posted February 17, 2011 09:20 AM            

The Middle East is on fire again, and crazy Muslims with funny names aren't helping things -- Mahmoud, ElBaradei, al-Banna, Barack ...

The major new development is that NOW liberals want to get rid of a dictator in the Middle East! Where were they when we were taking out the guy with the rape rooms?

Remember? The one who had gassed his own people, invaded his neighbors and was desperately seeking weapons of mass destruction? The guy who emerged from a spider hole looking like Charlie Sheen after a three-day bender?

Liberals couldn't have been less interested in removing Saddam Hussein and building a democracy in Iraq. So it's really adorable seeing them get all choked up about democracy now. Say, as long as liberals are all gung-ho about getting rid of out-of-touch, overbearing dictators, how about we start with Janet Napolitano?

Why did they want to keep Saddam Hussein in power again? Yes, that's right -- because he didn't have stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. Their big argument was that Saddam was five long years away from developing them.

By my calculations, that means as of March 2008, Israel would have been gone and Saddam would have been in total control of the Middle East.

Thanks, liberals!

But they were shocked by Mubarak. Liberals angrily cited the high unemployment rate in Egypt as a proof that Mubarak was a beast who must step down. Did they, by any chance, see the January employment numbers for the United States? The only employment sectors showing any growth at all are medical marijuana cashiers, Hollywood sober-living coaches and "Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark" understudies filling in for maimed cast members.

Are we one jobs report away from liberals rioting in the street?

Mubarak supported U.S. policy, used his military to fight Muslim extremists and recognized Israel's right to exist. Or as the left calls it, three strikes and you're out.

Obama was so rough on the Egyptian leader, the Saudis reportedly had to ask him not to humiliate Mubarak. (You know, like Chinese President Hu did to Obama.) In fact, Mubarak may be the only despot Obama didn't bow to.

You'd think Mubarak and Obama would be natural allies. Mubarak lives in Egypt; Obama created a pyramid scheme known as ObamaCare. To win Obama's support, maybe Mubarak should have dropped the whole "president" thing and called himself "czar." Obama seems to like czars.

Or he should have announced that Egypt was going to blow $500 billion on a high-speed bullet train nobody wanted.

You know another country where Obama wasn't interested in democracy? (I mean, besides the U.S. when it comes to health care reform?) That's right -- Iran.

Iran is ideal for democracy: It has a young, highly educated, pro-Western population, and happens to be led by a messianic, Holocaust-denying lunatic.

Liberals say: Why upset that apple cart? Much better to support tumult and riots against our allies than our sworn enemies.

When peaceful Iranian students were protesting Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's stolen election in 2009, we didn't hear a peep out of Obama. The students had good reason to believe the election had been rigged. In some pro-Ahmadinejad districts, turnout was more than 100 percent.

Wait, no, I'm sorry -- that was Al Franken's election to the U.S. Senate from Minnesota. But there was also plenty of vote-stealing in Ahmadinejad's election.

When it came to Iran, however, the flame of democracy didn't burn so brightly in liberal hearts. Even when the Iranian protester, Neda, was shot dead while standing peacefully on a street in Tehran, Obama responded by ... going out for an ice cream cone.

But a mob of Egyptians start decapitating mummies, and Obama was on the horn telling Mubarak he had to leave. Obama didn't acknowledge Neda's existence, but the moment Egyptians started rioting, Obama said, "We hear your voices."

He can hear their voices? He couldn't hear the voices of the tea partiers, and they were protesting on the streets of Washington, D.C.

But as long as Obama can hear the voices of protesters in Cairo, why doesn't he ask them what they think about ObamaCare? Maybe the Egyptians can change his mind.

The fact that liberals support democracy in Egypt, but not in Iraq or Iran, can mean only one thing: Democracy in Egypt will be bad for the United States and its allies. (As long as we're on the subject, liberals also opposed democracy in Russia, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and all the Soviet satellite states, China, Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, Grenada, Nicaragua and Minnesota.)

