Liberal Hate – Catch It!

What's your reaction when you first hear about some borderline despicable act that Republicans might be responsible for?

If you're like me, and despite the enormous number of false alarms sounded by the partisan media, you ask, "Say it ain't so?!?"

Because not only am I not going to defend some dastardly individual or a party that engages in outright lies and character assassinations (which is why the Democrat party should lose that "party" designation), I don't want to associate with people who have no ethical bearings.

Which brings me to the meaning of the above title. Liberal hate is so rabid and all consuming that they can't hide it. It's understandable, I mean, I myself can't hide the hatred I have for liberals, but the difference is that mine is grounded in reason. Liberals decide what or who they want to hate first, then they set about manufacturing their reasons. And even when they can't come up with any good ones, they engage in brainstorming hate sessions until finally the herd mentality takes over.

Nowhere is this better displayed than in the comment section of what promises to be a very hot topic should further details prove it to be true. I'm talking about "The Bracelet." Yesterday's scandal was that Obama had to read the name off of his "me too" bracelet because he apparently didn't remember it. I didn't see that, and I haven't seen a replay, so I can't personally verify anything. But the reason I was distracted that moment is because I immediately went into shock when I heard Obama's "I've got a bracelet too" reply which I found to be shockingly juvenile, and since it was in regard to a most sacred subject, fallen soldiers, I felt this was a defining moment.

Needless to say, if Obama actually did have to refresh his memory, it becomes a disqualifying moment.

That's just a fantasy, because the liberal position is, as always: how dare you try to take political advantage of any shortcomings in one of our candidates. No matter that liberals attempt to magnify the smallest mistakes, and they work at it twenty-four hours a day. No matter that while there is certainly political gain to be had regarding the bracelet, that doesn't negate the seriousness of what Obama may have done.

But as I said, that was yesterday's scandal. Today, there's an allegation that the mother of the dead soldier had asked Obama not to wear the bracelet because, get this, she didn't want her son's death to even have the appearance of being connected with politics.

However, all this is hearsay and speculation since it comes from the woman's now ex-husband who apparently supports McCain. Although when the mother gave the bracelet to Senator Obama, she's alleged to have said that she wanted us to leave Iraq – but very carefully, so as not to leave the possibility of having to go back when things might be far worse.

OK, so as I write, we don't know the truth, but Jake Tapper posted the story saying that he hoped to verify it one way or the other. He said that the matter was brought up by Republicans which may seem suspicious were it not for the always applicable question: If not they, who?

And what's far more important is, it was only an allegation, not a public story, until Tapper published it. In other words, wouldn't we all have been perfectly comfortable with having Tapper wait until he's nailed the story's details?

Draw whatever conclusions you want from the fact that he didn't, except that by posting it as he did, it make Republicans the story as much as the circumstances surrounding the bracelet.

Yet, that's not my story. I was struck by the comments that followed which, to me, are far more important. Liberal respondents, as usual, don't' care about any details that might reflect badly on their guy. Even if it's all true, that Obama had to use the bracelet as a teleprompter and that the mother had asked him not to wear the bracelet, to them, Republicans are the ones who are despicable, apparently for disrupting their fantasy.

But even here, it's not what they said, but how they said it. John McCain, according to them, is a horrible individual for bringing up his Vietnamese captivity, and for talking about virtually anything related to the military. And he's denounced in the most vile manner, again as is usual for liberals.

And Sarah Palin is denounced too. One person said that this matter was of no importance compared to the fact that Palin was again absent from the Sunday talk shows. It didn't occur to him that both matters could be relevant at once. Or that Palin's absence might be irrelevant since the debate this Thursday will determine whether she can cut it

As you scan the comments, I doubt you'll be able to get much further than I did, which is not far. Liberals are so low, so irrational, and so overflowing with hate that it's like you stumbled into the Texas Chainsaw massacre.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Advertisements

About tedwest

A longtime veteran of comedy and political forums, I decided that I needed a more restful venue because... well... I finally hate everybody. Except my wife that is... and my ex-wife.. and... no, that's about it. I lead about as simple a life as one can, preferring activities that include anything that doesn't involve going out and seeing YOU! And I particularly enjoy what I call "Get the Bitch" movies on Lifetime. You know the ones where the intended victim finally does something so incredibly stupid that she forfeits her right to live, and from that moment on you're rooting for the stalker. Of course, it rarely works out the way you want, but when it does, the feeling you get is... well, there's nothing else like it, other than, maybe, eating chocolate chip cookies. Oh, and I'm proudly anti-wildlife, both foreign and domestic, and anti-environment - especially foreign environments. I think Howard Stern put it best when he said, "If fifty percent of the population died tomorrow, I can live with that." And I feel the same about the other fifty percent, so together, we've pretty much got it all covered.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Liberal Hate – Catch It!

