this week. It amuses me how the word itself refers to an ideal of “free of intolerance and prejudice” when it seems that those who themselves Liberals politically are so not that.
If I say “liberal groups,” most people have an idea what I mean. They are groups who adamantly seek reformation in laws regarding their cause, play watchdog to private sector businesses and individuals, and may even have a radical section who choose to reform people by harrassment or violence.
If I say “conservative groups,” most people have an idea what I mean, as well. They are groups who protest change, organize protests, and may even have a radical section who choose to reform people by harrassment or violence.
It is for the latter problem in set of groups why I choose not to align myself with any “group.”
The terms “Liberal” and “Conservative” with regards to political parties came in their interpretations of our Constitution. Liberals believe that the Constitution is dynamic, and that it should be updated. Conservatives believe that the document should be preserved, and that it says what it says.
These terms have little or nothing to do with “Democrat” or “Republican.” Either can be Liberal or Conservative, and even liberal or conversative. There can be conservative Democrats who are Conservatives. There can be liberal Republicans who are Liberals. And any mixture in between.
It’s all twisted. Considering the twists on both sides, polarizing everything just makes it worse.
Back in the 1980’s, various liberal organizations began trying to ban people from owning “dangerous dogs.” Pit bulls were quickly lofted to the first position as the most cantankerous canine.
But when a six-week-old pit bull puppy chews four toes off of a one-month-old baby, liberal organizations all over the country call for volunteers to adopt the puppy.
At least, that’s what I hear…
“The puppy is too young to know what it’s doing!”
“It’s so young, it may have been trying to nurse!”
“Killing puppies is cruel! No animal deserves to die!”
So, umm… What did these same organizations want to do with all the pit bulls they tried to have banned?
Hmmm?
The story is simple, really.
Two parents went to sleep on the floor their home. Their one-month-old child stayed in her car seat on the floor beside them. An impromptu “fence” was constructed to keep the dog from waking them up.
Somehow, the parents didn’t wake up to the screams of their own child, screams which I’m certain would have been indicative that something was wrong. Instead, they slept two feet away as the puppy ate four of her toes.
Because, you know — it’s the parent’s fault, not the puppy’s.
*cough*
Riiiiiiiiiiiight…
Clearly both were at fault.
So let’s sit back and think for a minute…
What if the baby had been killed? Would the dog be saved, or would it be put down as a “dangerous dog?”
And if the puppy had been a opossum instead? There would certainly be no saving it.
The site, Little Democrats, has been spammed continually for the last week from Democratic organizations, Google AdSense and miscellaneous “do-gooders” who think that this Democrat-centric children’s book is a good idea.
Unfortunately, it’s a load of crap.
Just take a look at the sample pages … I mean, apparently, Republicans are a group of people who don’t share their toys, run over children and charge money to go to school.
Regardless, from what I remember, the Government isn’t supposed to be a Parent to its citizens. It’s supposed to exist to represent them.
So, of course, I couldn’t resist spoofing it…
