THE HOT JOINTS » Liberals

Video: Community Organizers Pray To Obama

Chris Jones — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:49:13 +0000

Liberalism really is a religion…

This from the same party that loves to cackle about how stupid religious people are. The left can’t stand God, but they do love themselves an authoritarian figure they can worship. When you look at this in along with their indoctrination of school kids — it’s pretty sick stuff.

(hat tip Michelle)

Audio: Progressives Discover Obama Is A ‘Charming Liar’

Chris Jones — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:23:17 +0000

Wow, you know the shit is really hitting the fan when far-left Air America radio realizes their Messiah is just another phony politician:

(hat tip Breitbart TV)

Christ the Radical

Marcus Gadson — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 15:53:35 +0000

Jesus Christ would not have many friends in contemporary society. That is the conclusion I reached reading through the gospels.

This might seem hard to believe. America is a religious place, at least compared to other western democracies. A Pew study last year found that ninety-two percent believe in God, and sixty-three percent say they believe in sacred scripture as the word of God.

Scripture is often invoked in our politics too. Opponents of gay marriage love to quote Leviticus—“you shall not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable”—to justify their position. For their part, religious liberals like Christ’s declaration that “whatever you do to the least of these you have done unto me.”

But in their zeal to invoke Jesus, liberals and conservatives alike have neglected much of what he taught during his life. For example, Christ didn’t have great things to say about the materialism that is so rampant today. When a rich man asked what he had to do to become perfect, Jesus replied that he needed to sell all of his possessions and follow him; the rich man wept for he had many possessions.

Christ then says that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to go to heaven. Some economic conservatives might be inclined to accuse anyone else who said this of stirring up class warfare. Many Americans would likely leave a church where the pastor told them that their constant pursuit of wealth made it harder for them to gain entry into heaven.

On sexual morality, Jesus would be far out of the mainstream today. He said “whosoever looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” All the young men who look at porn would mock someone who told them that their movie collections made them adulterers.

Jesus would appear just as out of place in discussions on divorce. He said “whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her.” Today, around half of all marriages end in divorce. It’s probably fair to say that these people don’t consider themselves adulterers. They would resent anyone who told them they were. To be sure, there is debate about whether there are some just causes for a divorce. However, it is hard to believe that Jesus would think that half of all marriages have such a just cause.

It drives me crazy to see the Bible selectively invoked like it is. Many of the people who use religion to make their judgments about gay people have said not a word against people who watch porn every night on their computers. They don’t spend nearly as much time complaining about how couples who divorce are undermining the institution of marriage. We aren’t supposed to pick passages we like to follow, and ignore passages that challenge our behavior.

Hypocrites ready to use the Bible to condemn others would benefit from another one of Christ’s ideas: let he who is without sin cast the first stone. When subjecting our behavior to Christ’s rigorous standards, it becomes clear that there aren’t a lot of people qualified to be throwing stones around these days.

The Jesus of the Bible clearly defies political classification. He was neither liberal nor conservative. But he was radical. Probably too radical for most of us.

-Marcus Gadson

Check out my blog

Huffington Post: “Palin Will Run in ‘12 on More Retardation Platform”

Chris Jones — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 01:39:21 +0000

You know how democrats are always accusing the GOP of being the “party of hate?” Think back to all the times you heard loathsome pieces of shit like Arianna Huffington accuse republicans of being hateful racists.

With all that fresh in your mind, take a look at what HuffPo writer Erik Sean Nelson wrote about Sarah Palin after she announced her resignation. It was so awful that it was pulled from the site just minutes after Free Republic wrote about it.

Luckily, Free Republic captured the despicable piece before it disappeared:

Palin Will Run in ‘12 on More Retardation Platform

In Sarah Palin’s resignation announcement she complained about the treatment of her son Trig who always teaches her life lessons. She said that the "world needs more Trigs, not fewer." That’s a presidential campaign promise we can all get behind. She will be the first politician to actually try to increase the population of retarded people. To me, it’s kinda like saying the world needs more cancer patients because they teach us such personal lessons.

Her first act as President: To introduce a Pre-K lunch buffet that includes lead paint chips. Sort of a Large HEAD-START Program.

She will then encourage women to hold off on pregnancies until their 40’s just to mix up some chromosomes.

She now is in favor of abortion only in case of diploid birth.

Her policies will increase jobs because Wal-Mart is building new stores each day and someone has to be the greeter.

This will lead to smaller government because fewer Americans will have the cognitive ability to hold a government job.

