HOW DOES IT HELP?

Honest Al Sharpton was being interviewed by Bill O'Reilly when he was asked about the alleged use of the "N" word at the D.C. Tea Party rally.

Sharpton claimed that someone shouted it at Congressman John Lewis (D-GA).

When asked by O'Reilly how he knew it happened, Sharpton declared emphatically, "I've seen the tape!"

When challenged that there was no tape, did Mr. Sharpton say something like, "Well, no, I misspoke. I didn't see the tape, but I heard that it had happened?"

No, he looked at O'Reilly and asked, "So, everyone hallucinated the "N" word use..."

Look, he did not say he HEARD that the "N" word was used, he stated categorically that he had SEEN the "tape" when he knew very well he had NOT seen the tape.

"There are all kind of reporters that were there," continued Mr. Sharpton, as though that addressed the issue of his having seen the "tape."

So what?

He did not say he got the information from the reporters, he said he SAW THE TAPE!

HE DID NOT SEE THE TAPE!

Guess what. When you say you saw something you did not see, do you know what that's called?

IT'S CALLED LYING.

The expression on Sharpton's face when he got called on his lie is priceless.

Have you ever seen a kid lie to his parents to avoid getting caught? Same expression.

So what's the big deal?

The big deal is that when you are trying to make people believe something, and you have to lie to get them to believe it, why should they trust you when you try to make them believe other things?

How do we now know which of the things the brother has said are true? Has he "seen the tape" on all of them?

Look, it COULD have happened (although there is NO evidence at this time that it did). If someone called Congressman Lewis the "N" word, that is despicable. It is wrong! Do you get that? I do not defend it! I oppose it!

That's not the point of this post.

My point is that politicians of every ilk, and others, think that they can convince you of something just by proclaiming it to be so, and by-and-large, they are successful! You fall for it.

Did you fall for Sharpton's declaration that he SAW the "tape?" Hmmm?

Just in case you think maybe there WAS a "tape," Andrew Breitbart has offered $10,000.00 to anyone who will come forward with a video verifiable as having been recorded at the Washington D.C. Tea Party event.

No takers, so far.

So, tell me: What did Al Sharpton gain by lying about seeing the "tape?" How was his credibility enhanced? Why did he think he had to lie about it?

Do liberals, especially black liberals, think that just making up something is convincing people that their cause is just?

(For those of you who think I just make things up [Tom], here is the video of the relevant portion of O'Reilly's interview with Sharpton):

QUESTIONS FOR LIBERALS AND ANYONE ELSE WHO HAS THE ANSWERS

HERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN BOUNDING AROUND IN THE INNER RECESSES OF MY FERTILE MIND:

What company has President BO ever run?

Has President BO ever had to meet a payroll?

What, exactly, does he know about business?

Is his business sense based on some etherial philosophy, or on hard, earned business knowledge?

What military experience has President BO ever had?

Why does he think he is qualified to be the Commander in Chief of the greatest military power the world has ever known?

He is a Harvard graduate, is he not? How did he pay for his education?

What visible signs of support did President BO have? Did he hold any significant jobs?

Did President BO spend his formative years absorbed in American culture?

Has President BO ever aligned himself with radical extremists, that is: those who have resisted and/or argued or acted against the American way of life?

Is our president an humble servant of the people, or is he absorbed in himself, as evidenced by his incessant use of the word "I?"

Does President BO prefer a European style government to the historical Representative Republic that has been America?

Does the president understand the principles of true capitalism?

Does he support or oppose those principles?

Has President BO sought to have the government take over large lending institutions, automobile companies, and the finest health care system in the world?

Does our president understand the economic forces that made the United States the world's economic leader?

Does he know why we have historically had the highest standard of living in the entire universe?

Does President BO realize that we could become totally energy independent within seven to ten years if we just allowed drilling in our country in places where we know we have vast oil reserves, and that we could do it using current technology, while we allow time for "green" technologies to get up and running?

Does the president willingly and openly consider the opinions of those who are politically not aligned with him?

Does President BO understand the difference between controlling and governing?

Does he seek to silence those who disagree with him, politically...people like Rush Limbaugh and others whose talents have allowed them to have vibrant, viable radio shows?

