You'll recall that less than a week ago the travesty which passes for comedy on Fox called 'Family Guy' decided to fall in line behind every other leftist in the country and address a very important political issue head on. Of course I am speaking of Sarah Palin's son Trig, who happens to live with Down Syndrome. Yes, thank G_d we have such brave souls on the left who are willing to address the really important issues of the day, like making fun of a political opponents child who is mentally handicapped. The episode in question portrays one of the main characters, Chris, dating a girl who is revealed to have down syndrome. While revealing details about herself, she drops this line:
"My dad's an accountant, and my mom's the former governor of Alaska."This is what passes as humor from the cesspool known as Hollyweird. Sarah Palin for her part was rightfully outraged:
She said she was too ticked off to respond personally --"felt like another kick in the gut," she said -- so on Palin's Facebook page her daughter Bristol said, in part, "People with special needs face challenges that many of us will never confront, and yet they are some of the kindest and most loving people you'll ever meet. Their lives are difficult enough as it is, so why would anyone want to make their lives more difficult by mocking them?"There appeared to be the end. A prepubescent boy's sense of humor which had been fashioned into a 'sitcom' takes a stab at a former candidate for Vice President's mentally handicapped son. The former candidate responds, rightfully so. Thus ends the saga, right?
Wrong. Enter Andrea Friedman, an accomplished actress who also lives with down syndrome. Not content sitting by and allowing this disgraceful episode to pass by, she pens a response to Palin's outrage calling the joke "sarcasm," read below:
"I guess former Governor Palin does not have a sense of humor. I thought the line "I am the daughter of the former governor of Alaska" was very funny. I think the word is "sarcasm".
In my family we think laughing is good. My parents raised me to have a sense of humor and to live a normal life. My mother did not carry me around under her arm like a loaf of French bread the way former Governor Palin carries her son Trig around looking for sympathy and votes."
"Hey, look! It's okay for Andrea to make fun, cause she's handicapped, too! We did it, we're completely covered on this one! If the right comes back at us, we'll accuse them of hating the handicapped!"
Hey Andrea, quit being a tool. You can have any opinion you want, but do you really think that you are doing yourself or any other person with down syndrome favors by ripping on an infant who happens to have down syndrome? Really?! If you really cared about the advancement of people with down syndrome, you'd be railing against the idea of anyone making fun of any person who has down syndrome for any reason. Instead you're falling in line with all the other lefties justifying the behavior because you disagree with Palin's politics. It's this mentality which allows outbursts like Rahm Emanuel's to be far too commonplace in our society. Shame on you.
What those the left do not seem to comprehend is that it's not okay to make fun of a minor person who has no control over their circumstances. In this case, Trig does not have the ability to control what his mother does with her life, nor what she does with him, nor does he have the ability to control his mental handicap. And for G_d's sake, the kid is a MINOR. You want to make fun of a candidate, go for it. They chose the public life and sought out all the attention it brings, both good and bad. But leave the kids out of it. Of course we on the right have no room to talk, since we have been relentlessly bashing Frances Quinn Hunter, ever since we found out she was the daughter of John Edwards. Oh wait, that's right, we haven't.
Let's go ahead and dispell the notion that Sarah Palin is using Trig to 'get votes.' Can anyone help me out here? What office is it that Palin is seeking? Anyone? That's right, she's not. She's a private citizen. Regardless, in at least one blog, Andrea Freidman's response was paired with this photograph. Based on the age of Trig in the photo, it's obvious that the picture was taken during a book signing stop, and NOT a campaign rally. So nice try on the justification there, but all the left has proven, once again, is that they have no respect for life, whatsoever. They consider Trig Palin a post cervical fetus, who should have been aborted.
You want to hurl insults at a public figure, go for it. You want to make fun of a person seeking public office, it's your right. You want to make fart jokes and idolize Noam Chomsky and call it great TV, you have that right under the First Amendment. You also have the right to belittle a little boy with down syndrome because you disagree with the politics of his mother. That doesn't make it right and you should have more class, but then again, this is the left we're talking about.
"Hey! While we're out bashing a mentally handicapped minor child, let's revive the original birther movement and question Trig's maternity!!! ALRIGHT!
