Patronizing Democrats – Susan Rice Only Being Criticized Because She’s Black

November 16, 2012 at 4:07 pm (Benghazi, Congressional Black Caucus, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Libya, Lindsey Graham, Marcia Fudge, Minority, Ohio, Race Card, Republican, Susan Rice, United Nations, Women)

It remains a mystery in my eyes, how liberals and Democrats fail to recognize that by constantly playing the race card in every possible scenario, it ends up being patronizing to the minority group that they are actually trying to defend.

Case in point – voter ID.  Liberals would have you believe that getting a free photo identification from the local DMV, and making it necessary to vote in elections, would suppress the minority vote.  Now, the only way you can possibly believe that statement is true, is if in your own little head, you actually believe that those minority groups are too incompetent to attain the proper identification necessary to vote.  It’s the only way that statement rings true.

And now we have this…

Via Gateway Pundit:

Representative Marcia L. Fudge the next Chair of the 43-member Congressional Black Caucus released a statement today defending Ambassador Susan Rice.
Twelve liberal Democratic women in the House embarrassed themselves today by defending dunce Susan Rice over her bizarre Libya comments.
They said Rice was being attacked because she’s black.
ABC News reported:
A dozen female members of the House staunchly defended U.N. ambassador Susan Rice against Republican criticism over her remarks on the deadly Sept. 11 Libya attack, suggesting the GOP lawmakers’ comments were racist and sexist.
“It is a shame that anytime something goes wrong, they pick on women and minorities,” Rep. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio, the next chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, told reporters Friday at a Capitol Hill news conference.
Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham earlier this week called Rice untrustworthy and unqualified to be the nation’s top diplomat if President Barack Obama chooses her to succeed Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. The two vowed to block any Senate confirmation if she is nominated.

First off, Rice’s actions amount to one of two things.  She either knowingly lied about what had happened in Benghazi, or she was used as a puppet by the administration to feed the public their talking points.  If she lied, then she is unfit to serve in her current post, let alone as a replacement for Hillary Clinton.  If she was used to promote the administration’s lies, then they have also denigrated this African-American woman by using her as a tool rather than letting her do her job.

Second, to come to the conclusion that Rice is being attacked because she is a black woman, is to view her with a condescending level of tunnel vision.  The very people that are criticizing her are doing so because they view her as Susan Rice, United States Ambassador to the United Nations.  The people that are defending her do not look at her in the same manner.  Instead they patronizingly view her as a poor defenseless black woman incapable of standing up to her critics or defending her position.

When Susan Rice attained the tremendous heights that she has throughout her career, do you think she’d rather have been viewed as a successful overall individual, or do you think she’d prefer to be viewed as the career product of being a poor black woman?

There couldn’t be anything less racial about the entire Benghazi cover up.  And yet Democrats feel they still have to play that card.  The left consistently turns race into a political ploy.  If you’re a minority, don’t you feel a little bit embarrassed every time they do it?

Advertisements

Permalink Leave a Comment

Republicans – Where Were You When Liberals Took Your Country?

November 7, 2012 at 1:34 pm (2012 Election, Enthusiasm, George Bush, Jimmy Carter, John McCain, Mitt Romney, President Obama, Republicans)

I honestly find this to be an unbelievable statistic.

According to the Gateway Pundit, Republicans turned out in fewer numbers for this year’s election than in 2004 and in 2008.

The enthusiasm gap that we heard so much about leading up to the election was supposed to be a double-edged sword – a drop in voter turnout for Obama, and a groundswell of support for Mitt Romney.

Only one edge lived up to the hype.  President Obama received 10 million fewer votes than in 2008.

But his Republican challenger saw no edge on his side, earning roughly 5 million fewer votes than President Bush in 2004, and even receiving 3 million fewer than the hapless John McCain campaign in 2008.

So I have to ask my fellow Republicans – Where the hell were you last night?

Not showing up just granted four more years of absolute failure to this President.

It’s four more years of trudging off to work knowing that a majority of your paycheck will be going to support government programs that benefit those who see no benefit in working.

Four more years of 8% unemployment being the norm in America.

Four more years culminating in over $20 trillion in debt.

Four years of further creating an entitlement society, one in which our children will live their lives predominantly dependent on government.

Four more years of having to accept the President’s own mantra – that American exceptionalism is a thing of the past.

Where were you when liberals took your country from you?

Now we get to sit back and find out what America would have looked like had Jimmy Carter won a second term – fasten your seatbelts and hold on to your misery index, it’s going to be one hell of a ride.