Does President BO seek to give those who cannot garner a radio audience because they have no radio talent and don't even understand what it is some kind of preferential treatment, calling it "fair?"

Does our president give speeches that sound more like a college professor's lectures to the sophomore class?

When challenged on an issue, does President BO tend to make great use of "uh" as a stalling tactic while he tries to think of a way to couch his response in such a way as not to really answer the question asked?

Other than garnering the necessary votes, what, exactly, are the things about President BO that actually qualify him to be the leader of the free world?

ERODING FREEDOMS

I first saw this on Social Sense. I recommend it to you.




We are loosing our freedoms.

One by one they are being taken away, always "for the good of society as a whole."

That is exactly the same reason Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussilini, Joseph Stalin, Hugo Chavez and dozens of other despots gave for ridding their citizens of their freedoms.

At no time in history has taking away a freedom resulted in a good to society.

"What freedoms have we lost?" you ask.

They are in the hundreds, so I will not list them all, but here are a few:

You cannot drive without a seatbelt. ("But wearing seatbelts saves lives. It is for the good of society as a whole! " Maybe, maybe not. Nevertheless it is a freedom you have lost.)

You cannot call people certain things. ("But it is hurtful to call people names." Maybe, maybe not. [Whatever hapened to 'sticks and stones...?"] Nevertheless, except for besmirching Christians and conservatives, that is a freedom you have lost.)

You cannot hug a child who is not yours on school grounds (indeed, not in most places). ("But there are so many perverts out there! This is for the good of society as a whole." Newsflash! One of the reasons many kids have developed anti-social behavior is because they have NOT been hugged. Kids NEED hugging. Society has NOT been served by the loss of this freedom.)

You cannot spank your child. ("But spanking children teaches them violence. This is for the good of society as a whole!" BULLHONKEY! The reason we have so many maladapted kids is exactly because we have become permissive by peer pressure, if not by law.)

You have lost the freedom of association. You may now be the subject of a government investigation simply because of the political, activist, or advocacy groups you are involved in, or the statements you make within these groups. ("But we can't have people hanging around groups that may advocate the overthrow of the government. This is for the good of the whole." How on earth do you think this country came into being? Did you think it was from some benign academics who sat around trying to come up with some viable govenment that could properly control the people? We held a WAR, for pity's sake! A WAR enabled us to come into being!)

So tell me. Can you:

Know that if you are extradited to another country, this is done only after due legal process?

Get on an airplane with a can of Coca Cola, or with some contact lens solution?

Buy a car using cash? (I tried that a few years ago...one of the most difficult things I have ever done.)

Know that your communications are secret, unless a judge explicitly allows them to be intercepted?

Get an on airplane anonymously?

Walk along the street unobserved by the authorities?

Sell your house and take out all my cash?

Carry a Swiss Army Knife everywhere?

Buy an LP, and play it on as many record players as you like. Forever?

Know that your communications will not be kept on file for years?

Buy an LP, and make a tape copy of it?

Own a gun without having it registered?

Voice your opinion in support of some freedom fighter group or other, without the risk of going to prison for “glorifying terrorism”?

Know that anyone who is forced to provide the authorities information against you can tell you about this without fear of prison?

Open a bank account without identifying yourself?

Smoke in your own office?

Bring your toolkit on an airplane?

Rent an airplane in 5 minutes, by just paying a pilot the hourly fee. In cash?

Phone people without the number being tracked?

Travel from, say, Dallas to Amsterdam without your details being tracked, and kept on file for up to 40 years, by at least one government (without me having the right to check the data and correct errors)?

Choose whether or not to carry health insurance?

All for the good of society as a whole.

BALDER-EVER-LOVIN'-BLUE-EYED-DASH!

SO, WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT?

Under President BO's leadership and insistance, Congress has passed a bill written by a committee whose chairman says he can’t figure all of it out, who calls it "imperfect," and which he says must have "fixes."

They have passed a bill that was passed by a Congress that could not take the time to actually read it.

They have passed a bill from which that same Congress has exempted itself, as well as the upper echelon of its employees... probably because it is such a good bill that they, personally, want nothing to do with it.

