LezloveVideo Group
Home
Login Member List
LezloveVideo Group   » General Discussions   » Off-Topic   » Backward  
Welcome Guest ( Login )

Backward
Author
Message
Posted 8/30/2017 11:58 AM


Supreme Being
Supreme Being

Group: Forum Members
Active: 10/19/2017
Posts: 8,361
I seem to recall the time Obama on one of his endless golf junkets went right back to playing after he gave ISIS another veiled threat not kept because they went and beheaded James Foley an American.

As opposed to Trump who went to the Hurricane Harvey hurricane command center in Austin Texas to meet with fellow Republican Greg Abbott. I'm greatful in one of the worst natural disasters to hit America that Obama is safely on some golf course and Mrs. Clinton is off in Westchester making love to her tonic and gin, sing it again your the piano man Billy Joel, sing us a song.
IP Logged
This member is offline.
Posted 9/5/2017 8:40 PM


Supreme Being
Supreme Being

Group: Forum Members
Active: Today @ 9:37 AM
Posts: 6,936
Excellent column by Dennis Prager in examining the psychology of the left and the issue of statues...

Those Who Don’t Fight Evil Fight Statues

Dennis Prager

All my life, I have known this rule about people: Those who don’t fight the greatest evils will fight lesser evils or make-believe evils.This happens to be the morally defining characteristic of the left. During the Cold War, many liberals and nearly all conservatives fought communism, but the left fought anti-communism.

The left opposed American military buildups and regarded the Cold War between America and the Soviet Union as nothing more than two scorpions in a bottle fighting to the death. They loathed Presidents Nixon and Reagan, not Communist Party Secretary-General Brezhnev.

They regarded Reagan’s labeling of the Soviet Union as an “evil empire” with contempt. Typical was the reaction of one of America’s best-known intellectuals, Henry Steele Commager, then a professor of history at the Amherst College. He said, “It was the worst presidential speech in American history, and I’ve read them all.”

With regard to fighting communism — which, aside from Nazism, has been the greatest evil in the modern world (it killed and enslaved far more people than Nazism) — the left was an obstacle, not an ally. The left in the West and elsewhere did far more to enable communist evil than to stop it.

The same holds true with regard to the greatest evil in the world at this time: totalitarian Islam, or Islamism. The left is doing precisely what it did during the war against communism: It’s fighting the anti-Islamists, not the Islamists. Just as it labeled anti-communists “cold warriors” and other derisive epithets, the left labels those fighting Islamism as “Islamophobes” and, of course, “racists.” In the moral order as perceived by the left, it is the anti-Islamists who are the enemy of the good.

In this battle, the left fights American conservatives — and Israel, the country in the front line against Islamism. In a nutshell, rather than fighting evil, the left fights those who fight evil.

Therefore, if you have moral clarity, you are not on the left. If you have moral clarity, you can be a liberal, a conservative, a centrist, an atheist, a believer, a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Hindu, a black, a white, a Latino, an Asian, a Native American, a gay, a straight or a bisexual. But you cannot be a leftist.

The problem, however, is that people want to feel morally good about themselves, and no one wants this more than the left. It has written the proverbial book on moral self-esteem. Therefore, it does not merely believe that it is morally superior to all others; it knows it is. Leftists know they are more compassionate, more enlightened, more intellectual and more intelligent than conservatives. And they know that they care more about the “downtrodden,” the “marginalized” and the “disenfranchised” than conservatives.

But to feel good about yourself, you have to fight against something bad. Since the left doesn’t fight real evil (that would take moral courage in addition to moral clarity), it has to fight lesser evils or made-up evils.

For example, the left relentlessly fights racism in America, even though America is the least racist multiracial society in history; it relentlessly fights sexism in America, the country that has afforded unprecedented equality and liberty to women (but it does not fight the terrible sexism that pervades the world’s most women-suppressing societies — those in the Muslim world); and, of course, it fights Nazis and white supremacists — who, though evil, constitute an utterly negligible threat to America today.

Fighting Nazis in Germany between 1933 and 1945 was an act of moral heroism. Given their negligible numbers and nonexistent power, fighting Nazis in America in 2017 is an act of moral onanism.

There’s a lot more on the list of made-up or lesser evils that the left fights instead of fighting real evil. It fights religious Americans, specifically religious Christians and especially evangelicals. Now that’s an enemy worth fighting — those mean Christians (and Jews) on the religious right. And it fights conservatives, or at least the conservatives who fight them.

