Ediblog

Those calling Arizona's new immigration law "racist" are not only wrong--but also hypocritical to the bitter core. This cohort (which includes the Catholic Church and the National Day Labor Organizing Network) have excoriated the bill as nothing more than a wildly draconian measure designed to persecute people of color.

This, of course--is typical left-wing propaganda. Arizona's new policy simply mirrors federal law which strictly prohibits any individual (irrespective of race, creed or color) from entering the United States illegally.

That said--I have yet to hear the above mentioned groups hector the Mexican government over the fact that its southern border (with Central and South America) is an armed fortress. And-- according to numerous reports--any individual who attempts to breach this boundary is shot on site.

Correct me if I'm wrong--but aren't the denizens of Central and South America considered people of color?

One of the most painfully dramatic events (subsequent to the 9/11 attacks) is still etched on the tissues of my psyche: When our government--without a hint of hesitation--publicly proclaimed that Islam was a religion of "peace and tolerance."

This feeble proclamation contravened centuries of well documented history (most of it written by Islamic scholars) that clearly detailed the hyper-brutality and misogynistic proclivities of this archaic religion.

Truth be told--the only way to violate such history is to be totally blinded by the one thing even more insidious than Islam: Political Correctness.

The Army's decision to abrogate its invitation to Evangelist Franklin Graham (who was slated to be the keynote speaker at next month's National Day of Prayer event at the Pentagon) is a stunning act of conspicuous cowardice. The verdict (handed down by military bureaucrats who labor feverishly in the fields of political correctness) was based on the fact that Graham called Islam an "evil" religion.

Graham's reason for labeling Islam evil is--in my unwavering estimation--dead center. Why? Because the religion is an historically destructive dogma, which not only foments the violent genocide of all non-adherents (think Armenian Christians)--but also teaches that women are nothing more than subservient objects. The latter--which the reverend has discussed infinitum--is evident in a vast majority of Islamic countries (including so-called mainstream ones such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia) that execute women for simply appearing in public without a male overseer.

The Army (which I profoundly respect) seems to be taking its cue from the Muslim Brotherhood--a rabid terrorist organization that profusely campaigns for the elimination of all forms of criticism against Islam.

It is a very sad day, indeed--when one of our nation's most venerated institutions has apparently sided with an organization whose modus operandi is: Death to America!

Clearly, one of the primary targets of Islamo-jihad is free speech. From the attaches on author Salman Rushdie to film maker Theo van Gogh to Danish cartoonists to the current threats being levied against the creators of "South Park" for depicting the prophet Muhammad in a bear suit during a recent episode--Muslim theocrats (and their barbarous subordinates) know that once they uproot this most sacrosanct pillar of Western Civilization (WC): A global Islamic Hegemony won't be far behind.

Unfortunately--the leaders of WC are too preoccupied praising the religion of 'Peace and Tolerance' to notice.

Not Political: LMAO!

April 22, 2010

To the hordes of liberal politicos, pundits, academics (and their vacuous worshippers) who stridently repeated the mantra we oppose the Iraq war on moral, not political grounds: Why then did you decide to abandon your anti-war demonstrations the minute Barack Hussein Obama was sworn in? After all (under his administration) there are still 150, 000 troops in Mesopotamia combating the forces of Islamo-thuggery.

Not political: LMAO!

"Clearly (when it comes to Wall Street) the the most effective bulwark against hyper-feckless risk taking is no taxpayer bailouts. Once this safety net has been permanently abolished, the oft relied on business plan "too big to fail" will quickly be replaced by profound sobriety." ---Burgess Redding

Yes, it's emphatically true...the Libs are shameless. In a lame and hypocritical attempt to eliminate administration dissenters from the public discourse, they have (and continue to) label Americans who participate in the Tea Party protests as racists.

So, according to the Left, if one happens to be 'white' and criticizes Obama's policies...he/she is a racist? How exactly is that possible, when Obama is only HALF black? After all, his mommy was a white woman. So does that make the critic half-a-racist?

I, and millions of other concerned Americans...who happen to be white...are critical of Mr. Obama because we have assessed his ideology and policies and have deemed them highly destructive to our Constitutional Republic...and a great threat to our freedoms.

So, for the record...those of us, who God has created with lighter skin, are aiming ALL our criticism at Obama's cracker side!

First Love: Hate Of Country

April 19, 2010

How disturbingly hypocritical that the party of Pelosi and Reid remained reticent during the hyper-malicious anti-war demonstrations (which featured a cornucopia of individuals burning Bush in effigy, desecrating the American flag, calling for the assassination of a sitting president, destroying public property, labeling our soldiers baby killers, espousing violence against returning Iraq vets, sabotaging domestic military supply lines, etc.)--and yet has been nothing short of shrill in its public condemnation of the visibly peaceful, respectful and civil Tea Party rallies.

