Left Wing Liberals Need To Watch Steps on Alito

Good choice Mr. President!

In 1990 there was not a single vote of opposition to Samuel Alito for the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That means not a SINGLE left wing moonbat including Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and others in office at the time had any qualms about his qualifications as a jurist.

So the question is now how much opposition will they mount and will it be the same old press releases about racism, sexism and homophobia simply with the name changed to the current nominee. And why, if he is as bad as liberals are sure to try and paint him didn’t they vote every one of their fellow travelers that failed to stop his nomination in 1990 out of office?

Answer: Because this isn’t about the truth or the facts it’s simply about power.

Difference Between Republicans And Democrats

Generally speaking in the Republican Party if you are even accused of a crime you have to step down from your post or resign (Tom Delay & Scooter Libby). An actual conviction and finding of wrongdoing need not apply.

But for Democrats in the spot light convictions and even admissions to committing crimes (Bill Clinton) are called attacks by the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy and you are allowed to carry on. And this continues today with former D.C. Mayor Marion Barry pleading guilty to failing to file his income taxes. Despite this crime he apparently will be allowed to continue serving in his possition on the city council.

Why? Come on. You know why! Because he’s a Democrat and when you’re a Democrat it’s different!

Where’s the outrage? Where’s the calls for Mr. Barry to step aside from the left? Please! Someone show me!

And THEY Accuse Conservatives Of Being Evil?

Clinton blood scandal exposed in new film
Documentary tying Arkansas guv to spread of AIDS to screen in Hollywood next week
Posted: October 30, 2005
10:10 p.m. Eastern

By Joseph Farah
? 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

WASHINGTON ? A documentary seven years in the making tying Bill Clinton to an Arkansas prison blood scandal that spread AIDS to thousands around the world is set to screen in Hollywood next week ? renewing controversy about the long-forgotten story.

(Read More!)

Truly a disturbing rehash of a scandal I had personally forgotten about. And liberals have the gall to call conservatives evil and accuse us of spreading AIDS (usually by accusing us of not spending enough money to combat it) and how all we are interested in is the almighty dollar?

Hypocrisy runs more and more rampant each and every day with these brianiacs.

Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broaddrick to Tour Clinton Library

Press Release Follows

Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broaddrick to Tour Clinton Library

Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) October 12, 2005 — Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey will visit the William J. Clinton Presidential Library and Museum later this month to draw attention to the former president’s treatment of women. They will be accompanied on the tour by attorney and author Candice E. Jackson.

Broaddrick and Willey have both accused Clinton of assaulting them. Broaddrick alleges that then-Governor Clinton raped her during a conference in Little Rock in 1978, and Willey says that Clinton sexually assaulted her when she worked in the White House in 1993. Both also charge that Clinton’s inner circle — including wife Hillary Rodham Clinton — subsequently attempted to pressure and intimidate them into silence.

“Juanita, Kathleen, and I will be touring the Clinton Library to see firsthand how it portrays Bill and Hillary Clinton’s treatment of women,” says Jackson, an outspoken feminist and author of “Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine” (World Ahead Publishing; hardcover $25.95; ISBN 0974670138). “The Clintons have crafted a public image of supporting women?s rights, and yet they have both used their power to intimidate and attack women whom they viewed as politically inconvenient.”

Willey claims she was subjected to a series of physical and verbal threats intended to pressure her to keep the assault in the Oval Office secret, and Broaddrick says three weeks after being raped she was approached at an event by a forceful Hillary who thanked her for “everything that you do” for Bill. Jackson notes that many other women have also reported similar treatment at the hands of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Broaddrick, Willey, and Jackson plan to visit the Clinton Library on October 26.

About World Ahead Publishing:
Headquartered in Los Angeles, World Ahead is the West Coast’s premier publisher of conservative and libertarian books, including the recently released “Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed” by Katharine DeBrecht and the forthcoming “Global Deception: The UN’s Stealth Assault on America’s Freedom” by Joe Klein. Visit http://www.worldahead.com to learn more.

Contact Information:
To interview Candice E. Jackson, contact Special Guests at (630) 848-0750.

# # #

Press Contact: Jerry McGlothlin
Company Name: WORLD AHEAD PUBLISHING
Email: jerry@specialguests.com
Phone: 630-848-0750
Website:

Being “Divisive” Is Not ALWAYS Bad

“I think that the Republican Party fairly recently has been taken over by the Christian conservatives, by the Christian right,” he said in an interview. “I don’t think that this is a permanent condition, but I think this has happened, and that it’s divisive for the country.” - Former Sen. John Danforth

To which I respond as follows:
John, yes the Republican party is the last vestige of the two major political parties for those of religion. One needs only look at poll after poll about how dissimilar Republicans and Democrats are in their religious beliefs to understand this. But to say that “Christian conservatives” have taken over the party is ignorant. It was the Democratic Party that for years has shunned those of faith by continuing to promote a Godless state and side with organizations such as the ACLU in this battle. No, Mr. Danforth, Christians did not take over the party. They were forced into it by the left wing.