And, of course, it fights global warming. Leftists have convinced themselves that the real fight against evil in the world today is not against Islamism; it’s against carbon emissions.

And now, we can add statues to the list. The left was AWOL against communism, and it’s AWOL against Islamism. But it’s in the vanguard of fighting statues.
IP Logged
This member is online.
Posted 9/8/2017 5:56 AM


Supreme Being
Supreme Being

Group: Forum Members
Active: Today @ 9:42 AM
Posts: 12,973
Lezfriends's article states: "The left was AWOL against communism, and it’s AWOL against Islamism. But it’s in the vanguard of fighting statues."

That Dennis Prager is a BRILLIANT man, Lezfriend! That's for posting that excellent column of his - it says everything that needs to be said about the priorities of the political-progressives and their pro-fascist supporters on the fringe (e.g. Antifa & #BLM)!

Check this out - do you think anybody at CNN is wanting to take this trial seriously? I found the following editorial on Investor's Business Daily:

When Is A Scandal NOT A Scandal? When There's A Democrat Involved

Corruption: A sitting U.S. Senator is currently on trial for bribery, and if he's found guilty it could have major political ramifications. Haven't heard about this case? That's because the Senator in question is a Democrat.

A CNN story this week about the opening of the trial against New Jersey Sen. Robert Menendez noted that "Democrats are eager to avoid the subject of Menendez's bribery trial."

That headline would have been just as accurate if it said "Reporters" instead of "Democrats."

Menendez in on trial for allegedly having sold his office in exchange for luxury vacations, private flights, and piles of campaign cash. In his opening remarks, Assistant U.S. Attorney Peter Koski said "this case is about a corrupt politician who sold his Senate office for a life of luxury he couldn't afford and a greedy doctor who put that senator on his payroll. ... The defendants didn't just trade money for power, they also tried to cover it up."

It's the first time in 36 years that a sitting U.S. senator has been on trial for bribery, which you'd think would make it front page news.

And the stakes of the trial's outcome are big, too. Should Menendez be found guilty and forced to give up his Senate seat, New Jersey's Republican Gov. Chris Christie would almost certainly replace him with a Republican, giving the GOP a bigger margin in the Senate. That could, among other things, improve the odds of getting things like ObamaCare repealed and tax reform enacted.

But the New York Times, for which this case also is a local story, has published a total of six articles about the case this year.  The day the trial opened, the Time's buried its story on page A20 in the local news section.

Nor did the Washington Post, where politics is its singular obsession, run the story about the first day of the trail on the front page.

Even when the press has covered the Menendez case, it has tended to downplay his party affiliation. The New York Times' 1,300-word curtain raiser about the trial (which also did not run on the front page) failed to mention even once that Menendez is a Democrat.

When confronted with this glaring omission, reporter Nick Corasaniti brushed it off as "just an oversight on my part after drafts."

Right.

Even when the Times updated the story online, it didn't mention that Menendez is a Democrat until the fourth paragraph.

Then there's the version of an AP story that ran on the NBC News website, which identified Menendez as "R-N.J." in the first paragraph. Several hours later, NBC corrected its mistake, noting that "an earlier version of this article misstated the party affiliation of Menendez. He is a Democrat, not a Republican."

Sloppiness? Bias? You decide. But try to imagine these reporters making such Journalism 101 mistakes if the case had involved a Republican. Does anyone outside of the liberal media bubble really think that a reporter would incorrectly identify a Republican as a Democrat when reporting on a major scandal? Or fail to mention the person's party affiliation at all?

The fact is that reporters and editors are so determined to portray Republicans as contemptible and corrupt that they can't or won't see scandals that involve their beloved Democrats.

And, believe it or not, there are plenty such scandals on the Democrat's side of the aisle. Under Obama, there was Fast and Furious, the IRS's war on conservative groups, the Clinton Foundation pay-for-play scandal. There's the House IT scandal involving former DNC head Debbie Wasserman Schultz. There's an FBI investigation pay-to-play scandal involving two Democratic Pennsylvania mayors. Former Pennsylvania Rep. Chaka Fattah was recently convicted on corruption charges and former Florida Rep. Corrine Brown on charges relating to a fraudulent charity. Calif. Rep. Maxine Waters is on the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington's "most corrupt" list. On and on it goes.