As for our Democrat counterparts:  It shouldn’t bother anyone to hear you shouting “Four more years!”  But it should bother you that every other America-hating leader around the globe is now chanting the same thing.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Republican Senators Respond to Hillary Clinton Accepting Blame for Benghazi

October 16, 2012 at 9:00 am (Benghazi, Buck Stops, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Kelly Ayotte, Lindsey Graham, President Obama, Security, State Department, Terrorism)

Late last night we received word that Hillary Clinton – not President Obama – was accepting full responsibility for the security lapses that led to the successful assassination of four Americans in Benghazi.

Falling on the sword for the administration during a tough re-election bid, Clinton today told a CNN reporter “I take responsibility” for security ahead of the attacks. 

Notice consistent use of the phrase ‘the buck stops with her’.

This is clearly an attempt to deflect criticism being aimed at the White House ahead of the second Presidential debate scheduled for tomorrow night. 

Now, U.S. Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte have responded to the ‘laudable gesture’, pointing out the unlikelihood that the President was unaware of the rising security risks in Libya.

“We have just learned that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has claimed full responsibility for any failure to secure our people and our Consulate in Benghazi prior to the attack of September 11, 2012. This is a laudable gesture, especially when the White House is trying to avoid any responsibility whatsoever. 

“However, we must remember that the events of September 11 were preceded by an escalating pattern of attacks this year in Benghazi, including a bomb that was thrown into our Consulate in April, another explosive device that was detonated outside of our Consulate in June, and an assassination attempt on the British Ambassador. If the President was truly not aware of this rising threat level in Benghazi, then we have lost confidence in his national security team, whose responsibility it is to keep the President informed. But if the President was aware of these earlier attacks in Benghazi prior to the events of September 11, 2012, then he bears full responsibility for any security failures that occurred. The security of Americans serving our nation everywhere in the world is ultimately the job of the Commander-in-Chief. The buck stops there. 

“Furthermore, there is the separate issue of the insistence by members of the Administration, including the President himself, that the attack in Benghazi was the result of a spontaneous demonstration triggered by a hateful video, long after it had become clear that the real cause was a terrorist attack. The President also bears responsibility for this portrayal of the attack, and we continue to believe that the American people deserve to know why the Administration acted as it did.”

Permalink Leave a Comment

McCain: "C’mon Honey, Bring Your Mortars, We’re Going To A Spontaneous Demonstration"

September 27, 2012 at 11:30 am (John McCain, Libya, Senator McCain, Terrorist)

Every once in a while you have to hand it to Senator McCain, he can deliver some good comments.  Watch as he blasts the Obama administration for their response to the terrorist attacks in Libya.

“C’mon Honey, Bring Your Mortars, We’re Going To A Spontaneous Demonstration”

He’s right, it was obvious.  To everybody but the President and his administration.

In the meantime, here is what is being described as the definitive timeline in the administration’s cover up story, involving the attacks on September 11th.

Permalink Leave a Comment

GOP Senators Rip Obama’s ‘Failure of Leadership’

September 26, 2012 at 9:00 am (2012 Election, Al Qaeda, Bumps in the Road, Egypt, Embassies, Failure of Leadership, GOP, Israel, John McCain, Kandahar, Kelly Ayotte, Libya, Lindsey Graham, Middle East, President Obama, United Nations)

U.S. Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) today released the following joint statement on President Obama’s recent comments about “bumps in the road” in the Middle East on his watch:

“President Obama recently said the broader Middle East has been experiencing some ‘bumps in the road.’ If the President had taken some time to hold even one meeting with his foreign colleagues during his visit to the U.N. General Assembly in New York today, perhaps they would have told him what has really happened in the Middle East on his watch.

“It is not a ‘bump in the road’ when American embassies, and those of our friends and allies, are attacked by hateful mobs who also murder their fellow citizens, allegedly because of a disgusting and bigoted video. That is the result of extremists who would seize on any opportunity to further their ideological agenda – extremists who have been gaining ground over the past two years.

“It is not a ‘bump in the road’ when Al-Qaeda fighters and their terrorist allies have been gaining ground in Libya, a country the United States helped to liberate but has not sufficiently supported in its ongoing struggle against lawlessness and violent extremism.

“It is not a ‘bump in the road’ when the relationship between the United States and Israel has never been worse at a time when the threat from Iran has never been greater and when events in the Middle East have never been more tumultuous or uncertain.

“It is not a ‘bump in the road’ when Israel and our Gulf partners have never had less confidence in the willingness of the American President to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability.

“It is not a ‘bump in the road’ when more than 25,000 men, women, and children have been slaughtered by the Assad regime in Syria – a conflict that is destabilizing the region, putting weapons of mass destruction at risk, creating a new safe haven for Al-Qaeda and its terrorist allies, and growing more dangerous by the day for the United States and our allies. That is the result of the President’s complete lack of leadership and unwillingness to take the necessary actions together with our friends and allies that could end the violence and create the conditions for a negotiated transition to a more peaceful, democratic future in Syria.