They have passed a bill signed by President BO, who has not read the bill, either.

They have passed a bill about health signed by a president who leads the way by smoking.

They have passed a bill that is funded by a Secretary of the Treasury who does not think it important to pay his own taxes.

They have passed a bill to be administered by a Surgeon General who is overweight, Regina M. Benjamin, M.D.

They have passed a bill underwritten by a country on the verge of bankruptcy, that will saddle its progeny with massive debt and huge budget deficits.

What could possibly go wrong?

A NEW CONSTITUTION

President BO has both publicly expressed disdain for, and taken an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America.
Seemingly, in his world, one can have it both ways.

His behavior since taking office has evidenced his continued disenchantment with the greatest document ever written by man.

I suggest that he consider re-writing the Constitution so that it is more to his liking.

Perhaps he could start it like this:

PREAMBLE: We the government over the people of the Disunited States, in order to force all people into a single mold, warp and pervert Justice, incite unrest and reactionary responses, defend and separate ourselves from the people, provide welfare for all citizens, and usurp and eliminate the blessings of liberty and economic stability for the people and their posterity, do alter and denigrate this Constitution for the Disunited States of AMarxista.

Article I, Section I: The President shall put himself at the fore of every issue and shall have the power to do what he wants, when he wants, how he wants to whomever he wants.

Article II, Section I: Congress shall have the power to enact any law it wants to about any issue it wants to with a 1/3 vote of Democrats present at the time of passage.

Article III, Section I: The Supreme Court shall be composed of liberals only who will interpret laws in such a way as to move us toward a more totalitarian form of government.

Article IV, Section I: The states shall have no rights.

Article V, Section I: The people shall do as they are told, and any majority that makes its will known contrary to the Democrat Party line shall be ignored or ridiculed or both.

Coming soon to a government near you.

"LOOK, THE ELECTION IS OVER AND I WON"

It was about, and only about, winning.

They won.

Sunday, March 21, 2010 will go down as the day President Barack H. Obama and his willing accomplices in congress and the MainStream Media made a fundamental change in America.

Far from representing the people, congress passed a health care reform bill that is a blow to freedom and a financial albatross around the necks of our yet-to-be-born posterity.

The cost of this legislation, conservatively, will be $940 billion. Since we do not have that kind of money and will have to borrow it, it will also add to the staggering national debt, which will now be over $12 trillion!

Who will ever know the extent of bribery and corruption, payoffs and promises thereof that allowed this travesty to take place?

The power of the federal government over our lives has been geometrically expanded and is the antithesis of what our forefathers intended for this Great Experiment.

The door has been opened for the further degradation of the free market, which the socialists among us have decried as responsible for our current economic woes, the Community Reinvestment Act notwithstanding.

It is not the greed of large corporations that has brought us here (although their willing participation must not be discounted), it is, rather, the general culture of entitlement and individual corruption in high places.

Opposing “free” health care will very difficult for conservative Republicans in November, and it is doubtful whether there are enough of them with the back bone for it.

All of this, and we have not yet been told the inevitable costs of shipping and handling for this boondoggle.

President BO's change has begun in earnest.

SUNDAY SAYINGS FROM OUR FOUNDERS-James Madison

James Madison

SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; AUTHOR OF THE FEDERALIST PAPERS; FRAMER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; SECRETARY OF STATE; FOURTH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony in favor of religion or against temporal enjoyments, even the most rational and manly, than for men who occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and [who] are rising in reputation and wealth, publicly to declare their unsatisfactoriness by becoming fervent advocates in the cause of Christ; and I wish you may give in your evidence in this way.


A FOUR MINUTE VIDEO YOU NEED TO SEE:



ONE MORE THING:



House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr. , R-Norwalk, pictured standing, far right, speaks while colleagues Rep. Barbara Lambert, D-Milford and Rep. Jack F. Hennessy, D-Bridgeport, play solitaire Monday night as the House convened to vote on a new budget. (AP)

The guy sitting in the row in front of these two.... he's on Facebook, and the guy behind Hennessy is checking out the baseball scores.

These are the folks that couldn't get the budget out by Oct. 1, and are about to control your health care, cap and trade, and the list goes on....