Damn, you guys on the left really know how to party. All that's left is to drag out Andrew Sullivan's lame ass...
-UPDATE
And right on cue...
Under current law, foreign nationals cannot donate to political candidates or pay for campaign ads. Concerns that other countries might try to influence American elections are not merely academic. In the late 1990s the Justice Department and congressional investigators uncovered efforts by foreign donors to infiltrate the American political system through donations to the Democratic Party under Bill Clinton. Among those implicated was Johnny Chung, a Clinton fund-raiser who told Federal investigators that a large part of the nearly $100,000 he gave the Democrats in the 1996 campaign came from China. According to published reports, Democrats had to return another $1.6 million brought in by another prominent Clinton money man, John Huang, after questions were raised about the source of the funds.So, you're saying that the only ones to ever exploit the system in place by accepting donations from foreign companies was the Democrats?! Say it ain't so! Anyhoo, looks as though the party of law breakers found another loophole to exploit. From Hot Air:
"...the New York Times reports today, one select group of Democrats have had no problem cultivating corporate influence, and doing so by working around the McCain-Feingold restrictions their party claims to champion:Color me completely shocked. Be sure to read the rest and watch the attached video. The effort here is to keep the status quo, in other words allow Democrats to continue to collect large sums of money from corporations to fund their political activities, while explicitly denying corporations from donating to groups and individuals with differing ideologies. Keep in mind that the Congressional Black Caucus is the same group of morons who visited Fidel Castro in Cuba last year and proclaimed him a great and compassionate leader.
When the Congressional Black Caucus wanted to pay off the mortgage on its foundation’s stately 1930s redbrick headquarters on Embassy Row, it turned to a familiar roster of friends: corporate backers like Wal-Mart, AT&T, General Motors, Coca-Cola and Altria, the nation’s largest tobacco company.Now, consider that $55 million in light of the outrage expressed over the last few weeks over the court’s Citizens United decision.
Soon enough, in 2008, a jazz band was playing at what amounted to a mortgage-burning party for the $4 million town house.
Most political groups in Washington would have been barred by law from accepting that kind of direct aid from corporations. But by taking advantage of political finance laws, the caucus has built a fund-raising juggernaut unlike anything else in town.
It has a traditional political fund-raising arm subject to federal rules. But it also has a network of nonprofit groups and charities that allow it to collect unlimited amounts of money from corporations and labor unions.
From 2004 to 2008, the Congressional Black Caucus’s political and charitable wings took in at least $55 million in corporate and union contributions, according to an analysis by The New York Times, an impressive amount even by the standards of a Washington awash in cash. Only $1 million of that went to the caucus’s political action committee; the rest poured into the largely unregulated nonprofit network. (Data for 2009 is not available.)
I hear you on the radio
You permeate my screen, its' unkind but
If I met you in a scissor fight
I'd cut off both your wings on principle alone
On principle alone
Hey mega-lomaniac
You're no Jesus
Yeah, you're no fucking Elvis
Special, as you know yourself, maniac
Step down
Step down (Step down)
If I were your appen-dages
I'd hold open your eyes
So you would see
That all of us are heaven sent
There was never meant to be only one
To be only one
Hey mega-lomaniac
You're no Jesus
Yeah, you're no fucking Elvis
Special, as you know yourself, maniac
Step down
Step down (Step down) (Step down) (Step down)
Yeah
You're no Jesus
You're no Elvis...
You're no Jesus
You're no Jesus
You're no Elvis
You're no answer... Oooooh (Step down) (Step down) (Step down) (Step down) Hey Hey
Hey megalomaniac
You're no Jesus
Yeah, you're no fucking Elvis
Special, as you know yourself, maniac
Step down (Step down) (Step down)
Ooh(Step down) Ohh(Step down)
I came across an article on Salon entitled “How to leave a soldier” that has apparently been making ripples across the blogosphere. It absolutely infuriated me, and I knew I had to write about it.