“It is not a ‘bump in the road’ when a small group of insurgents are able to destroy nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in U.S. fighter aircraft in a single attack in Kandahar – or when the ‘insider attacks’ against our forces and those of our allies have risen to such an extent that our commander has suspended training and joint operations with Afghan units, which is the core of our strategy to succeed. That is the result this Administration’s consistent efforts to cut corners in the war in Afghanistan – giving our commanders fewer troops than they recommended and withdrawing them in larger numbers and at a faster pace than our commanders advised, which is resulted in the very additional risks to our mission that our military leaders warned.

“It is not a ‘bump in the road’ when violence in Iraq is rising, the Iraqi political system is growing more authoritarian, Iranian meddling and influence is growing, and the Maliki government is allowing Iran to fly planeloads of weapons and fighters into Syria through Iraqi airspace. That is the result of a U.S. President who has squandered the gains of the surge in order to fulfill his campaign promise of withdrawing all U.S. troops from Iraq, even at the expense of our national security interests.

“None of these events are ‘bumps in the road.’ They are failures of American leadership. And they call for the United States to begin leading more actively, rather than trying to lead from behind.”

Permalink Leave a Comment

Study: Red States Far More Charitable Than Blue States

August 20, 2012 at 6:07 pm (Barack Obama, Blue States, Charity, Democrats, Donating, Donations, John McCain, Philanthropy, Red States, Republicans)

I remember a liberal friend of mine once saying to me that they couldn’t understand how I could be a Republican, ‘because they just seem so mean’.

And listening to Democrats rail about how Republicans are greedy, that they want to cut Grandma’s Medicare benefits, how they have to force the rich to pay more in taxes because it’s the patriotic thing to do so, and so on, you just might believe it.

But make no mistake, Democrats aren’t a kinder bunch.  They don’t want to spread their wealth around, they want to spread yours.

A new study from the Chronicle of Philanthropy shows that the most charitable states in the US are all red, while the least charitable are all blue.

Red states give more money to charity than blue states, according to a new study on Monday.

The eight states with residents who gave the highest share of their income to charity supported Sen. John McCain in 2008, while the seven states with the least generous residents went for President Barack Obama, the Chronicle of Philanthropy found in its new survey of tax data from the IRS for 2008.

The eight states whose residents gave the highest share of their income — Utah, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina, Idaho, Arkansas and Georgia — all backed McCain in 2008. Utah leads charitable giving, with 10.6 percent of income given.

And the least generous states — Wisconsin, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire — were Obama supporters in the last presidential race. New Hampshire residents gave the least share of their income, the Chronicle stated, with 2.5 percent.

“The reasons for the discrepancies among states, cities, neighborhoods are rooted in part in each area’s political philosophy about the role of government versus charity,” the study’s authors noted.

Democrats however will continue to portray the Republican party as the party of rich, greedy, old men who make their money off the backs of the 99%.

The difference though is clear – Republicans want the choice to give their money to charity, while Democrats want to legislate charity by forcing others to hand over their hard-earned money.  Isn’t that a fundamental difference of both parties – choice vs. government?

Permalink Leave a Comment

Is the Newsweek/Obama Love Affair Over?

August 20, 2012 at 10:38 am (Andrew Sullivan, Baby Boom, Hit the Road, John McCain, Liberal Media, Magazine, Niall Ferguson. Newsweek, President Obama, Sex)

Likely not.  After all, it was just a short time ago that the headline glaring from the cover of Newsweek was asking, “Why Are Obama’s Critics So Dumb?”

This is also the same magazine who’s post-election analysis in 2008 included a prediction that there would be a baby boom based on the excitement, and subsequent increase in sex, that would result from Obama’s victory. No, I’m not kidding.  Yes, I also just threw up in my mouth.

But the latest article which gets feature status on this week’s cover of Newsweek is a stunner nonetheless.

The title?  Hit the Road, Barack.  

The subtitle?  Why We Need a New President.

Does it get any more honest than that?

Author Niall Ferguson then poses this question and answer:

Why does Paul Ryan scare the president so much? Because Obama has broken his promises, and it’s clear that the GOP ticket’s path to prosperity is our only hope.

Ferguson then goes into a little more detail as to why the GOP ticket is the only hope.

I was a good loser four years ago. “In the grand scheme of history,” I wrote the day after Barack Obama’s election as president, “four decades is not an especially long time. Yet in that brief period America has gone from the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. to the apotheosis of Barack Obama. You would not be human if you failed to acknowledge this as a cause for great rejoicing.”