It is this virulent strain of hypocrisy that best epitomizes the Democrat Party's first love: Hate of country.

The line between reality and fantasy got blurred again by the Obama administration...and, if you read between the lines...it's another slap across Israel's face...

Wednesday evening, a ceremony was held at the Israeli Embassy in DC to celebrate the Jewish State's 62nd Independence Day. Again, in a show of disrespect for Israel (taking into consideration his recent abominable behavior toward PM Netanyahu), Obama sent David Axelrod in his place.

And to add insult to injury (as if Axelrod wasn't insult enough)...O's message to the many present was absurd. According to Ynetnews.com, Axelrod said a two-state solution was in the interest of Israel, the Palestinians and the US...and that the absence of such a solution would make it difficult for Israel to maintain its Jewish and democratic identity.

What on earth is Axelrod talking about? How exactly does a 2-state solution positively impact the Jewish State? If the Gaza surrender is any indication, then the Israeli citizenry should be supplied with bomb shelters and hazmat suits in preparation.

But I guess I shouldn't wonder considering that this is emanating from the man, with the Cheshire Cat smile, who wins a Nobel Peace Prize for merely DESIRING peace. So it follows that anything is possible...even for Israel to maintain its identity and democracy by agreeing to give its land away to a group of people who deny their right to exist...and would rather see them floating face-down in the sea.

It's looking more and more like this administration fell down a rabbit hole...and they can't get up.

One of the most perplexing (if not egregious) issues I have ever dealt with in the political realm is the following: Why do a majority of American Jews support Democrats? After all--two of our nations most dogmatically rabid and sordid anti-Semites happen to be Dems. Of course I'm referring to Jimmy Carter and Barrack Hussein Obama.

These two demonstrably pro-Arab politicos have (throughout their jaded careers) labored vigorously to ridicule, castigate, undermine and threaten Israel. And why do I believe this? Because they have gone to extensive lengths to proffer olive branches to the very Islamic-terror regimes and organizations (Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas, etc.) that violently oppose the very existence of the Jewish State.

Perplexing, indeed.

(Note: To all my Catholic friends...this is not meant to bash Catholicism, but rather to pressure the hierarchy in the Church to seriously deal with an issue which has been systemic for centuries.)

A dark cloud has hovered over the Catholic church for some time now. Am I referring to the ongoing Priest-Pedophile sex scandal? No, as heinous as that is, this disgrace has tainted the Church from Origen of Alexandria in the 3rd Century to the present day. It has caused divisions and proliferated hatred toward a certain group, unjustly...and has betrayed the very doctrine of and the central Person of worship in the Church.

Since Pope John Paul II, much has been done to try to reconcile the virulent rift between the Catholic Church and the Jewish people. Some of the work includes:

And although more efforts have been made, a retired Italian bishop, by the name of Giacomo Babini, recently suggested that the sexual abuse in the Catholic church are a "Zionist attack." This 'Jewish conspiracy' mindset reveals a systemic problem that remains in the Church and must be addressed. Babini added, "They do not want the church, they are its natural enemies. Deep down, historically speaking, the Jews are God killers."

Italy's Bishops Conference immediately attempted damage control (something at which the Church has now become adept)...but I'm not buying it.

There's a serious problem here...and it cannot be excused away as simply 'misspeak'.

The Bible in Matthew 12:34 states, "For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks." How does the Church reconcile that with Babini's statements? Attempting to blame Jews for the egregious failure of the Church...at its highest levels...to stop the proliferation of such a venal crime as pedophilia? And a man, harboring this type of hatred, was allowed to guide the flock?

This is a grievous problem that must be rooted out, but unlike the sex-abuse situation...it must be a massive repentance of this erroneous mindset and a reeducation of the clergy, to the truth.

For if the Vatican fails to address this virus that has infected the Church for centuries...it may be forced, one day soon, to sell off its massive store of treasures for survival.

Political leaders who doggedly adhere to the philosophy that America should drastically reduce its nuclear stockpile--because it would compel belligerents like Iran and North Korea to forsake their nefarious (nuclear) ambitions--must be smokin' some mighty strong stuff.

Why? Because history clearly and explicitly demonstrates that (when dealing with despotic nations) any form of appeasement has always resulted in the following: The genocide of innocents.---From the OIB study group POP (Politicians On Pot).

Those Who Serve--Not Serviced

April 12, 2010

Last week Tiger Woods returned to the links on a wave of rhapsodic applause and accolades. The Leviathan of Libidoville was treated like a returning war hero who had just slayed the enemy in a far off land. Manifestly--in today's pop culture--you can be a serial cheater, liar and lout and still be hailed as a god.

But while this raucous idol worship was taking place--a very significant event was unfolding: Our Marines were quietly preparing to fight the one battle (Kandahar) that very well may decide the fate of Afghanistan (and the overall War on Terror).

