Two major leftwing hacks, Maureen Dowd and Frank Rich, stated on Saturday that McCain and Palin have been out stirring up 'mob anger' toward Barack Obama.
Both Dowd and Rich are ultra-liberal columnists for the New York Times.
And both are entirely WRONG about McCain and Palin 'stirring up the mob.'
The two leftist columnists should know that average, everyday, God-fearing, hard-working, taypaying, responsible citizens in the heartland of this country are scared to death of Barack Obama and his extremism.
Their anger has been slowly rising the closer we get to Election Day due to the fact that they know the truth about Obama and are seething about the fact that this man may actually get elected to the Presidency, when he could not even get a security clearance for a government job due to his ties with persons of dangerous reputation.
Governor Sarah Palin is not to blame for Barack Obama's votes to kill infants who survive botched abortion attempts. Senator John McCain is not to blame for Obama's sleazy relationships with terrorists and thugs in the corrupt Chicago political machine.
No, Ms. Dowd and Mr. Rich, Barack Obama did those things all on his own. And now he must take responsibility for his actions and pay for them with being denied the White House at the very least. He may even need to go to jail, depending on what Tony Rezko tells the Feds about him.
Alerting the voters to the myriad of highly troubling problems surrounding Barack Obama is not stirring up a mob. It is telling the truth, which the mainstream media and columnists like Dowd and Rich are NOT doing.
Thus, in the eyes of Obama disciples and their mouthpieces in the mainstream media, I am now part of a 'mob' because I am angry that someone like Barack Obama could get this close to the White House. My fellow bloggers who oppose Obama tooth and nail are now considered part of a 'mob.' Gun owners who cherish their God-given and Constitutionally-protected right to bear arms are now part of a 'mob' because they are livid that a man who stated publicly that all handguns should be banned in America is on his way to becoming President, if we believe some of the polls.
And last but certainly not least, those who are outraged that a man who voted 3 times to disallow medical care for infants that survive botched abortion attempts is within a hare's breath of being elected are now referred to as 'a mob mentality.'
No, Ms. Dowd and Mr. Rich, these are the best and brightest among us.
And thus, if the outrage the ordinary citizens in the heartland feel toward Barack Obama makes us a 'mob,' then I will gladly take my spot as part of it. We are angry that the media of which you are a part has thrown its hat into the ring for Obama, openly campaigning for him when it is supposed to be neutral.
And we are mortified over the prospects of an outright Socialist being elected as President of the United States of America.
I supposed Dowd and Rich in their almighty wisdom would refer to Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Henry, and John Jay as 'a mob' because they were livid over British rule and actually defied authority on behalf of liberty.
Yes, I am proud to be associated with such mobs. And if getting angry about what is about to happen to this country is what it takes to save it from socialist tyranny, then so be it.
Signed,
A Proud Member of the Angry Mob Against Obama
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
What a bunch of sissy pants-wetters y'all are. Man up would you. If Obama wins America is still America and Americans are still Americans.
I sincerely hope you sent to them, or at least the rag they work for.
Anon--Blah, blah, blah!
Straight--I would do that if I thought it would do any good, but the NYT has ceased being a real newspaper and is nothing more than a propaganda machine for the Left.
The way this meme has unfolded over the last few days is hilarious.
A handful of people shout something rude at a rally, and the media is buzzing about a "mob." Some talking head on CNN said he was expecting violence from Republicans, like, any second now. Meanwhile, the Kosmonauts, Huff Post, Slate, etc.. are all painting some elaborate Palin + NRA = "militia" + McVeigh conspiracy theory.
But for all this talk about the "angry right," all the violence and mob mentality is coming from the left.
They're the ones who had riots at both conventions, and tried to rush the stage when Palin spoke. They're the ones making assassination fantasy films/posters/T-shirts about W, and burning him in effigy during protests in San Fran. They're the ones who bombed Marine recruiters. They're the ones writing articles in "mainstream" newspapers threatening race and class war if The One loses.
And, for that matter, the Obama campaign is the one sending action alerts to supporters telling them to get in people's faces and shout them down. Supporters, who, like good little Brownshirts, have been disrupting McCain rallies with increasing regularity.
My question is, are they just projecting their own instability like they always do? Or are they writing the narrative which they will use as an excuse for bringing in new laws?
Excellent question.
I think it's a bit of both.
We all know the extremist Leftwing is nuts through and through. This is the group that on the one hand talks about peace, love, brotherhood and sisterhood, etc, etc., and yet on the other hand exhibits the most violent propensities in public life today.
But we also know that Leftwing political causes are not above using violent means to usher in their 'new order.' Each and every time statism gained control in the form of Communism or Socialism around the world, it was ushered in with violence and bloodshed.
If they get both the White House and a veto-proof Congress, look for an all-out assault on Constitutional rights, including free speech. Obama has already done it in this campaign!
Post a Comment