In each case, the mainstream press either ignored the scandal, offered little more than perfunctory coverage, or dutifully tried to play it down or explain it away.

We have nothing against the press aggressively pursuing and exposing corruption and other scandals involving Republicans. That's the role a free press should play. But the media's one-sided accountability is a total disgrace.

Reporters love to say they "speak truth to power." But they only ever seem to speak up when the "power" has an "R" after its name. Otherwise, they're happy to be as silent as the grave.


- President Trump NAILED IT - the modern national news media really deserves the "FAKE NEWS" moniker they've been so accurately saddled with!
IP Logged
This member is online.
Posted 9/8/2017 8:24 PM


Supreme Being
Supreme Being

Group: Forum Members
Active: Today @ 9:37 AM
Posts: 6,936
Quote: Lezfriends's article states: " The left was AWOL against communism, and it’s AWOL against Islamism. But it’s in the vanguard of fighting statues. " That Dennis Prager is a BRILLIANT man, Lezfriend!...

Does not surprise me in the slightest, Anon. Remember how CNN and MSDNC devoted practically round the clock coverage to the Bridgegate scandal in New Jersey.

And here we have another case involving a Jersey politician accused of wrongdoing (Senator Menendez) and there is little to no coverage. Proving yet again their bias when it comes to embarrassing or ridiculing Republican transgressions, while at the same time ignoring or covering up Democrat ones.

IP Logged
This member is online.
Posted 9/9/2017 6:20 AM


Supreme Being
Supreme Being

Group: Forum Members
Active: 10/19/2017
Posts: 8,361
Ahhh NBC the network run by Hoda and AL Roker called Robert Menendez a Republican in one of there " news " broadcasts. Sorry but the senator on trial for free junkets and favors and all kinds of nasty behavior is in fact a demoncat. Might Chris Christie be waiting in wings to replace Menendez and receive public endorsement from Robert our forum poster from the Northeast bureau.

Attachments:

Please login
to view the image

Please login
to view the image

  
giphy (12).gifl_comey-testimony_2_1200x675.jpg  
IP Logged
This member is offline.
Posted 9/9/2017 12:01 PM


Supreme Being
Supreme Being

Group: Forum Members
Active: Today @ 9:42 AM
Posts: 12,973
Lezfriend wrote: "Remember how CNN and MSDNC devoted practically round the clock coverage to the Bridgegate scandal in New Jersey."

Sylvester wrote: "NBC, the network run by Hoda and AL Roker called Robert Menendez a Republican in one of there "news" broadcasts."

What probably happened is that NBC fully knew that a U.S. Senator facing a corruption trial is HUGE news, but since their news network also has an ongoing policy to shield & protect all Democrats from negative news coverage, they purposely switched the party-label on Menendez in order to report that story!

This is EXACTLY the reason why so few Americans respect the modern news media anymore, or care about their polls guaranteeing a Hillary Clinton win and/or repeatedly telling us all just how unpopular Trump is. It's more fake news!

- The Democratic Party's got NOBODY who can unite their fractured party - and nobody right now who could successfully challenge Trump in 2020!
IP Logged
This member is online.
Posted 9/9/2017 7:51 PM


Supreme Being
Supreme Being

Group: Forum Members
Active: Today @ 9:37 AM
Posts: 6,936
Anon wrote: 'The Democratic Party's got NOBODY who can unite their fractured party - and nobody right now who could successfully challenge Trump in 2020!'

My guess is that as we get closer to 2020 the media is going to increasingly hype the junior Senator from California Kamala Harris as a potential challenger to President Trump. They did the same thing in 2016 with Lizzie Warren. But she bailed out of running when it became a forgone conclusion that Hillary was going to be the DNC nominee.

Anyway, you can be sure that the Dems are going to continue to exploit the gender issue as they did with Hillary in 2016 and the race issue as they did with Obama in 2008 and 2012. It is called identity politics, which even though the majority of American voters reject, it is really all the Dems have at this point.
IP Logged
This member is online.
Posted 9/10/2017 5:22 AM


Supreme Being
Supreme Being

Group: Forum Members
Active: Today @ 5:06 AM
Posts: 4,940

If Kamala Harris was lesbian, the Democraps would have all their bases covered!

