Wednesday, December 21, 2011



sue hanes said...

Way to go Joe.

This is really good stuff.

I liked the second one best - then the third one next.

You're on a roll now Joe.

We're looking at the Best Post of 2011 here - with the award presented at the Kennedy Center!

Lisa said...

I lIke it alot . I will be needing to borrow these.

Leticia said...

I am with Lisa, I will be posting these on Facebook.

Great finds!

Quite Rightly said...

That was GREAT, Joe.

Merry Christmas to you & Bonnie!

Anonymizer said...

Not too long ago, our nation's top Democrats were praising Occupy Wall Street as if they'd hung the moon instead of just threatening to hang the Evil Rich.

“God bless them for their spontaneity,” Nancy Pelosi exclaimed, “It’s independent people coming together, it’s young, it’s spontaneous, it’s focused and it’s going to be effective!”

Not willing to be outdone, Barack Obama declared that the protesters "express the frustrations the American people feel" and told members of OWS "you are the reason I ran for office."

All of which makes it sound like these upstanding, spontaneous, America-representing young patriots should get front row seats at the Democratic national convention in Charlotte next year. But noooOOoooo.

The Democrats have now realized that there are "bad optics" from having Barack Obama's anti-capitalist message shouted out by scraggly, mask-wearing, drug-dealing, child molesting, lice-infested anarchists instead of having it delivered on a massive stage with greek columns and patriotic bunting by a "clean and articulate" president with a sharp crease in his trousers.

Which is why Charlotte has proposed an ordinance declaring that occupying tents in their downtown area would be an illegal "public nuisance." Just to put the icing on the cake, they're also banning "noxious substances," which should pretty much eliminate even those protesters who don't own a puptent.

Considering the love that the Democrats claimed to have for OWS until now, you'd think they'd be making a loud outcry to make sure that this "voice of the people" can be heard loud and clear as we think about who'll be running the country for the next four years.

Or just maybe, now that the American people have seen the filthy, angry, and idiotic results of what "community organizers" actually do, the Democrats would rather not offer up any reminders that this is Barack Obama's past...and our potential future.

David Schantz said...

Merry Christmas to you & Bonnie and all of your readers.

There is no way I could pick a favorite out of the three. I cast my vote for all of the above.

I've heard folks say Obama is more corrupt than Nixon or Clinton and less effective than Carter. Let's hope and pray we can get rid of him at the end of his one term.

God Bless America, God Save The Republic.

Anonymous said...

David Schantz said...
I've heard folks say Obama is more corrupt than Nixon or Clinton and less effective than Carter. Let's hope and pray we can get rid of him at the end of his one term.

We should give the progressive crow a lobotomy, that might do it.

Xavier Onassis said...

Darth Bacon - "crow"? Can you possibly explain how that's not incredibly racist?

No. You can't.

Anonymous said...

Xavier Onassis said...
"Darth Bacon - "crow"? Can you possibly explain how that's not incredibly racist?"
No. You can't.

Oh, Golly Gee, he called me a Racist! Isn't that hilariously ironic, a Liberal calling a Conservative a Racist!
Don't forget that I'm a Conservative and in your STUPID and Idiotic Liberal mind, all Republican are Racist's

Apparently you're not aware that being a racist is NOT against the law.
No wonder the majority of America's are disgruntled with the leftist's, you are all full of crap.
Get a life.

Joe said...

XO: "Crow." Can you explain how this IS incredibly racist?

You can't.

Joe said...

According to liberal theology, anything that contains the word "black," or refers to something that is black, when said by a conservative, is racist.

If I say, "President BO (the child president) went walking in the woods today and made his way around as skillfully as a black bear..." that is a racist remark.

If I am speaking about being a low-life instead of a person of high moral character and I express it with the phrase, "Why be black when you can be white?" I am guilty of racism.

(For eons, "black" has been used to describe that which is dark and evil, while white has been used to describe that which is bright and hopeful, and neither had to do with ethnicity or skin color...but that doesn't matter to a liberal. If a conservative says it, it is racist.)

Never mind that liberal Democrats have been the Party of racism from the beginnings of the country.

And they still are.

Their slavery of minorities takes a different form, but it is slavery, nonetheless.

Xavier Onassis said...

Jo Joe and Darth - Once again it's time to take you both to school for a history lesson:

"The phrase "Jim Crow Law" first appeared in 1904 according to the Dictionary of American English,[2] although there is some evidence of earlier usage.[3][4]

The origin of the phrase "Jim Crow" has often been attributed to "Jump Jim Crow", a song-and-dance caricature of blacks performed by white actor Thomas D. Rice in blackface, which first surfaced in 1832 and was used to satirize Andrew Jackson's populist policies.

As a result of Rice's fame, "Jim Crow" had become a pejorative expression meaning "Negro" by 1838 and when the laws of racial segregation – directed against blacks – were enacted at the end of the 19th century they became known as Jim Crow laws.[3]"

So yes, referring to a black man as a "crow" is incredibly racist.

Anonymous said...

Xavier Onassis has proved a long medical study. He has proved what I've long held to be true, falling on your head when your a baby can be very dangerous in adulthood. One can have serious repercussions including permanent brain damage!

Xavier Onassis said...

Darth - You are right about one thing, "...being a racist is NOT against the law."

It is, however, unbelievably ignorant.

Joe said...

XO: You're the ignorant one. "Jim Crow" is one thing. "Crow" is another.

But in your ignorance, you are unable to make the distinction.

One thing you liberals excell at is ascribing intent to others. Another is being of a stereotypical mind set that requires similar things to be equal.

Oh, yes, and you are good at missing sly have none. Much too PC for that.