Democrats are all for meddling in other countries –- but only provided a change of regime will harm U.S. national security interests.

Time and again, Democrats' fecklessness has emboldened America's enemies and terrified its allies, which I believe was the actual slogan of the State Department under Jimmy Carter: "Emboldening America's enemies, and terrifying her allies, since 1976."

For 50 years, Democrats have harbored traitors, lost wars, lost continents to communism, hobnobbed with the nation's enemies, attacked America's allies, and counseled retreat and surrender. Or as they call it, "foreign policy."

posted February 17, 2011 01:45 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
...crazy Muslims with funny names aren't helping things -- Mahmoud, ElBaradei, al-Banna, Barack ...

---

seriously???? am i honestly expected to listen to anyone who reverts to such adolescent name calling?? she may have some interesting points but loses a fair amount of validity with that opening sentence....
perhaps someone should remind her that she's not in junior high...

posted February 17, 2011 03:00 PM            

So, what is it emitres? You don't think Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is crazy...or you don't think he's a muslim?

Again emitres, you don't think the guy who ran around in Iraq for years with a blindfold over his eyes and couldn't find Saddam's chemical stocks or his chemical weapons...is crazy? Or, is ElBaradei not a muslim?

Or emitres, you don't think the guy who founded the Muslim Brotherhood, the guy who had offices in Berlin and conspired with Hitler to take over the Middle East; the very same Muslim Brotherhood which spawned al-Qaeda and Hamas and whose creed is..."“Allah is our goal; the Messenger is our guide; the Koran is our law; Jihad is our means; and martyrdom in the way of Allah is our inspiration.” Creed of the Muslim Brotherhood; you don't think he was crazy...or he was not a muslim?

posted February 17, 2011 03:38 PM            

and the junior high metaphor is perfect for your particular brand of bullying humour...

posted February 17, 2011 10:52 PM            

"in other words people who present the same points without resorting to puerile caricatures deserve respect, whereas the ann coulters of the world"...katatonic

Any of these following quotes ring any bells for you katatonic?

"as for sarah palin i think she must have asteroid goofy on her midheaven"

"she's not nuts she just can't read. someone reads it to her and tells her what it says"

"how about sarah the impaler? or better yet -the alaska gasbag?"

"and of course "caribou barbie" as someone recently dubbed our favourite quitter"

posted February 20, 2011 11:18 PM            

"You started out making juvenile and puerile gaffes and whoppers...before you came to this forum"

How many forums are there at LindaLand katatonic?

"your posts say far more about you than perhaps you are aware of"...emitres

I'm an open book emitres; nothing hidden. Herein are the reasons for the posting style I adopted here.
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/003354.html

"are you sure you're just Scorpio rising?"

posted February 21, 2011 06:56 AM            

She is afraid of genuine Muslim Democracies. For no more weapons can be sold, no more oil can be looted. Mother Earth will be liberated when there is peace in West Asia.

Wait till Mars conjuncts Uranus in Aries. The biggest evil ally regime, Mr Sauds will do a humpty-dumpty.

posted February 21, 2011 09:38 AM            

You mean the martyrs who beat and raped an American newswoman iQ?

You mean the martyrs who have beaten other members of the press covering their "peaceful group meetings" iQ?

You mean the martyrs who beheaded an Egyptian mummy from the antiquity of Egyptian history iQ?

You mean the martyrs who stole the Tutankhamen statue and other Egyptian artifacts iQ?

posted February 21, 2011 06:47 PM            

however i will just cut you a break. i don't want to give you any more reason for emulating those you claim to hate, and i certainly don't want to be playing *** for tat myself.

the palin jibes were mostly because...madeira, you are so blatantly predictable to go off at the mere suggestion that she is less than perfection itself. anyone would think she was your favourite...actress!

posted February 23, 2011 01:19 PM            

wonder why such a popular figure needs to PLANT approval on her page? and that obviously leads to the next question...HOW MUCH OF HER APPROVAL IS COMING FROM THE SAME SOURCE...herself?

posted February 23, 2011 02:54 PM            

do you know what luddite means? it obviously does not apply to this writer or situation...

but you're right. there is no proof that this "lou sarah" whose friends were mostly from wasilla and who played yesgirl on sarah's page was actually "sarah louise" our pinup girl...

posted February 23, 2011 03:52 PM            

Second, anyone can say they're from anywhere...like here for instance and some do.