 

 

IP Logged
This member is offline.
Posted 9/13/2017 3:54 AM


Supreme Being
Supreme Being

Group: Forum Members
Active: Today @ 5:06 AM
Posts: 4,940

OMG....it just goes on and on and on. Can you believe that this certifiably crazy, corrupt, nutty and delusional old biddy came within a few more illegal votes of being the Commandress In Chief!!!

Good grief Charlie Brown. Keep it up Hildabeast, you're a blessing to the GOP and a detriment to the Democrat brand, whatever that is. Mark Davis, filling in for Hugh Hewitt, really gave it to her this morning.

From the Los Angeles Times by Mark Z. Barabak and Barbara Demick

============================================================================================

NEW YORK — Hillary Clinton, who spent decades on the public stage in a myriad of roles and changing personas, emerged Tuesday in a new one: ghost from the political past.

The reception was decidedly mixed.

On the day marking publication of her latest memoir, the former first lady, U.S. senator, secretary of state, two-time Democratic White House hopeful and loser of the searing 2016 presidential race made a flurry of campaign-style stops, including a book signing and batch of media interviews.

It was a chance to open old wounds and allow partisans to fall back on familiar positions.

For Clinton fans, their ardor undimmed, the re-emergence of their heroine offered a chance to ponder what might have been.

In New York City, hundreds lined up at a Manhattan Barnes & Noble for a chance to shake her hand, enjoy a snatch of conversation and buy their own autographed copy of "What Happened."

Shannon and Jessica Marshall, 29-year-old twin sisters from New York, dug out of their cupboards the blue "I'm With Her" T-shirts that they hadn't worn since the early hours of Nov. 9, when Clinton conceded defeat. "The world would be a lot less stressful if she'd won," said Shannon, who arrived at 5 a.m. to be among the first in line.

For some, Clinton was even more appealing in defeat than she seemed as the once-prohibitive front-runner. "Women are always dumped on and disrespected," said 24-year-old Brandon Powell, who crossed the Brooklyn Bridge from Flatbush to see Clinton. "She's a hero for the way she stood up under pressure."

The former candidate, wearing a luminescent turquoise jacket and trademark black pantsuit, arrived at the bookstore nearly an hour after the scheduled 11 a.m. starting time. The crowd greeted her with shouts of "Hillary! Hillary! Hillary!"

Seated on a makeshift stage separating her from reporters and those in line, Clinton made no public remarks to the media, but chatted with fans, offering sympathetic bromides to the many who expressed their grief over the election's outcome.

"Keep up your spirits," she was overheard saying. "We have to do better. ... I'm glad you like the book."

In the course of 491 pages, Clinton took full responsibility for her stunning loss to Donald Trump — she carried the popular vote, but lost in the Electoral College — except when she didn't.

"I go back over my shortcomings and the mistakes we made," she wrote in her memoir. "I take responsibility for all of them. You can blame the data, blame the message, blame anything you want — but I was the candidate. It was my campaign. Those were my decisions."

She said her lucrative speechifying after leaving the Obama administration, which drew attacks from both Trump and her primary rival, Bernie Sanders, had been a mistake. "I should have realized it would be bad 'optic' and stayed away from anything having to do with Wall Street," she wrote. "I didn't. That's on me."

She also reiterated that her decision to use a private email server as secretary of state, which led to a politically enervating FBI probe, was "a dumb mistake." But, she said by way of qualification, it was "an even dumber 'scandal.'"

In the same fashion, Clinton's buck-stops-here statement yielded to a number of grievances — about misogyny, a public with little patience for substance — and a gallery of villains — some more insidious than others — which she blamed for costing her the election.

Among those cited are Sanders, President Barack Obama, Russian President Vladimir Putin and, most especially, James B. Comey. The former FBI director came in for particular derision for his handling of the email probe — and especially for reopening the case in the closing days of the election based on a newly discovered cache of emails that proved immaterial.

"What happened in the homestretch that caused so many voters to turn away from me?" Clinton wrote. "First, and most importantly, there was the unprecedented intervention by then-FBI Director Jim Comey."

Clinton suggested he was more concerned with appearances than justice, and she suffered as a result.

"When you're the head of an agency as important as the FBI, you have to care a lot more about how things really are than how they look," Clinton wrote, "and you have to be willing to take the heat that goes along with the big job."

She said Obama could have been more forceful responding to Russia's pro-Trump meddling in the campaign, and also writes that he kept her from going harder after Sanders, who turned into a far more formidable primary opponent than she or many had imagined.

