Democrats Expose Themselves

I couldn’t sleep Wednesday night.

Normally I don’t go looking for fights, even though they often find me, but I was bored!

I decided to troll the leftwits at the Huffington Post forums.

Okay, that isn’t exactly true.  I was reading stories about the floor vote at the DNC convention to add the words “God” and “Jerusalem” back into the Democrat’s platform, and I wanted to see how the liberals were reacting to it.  It all started out as simple honest interest in how they viewed those events.  I didn’t plan to engage in any heckling, but, as I said, I was bored!

For me, the events of Wednesday’s floor vote sums up everything about the Democrats in one neat little package.  All you ever needed to know about them is encapsulated in one little video caught by C-Span:

1)      Racism is alive and well, and resides in the Democrat Party.

2)      Democrats will go to any lengths to deceive the public.

3)      The Godless do indeed make up a large contingent of the DNC.

4)      Anti-Semitism is rampant among liberals.

5)      Democrats use crass demagoguery to keep minority factions in line.

6)      Democrats will throw their own under the bus.

7)      Votes only count to Democrats if they like the results.

Racist Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (who thinks that he belongs to “the” race) was the perfect choice by the Democrats to represent them as their Convention Chairman.  He embodies the liberal notion of placing the color of one’s skin ahead of the content of their character, and, as if any further proof was needed, this event leaves no doubt that he is personally bereft of any such character.

This vote was a set up from the beginning.  It was a contrived effort to attack Mitt Romney for not being 100% in line with the Republican platform, which, in this case apparently calls for abortion to be restricted with no exceptions.  Romney would leave exceptions for rape, incest and the health of the mother.  Democrats spent a good part of last week trying to make some political hay out of that difference, but didn’t gain any traction.  Most everyone knows that a fresh political candidate has little control over their party platform.  Only incumbents, like Barack Obama, really have that power.

The Democrats concocted this political maneuver in order to try to slam Romney while portraying Barack Obama as a forceful leader.  They were deriding Romney for not having the “courage” to attack the Republican platform and force it to mirror his own views.  The original wording of the Democrats platform was written with the intent of setting the stage to allow for the “heroic” Obama to rush in and save the day by demanding that his own platform be changed to his will.

Unfortunately, for them, they let the cat out of the bag earlier in the week by letting it be known that Obama signed off on the original wording.

Also unfortunately, for them, the masquerade backfired in a spectacular and glorious fashion!

So, as Villaraigosa took the stage at the DNC, with his teleprompter already displaying the results of a vote he had not yet taken, he was met with something that he didn’t expect:

Resistance!

Everybody knows that happy little liberals are not allowed to disagree with the stated party line!  It doesn’t even matter how ridiculous the spin might be!  They’ll keep to it.  I guess they just weren’t prepared for the talking points to change, and Villaraigosa was DEFINITELY not prepared for the delegate’s reaction to those changes!

The delegate’s reaction to the notion of adding God back to the platform was very telling, as was the reaction that I saw among many liberals posting at The Huffington Post.  They railed at the notion of the “sky fairy” being mentioned in a political setting.  They revealed that they believe that anyone who believes in such “fairy tales” could not be rational or intelligent.

I pointed out to them that it was Obama himself that forced the wording changes.  So, either Obama believes in God, which, by their logic, would make him irrational, or Obama doesn’t believe in God, which makes his own platform a lie. 

By their own definition, Obama is either an idiotic lunatic, or a liar… or both.

They REALLY didn’t like to hear that much!  They weren’t able to refute the point, so many of my posts were deleted by the site moderators and deemed as “personal attacks”.  Apparently pointing out logical fallacies to a liberal equates to attacking them personally.

The Anti-Semitism among liberals and Democrats was evidenced by the people carrying “Arab-American Democrat” signs (like we really need more hyphenated “Americans”?) and shouting “NO!” to the notion of confirming Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.  There is a huge contingent of Pro-Palestinian, Anti-Israel Democrats.  They may, in fact, make up the majority of that party.  Jewish people in America are finally starting to wake up to that reality, and more and more are “defecting” to the Republican Party every day.  I thought it very telling that the Democrats had to rush out to attempt damage control.

There was even the claim that conservative Christians only care about Israel because, according to Palm Beach County Democratic Chairman Mark Alan Siegel, “The Christians just want us to be there so we can be slaughtered and converted and bring on the second coming of Jesus Christ”.

Disgusting.

But what I thought was the funniest part about this whole ordeal was how the vote was rigged from the beginning, and I was delighted as I watched Villaraigosa throw his own party’s delegates under the bus!  The look on his face was just pure comedy gold!

Two-thirds of the delegates would have been required to accede to the changes for the vote to have passed, but there is no way that anyone residing within a realm with the slightest connection to reality could claim there was a 2/3 vote in favor of either side.

But the fix was in.