Third, someone hawking a book isn't a reliable source of dirt on someone else. Sensationalism is the order of the day...and if something nasty isn't said to stir up the leftist hate mongers then none of the little leftist kiddies would borrow the money from their parents to buy the book.

Lastly, you're wrong about the flake author of the fairy tale in question, James Nixon.

"do you know what luddite means? it obviously does not apply to this writer or situation..."...katatonic

"James reckons he's had his eyes glued to a computer screen since some time in the late ’90s. Half-geek, half-Luddite, all nerd, he mixes his enthusiasm for all things IT with a healthy disdain for razor blades and a smattering of eco-angst… although another bout of lumbago might just tempt him to trade his wind-up gramophone for an iPod after all.

http://www.thinq.co.uk/staff/James/#ixzz1EohT7KvA

posted February 23, 2011 05:17 PM            

it's okay with you though that people who get PAID to spew nastiness, like coulter, imply and outright assert that obama is a muslim...with no proof whatsoever

nor does the fact that the man doesn't shave qualify him as a luddite.... a person who detests modern technology. i somehow don't place razor blades in that category, and plenty of high tech folk love hi-fi records too.

i see you have thoroughly checked out the author of the piece...though he was not the entity who brought OUT the story, claiming to have traced LOU SARAH from an email address that belongs to none other than your sweetheart sal.

posted February 24, 2011 08:33 AM            

Oh, btw, it was Nixon himself who proclaimed himself a Luddite. Are you now going to claim your flimsy source for your nonsense is a liar?

P.S.....I never said O'Bomber wasn't born in the United States. However it is more than strange that O'Bomber has spent more than a million dollars in attorney fees to keep his long form birth certificate, university records and passport records...Secret.

posted February 24, 2011 09:21 AM            

Da book touted to destroy Palin's credibility...and political future is so stuffed with lies, unsourced accusations and lack of proof that no publisher dares publish it.

So, the author(s) leaked it to the little creep who rented the house next door to the Palins in Alaska who was attempting to spy on them for material for his own drivel hit piece book.

"Palin Derangement Syndrome" is alive and well on the radical far left.

If Sarah Palin was crazy, incompetent, bungling, seditious, immoral and a moron...as the radical far left claims...then, they would be using all their efforts to get Sarah Palin nominated as a candidate for Prez. After all, such a candidate would be easy to defeat.

But no, the radical far left fears Sarah Palin above all other possible candidates and that's the reason they have pulled out all the stops to smear her....including the "unpublished" tissue of lies hit book by a former employee.

Trouble in Paradise: Bailey and Company Blame Creepy Joe for Leaking Manuscript http://conservatives4palin.com/tag/frank-bailey-manuscript

posted February 26, 2011 12:43 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
I'm an open book emitres; nothing hidden. Herein are the reasons for the posting style I adopted here.
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/003354.html

---

jwhop all i see is you making the ACTIVE choice to behave in a manner which is counterproductive to your intelligence - because i do believe that you are really quite intelligent... the link you provided just reinforces what i said before - you retaliate in some of the most negative ways - name calling, pseudo racial slurs... honestly... and i am in no way suggesting that you are alone in this but - but - there are times when someone like me could be interested in hearing more of what you had to say if you would simply present it in a less confrontional way...
i stand by my intial comment - whoever wrote the opening post ( in this case you ) needs to be reminded that this isn't junior high... try to rise above that sort of thing...