And yes, it IS divisive. It draws the battle lines between those of faith that are intelligent enough to actually understand that our founding fathers formed this nation based upon a belief in God and those that wouldn’t know the Declaration of Independence and the constitution if they hit them in the face. Those later seek to establish a Godless state where morality is relative similar to what was done in the former Soviet Union. Because only once they eliminate God from the foundation of this country can they convince people that they should receive their rights from the state rather than from God as we currently do.

This division is not bad. It is a battle that anyone of faith and with an understanding of the founding of this country should welcome. As for you Mr. Danforth, I can see that you are nothing more than a “moderate” Republican at best unsure of where you should stand by making such a statement. And until you realize the truth you are just as great of an enemy to this Republic as the Socialists and the Communists trying to destroy her from within.

URGENT! Liberalism Assaulting Kindergarten Students

Press Release Follows:

Liberals: OK for Kindergarten to Read Gay Marriage Book

Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) October 4, 2005 — The author of a conservative children’s book is condemning published reports that a public school in Lexington, Massachusetts, is forcing its kindergarten students to read a book promoting gay marriage. Katharine DeBrecht, the author of “Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed” (Kids Ahead; hardcover $15.95; ISBN 0976726904), criticized the school and asked why the very same liberals who have vocally attacked her book and called her a “Nazi” have been so silent in this case.

Reports recently surfaced that Estabrook School mandated that all kindergarteners read “Who’s in a Family,” a picture book that endorses the controversial topic of gay marriage, and invited gay parents to come into class to talk to the young children about the topic. The story came to light when David and Tonia Parker — two parents who ironically support gay marriage but do not want their son exposed to the topic — sought and failed to get their child exempted from the controversial curriculum. Their protests have not only fallen on deaf ears, but the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Massachusetts has intoned that it supports the school’s decision to have five-year-olds learn about homosexuality over their parents’ objections.

“This is yet another example of liberals bringing their ideological agenda into our classrooms,” says DeBrecht. “It is bad enough that a public school would seek to expose young children to an issue like gay marriage in the first place, but it is even more outrageous that they would ignore the request of parents who want to shield their kids from this topic.”

DeBrecht added that liberal children’s books have long been finding their way into our nation’s schools. Another pro-gay marriage book, “King & King,” has also turned up in many classrooms across America, as has the picture book “Rainbow Fish,” which tells a socialist story of a beautiful fish that is hectored into giving away his shiny scales.

“It’s ironic that liberals have so vehemently objected to parents acquiring my book, but we?ve heard no outcry against the Lexington kindergarten reading list,” notes DeBrecht, whose book tells the story of two brothers who open a lemonade stand only to have cartoon look-alikes of Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy tax away their profits and outlaw sugary drinks.

Left-wing blogger and pro-gay marriage pundit Andrew Sullivan said “Help! Mom! There Are Liberals Under My Bed” invoked memories of Chinese dictator Mao Tse-Tung. Alan Colmes, co-host of Fox’s Hannity & Colmes, called DeBrecht’s book “brainwashing.” MSNBC host Ron Reagan mused that he should write his own kid?s book depicting conservatives as “hat[ing] black people.” The Democratic Underground website listed DeBrecht on their “Top 10 Conservative Idiots” list. And Daily Kos, the most trafficked left-wing blog, likened the book to Nazi propaganda.

“Apparently liberals are happy to see young kids exposed to political issues, just as long as it’s from a left-wing perspective,” adds DeBrecht, who is a mother of three. “And the ACLU has shown it is willing to even go one step further and fight to support a public school’s right to indoctrinate. Conservative parents have no choice but to make sure their kids have a chance to hear about traditional values, because it surely will not happen in school.”

About Kids Ahead:
Kids Ahead is an imprint of Los Angeles-based World Ahead Publishing, the West Coast’s premier publisher of conservative and libertarian books. To learn more, visit www.worldahead.com.

Contact Information:
To interview author Katharine DeBrecht, contact Special Guests at (630) 848-0750.

# # #

Press Contact: Jerry McGlothlin with Special Guests
Company Name: WORLD AHEAD PUBLISHING
Email: jerry@specialguests.com
Phone: 630-848-0750
Website: http://www.worldahead.com

College Says “Obviously, we cannot support guns”

When Shoreline Community College posted a doctored image of Ward Churchill where the gun toting left wing, anti-American loon was changed to take the gun out, many conservatives have focused on the removal of the gun to show how the left continually tries to repaint their image and the image of their political opponents. This comes just days after USA today was caught doctoring a photo of Condoleezza Rice.

