Archive for April 29th, 2010
What if Bush had done this?
What would the Left have said about Bush if he had cried at a white person's funeral, after having skipped a high profile black's funeral a few weeks before -- TO PLAY GOLF?
Consider an alternate dimension.
Same Earth, with a relative parallel history, save for the fact that, somehow, George W. Bush is still president today, April 29th, 2010.
On this parallel Earth, a horrific plane crash in Botswana earlier in the month took the lives of many black dignitaries, leaders, and other luminaries. Nelson Mandela, the former president of South Africa, was on board, along with prominent black military figures such as Colin Powell. Aretha Franklin was on the flight, sitting next to Mandela, wearing a giant hat of some kind, with a bow bigger than a propeller. Kanye West was apparently flying the plane, though no one seems to miss him.
Everyone on board — all black — perished in this horrific crash.
When funerals in South Africa were arranged, President Bush decided he didn’t much feel like going — because it was “just some black people that died. No big deal”.
So, the White House made up a cockamamie excuse about “the air being too dusty to fly Air Force One to South Africa”.
The South African embassy in Washington held a service on the day of Mandela’s funeral, and invited the President, since he would still be in Washington that day. Bush declined the invite, and also refused to seek out a South African church somewhere in the nation — accessible by motorcade, in case it was still too dusty to fly — where he could attend a service to pay his respects at a virtual funeral for Mandela.
Instead, Bush went golfing that day.
“Screw ‘em,” was an apparent quote overheard by Henry Gates, in Cambridge, whose practiced hearing can detect slights against blacks hundreds of miles away. Like Oprah hearing a bag of Doritos opened in Texas from her penthouse in Chicago.
Maureen Dowd at the New York Times heard Bush, too, and added an (implied) “boy” to the end of Bush’s remark.
Several weeks later, famous wealthy white person Warren Buffett dies suddenly and receives a high profile funeral.
Not only does Bush attend, but he openly weeps during the service. Laura Bush sits next to him, demure and peaceful in a black dress and pearls.
Somewhere in New York, Al Sharpton grabs a bull horn and rallies his Race Industry troops to launch major protests in every urban enclave Democrats hold — because Bush refused to go to the funeral of prominent blacks killed in that plane crash…and even more insultingly, PLAYED GOLF instead of honoring them…but he cried openly during the funeral of a white person.
RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST!
**************************************
Now, nobody here is saying it’s wrong for Obama to cry at a funeral. We actually think more of him seeing what was obviously real emotion. It was 100% appropriate for the President of the United States to attend the funeral of Dorothy Height — who was not only a civil rights icon, but one of the sharpest, sassiest, most interesting women in Democrat politics for decades. She will indeed be missed.
But, clearly, in an alternate universe where Bush would have treated blacks like Mandela the way Obama treated whites like the Polish president…and where Bush would have skipped a black leader’s funeral to play golf…and where Bush would have then cried at a white person’s funeral, after having so glaringly ignored a prominent black’s, the usual Race Industry gang of Al Sharpton/Henry Gates/Jesse Jackson/James Clyburne/John Lewis/Spike Lee/Eric Holder and all the rest would have been having near epileptic fits of apoplectic outrage.
They’d be rolling around in the streets, foaming at the mouth, demanding Bush’s immediate resignation.
“He played golf instead of going to the funeral!”
“He said it was too dusty to fly, my ass!”
“Then he done sat there there, all weepy-eyed, ’cause some white guy died, but he couldn’t go to Mandela’s funeral? NELSON MANDELA. Oh, that’s just cold. That’s racism right there, that’s what that is. Stone cold racism!”
Do you think the Left, and its propaganda arm in the MSM, would have given Bush a pass for this?
Conservatives4Palin announce meet-up in San Diego, July 9-11 weekend
We really like the folks over at Conservatives4Palin, and are glad to see them organizing a “meet-up” event, where Palin supporters will gather in July.
Have to be honest and say we were pulling for Chicago to win in their “where shall we have this” poll, because we sure would have liked to see everyone here — and would have been happy to show folks around our city. We could have chartered a bus and taken a tour of the Southside, which was Obama’s state senate district, before he became a US Senator and did even less to make any of it less terrible.
That’s a fun tour, let us assure you, but illustrative of what good Hope and Change did anyone in this city. Even less than what it’s done for the entire country in the Golden Age of Hope and Change.