Look, she says she’s resigning as governor because people are making attacks on her and Trig. If she ever did become president, all Osama bin Laden would have to do to defeat the United States is Photoshop a picture of Trig and she’d surrender the country that night. As she said, "That’s not politics as usual." It isn’t. Politicians don’t usually quit for so stupid of reasons.

Nelson’s HuffPo bio: Erik Nelson has written for several comedy websites and published short fiction while living in the deep South. He has studied the local culture of his Red State and feels confident that they have accepted him as one of their own. Big mistake.

Join him behind enemy lines, deep in the Red Zone. Or email him at erikseannelson@gmail.com.

Here’s a picture of Erik Sean Nelson:

Classy guy, huh?

It’s interesting how all the politically correct language and condemnation of hate speech go flying out the window when it comes to tearing down a political opponent.

You would think a guy like Erik wouldn’t be so quick to personally attack people, especially when it comes to physical appearance, etc.

It’s always been my experience that fat slobs like Erik avoid being too personally critical of others so as not to to draw attention to their own physical appearance.

Feel free to contact Erik by phone:

(407) 529-6787

Video: Anderson Cooper Interviews Anti-War Liar Who Claimed To Be Wounded Gay Marine

Chris Jones — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:15:40 +0000

Anderson Cooper interviewed the asshole who became a public face of the anti-war movement. Rick Strandlof turned out (not surprisingly) to be a total fraud. He was never in the Marines, never wounded, and was not in the Pentagon on 9/11. This guy shilled for liberals during the election and pretended to be a wounded gay marine. He’s really just a lying scumbag and a fraud. Liberals never miss an opportunity to play the victim.

ABC Becomes The All Barack Channel

Chris Jones — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:24:18 +0000

ABC News has announced that on June 24, the network will be broadcasting live from the White House to shill for Obama’s health care plan.

This from Drudge:

ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.
The network plans a primetime special — ‘Prescription for America’ — originating from the East Room.

Here’s the funny part. In an effort to reassure critics, ABC News says they’re committed to “thoughtful” and “diverse” points of view on the health care debate.

However, that assurance is meaningless because ABC’s primetime special will include no opposing points of view.

“Thoughtful” and “diverse” means shilling for the Obama administration and repeating whatever the Dear Leader says.

The media has always been in the tank for democrats, but the difference this time around is they’re not even trying to hide it.

-Chris Jones

(picture via Michelle Malkin)

Whiny NARAL Mouthpiece Blames O’Reilly For Tiller Murder

Chris Jones — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 23:39:37 +0000

Today’s Washington Post has a ridiculous hit piece in it from NARAL vice president of communications Mary Alice Carr. She apparently took the brave stance of refusing to appear on “The O’Reilly Factor” to discuss the murder of abortion doctor George Tiller.

Carr shamelessly exploits the tragic death of Dr. Tiller by laying the responsibility for it at O’Reilly’s feet.

O’Reilly is being incredibly disingenuous when he claims that he bears no responsibility for others’ actions in the killing of Dr. George Tiller on Sunday. When you tell an audience of millions over and over again that someone is an executioner, you cannot feign surprise when someone executes that person.

So by this logic if president Bush had been assassinated it would have been Keith Olbermann’s fault. After all, you can’t come on television every night and tell Americans their president is a fascist war criminal who’s spying on them and not expect someone to try and stop him.

Obviously, this is ridiculous logic. To follow this logic would mean commentators couldn’t really talk about anything. Who’s to say what topic might set some nut off? Anything could prompt anyone to violence at anytime.

Carr also makes the false charge that O’Reilly never expressed sympathy or remorse for Tiller’s death. It’s true that O’Reilly never apologized for anything he said (nor should he), but he said on two different nights that the murder of Dr. Tiller was wrong.

He said we are a nation of laws and that kind of vigilante justice is unacceptable — and he’s right.

What Mary Alice Carr is trying to do on behalf of her radical abortion-on-demand cause is intimidate people from being publicly critical of abortion.

Sane Americans of every political stripe know what happened to Dr. Tiller was wrong. It was a case of domestic terrorism pure and simple.

However, most Americans also believe that partial birth abortion is wrong and morally repugnant. Clear thinking Americans on all sides also agree that Tiller was a butcher. He made millions over the course of his career and murdered more than 60,000 babies.

For $5,000 Tiller would perform an abortion for any woman at any point in her pregnancy for any reason.

It was only because of a sympathetic governor and Attorney General in Kansas that Tiller wasn’t sent to prison for performing illegal late-term abortions.

I myself am pro-choice, but what Tiller did was wrong on every level. If it were no big deal then Tiller wouldn’t have been one of only three doctors in the United States willing to do what he did.