But the BIGGER story here is what the University?s actual response was. That response?

“Obviously, we cannot support guns, so it was taken out” - Judy Yu, SCC’s director of communications

What do you mean “obviously” Judy?

This is yet another example of an institution of higher learning that doesn’t apparently believe in America teaching our children about America. And I quote “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”.

Saying that “Obviously, we cannot support guns” is saying “Obviously we cannot support the Constitution”. And people pay good money for this tripe. No wonder John Kerry and other left wing anti-American candidates get 30 to 50% of the popular vote in elections with this kind of lame brain rhetoric being drilled into the minds of the public for decades!

I Don’t Want To FIght You … But I Will

I don’t want to have to stand up with millions of other conservatives against you again Mr. President should you decide to try another stealth nominee for the Supreme Court with a vacant record on qualifications based on your pleads for “trust”. But I will. Make no mistake about it Mr. President.

I will fight you tooth and nail should the next nominee be someone suspiciously unqualified who cannot even be counted upon to interpret the Constitution as it is written. We conservatives won. And we are going to start acting like winners Mr. President. We don’t care if it means we have to fight against the screeching of the left wing who want to insert this or that right into the Constitution to satisfy their constituents and their me centered culture and usurp the correct process for actually changing what the Constitution says (because they know that they won’t succeed).

You are either with us or you are against us.

And here’s a hint - be against us at your own risk. If you think the yelling, barking moonbats on the left are a problem be thankful they are all bark and no bite. We on the other hand have teeth and don’t bark a whole lot.

Libby Indictment - Long Winded But Short On Substance

pg 8, 21 says that Libby was told that Novak had information about Wilson’s wife and would be writing an article about Valerie Plame and her involvement with the CIA and getting her husband sent to Niger (source)

Count 1 of the indictment claims that Libby obstructed the grand jury by not being truthful about when he learned about who Valerie Plame was but the indictment does not address the issue of whether this was material to the issue which was who leaked Valerie Plame’s name.

Count 2 of the indictment claims that Libby lied when he made misstatements to Tim Russert but does not address if there was an actual crime committed by Libby (ie that he leaked the name of an undercover agent)

Count 3 of the indictment claims that Libby lied to Timothy Cooper about Reporters telling the white house that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA. Which was actually true … reporters were indeed coming to the white house with that information so this count makes little sense. (read the indictment for info)

Count 4 of the indictment is a confusing array of claims that Libby lied to the Grand Jury about the conversation cited in count 2 but once again no evidence that Libby was the source of Valerie Plame’s name.

Count 5 of the indictment is a claim that Libby lied to the Grand Jury about the statements in Count 3.

But the question remains, was there a crime in the first place.

And there is something even more troubling. Page 3 says only that Valerie Plame’s status was classified and that her status of employment with the CIA was “not common knowledge” outside of the intelligence community.

“Not common knowledge”? Shouldn’t that say “not at all known”? “Not common knowledge” indicates that someone, somewhere outside of intelligence knew about her and what she did. And if that is true the question still remains as to who leaked her name and was she in fact a deep cover operative which would have made disclosing her identity a crime.

These answers are completely vacant from the indictment against Scooter Libby but are material parts of this case that one would think would need to be looked into.

Maybe it will ultimately be shown that Libby committed some crime here but the evidence is still lacking on that conclusion.

Liberals are salivating over this (mostly without reading the indictment). And they are now equating “indictment” with “guilty”. Of course they have to because otherwise they don’t have their scalp that they have been searching for ever since Bill Clinton got up and admitted that he perjured himself before the grand jury and incited others to commit a conspiracy to cover-up his affair with Lewinski.

If Libby is actually guilty of something he should be punished. But only after a trial and being found guilty. And that is more intellectual honesty that you will ever hear from the rank and file liberals who still defend Bill Clinton over his own self admitted act of perjury.

Secrecy? WHAT SECRECY?!?!?!?!?!!

A person outside the legal profession familiar with recent developments in the case said Thursday night that Rove’s team does not believe he is out of legal jeopardy yet but likely would be spared bad news Friday when the White House fears the first indictments will be issued.

Fitzgerald signaled Thursday he might keep Rove under continuing investigation, sparing him from immediate charges, the person said, speaking only on condition of anonymity because of the secrecy of the grand jury probe. - Fox News

If the grand jury probe is so “secret” then where does this information come from and why is someone talking about it? Seems like there is some confusion about what the term “secrecy” means here by those involved with and following the case. Someone get these people a dictionary.