Anyway, there’s talk of C4P doing another event here in Chicago in October, which we’d definitely love to be a part of.
Here’s hoping.
Question: Could DEMOCRATS end up taking down Charlie Crist, and exposing his hypocrisy and Green Iguana shenanigans?
"Hey stud. Sweet Speedo. Buy you a daquiri? Strawberry, or Razzleberry?"
Here’s a brief thought we just had: if Charlie Crist, as an Independent, pushes lackluster Democrat candidate Meeks into third place in the Florida Senate race, as suspected, then will Democrats take Crist down themselves, Eric Massa-style?
We got the idea when we heard that Crist was trying desperately to get in touch with Rahm Emanuel at the White House, through intermediaries, but Rahm wouldn’t take the call (“Tell him I’m watching Justin Beiber on Youtube and will call him back, at like, never”).
We wondered: why WOULDN’T Emanuel take that call?
Why WOULDN’T he help Crist run as an Independent if that would hurt Marco Rubio and help the Democrats’ chances of picking up that Senate seat?
Unless, Rahm’s numbers show Crist hurts Meeks more than Rubio.
In which case, we wonder how long before Rahm takes Crist down to increase Meeks’ odds for victory.
Question: Has anyone ever proposed seizing Mexico's Gulf oil to pay for all of the Mexican citizens in the US illegally?
What’s fascinating to us about the whole illegal alien situation with Mexico is that there seems to be absolutely no shame whatsoever in Mexico City that the country is so bad that millions of its people break the law to get away from it.
These are unskilled individuals, and more than a few criminals, Mexico does not want. Hence the lack of tears shed for their flight from the country.
They’re purging those they don’t want anymore, and resist every effort the United States makes in stemming this tide and sending them back.
Though we know this would never happen, we’d love to see Mexico’s response to a serious effort to seize Mexican oil wells in the Gulf as compensation for the millions, if not billions, that have spent either trying to control America’s borders or providing illegal Mexican aliens with health and public services once they cross into the US.
If Mexico faced a serious financial penalty for allowing its unwanted citizens to illegally enter and take root in the US, we bet Mexico would, suddenly, MAGICALLY, stop these people from crossing into the US illegally.
Why doesn’t the US act like the global power it is, and teach Mexico there are consequences for Mexico City’s deliberate purging of its unwanted across the US border?
Take that oil, and watch Mexico take action against these illegal aliens.
Imagine that.
RESEARCH: Do Democrats only put up weak resistance to closeted gay Republicans running for office (in hopes they can blackmail them when in office, so it's like Democrats picking up that seat anyway)?
Florida's orange governor, Charlie Crist, tricked into believing Jason Wetherington was turned into a conch shell. By magic. "Curse you, Hogwarts, and all those wizards at Universal Orlando!".
Crist, after realizing the thing he was blowing...into...was not a 21 year old man turned into a conch shell.
Here’s something that occurred to us, as a hypothesis, that we’d love to get some research done on.
We had the idea when seeing a news clip from 2006 talking about Florida’s current orange Governor, Charlie Crist, back when he was Attorney General running to succeed Jeb Bush. Many in Florida — and all in the political world — knew Crist was gay, but the MSM had no interest in reporting on this, and in fact did a big Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous spread on Crist when he had his Liza Minnelli/David Gest inspired wedding to fake-beard-and-novelty-products-heiress Carole Rome. If there was a movie made about this marriage, it would star Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. With costumes done by the ghost of Adrian.
We don’t remember Democrats putting up all that much of a fight against Crist in that Governor’s race.
We also never see Democrats put up all that much of a fight against Lindsey Graham in South Carolina.
There are races across the country where Democrats put up joke candidates against gay, closeted Republicans who — if outed — would most surely lose their elections.
Why do Democrats do that?
Is it because having a gay, closeted Republican like Crist or Graham in office is “just as good” as having a Democrat in that seat, since the DNC knows it can just blackmail these men into doing whatever they want anyway…and, when the time comes and the Dems have groomed a decent candidate to unseat this person, they know they can take him down whenever they like anyway.
Are closeted, gay Republicans really, at the end of the day, just Democrat puppets?