  1. Kelly says:

    Please don't smear all liberals; you just said I was nice and I am a huge liberal.
    Anyway. I don't know about the mother and what she said or didn't say, I just know what I saw from the debate. Barack Obama definitely paused and then stumbled over the name of the soldier; I'm not sure if he actually read it off the name of the bracelet or not because it was on a closeup of him at the time and I couldn't see his arm.
    But yeah, I've been waiting for someone to bring that up (instead of just mentioning the duel of the bracelets) because that was a total cringe moment for me. I am still voting for him but if you can't remember the guy's name off the top of your head, don't bring up your bracelet.

  2. TedWest says:

    Kelly,
    You've put me in an uncomfortable position because you do seem very nice, and I was already slightly aware you you, having once gone to your blog and considered responding to a post about gay marriage, which I thought better of because you seemed so nice.. So see, it's a vicious circle!?!
    OK, so now I can get serious. From what I can see, you're not your average liberal, but if you agree with that, what does that say? Or do you not agree with anything I wrote above?
    And I don't want to reduce Obama to gotcha moments any more than I do McCain, most especially because he is unfit to be standing on a stage next to McCain for reasons I've amply elaborated on in these pages.
    The most troublesome thing to me is that I've rejected a lot of Republicans because they didn't meet my standards, most notably George Bush whom I guarantee I hate as much as anyone. So I don't care about whose tax plan is better if the man himself is a thug, a dope, or a fraud.
    And while I could go on endlessly, let me try to put this in perspective for the Judgebobs of the world… would you be kind enough to give us the name of your favorite Democrat? Or failing that, is there one you respect? I mean other than Obama. And I would be happy to do the same about Republicans.

  3. Left-liberals only hate what they can not control. If you are not part of their movement then you are a non-believer, an infidel. Just ask Pol Pot.

  4. Kelly says:

    It's okay–we can disagree and still like each other. I don't want anyone to give me a free pass just because I'm not a jerk. (Mostly not a jerk.)
    My favorite not Obama Democrat? I like Ted Kennedy, but I think that may be respect for history and his brothers–it's kind of like the Beatles, you know? Because it's very sad that Ringo is alive and John Lennon isn't.
    I like Bill Clinton a great deal. I like his wife more after the way she handled herself at the convention.
    I really like Joe Biden, although every time he makes a hideous comment, I heave a mighty sigh and wonder why I do like him. (I'm from Maryland, the part that's close to Delaware, so I've known about Joe for a long time.)
    I like Ben Cardin, who I met once. He was really nice.
    Republican-wise, I liked John McCain until he started playing dirty politics.

  5. Kelly says:

    also, I think I am your average liberal. I'm pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-union, pro-not destroying the environment, pro-people as opposed to pro-business. (Although, since I like getting a paycheck, I'm not exactly anti-business.) I try not to demonize entire groups of people, although sometimes that's hard to do.

  6. dox^2 says:

    Republican-wise, I liked John McCain until he started playing dirty politics.I think most of them (reps and dems) play dirty politics. That is part of the territory I guess…

  7. Kelly says:

    Oh, definitely.
    I in no way think my party is taking the high road.

  8. TedWest says:

    We just had a big "discussion" elsewhere about "pro-choice" And I lost several online friends because of it/It all started with my expressing shock that Camille Paglia feels abortion is murder… and I don't, at least for early stage. I expressed the hope that there might be grounds for a compromise in there somewhere, but that was quickly dashed when on fellow said he'd gladly compromise – as a first step to outlawing all abortions. And so it goes. I tried to explain that God himself is guilty of wanton mass murder, but they didn't seem to care… just like liberals and their causes.
    To me, gay rights should is a non-issue No one should be discriminated against unless it's very clear they are a member of a minority I don't like. But seriously, other than gay marriage which I am uncompromisingly opposed to, I don't know what "gay rights" means?
    Unions – no good can come of them. That's not true in theory, only in practice, and that applies to most liberal ideas.
    Not destroying the environment. Again, I have no idea what that means.I mean, I'm not in favor of dumping chemicals in rivers, but I'm decidedly not in favor of holding up projects because some microscopic something is found there.
    Pro-people or pro-business? I do understand what you're getting at here, and I have enormous sympathy for the average man. I am never in favor of him being trampled on by rich people or business. For example, I am not in favor of repealing the estate tax because it's good for America that rich people don't have a free ride forever.
    But it's a very delicate situation with respect to business, and I know, having run one for nine years that I started from scratch. Government must regulate excess, but taxes are another story as I've mentioned elsewhere, and Business provided healthcare should be illegal. Only the free market can provide decent care at a reasonable cost, and only John McCain is offering any hope of our getting there.
    I do not have a problem condemning entire groups, and you probably notice. For one thing, stereotypes exist for a reason. However, I would relish the friendship of any decent, compassionate, intelligent and thoughtful individual. Idiots need not apply.
    Speaking of which, when Colin Powell was considering running, I know of no conservatives who gave a thought to his blackness. All that mattered was competence, and had he run, I would have been thrilled to have voted for him instead of Bob Dole.
    But Obama is not where he is because of competence or experience, and therein lies the rub. All his ideas are things he thinks are great, and we're supposed to take his word for that? Someone who has never done anything? Why it's like if Zak were running and wanted to start a bunch of new banks and tell everyone to walk away from their existing bad mortgages…
    And Zak has way more experience than Obama! (don't hate me, Zak)