Despite having been—full disclosure—an adviser to John McCain, I acknowledged his opponent’s remarkable qualities: his soaring oratory, his cool, hard-to-ruffle temperament, and his near faultless campaign organization.

Yet the question confronting the country nearly four years later is not who was the better candidate four years ago. It is whether the winner has delivered on his promises. And the sad truth is that he has not.

In his inaugural address, Obama promised “not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth.” He promised to “build the roads and bridges, the electric grids, and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together.” He promised to “restore science to its rightful place and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost.” And he promised to “transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age.” Unfortunately the president’s scorecard on every single one of those bold pledges is pitiful.

Read the rest here…

This certainly isn’t an indicator that Newsweek is shifting it’s policies to to the right.  It is after all, a lone article.  Several liberal pieces of tripe are surely in queue in the coming months.

But the question remains, how bad does it have to be for a hard liberal magazine to shift focus even for a day, and take a hard shot at the President?

Permalink Leave a Comment

Protester Heckles Former POW John McCain During Memorial Day Speech

May 29, 2012 at 7:43 am (Heckler, Hero, John McCain, Liberals, Memorial Day, MIA, Mitt Romney, POW, Respect, San Diego)

Leftists staying classy as usual…

During a speech in San Diego on Memorial Day, Senator John McCain was interrupted by a heckler wearing a POW-MIA shirt.  The event was hosted by the Romney camp, seemingly making McCain’s main crime the fact that he is Republican.

McCain ends up calling him a jerk during the video (seen below), which had to take an extraordinary amount of restraint.

Liberals are rarely aware of the situation in which they protest, so a bit of a primer on why attacking McCain on Memorial Day is especially heinous – McCain spent over five-and-a-half years as a POW in North Vietnam.  His stint included minimal medical care for a fractured leg and two broken arms, and McCain was repeatedly subjected to torture and brutality.

Whatever issues of contention one might have with McCain, he remains an American war hero of epic proportions.  Hero is a term the left has trouble understanding.  They are no longer comfortable referring to veterans and soldiers as heroes, hence the lack of respect when it comes to Memorial Day speeches.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Did Democrats Tamper With the 2008 Election?

April 23, 2012 at 3:30 pm (2008 Election, Barack Obama, Democrats, Jesse Jackson, John McCain, Julian Assange, Wikileaks)

We know what you’re thinking…  Far-fetched, right?

Via Conservative Byte:

According to emails obtained by WikiLeaks, which is led by the embattled Julian Assange, Republican Senator John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign staff allegedly had evidence that Democrats stuffed ballot boxes in Pennsylvania and Ohio on election night. However, the candidate chose not to pursue voter fraud, according to internal emails obtained from the private intelligence and analysis firm, Stratfor.

Stratfor regularly reports on geopolitics, narcotics, security and terrorism, particularly overseas. The company, which was founded by George Friedman, has high-level subscribers including at least one former U.S. Secretary of State, various foreign governments, and intelligence agencies. The U.S. Marines and the Department of Homeland Security are also customers. In recent months, Stratfor was in the news because a still unknown party hacked the Stratfor website and obtained subscribers’ names.

Why did McCain choose not to pursue voter fraud allegations?  Likely because, much like voter ID laws, it would have been perceived as racist.

Good to see things like this coming out nearly four years after the act.  As opposed to say, in 2008, when it actually mattered.

More from Spero News:

In an email sent on November 7, 2008, entitled ” Insight – The Dems & Dirty Tricks **Internal Use Only – Pls Do Not Forward **,” Stratfor vice president of intelligence Fred Burton wrote:

1) The black Dems were caught stuffing the ballot boxes in Philly and Ohio as reported the night of the election and Sen. McCain chose not to fight. The matter is not dead inside the party. It now becomes a matter of sequence now as to how and when to “out”.

Philly, eh?  Wonder if Eric Holder would be interested in investigating more of “his people”.

Two days earlier, Burton wrote an email entitled “Insight – McCain #5 **internal use only – Pls do not forward **,” :

After discussions with his inner circle, which explains the delay in his speech, McCain decided not to pursue the voter fraud in PA and Ohio, despite his staff’s desire to make it an issue. He said no. Staff felt they could get a federal injunction to stop the process. McCain felt the crowds assembled in support of Obama and such would be detrimental to our country and it would do our nation no good for this to drag out like last go around, coupled with the possibility of domestic violence. The Nov. 7 email also contains allegations that Democrats made a “six-figure donation” to Rev. Jesse Jackson to silence him on the topic of Israel after an October 2008 interview in which he said Obama’s presidency would remove the clout of “Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades.”

Read more here, it’s interesting to say the least…

Permalink Leave a Comment