Can we look back on the political careers of people like Charlie Crist, Lindsey Graham, Aaron Schock, Larry Craig, Mark Foley, and other gay Republicans in state and national office and see just how much of a fight the DNC waged against their campaigns…and how often, when installed in office, these guys buckled to pressure (real or implied) and sided with Democrats against Republican or constituent interests?
Our thinking on this is that Independents should take these guys down, because the GOP and DNC are content to use them for various purposes — but having men so easily blackmailed in office doesn’t do a lick of good for the people who elect them.
If they are just going to be puppets to the DNC, but they are running as Republicans, then they are lying to their voters and should not be allowed to get away with this scam.
David "Popcorn" Kernell Trial Watch: Likely Verdict Today
Please add the latest development’s to Obama operative David “Popcorn” Kernell’s trial to this thread.
As of about 2pm CST on 4/29/10, the jury’s announced it’s reached a partial verdict, but is still deadlocked on the question of identity theft. There’s also word some jurors have had trouble paying attention and following directions.
This jives, actually, with what courtroom followers we know speculated on, in terms of why the jury was out for two days with this case: there is probably a lone holdout on all of the counts, who does not want to convict Kernell.
The identity theft count is very interesting to us, to be the stumbling block, because we also have heard speculation that if Kernell is convicted of identity theft that the Palin family will have recourse to sue the Kernell family for monetary damages in civil court over this. Isn’t that what happens if someone is convicted of stealing your identity — that you then have the option of recouping personal damages from that theft?
Perhaps an Obama operative on the jury is doing his or her level best to protect Popcorn, and his disgraceful father, Mike Kernell, from financial ruin over all of this.
Chime in — why is identity theft the stumbling block here, in your opinion?
What do you think the “partial verdict reached” and the complaints about some jurors not following instructions means to this case?
*******************
UPDATE:
Here’s a recap of the charges Popcorn faces:
- Charges, possible sentenceCount one: identity theft
Maximum 5 years in prison
$250,000 fine
3 years supervised release - Count two: wire fraud
Maximum 20 years in prison
$250,000 fine
5 years supervised release - Count three: unlawful computer access
Maximum 5 years in prison
$250,000 fine
3 years supervised release
Lesser included misdemeanor offense on count 3 carries a maximum of 1 year in prison - Count four: obstruction of justice
Maximum 20 years in prison
$250,000 fine
5 years supervised release
What this doesn’t list are the MINIMUM sentences.
Can someone dig those up?
We’re betting whatever he’s convicted of, Eric Holder’s Justice Department will see to it that he receives the low-end of all of these.
**********************
Just for fun, we can’t help thinking about what it means that this jury took three days to decide this case.
We’ll never know what went on in that room, and we’ve only personally seen a trial in person once, and that was Jim Trafficant’s corruption trial in Cleveland a decade ago. The jury in that case didn’t seem to take all that long to convict him, but the entire trial was a farce. The days we were able to observe, the Judge seemed to be playing movies in her head, with the prosecution repeatedly trying to keep Trafficant from offering up all manner of bizarre explanations for his crimes. The Judge essentially said, at one point, “Just let him talk and have his say so we can get this moving”.
It felt like they just ran through the motions, with everyone knowing he was going to be convicted.
The jurors in that case seemed like they were enjoying being in the air conditioning of the court room, that they liked the snacks that were provided, and they enjoyed sitting up in that booth judging someone. We remember being surprised they didn’t take longer to deliberate, because we thought of the Designing Women episode “Miss Trial” and remembered the Julia Sugarbaker riff about how jurors love eating fried cheese and think being sequestered in a cheap motel is “the nicest place they have been in a while”.
So, we wonder if the jury in Kernell’s case is just milking the fun of not being at work, of eating snacks, ordering sandwiches in (for FREE!), and getting $12/hour in a lousy economy to “be important” for a few days.
We’ve seen union members work: what could take them two hours to do ends up being a two day project, because they don’t want “to waste it”.
We think Kernell will end up being guilty of something, though, because if they were going to acquit him of everything, they might have gotten away with one day of sandwich eating at court expense, but we doubt it would have stretched into three days of deliberation.
Even the worst of the cheese-eaters would have a hard time stalling a verdict if it was a cut and dry acquittal…just as the Trafficant jurors couldn’t spend a week pondering his fate, when he was clearly guilty.
Our best guess is that he’s going to be convicted of two of the counts against him.