Bill O’Reilly had every right to comment on Tiller and let Americans know what the hell was going on in Kansas.

The real outrage is that O’Reilly was the only one in the media with enough guts to talk about it.

I don’t the patience for it, but Tim Graham over at NewsBusters breaks down each lie and mischaracterization in Carr’s column and sets the record straight.

-Chris Jones

Hey Liberals, Gay Republicans Don’t Bother Me

Chris Jones — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:59:52 +0000

One of the left’s favorite things to do is “out” gay republican politicians. I happen to share their disdain for republicans who crusade against gay rights and turn out to be gay themselves. That kind of hypocrisy really is just too much.

However, it’s when the left tries to “out” republicans just because they’re republicans through nefarious whisper campaigns and gossip that bug me.

A republican senator or congressman who’s above the age of 40 and still single must be gay — according to the left.

Oddly, it’s the same leftists who howl about gays being treated equally that relish outing gay republicans as if being gay were something bad.

A favorite target of lefty homophobes is Sen. Lindsey Graham. Liberals often talk about Graham being gay as if it’s an established fact that everyone already knows.

Proud lesbian lefty and former democratic congressional candidate Linda Ketner is the latest one to “out” allegedly gay republicans.

In an interview with far left blog Firedoglake, Ketner makes the claim that three South Carolina GOP politicians are gay.

She names Sen. Lindsey Graham, Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, and S.C. Senate President Glenn McConnell.

Ketner doesn’t actually know if the three are gay, but certainly thinks so based on what she’s heard.

Here’s the real point that liberals and gay activists are missing. The vast majority of republicans don’t really give a damn if someone is gay.

Folks who support Lindsey Graham are not going to scream in horror if they discover he’s gay and not vote for him anymore. As much as the left would love for that to happen it’s not.

Liberals often make the mistake (on purpose usually) of tying the gay marriage issue to a hatred of gays.

Just because a person thinks the word “marriage” should remain legally defined as being between a man and a woman doesn’t show a hatred of gays.

In California, gay couples get ALL the same rights as married couples do, but it’s just not called “marriage.”

So demonizing Carrie Prejean, staging dramatic protests, and invoking Martin Luther King Jr. is about nothing more than semantics.

Gays want that damn marriage word and nothing short of it. To hell with all the legal rights they just want that damn word!

But, that’s another issue — back to outing gay republicans.

I happen to like Lindsey Graham. Many conservatives think he’s too much of a RINO (Republican In Name Only), but nevertheless he’s a good guy.

His sexual orientation is totally irrelevant. Whether or not he likes dudes has no impact whatsoever on his performance as a U.S. Senator.

Again, it’s the same people who want special hate crime laws to protect gays and pretend to be champions of gay rights, who also try and publically humiliate other allegedly gay people with whom they disagree.

This of course is the usual rank hypocrisy you get from the left — so I’m not really surprised.

-Chris Jones

Minorities Only Count If They’re Liberal

Chris Jones — Wed, 27 May 2009 16:26:36 +0000

If there’s one thing liberals love it’s identity politics. They play it at every opportunity and they play it well.

Since president Obama named judge Sonia Sotomayor as his choice for the supreme court, liberals have been cooing about her rise from the inner city and everything she had to overcome, blah, blah, blah.

Liberals love to name “firsts” and then constantly remind republicans that they’re naming a “first” and then dare them to oppose that “first.”

One must be careful not to get too carried away criticizing the first black president. Criticism could well be interrupted as racism and nobody wants that!

By the same token, Obama chose Sotomayor because in the mind of democrats (and sadly most republicans) opposing the first Hispanic woman to the court is dangerous ground and should be done with extreme caution.

Liberals aren’t actually interested in diversity, they’re interested in using the pursuit of diversity as a weapon.

When naming the first woman or minority to a particular position, if democrats cannot in some way benefit from it they don’t talk about it or pretend it didn’t happen.

Justice Clarence Thomas is a prime example of this. Because he’s not a radical leftist nothing he does counts for anything in the eyes of most liberals and more importantly most blacks.

Sen. Claire McCaskill made the stunning claim yesterday on Fox News that Obama’s nomination of Sotomayor was important, because no one currently on the court comes from an impoverished background. “That’s something new,” she added.

I suspect that was the moment Justice Clarence Thomas kicked his TV over. Not only is Thomas a black man sitting on the Supreme Court (appointed by a republican), but he comes from the poorest background imaginable.

In his memoirs, Thomas recounts a childhood of poverty that judge Sotomayor could not in her wildest dreams imagine. She grew up like royalty compared to the adversity that Thomas faced.