Perhaps it's time for our pop culture generation to finally grow up (put aside childish things) and start paying homage to those who serve--instead of to those who demand to be serviced.

The eradication of Islamo-terror will remain a pure fantasy as long as the current leader of the Free World continues down the sinuous path of appeasement. A path, mind you--that has brought many men (and civilizations) to great ruin.

Manifestly, the only way to prohibit Iran from going nuclear is an Israeli air strike. Why? Because it has become agonizingly apparent that the Obama administration (sporting it's diminutive man fruit) has settled on the most dangerous, not to mention timorous--of all strategies: Containment. Unfortunately, our child in chief fervently believes that a nuclear armed Tehran can easily be contained with a copious dose of golden oratory.

Pathological naivete has a new address: 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Disdainful Affront

April 7, 2010

"It flouts all reason that the Obama administration continues to extend a diplomatic olive branch to rogue regimes like Syria and Iran which have explicitly (from funding and training insurgents to manufacturing IED's) killed scores of US troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The administration's actions are a disdainful (not to mention painful) affront to all who serve our great nation."

(The Editor is off today - This is Audrey's Blog) 'Palestinians': In Love With The Lie

You know it, defined as: A false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood. It's the antithesis of truth...the enemy of honesty: The Lie.

We know it's wrong and using it as a foundation for anything will surely lead to collapse. So why would one stake one's life on a bushel of them?

That's exactly what Israel's 'neighbors' have done. Everything from their name to their historical land claims are unadulterated lies. And they don't stop there.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Here's their latest act of paltering...a 15-yr-old 'Palestinian' who was purportedly killed by IDF soldiers on March 30th, returned home alive and well on April 2nd after spending numerous days in Egyptian detention. Gaza emergency chief Mo'aweya Hassanein told reporters that medical teams and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) synchronized with the IDF to annex the boy's body.

Oops! Hassanein made a mistake. Imagine that? The boy was safe in Egyptian custody and the emergency chief arranged to pick up the imaginary body?

Interesting...did you hear anything about it in the news? Probably not...all that the Muslim-controlled media, world media outlets OR the MSM is reporting is the death of 'palestinian' civilians by the IDF on the Gaza border.

Are we done with this 'palestinian' crock of paltering poop yet? If not...we are truly their infidel useful idiots.

It's Chic To Hate Israel

April 5, 2010

"Manifestly President Obama's public invective and condescension over Israeli settlements is designed to not only appease the anti-Semites in the European Union--but to also garner favor (and accolades) from the Jew-killing tyrants and autocrats of the Islamic World. If there's one thing Obama knows (when it comes to the EU and IW)--it's chic to hate Israel."
---From the Foreign Policy Desk at OIB

Most assuredly, it is not news that since Barack Obama ascended to the White House, he ushered in the first administration to be unequivocally anti-Israel.

From his long alliances and relationships with racist, anti-Semitic, faux reverends...to his obeisance to tyrants and Jew-hating Muslim despots...to his Hamas proponents who longed to see their 'brother' take the Executive Mansion (in hopes Islam would get a tentacle around more infidels)...Obama has sent a clear message, to anyone who has ears to hear, that he was bringing change to our long friendship with a kindred nation.

He wasted no time in office when he began his pedantic DISSertation to our only friends, and the only democracy, in the Middle East. Slamming the Jewish State for building on its own land. Scolding them when they took a defensive action to protect their citizens from terrorist attacks. And most of all...dissing their Prime Minister, Benjamin 'Bibi' Netanyahu. A war hero, statesman and the unambiguous leader of the free world.

Obama's most recent offensive offering occurred in Washington this past week, when Obama:

Personally, I am fed up to here (my hand is above my head) with this arrogant Aunt Fanny slapping the Jewish nation in the face, as he stabs them in the back. Over 64% of Americans support Israel, so Obama's disdain for the owners of the Holy Land is not shared by his 'subjects'.

So I think the mea culpa tour should return...but this time, for the right reason: Obama repenting for HIS un-American acts.

Mr. Obama, we all know you're dying to 'change' something...but maliciously kicking our friends, while kissing our enemies tukis'...ALL in our name...is not tolerable any longer.

I believe, Mr. Obama...you might just want to save the 'changing' for the Depends you and your party will require, come Nov. 3rd.

April 1, 2010

Has President Obama ever passed a piece of racist legislation? Well the answer to this stinging (not to mention very hot button question) is a resounding--YES! As a friend of mine (just the other day) astutely pointed out: the tax on suntan salons (included in the ObamaCare bill) is racist to the very core. Why? Because it clearly burdens only those of the Caucasian persuasion. After all (according to my friend, who happens to be an American of Hispanic lineage)--when was the last time you saw a black person in search of a suntan?