We think it’s going to be a compromise verdict, with the two worst counts tossed out, and conviction on the two lesser offenses.
That means “unlawful computer access” and “identity theft” will be the two he goes down for — since they have maximum sentences of 5 years each, knocking out the chance for the judge to send him to jail for 20 years for the obstruction of justice and wire fraud counts.
We can’t imagine him NOT being convicted of “unlawful computer access”. That seems like a no-brainer.
We also bet the sticking point with “identity theft” is that one juror is insisting that Kernell did not pose as Palin…either in drag with glasses and a red suit, or as Palin on the Internet, pretending to be her. So, that’s why the jury asked for the actual statutes on “identity theft” again, because this person is the lone holdout who does not understand what “identity theft” really is. That person probably thinks it’s like when Faith used a magic spell to swap bodies with Buffy in Season Five, “and done stole her identity thing”.
Since Popcorn didn’t use magic to become Palin, possibly this jury is cornfused about it all.
Those requested statutes should clear that up…after the foreman reads them all out loud a few more times. It feels like that juror’s going to eventually give in on this, and then the full verdict can be released.
All of this is speculation and conjecture — and, seemingly, just an excuse to work in the Buffy reference of the day.
Whatever happened to Jason Wetherington — the 21 year old who said in 2006 he slept with Charlie Crist?
The GOP has been protecting Charlie Crist for years.
Watch the video above from 2006.
It’s from before Crist ran for Governor, when the Mark Foley scandal was cresting. In this report, it says conservative Christian groups were part of the conspiracy to protect Crist, because Crist was willing to make anti-gay remarks and push anti-gay policy…so long as he got to date 21 year old men, be as hypocritical as possible, and remain as orange as he wanna be.
We talk repeatedly about Democrats knowing who all the gay Republicans are — including the three in Illinois’ Congressional delegation, Lindsey Graham in South Carolina, and others at large (and in charge). Democrats blackmail these closet cases into backing bad legislation, trading their submission for secret-keeping.
Republicans, ALSO, know who all these closet cases are, and keep their secrets because, as this video illustrates, some of these guys can be used to attack gays as proxies for the far Right. Who better to stick it to gays than closet cases, whom Democrats are also using, and whom Democrats won’t out or expose as hypocrites because they are so useful as pawns?
These guys are pawns to just about everyone it seems.
And, we truly believe, guys like Crist love every minute of that. There are indeed sexual fetishists who are thrilled to be bossed around, degraded, humiliated, threatened, and subjugated like this. It seems to be Charlie Crist’s thing.
Every time we bring up Crist, or closet cases like Graham, or Aaron Schock in Peoria, we get pushback from some of you out there who say “it’s nobody’s business if they are gay”.
That would be true if these guys were all accountants.
It would be true if they were doctors.
It would be true if they were plumbers, go-go dancers, librarians, basketball players, or leprechauns.
BUT — and it’s not the kind of delicious 21 year old Speedo-clad butt Crist hungers for — it very much matters that these guys are secretly gay when BOTH PARTIES blackmail and p-own them at their leisure.
It is a VERY SERIOUS matter that the people of a state elect someone to office, send that person to the Governor’s mansion or to Washington, and have no idea that man will not represent his constituents’ best interests, but instead will be perpetually beholden to whomever is blackmailing him that day.
This is a massive and coordinated fraud of the public’s trust, and the usurpation of our constitutional rights for legal representation in government.
Crist, Graham, Schock, and others don’t have an (R) after their names, in actual practice, because they are not really beholden to a party…but to whomever has the most goods on them, who threatens to do the worst to them by revealing what they know, and who comes into their offices and tells them what to do that day — lest they be exposed for who they really are, and how many himbo eruptions could plague them if they ever stopped doing what they are told.
We will always maintain these men need to be dragged out of the closet and into the sunlight, because allowing them to continue to be controlled by blackmailers like this means the people they represent are not being listened to, their best interests are not being considered, and these men are just puppets to whomever finds the most Jason Weatheringtons in their lives.
The same is true for anyone else in government with some secret they keep — a secret powerful people use to get them to do their bidding.
Expose them all.
Reveal everything.
Stop the blackmailing.
Elect people to office who stand tall and proud in the light of day with nothing to hide, no secrets to keep, no vulnerabilities and liabilities.