Thanks to video taken at the event, we know now that Villaraigosa’s teleprompter was already set up for him to read the results as being in favor of making the changes.  This demonstrates beyond any doubt that the Democrats only care about votes if those votes are going their way. 

If they will ignore the votes of their own delegates to fix an election at their own convention, how can that leave any doubt about what they would do in a general election?

This one event nearly sums up the entire case against the Democrats and liberals.

Letting the DNC Rewrite History

Former President Bill Clinton’s scheduled speech tonight at the DNC convention reminds me of just how often we, as conservatives, have allowed the Democrats and the liberal media (redundancy!) to dictate the narrative and rewrite history.

Seriously, I have been hoping for a long time to see this trend change, but even with social media taking a large chunk out of the dinosaur news networks, we are still allowing the liberals to get away with an insane amount of propaganda.

Maybe it is because I am old enough to remember how things were when they actually happened.  Our newest set of voters was still in diapers during Clinton’s last term.  The Democrats work to take full advantage of the naiveté of youth, which is why they target younger voters and deceive them.  What disturbs me most is that all too often conservatives go right along with the deception unwittingly.

But I fully remember Bill Clinton’s first election.  This is because I actually supported Clinton.  Don’t hate me!

It was a definite year of discovery for me.  It was the year that I discovered first-hand how blatantly deceptive the liberals can be.

I was young.  The 1992 election wasn’t my first, but it was close to it.  I was angry at George H. W. Bush for his myopic “family values” platform.  Ross Perot had some good sound bites, but I thought the guy was a bit of a lunatic (and it turns out that I was right).  Bill Clinton was the “cool” candidate, much like Barack Obama was portrayed in 2008.  Hell, he could play the saxophone!  He went on popular shows like Arsenio to prove it.  Even most conservatives will still say that Clinton is a likable guy on a personal level.

But, in reality, Bill Clinton was Barack Obama 1.0.

Clinton’s first campaign was very much like Obama’s.  The Democrats pilloried Bush for going back on his pledge to not raise any taxes, even though it was the Democrats in Congress that placed that poison pill into an unrelated bill that Bush felt he could not veto.  Clinton promised to lower taxes and bring us all together as a nation.  He gave us empty platitudes.

What we got instead was almost IDENTICAL to Obama’s first two years in office.

As soon as Clinton got in, he and his Democrat allies in Congress passed one of the largest tax increases in the history of the country.  Then Bill and Hillary went to work to push a universal health care plan, dubbed “Hillarycare”.  The only difference was that they did not have a super-majority in Congress, like Obama.  The nation recoiled at Clinton’s actions.  They were so incredibly unpopular that Republicans swept the House and Senate races to gain control for the first time in 54 years.  The sweep was nearly identical to the one in 2010.

Citizens of the United States had developed a clear case of buyer’s remorse.

At that point, there were only two differences between Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.  Without the presence of Ross Perot in the elections, Clinton would never have come close to winning, either time.  He never managed a majority of the popular vote.  But Clinton did something else that Obama failed to do; after he got his clock cleaned in the mid-term elections, Bill Clinton decided to portray himself as a centrist.

Today, we have liberals like Barack Obama going around telling the country that his ideas are the same as Clinton’s, and that those ideas worked.  And he is allowed to get away with it.

Not even conservatives will call him on it.

But the truth is that the ideas that brought us prosperity in the 1990’s were not so popular with Clinton.  He fought against them tooth and nail, and went so far as to wage a war with the Gingrich-led Congress that would shut down the government.  If Clinton had gotten his way, and had retained control of the House or Senate, we likely would not have seen so much prosperity, even with the technological boom.  Clinton went kicking and screaming against ideas like welfare reform (vetoed three times), until he was forced into a political position where he had to sign such ideas into law.  He then turned around and portrayed ideas like welfare reform and a balanced budget as hallmarks of his administration, with the liberal media in full cooperation.

But those ideas did not originate from Clinton, he opposed them at the outset, and he only came to get on board when it became politically expedient for him to do so.

The boom in technology was enough to spur our economy to great heights, not because of Clinton’s policies, but despite them.  In fact, Clinton ignored several pitfalls that caused our economy to take a large downturn near the end of his administration.  Several companies were cooking the books.  Many of the prosperous internet corporations had no physical inventory of which to speak.  When the bubbles burst, Clinton didn’t care.  He was on his way out.

The media blamed George W. Bush for Tyco, Enron, WorldCom, and the like, but those crimes were all committed under Clinton’s watch.  Apart from that, Clinton’s administration had more high level corrupt scandals than even Obama’s.  They made Nixon look like a choir boy.  But the dinosaur media covered for him, and portrayed him as an enigmatic superstar.

And we let them.

And now we are letting them tell everyone how successful Clinton was as a President.

Why..?

Because we allowed them to create that narrative and let it become ingrained as common knowledge.

We even went along with it to a degree, and we’re paying the price now.  Obama is able to fool much of the populace with this narrative.

We’ve got to stop letting this happen.