  9. Thanks Ted! If nominated I will not run If elected I will not serve. 😉
    I never actually advocted people walking away enmass, but only as a tactic for personal survival. I don't advocate being a slave to worthless assets.

  10. Kelly says:

    Besides gay marriage, it's making sure that we don't get fired or evicted for being gay. It's also the fact that in many states, we aren't necessarily allowed to make medical decisions for our partners (if they are in a coma, say) or even to visit them. It's a scary thing to think about.
    Well, yeah. I am a fan of animals and I don't think mascara should be tested on bunnies, but if a mouse needs to get shots so that cancer can be cured a little faster, well, I am okay with that.
    I think there's a difference between taxing large corporations and small businesses. I do like healthcare, but again, I don't think small businesses should be mandated to offer it (although I think Walmart should–it's not like they can't afford it).
    I do like Colin Powell. I would consider voting for him.
    I didn't mean you condemn entire groups; that was the general "you."
    I do really like Obama (as you may notice by the giant banner on my page). I'm a cynic by nature and he's making me not be one, which I enjoy and fear in equal measure.

  11. TedWest says:

    When you put it that way, I know something about worthless assets and being a slave to them, but walking away from a mortgage is a drastic step and should not be taken except as an ultimate last resort unless one doesn't' mind going a decade without another house. Oh the good old days when you could assume a mortgage, eh?
    And amazingly, my spell checker just passed "aways."

  12. TedWest says:

    Kelly, see it's always the same problem once we get deeper into things. It seems your positions aren't rooted in reason, only feelings.
    I agree that anyone should have certain rights, and the ones you mentioned are perfectly reasonable. Except that I should have to accommodate anyone I don't like because not all dislikes are created equal.If I don't want to rent to you, that's my business.
    Animals: cruelty to animals is cowardly and abhorrent, which is why I advocate clearing the Earth of them so the problem won't arise. Besides, they're dirty, a nuisance, and they carry disease, and we have plenty on film, so it's not like they'd be dinosaurs or anything.
    Now, if I must be realistic, I think any reasonable step should be taken to preserve habitat and species, but whenever it's a choice between human welfare and animal welfare, please see the above paragraph.
    As for taxing big vs small corporations, I'm sure you have a specific dividing line? And did you not see my comment about healthcare provided by business should be illegal? And I'm not talking about mandating care, that would be impossible. Employer provided healthcare is discrimination at its worst. I literally have to take what's offered while you may get something better or worse, and you have no choice either. It's the biggest outrage going.
    Every individual should not only be able to buy his own plan at competitive prices, it should be required that such a market exists.The only thing worse than the current system is government sponsored care. Again unless I'm missing something and you have details I should know and consider.
    As for Walmart, how do you know what they can afford? Every tax, every regulation impacts how they do business, and anything that would disrupt the company's primary mission of quality products for cheap prices effects everyone. if Walmart is making obscene profits, invest in it, don't tax it into disaster. I have to say that your comment was really shocking. If you don't understand business and markets, and then whine when business moves overseas… well… this is exactly why I can't have a discussion with liberals… it's always feelings over sound principles, be they ethical or economic.
    And if you're not cynical about Obama, you're either not informed or you're in denial. I haven't seen your blog lately. If I had, we'd likely not have gotten this far, and I don't know if that's good or bad, all I know is that this latest exchange has taken us back to somewhere before square one. I'm sorry, but I can't put niceness ahead of the welfare of the country.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s