McCaskill’s claim is one of the most ignorant statements ever uttered. But it speaks to the larger point that in McCaskill’s eyes and in the eyes of most liberals Sotomayor really would be the first.

Clarence Thomas is a black conservative which makes him both an enemy to democrats and an enemy to most blacks.

What he believes and what he’s accomplished in life mean nothing. As far as most liberals are concerned there is no black man on the Supreme Court.

You see the same kind of treatment when it comes to Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice.

Colin Powell was the first black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the first black Secretary of State, but did you ever hear the media cooing about that? Nope. Never.

Did you get a chance to read all those columns in the NY Times during the last eight years about what a progressive guy Bush was for putting so many black people in positions of power? Me either, I’m still trying to find them.

Had he been a democrat appointed by a democrat you would hear about it ad nauseam for years even decades to come.

Dr. Condoleezza Rice who herself came from very impoverished beginnings in the south when racism was at its very worst.

Rice was the first black national security adviser and a woman to boot. She went on to be the first black female Secretary of State. Once again, did you hear the media gushing about any of that? Not just no, but hell no!

Like Powell, she’s a republican appointed to a position of power by republicans. Therefore, those “firsts” don’t count. Like Clarence Thomas, Rice and Powell are also heretics and enemies of both democrats (Powell not so much lately) and most blacks.

Think about how significant it is that both of president Bush’s Secretary of State picks were African-American. I don’t remember ever reading a column or magazine article applauding president Bush for appointing so many minorities to his cabinet. You can imagine the books, movies, documentaries, and monuments that would have been created to honor a democratic president for doing the exact same thing.

It’s interesting that the party most often labeled “racist” is also the party that has put more minorities in positions of power. Unlike democrats, this wasn’t done to make a political statement they were simply the best people for the job.

Republicans should not bow to political correctness on Sonia Sotomayor. They should ignore her ethnicity and gender (no matter how many times liberals bring it up) and focus on her judicial record.

It’s pointless to fret about being called a racist, because liberals are always going to call throw that bomb around no matter what.

If you’re a republican and you dare to question a liberal you WILL be labeled racist, sexist, homophobe, bigot, hatemonger, and any combination of those. Get over it.

I believe the American people by and large can see through the race baiting and identity politics the democrats so often play.

The important thing is for republicans to challenge Sotomayor’s record and show the American people why judicial activists like her are bad for the country.

There’s little doubt that Sotomayor will eventually be confirmed. However, republicans can still count it as a win if they present an effective case to the public about why she’s a judicial activist and what that means for them.

The most important thing for republicans to remember is that by not engaging on issues the democrats have labeled as racially sensitive it only make things worse.

Playing the race and gender card has been such a success for democrats over the years that they’re using it more and more.

Republicans need to aggressively make their case and let the chips fall where they may.

-Chris Jones

Obama Spends An Hour With America-Hating Groups Before Security Speech

Chris Jones — Thu, 21 May 2009 14:32:43 +0000

Worried that his kooky far-left reputation might be in danger as a result of his surprisingly sane decisions on national security recently, president Obama spent an hour and fifteen minutes bloviating with all the relevant America-hating groups before his speech today.

Here was the all-star lineup:

In an interview with the Huffington Post, Massimino detailed what she described as a "lively and detailed and serious" discussion on some of the days most vexing national security issues. Over the course of roughly an hour and fifteen minutes, Obama, along with Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, Attorney General Eric Holder, advisers Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod, foreign policy hand Dennis McDonough, and counter-terrorism chief John Brennan, held court with a group of academics, as well as officials with the ACLU, Human Rights Watch, and the Center for Constitutional Rights.

I cannot imagine a more loathsome group being assembled anywhere, much less at The White House.

The ACLU doesn’t give a damn about our national security and it’s horrifying that the president takes his marching orders from those thugs.

What a disgrace.

-Chris Jones

THE HOT JOINTS » Liberals

Video: Community Organizers Pray To Obama

Related Posts

Audio: Progressives Discover Obama Is A ‘Charming Liar’

Related Posts

Christ the Radical

Related Posts

Huffington Post: “Palin Will Run in ‘12 on More Retardation Platform”

Related Posts

Video: Anderson Cooper Interviews Anti-War Liar Who Claimed To Be Wounded Gay Marine

Related Posts

ABC Becomes The All Barack Channel

Related Posts

Whiny NARAL Mouthpiece Blames O’Reilly For Tiller Murder

Related Posts

Hey Liberals, Gay Republicans Don’t Bother Me

Related Posts

Minorities Only Count If They’re Liberal

Related Posts

Obama Spends An Hour With America-Hating Groups Before Security Speech

Related Posts