Friday, April 20, 2007

Sherwood Ross - Grade A Moron.

I just read some comments from Sherwood Ross, senior headcase, at CounterPunch. Sherwood's comments can be read here. The gist of his article is that no one has a right to grieve for the victims of the Virginia Tech massacre. Why? Because they were Americans and Americans are the problem. He then blathers on about America's so called gun culture followed up by dribble about America's wars of the past century (he even makes us the bad guy in WWII).

I could school this jackass all week about America's involvement in war and how we have held this world together but it would be like trying to drive a paneling nail into a Abrams tank. Aside from that what I would write might just turn out a book.

But the "gun culture" I can handle.

Let's start with the premise of the gun control crowd. Make guns illegal and there will be no gun crime. Let me ask this, If a person is intent on committing a crime (robbery, murder, rape et al) do you honestly think that that person will care that gun possession is illegal? The answer to that question is a resounding NO. That person will get a gun illegally.

The next point made by the anti-gun crowd is usually something along the line of, if we get rid of the illegal guns criminals will not be able to get them. Response: is cocaine illegal? Yes. Do criminals still manage to get cocaine? Yes.

Liberals cannot see this though. They cannot bring themselves to blame criminals for crime so instead they want to blame inanimate objects. They cannot come to grips with the facts. Here are the facts:
-Murder cannot be committed by anything other than a human being.
-Firearms are nothing but paperweights without someone to pull the trigger.
-People killed each other (and in much greater rates) before the invention of gun powder.

History dictates that before guns people killed each other with arrows, before that swords, before that sharp, pointy sticks, before that rocks and before that bare hands.

I've heard comments from the gun control lobby play the "what if" game. they say if guns were illegal the Virginia Tech shootings would not have happened. BS. If guns were illegal, Cho Seung-Hui would have found a gun on the black market, perhaps he would have brought a knife or a machete, regardless of how, he would have killed.

Allow me to give you a what if: What if every professor at that college carried a gun? What if every student carried a gun? Do you honestly think that Cho Seung-Hui would have been able to kill 32 people? Me neither.

Supreme Court uploads partial birth abortion ban

Earlier this week the Supreme Court upheld the legislation banning partial birth abortion. Naturally Liberals are livid by this decision. Over the week we have heard all the usual suspects yammering on about "women's health" and "women's rights" and so.

However, nowhere have seen these people call it as it is. Not once has anyone said, "This denies a woman the right to have a doctor reach into her, grab her unborn baby by the feet, pull it out up to his/her neck, jam a needle into the base of the babies skull, inject saline into the skull to 'loosen' all that brain matter before finally, using a vacuum cleaner to simultaneously suck the brains and collapse the skull."

For those of you that support this form of atrocity do not fret, rumor has it that your favored butchers are working on another form of late term abortion. In this method the baby is dismembered in the womb. Nice.

Here's the thing, the pro-abortion folks never want to talk about the baby. Anytime you talk to a pro-abortion zealot they will always talk about "rights" and "health" and "choice" as if someone is having a mole removed. But that is not it. They are removing and killing a human life.

Before signing off I can say to all the pro-abortion folks I've talked to, "YOU are the best person to make the case for abortion."

Sunday, April 15, 2007

What have some white boys NOT go to do to get some love?

After a more than one year long Liberal feeding frenzy, the three Duke (or Dukies for you Libro-Americans) lacrosse players have been cleared of all charges. Naturally, Liberals are miffed at this and have shown their disdain in various ways. And why should they not be upset? I mean afterall in the bizarro world that IS the Liberal mindset this was the perfect fairy tale story. A poor disadvantaged, black woman, forced to strip for a living because of social injustice raped by three rich, white, lacrosse playing, frat boys from Duke University (conveniently located in the South). I mean the only thing that could have made this more a Liberal wet dream would be if one of the accused was named Bush. There is one problem with the story, it wasn't true. At all.

For a year we were treated to guilty verdicts from the Libs all over the place from would-be John Edwards blogger Amanda Marcotte with this little gem, "Can't a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it?" To Mike Nifong's hooligan remarks. The thing to remember is that Liberals found these men guilty, with no trial, no evidence and an inconsistent story from the accuser. But now that the truth has been revealed the Libs are making all the efforts to find these men guilty of something or anything.

Our more "high-brow" Liberals in the media take the tact that these men may not be guilty of rape (like we've been saying for a year); but they are NOT innocent. That statement is followed by snippets about how the lacrosse players hired strippers, drank alcohol and allegedly said racial things to the strippers. The real award goes to Terry Moran who who lamented that if it were not for the fact that the players' families were able to afford good legal representation that they would have likely gone to prison. Oh great, if only their parents were a little poorer we could have sent these men to prison something didn't do, damn the luck.

For the lower brow Libs it breaks down to race and "class". You read plenty of "poor little white boys" remarks or "rich white boys will get on with their privileged lives" and so on. Bascially, it doesn't matter these men did not commit the crime but what does matter is that they have not suffered enough for being white, male, college students.

To the first I say this no one is truly innocent but we are talking about the law here. Is it illegal for men to hire strippers? The answer is no. Is it illegal to drink alcohol? No. Is it even illegal to call someone a racial slur. Morally disgusting but no. These men did not commit rape, they did not deserve to get indicted, they did not deserve the attempt at railroading that Nifong tried. But what they do deserve is for those papers that found them guilty to stand up and say, "These men are innocent."

To the second. Do these men not deserve equal protection of the law because they are white? Does due process not apply? Perhaps they are not even human and thus a year of derogatory and scathing indictments in the media do not matter? Go to any Lib blog. The Duke lacrosse players were not only guilty of "rape" but being white and "rich".

If we want a "color blind" society as so profess that color blindness has to work both ways.