Before I get into the article, though, let me explain some things in the interest of full disclosure. My significant other is a Marine. We live together in North Carolina while he’s stationed at Camp Lejeune. He’s an 0311 (infantry rifleman) who has been to Iraq twice and is deploying to Afghanistan this year. The first year of our relationship was long distance, with him in North Carolina and me in Florida. We’re together now, but the Corps brings us apart occasionally for training and such, and of course, for deployments. Never, ever would I do something so cowardly as to send him a Dear John letter while he was deployed.
But that’s exactly what this woman did. Meet Courtney Cook, an extraordinarily shallow and callous woman.
You’d be surprised how easy it is to leave a soldier on deployment. You can do it with a letter. (He can’t argue with you. He doesn’t have a phone.) If you lay the groundwork early, saying to the soldier before he leaves, “This will be the end of us, we might as well admit it,” it’s that much easier. The letter won’t even come as a shock.
And if you have children with that soldier? You can handle all that with a letter, too. He’ll write it — because he cares about the kids, because he wants to work with you to do what’s best for them even though you’re leaving him — and you’ll give it to them. Here again, you will avoid a nasty confrontation. Who will they cry to? You? You’re just the teary-eyed bearer of the letter. Him? The one who’s sweating it out in the desert?
There will be no moving truck, no boxes, no house torn asunder. The soldier is peeing in a bucket as you pack. He doesn’t care who gets the couch.
It isn’t enough for her to be this callous, shallow, superficial, and selfish. She’s recommending other women do the same thing, too. One of the worst parts about this is that she feels like it was a good thing to tell him while he’s away at war that she’s leaving him. She presumably doesn’t care about the effect this has on soldiers while they’re deployed.
"Yeah, well, when he appears at Caroline's, the comedy club, I'll believe it was satirical. "You see, only comedians in comedy clubs can use satire. Everybody knows that.
"People who could not spell the word 'Vote' or say it in English, put a committed Socialist Ideologue in the White House, who's name is Barrack 'Hussein' Obama..."
"...People at the convention should have to pass literacy tests in order to be able to vote in this country..."
Published under the headline “Backdoor taxes hit middle class,” the article opened by describing the Obama Administration’s plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade as relying “heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.” Four hours and three minutes after it hit the wire, the story was “withdrawn” with a promise that “a] replacement story will run later in the week.”Why did Reuters pull the story? One site cited a Reuters rep as saying the piece was withdrawn “due to significant errors of fact” and “should not have gone out.” I think it was the language used in the article that prompted Reuters to pull it. In particular, it was the series of phrases shown below that, combined with the one mentioned above, must have made the hair stand up on the back of Rahm Emanuel’s neck:“…effectively a tax hike by stealth.”
“middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.”Perhaps the largest contributing factor to the article being yanked is a list of tax break provisions popular among middle-class families that Obama might allow to expire:* Taxpayers who itemize will lose the option to deduct state sales-tax payments instead of state and local income taxes.* The $250 teacher tax credit for classroom supplies.* The tax deduction for up to $4,000 of college tuition and expenses.* Individuals who don’t itemize will no longer be able to increase their standard deduction by up to $1,000 for property taxes paid.* The first $2,400 of unemployment benefits are taxable, in 2009 that amount was tax-free.The last line of the story was, perhaps, the proverbial “nail in the coffin” for the Reuter’s piece:* Trickle-down-taxation.
Here's why. "If the provisions are allowed to expire on December 31, the top-tier personal income tax rate will rise to 39.6 percent from 35 percent. But lower-income families will pay more as well: the 25 percent tax bracket will revert back to 28 percent; the 28 percent bracket will increase to 31 percent; and the 33 percent bracket will increase to 36 percent." This is what they all were before Bush cut them. "The special 10 percent bracket is eliminated." This is all true. Every bit of it is true. If you're going to let these tax cuts sunset, it means we're going to go back to what they were before Bush cut them, and those are the rates that I just gave you. That means that everybody paying income taxes is going to effectively get an increase, a tax increase, despite Obama's constant pledges that 95% of the American people get a tax cut, and he's calling one-time tax rebates a tax cut. So obviously the White House did not like this story.
I Am Classicaliberal And You Should, Too!. Copyright 2009-2010 All Rights Reserved Revolution Two Church theme by Brian Gardner Converted into Blogger Template by Bloganol dot com Background Image Courtesy bama287