The Vermont senator, a political independent and not a registered Democrat — as Clinton notes — came in for some of her most barbed observations. "Because we agreed on so much, Bernie couldn't argue against me in this area on policy," Clinton wrote. "So he had to resort to innuendo and impugning my character. Some of his supporters, the so-called Bernie Bros, took to harassing my supporters online. It got ugly and more than a little sexist."

The sniping at Sanders, who fired back after excerpts from the book were published last week, has only deepened the discomfort among Democrats wishing Clinton had taken the more typical political route, accepting her lumps, not writing the book and retiring to the role of respected, but seldom seen, party elder.

Instead, she will embark on a monthslong nationwide tour — mixing free book signings and paid appearances — that will stretch into mid-December.

"It tears the scab off the wounds," said a longtime Clinton loyalist, who did not want to be identified to preserve his relationship with the Clinton family. "A few people would say she has every right to speak out and God bless her. But most people are just, 'Why?' We don't need this. It doesn't do anything to fix the problems we have as progressives or Democrats or liberals or whatever we might be."

For their part, Republicans were delighted to take a few shots at their old nemesis and enjoy a break from months of Trump-related upheavals.

"The book really is just a big excuse for why she lost," said Barry Bennett, a Republican strategist who served as an advisor to Trump's campaign. "She blames everyone for her loss. ... She seems to truly be delusional."

Not surprisingly, Trump came in for brutal treatment in her account.

She describes him as phony, cruel, insensitive, sexist and thoroughly unqualified to serve as president, though she allowed as how: "You've got to give it to Trump — he's hateful, but it's hard to look away from him."

She suggested Putin is not just someone the president personally admires, but wishes to emulate: "A white authoritarian leader who could put down dissenters, repress minorities, disenfranchise voters, weaken the press, and amass untold billions for himself. He dreams of Moscow on the Potomac."

In an interview published Tuesday in USA Today, Clinton went even further, saying she was convinced the Trump campaign purposely colluded with the Kremlin to tilt the election against her.

"There certainly was communication and there certainly was an understanding of some sort," she said. "Because there's no doubt in my mind that Putin wanted me to lose and wanted Trump to win.

"I happen to believe in the rule of law and believe in evidence, so I'm not going to go off and make all kinds of outrageous claims," she went on. "But if you look at what we've learned since (the election), it's pretty troubling."

In one of the book's more tender moments, Clinton discussed her sometimes-difficult marriage to President Bill Clinton, who was impeached for lying about his White House affair with intern Monica Lewinsky.

"There were times that I was deeply unsure about whether our marriage could or should survive. But on those days, I asked myself the questions that mattered to me: Do I still love him?" she wrote. "And can I still be in this marriage without becoming unrecognizable to myself — twisted by anger, resentment, or remoteness? The answers were always yes. So I kept going."

And for those who may wonder, Clinton said, yes, it can be painful to be a public figure so deeply reviled for reasons she still cannot fathom. "For the record," she wrote, "it hurts to be torn apart."

But despite what Republicans and even some Democrats might hope, she said, she would not follow the path of those previously vanquished and quietly go away. "There were plenty of people hoping that I, too, would just disappear," she wrote. "But here I am."

———

 
IP Logged
This member is offline.
Posted 9/13/2017 6:20 AM


Supreme Being
Supreme Being

Group: Forum Members
Active: 10/19/2017
Posts: 8,361
Meanwhile in the courtroom Demoncat Bobby Menendez is up on corruption charges...I heard the RNC chairwoman , gal is the niece of Mitt Romney. ( Pays to have an Uncle Mitt ) Anyhow on the radio show Hugh Hewitt she mentioned a petition was circulating that demanded if convicted of felony charges Menendez step down ?

You mean to tell me a convicted Felon can stay in the senate on appeal ? You mean minority whip Chuckie Schumer and the outright corrupt Demoncats won't demand Menendez step down ? How absurd is gubment today and out of control when and if a convicted felon stays in the Senate on appeal ?...


Attachments:

Please login
to view the image

   
nnmen.video_1067x600.jpg   
IP Logged
This member is offline.
Showing page 144 of 146 - 1460 messages found « First Page Prev Page Next Page Last Page »
« Next Oldest :: Next Newest »


Design & Architecture © 2004 SMG Video, Inc | Terms & Conditions | All rights reserved.